Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

I'm for more gun control (Farah calls for disarming those attempting to monopolize armed force)
WND ^ | March 17, 2013 | Joseph Farah

Posted on 03/17/2013 8:06:00 PM PDT by Perseverando

The federal government bought firearms in the U.S. and sold them to the Mexican drug cartels – guns that ended up killing American law enforcement officers and an untold numbers of civilians in the U.S. and Mexico.

The Department of Homeland Security purchased 1.6 billion rounds of ammunition, including hollow points – a supply that, according to some sources, should be enough to last 100 years.

The Department of Homeland Security has ordered thousands of automatic weapons already banned for sale to U.S. citizens.

Nearly every federal agency – from the Environmental Protection Agency to FEMA – arms its field personnel, often with firearms unavailable to the citizenry.

For decades, the civilian side of the federal government has been purchasing military-style weaponry without any explanation to the citizenry as to why this is necessary.

Barack Obama now famously remarked during his first campaign that he wanted to build a “civilian national security force” as well-funded as the Department of Defense.

It is with all this and more in mind that I now proclaim my 100 percent support for stricter gun control laws – laws that would effectively disarm the civilian side of the U.S. government, other than legitimate police agencies such as the FBI and Secret Service.

The next time you hear an elected or appointed federal official suggesting further restrictions on firearms and ammunition purchases by citizens, understand what is happening. The federal government is attempting to monopolize armed force in America. This is directly contrary to the spirit and letter of the Constitution’s Second Amendment.

America’s founders were not attempting to protect the rights of hunters and sportsmen when they ratified the Second Amendment. Their intent was clear: Like almost everything else they wrote in the Constitution, it represented a check on the tendency of

(Excerpt) Read more at wnd.com ...


TOPICS: Constitution/Conservatism; Crime/Corruption; Government; Politics/Elections
KEYWORDS: 2ndamendment; ammo; ammunition; banglist; bloodoftyrants; cnsf; cw2; dhs; dhsammo; fastandfurious; govtabuse; guncontrol; joefarah; secondamendment; styg; tyranny; waronliberty

1 posted on 03/17/2013 8:06:00 PM PDT by Perseverando
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Perseverando

Here's a somewhat appropriate DHS/Janet Napolitano graphic. Thanks to Pookie18's "Today's Toons."

2 posted on 03/17/2013 8:17:00 PM PDT by Perseverando (Gun control? It's really not about gun control is it? It's really about PEOPLE CONTROL!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Perseverando

I would call this The Federal Government Disarmament Act, which specifies first of all, that only US military and federal police may use arms in the conduct of their duties.

Second, that federal police agencies would be consolidated from the current 100+ into a limited number: The FBI, the Secret Service, US Marshals, Bureau of Diplomatic Security, Federal Bureau of Prisons, Bureau of Indian Affairs Police, United States Customs and Border Protection and Border Patrol and ICE, Federal Protective Service, Federal Air Marshal Service, and several others. Note: NOT the BATF&E or the DEA.

Third, the restoration of the Posse Comitatus Act, and the creation of the Sheriffs First Act.


3 posted on 03/17/2013 8:21:32 PM PDT by yefragetuwrabrumuy (Best WoT news at rantburg.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Perseverando
The Department of Homeland Security purchased 1.6 billion rounds of ammunition, including hollow points – a supply that, according to some sources, should be enough to last 100 years.

I want someone to point me to the exception used by DHS to get around the The Bona Fide Needs Rule
B. 1. Background
a. Introduction
Page 5-11

Over a century ago, the Comptroller of the Treasury stated, “An appropriation should not be used for the purchase of an article not necessary for the use of a fiscal year in which ordered merely in order to use up such an appropriation.” 8 Comp. Dec. 346, 348 (1901). The bona fide needs rule is one of the fundamental principles of appropriations law: A fiscal year appropriation may be obligated only to meet a legitimate, or bona fide, need arising in, or in some cases arising prior to but continuing to exist in, the fiscal year for which the appropriation was made. Citations to this principle are numerous. See, e.g., 33 Comp. Gen. 57, 61 (1953); 16 Comp. Gen. 37 (1936); B-289801, Dec. 30, 2002; B-282601, Sept. 27, 1999; B-235678, July 30, 1990.

My experience in Government contracting leads me to believe the purchase of this ammo is mostly of a Commercial Item nature and therefor a Multi year Contract would not be appropriate. When the Government purchases supplies and services that are available off the shelf, you only are allowed to purchase for the needs of the current year. What type of funding are they using that would allow a 50-100 year purchase? When I think ammo I think of O&M funds which can only be used in the current GFY and cannot be carried over. R&D and Procurement funds can be carried over as long as the delivery is in subsequent years(s) - i.e. payment made to the contractor for F-35 Fighters. In the case of F-35 the contractor is probably being paid progress payments, against funding that may have been appropriated by Congresses years past. Paper, paper clips, copiers, ammo would be purchased as required. For the military there could be a DPAS emergency action to require the contractor to move the DoD's deliveries ahead of commercial deliveries, BUT I KNOW OF NO SUCH EMERGENCY OVER AT DHS.

I sure wish someone working in the contracting community would fill out a FOIA request and see what type of funding is being used for the purchase of 100 years of ammo (IMHO it is breaking the law). But what the heck, Zero has no more respect for the law than Big Sis or Holder have.
4 posted on 03/17/2013 8:30:45 PM PDT by Cheerio (Barry Hussein Soetoro-0bama=The Complete Destruction of American Capitalism)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: yefragetuwrabrumuy
"...I would call this The Federal Government Disarmament Act...."

What a great idea....I wonder if the new breed of conservative politicians (Paul, Cruz, Ryan, etc) are considering this.

If not, this needs to be put out there in the public discourse...

5 posted on 03/17/2013 8:31:18 PM PDT by Victor (If an expert says it can't be done, get another expert." -David Ben-Gurion, the first Prime Minister)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Cheerio

IDIQ - you could look it up.


6 posted on 03/17/2013 8:34:44 PM PDT by T-Bird45 (It feels like the seventies, and it shouldn't.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Perseverando
Have you guys ever thought that maybe all those arms are being shipped to the middle east? All Americas financial resourses are. (BTW, what's up with Bengazi? Why the cover up?)
Obama's Israel
7 posted on 03/17/2013 8:48:38 PM PDT by concerned about politics ("Get thee behind me, Liberal")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Perseverando

Here is a list of some agencies that DON’T NEED GUNS!!!! EVER!!!!!

The FDA
The Dept of Education
HUD
The IRS
The EPA
The FHA

I could go on, but pretty much any agencies that doesn’t DIRECTLY deal with law enforcement activities on a federal level and SOME of those should be disarmed as well.

If the FDA needs firepower they can make their case to the agencies at a state or county level that are allowed to carry arms!


8 posted on 03/17/2013 10:01:41 PM PDT by GraceG
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: T-Bird45
Very familiar with IDIQ contract but that "contract: is NOT an order for supplies and services - it is only a contract vehicle for future orders placed one at a time called Delivery Orders. The DO is where the appropriation must be cited. I want to see what funding source is funding the purchase of 100 year supply of ammo. That's all.

IF journalists are running around writing stories that DHS is purchasing 100 year supply of ammo, when in fact an IDIQ contract has been let with a max amount of 1.6 Billion rounds, then these are false articles - the IDIQ contract can be issued with ZERO order or in some cases depending on whether it was competed or not, may have a minimum order quantity (again placed via a DO, not the IDIQ contract itself. Been there done that.

Many IDIQs are let for a five year period, but again all DOs would have to have appropriation citations that would come from future congresses, and is not an ORDER today.
9 posted on 03/17/2013 10:02:03 PM PDT by Cheerio (Barry Hussein Soetoro-0bama=The Complete Destruction of American Capitalism)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Victor

“...I would call this The Federal Government Disarmament Act....”

What a great idea....I wonder if the new breed of conservative politicians (Paul, Cruz, Ryan, etc) are considering this.

If not, this needs to be put out there in the public discourse...

Call it the:

“The Federal Gun Control Act”

An use that name to re-direct ALL of the hollywood anti-gun hype in a MORE POSITIVE DIRECTION!!!


10 posted on 03/17/2013 10:03:54 PM PDT by GraceG
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Perseverando
The federal government is attempting to monopolize armed force in America.

If people read Dianne Feinstein's own "assault weapons ban" bill, they'd discover that the intent isn't limited to the federal government, but government in general.

S.150 Section 3 Paragraph 4 Subparagraph (A) reads that the ban "shall not apply to the importation for, manufacture for, sale to, transfer to, or possession by the United States or a department or agency of the United States or a State or a department, agency, or political subdivision of a State"

11 posted on 03/17/2013 10:49:08 PM PDT by raisetheroof ("To become Red is to become dead --- gradually." Alexander Solzhenitsyn)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Perseverando

I appreciate Farah’s getting a little more respect on FR lately. Regrettably it’s because we have Mr. Mombasa in the White House. The minute we get another Republican, faux, nouveau, or otherwise, Farah’s constitutionalism will have him branded persona non grata in these parts.


12 posted on 03/18/2013 4:31:36 AM PDT by golux
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Perseverando

13 posted on 03/18/2013 4:54:25 AM PDT by Travis McGee (www.EnemiesForeignAndDomestic.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Travis McGee

MRAPs in action.

http://westernrifleshooters.wordpress.com/2013/03/17/reichssicherheitshauptamt-follies/

Did you know that the FBI is now an irrelevent junior agency? Have you heard of the SRT, part of the HSI (Homeland Security Investigations), part of ICE, part of DHS?

When and how was this national paramilitary force authorized and created?


14 posted on 03/18/2013 4:57:08 AM PDT by Travis McGee (www.EnemiesForeignAndDomestic.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: Travis McGee

There is a humvee equivalent of the vehicle depicted top center. In recent days I have seen lots of them on flat bed trailers headed north on I 81

They are apparently headed somewhere for rework and perhaps new paint to cover the faded desert tan


15 posted on 03/18/2013 5:01:46 AM PDT by bert ((K.E. N.P. N.C. +12 .....The fairest Deduction to be reduced is the Standard Deduction)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: Travis McGee
The new face of federal law enforcement. (Except they are wearing masks.)

Is this federal eagle going to use that AR-15, or are they swooping in to take them away from Americans?


16 posted on 03/18/2013 5:06:32 AM PDT by Travis McGee (www.EnemiesForeignAndDomestic.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: bert
Meet the new Boss in Town: ICE spawns… HSI Homeland Security Investigations
17 posted on 03/18/2013 5:09:38 AM PDT by Travis McGee (www.EnemiesForeignAndDomestic.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: Perseverando

Does anyone remember the democrat that stated that

“the government SHOULD have a monopoly on the use of violence”

?

I’m not sure if it was a politician or some talking/empty head.


18 posted on 03/18/2013 5:21:21 AM PDT by MrB (The difference between a Humanist and a Satanist - the latter admits whom he's working for)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: MrB; Eaker; Absolutely Nobama; afnamvet; Ancesthntr; An Old Man; APatientMan; ApesForEvolution; ...
Don't worry comrades, a police state is a safe state!


19 posted on 03/18/2013 6:41:08 AM PDT by Travis McGee (www.EnemiesForeignAndDomestic.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: Travis McGee

These things are pretty cool. I got a chance to check out the first batch when they came over to the desert. This is what was needed instead of Humvees. We did not learn a lesson from the South Africans.


20 posted on 03/18/2013 8:06:40 AM PDT by USAF80
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: bert

They are probably going to get refitted, some are returning to their original units here in the states. You see a lot of that these days if you are close to a depot. A lot of our equipment is getting torn up over in the desert.


21 posted on 03/18/2013 8:11:55 AM PDT by USAF80
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: USAF80

I’m glad our Marines had them for warfighting in Iraq and A-stan.

Not so much the DHS in America.


22 posted on 03/18/2013 9:41:46 AM PDT by Travis McGee (www.EnemiesForeignAndDomestic.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: Travis McGee
(+)
23 posted on 03/18/2013 3:03:16 PM PDT by Chode (Stand UP and Be Counted, or line up and be numbered - *DTOM* -ww- NO Pity for the LAZY)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: Cheerio

When you do not have a budget passed in over 4 years, the normal oversight and “Bona Fide Need Rule” is difficult to apply to such an un-conventional process...

So to put to bed the nonsense that the republicans we have in Congress now are not playing ball with the budget that is submitted by the president, I am absolutely ok with the obstructionist position we are holding...

BUT!!!

That should not mean we should allow those very dsame republicans a pass, they should be watch every damn thing that is being procured, by these departments as if it was a normal process...

My opinion is they are once again dropping the ball and not following through these purchases...

Otherwise we would not be having conversations like this...


24 posted on 03/18/2013 4:19:04 PM PDT by stevie_d_64 (It's not the color of one's skin that offends people...it's how thin it is.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Travis McGee; All

As you say...

“...the continued militarization of our law enforcement...”

What a sweet deal for some of these combat vets coming back, looking for work...Of course they would have to be properly vetted and indoctrinated to remove all sense of questioning the constitutionality of their potential duties...

They’ll be given plenty of opportunities to ride in parades and do other PR type work for now to get the peeps used to seeing them around...

Give them some high vis busts or other activities to prove and justify their existance, leaving the poor overworked and underpaid local law enforcement looking like second rate Barney Fife’s...

But...What do I know...hehehe


25 posted on 03/18/2013 4:25:49 PM PDT by stevie_d_64 (It's not the color of one's skin that offends people...it's how thin it is.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: stevie_d_64
Budget or no budget, when the contractor submits an invoice to the Government that invoice has to have the funding citation on it and when the payment office of the DHS receives the invoice the bill has to be paid out of specific funding citation and it has to be traceable back to a CONGRESSIONAL APPRORPIATION. In years past one could actually find the line by line budget of all the various agencies and if you knew the coding you could find the ultimate source of the money. The Admin cannot spend one penny without a corresponding appropriation from the Congress. In an environment of CR after CR, you go back to the last line by line appropriation - that is why there are no “new starts” in an CR environment. Budgets and Appropriations are two very different animals - budget only provides policy guidance. Appropriation actually authorizes the spending, and without it Zero is shut down. That is why I constantly write on this forum that Boner and the boys are holding a Royal Flush, but are afraid to use it, remembering how Newt was pilloried for shutting down the Government.
26 posted on 03/18/2013 5:34:52 PM PDT by Cheerio (Barry Hussein Soetoro-0bama=The Complete Destruction of American Capitalism)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: Cheerio; All

That is correct...But in addition to the lack of congressional oversight, those funds that are being used are year end monies that need to be spent, or they are lost...As with any excess fundage...

This type of mentality needs to stop...To spend, just because you got money does not constitute good fiscal policy...

If some sort of incentive were to be available, instead of the “use it, or lose it” system, then we may be able to fix a lot of the feduciary malfeasance at all levels of government...

But that is a pipe dream...Along with the politicians needing to justify their existance, retain their power and position, no one wants to do anything to upset the perks that come with power, and the ability to spend money to make themselves look good to their constituencies is worse than what crack cocaine will do to anyone...


27 posted on 03/18/2013 7:09:53 PM PDT by stevie_d_64 (It's not the color of one's skin that offends people...it's how thin it is.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: Travis McGee

The dork second from left. THAT’S what we are supposed to be afraid of? Bring it on! What a gomer!


28 posted on 03/18/2013 7:37:03 PM PDT by CodeToad (Liberals are bloodsucking ticks. We need to light the matchstick to burn them off.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: stevie_d_64
If some sort of incentive were to be available, instead of the “use it, or lose it” system, then we may be able to fix a lot of the fiduciary malfeasance at all levels of government... But that is a pipe dream...

And I never used to believe in term limits for Congress since "we the people" have a chance to throw the bums out of the House every two years.

But I have changed my mind seeing how they spend their entire two years working for reelection and not doing what we send them to the District of Corruption to do. FOR THESE TWO YEARS I THINK WE SENT THEM THERE TO STOP THE OBAMA WRECKING BALL.

But just like the budget and appropriation mess they have created, we will never ever have term limits because it will stifle their "CAREERS".
29 posted on 03/19/2013 7:01:58 AM PDT by Cheerio (Barry Hussein Soetoro-0bama=The Complete Destruction of American Capitalism)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: Cheerio

Well they become instant millionaires if they are able to complete one term of office, IIRC...Their retirement package after working only that two years is a sweet deal as far as I am concerned...

An old Precinct Chair friend of mine has successfully worked his way up to US Congressman (Randy Weber), and his balliwick is an A/C repairman, owned his own business, and now he has gotten into politics I guess in the right way...You gotta start somewhere I remember telling him a few years ago, he cut his teeth in the Texas Legislature, and look at him now...

He’s a solid conservative, but a junior to the wheeling and dealing in D.C., and he knows it...But he is made in the shade now...

I bet we could find 85 billion to cut if we could dive into the perks packages congresscritters get for their troubles...Most conservative rookies might give that stuff up if we pressed...But instead we have stupid stuff cut like the tours, and other WH functions because of the sequester Obama supported before he didn’t support it, or something stupid like that...

I still hold to the idea that we need to fire all of them and start over...Even Randy...He’d probably be one of the few that would say “Thanks You!!!”


30 posted on 03/20/2013 5:33:33 AM PDT by stevie_d_64 (It's not the color of one's skin that offends people...it's how thin it is.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson