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

Skip to comments.

WHY IS THE U.S. GOVERNMENT (OR SOME IN IT) WORRIED ABOUT SEMIAUTOMATIC RIFLES?
Vanity | 12 April 2003 | Mene Mene Tekel Upharsin

Posted on 04/12/2003 7:11:11 PM PDT by MeneMeneTekelUpharsin

A story was just posted about an Iraqi shopkeeper defending his shop against looters when U.S. troops arrived, were lied to and told the man was a Saddam loyalist, and shot the man to death with heavy machine gun fire. That and the battle for Baghdad are the biggest arguments against government interference in citizen ownership of semiautomatic rifles of ANY configuration that I know of.

The Iraqis saw their heavy weaponry (i.e. mortars, tanks, APCs, heavy machine guns, artillery, etc., etc.) destroyed very quickly in the recent conflict. That left them with little but AUTOMATIC rifles, portable machine guns and rocket-propelled grenades with which to fight. They were annihilated when they tried to attack our forces with such weapons. Our soldiers have even been quoted as saying that it was a horrific bloodbath which left them in shock that so many would die needlessly.

The U.S. public (except for a very small minority of lawless thugs) have ANY of the items just mentioned. Why are we a threat with semiautomatic rifles of ANY configuration against the U.S. government? What could we do IF WE HAD AUTOMATIC RIFLES? Almost nothing in the long-term. I simply don't understand the continuing push to outlaw SEMIAUTOMATIC "assault" rifles which are close to becoming usless in a war against a well-equipped military force with air power at it's disposal.

Seems to me more and more that the real purpose for eliminating rifles and handguns from public hands is eventual oppressive government. Government officials want to tell us how much in taxes to pay, what to think, were to live, what job to do, and eventually which unnecessary wars to fight for the furthering of GOVERNMENT aims instead of for the right to a free society. If the public has such weapons they are not a threat to the government as a whole, but are a threat to local officials who might want to become abusive and don't want ANYONE questioning anything they do. The government at large is not threatened and will not be threatened by any coordinated attempt at overthrow as it would not only be unattainable and a massacre but the very concept of government at will without any regard for the concerns of citizens is what is threatened.

The government as a whole can continue as they please but could not allow government at the local level to become abusive as groups of citizens would rebel and creat major problems requiring the higher level officials to step in and kill and bunch of citizens and restore order. Therefore, if the citizenry has a justifiable complaint and demands relief, the government will more than likely step in and give relief...by making the officials in charge rule justly in order to avoid conflict. This is not to say that such citizens want to (or even could) overthrow the government at the national level. Quite the opposite. If the government rules justly, the armed citizenry would support and defend said government as they did at the beginning when the nation was founded. If Iraq had been ruled properly, the citizens of that country would have rallied to the aid of the government and our troops EVEN WITH AIR POWER AND HEAVY WEAPONRY would have had an extremely difficult time taking ground (Vietnam). When government rules in a wicked way, it loses the support of the citizens and eventually leaves itself open to subversion by a wiser enemy. I would beg government officials to punish those who misuse weapons severely (trial and execution) but to leave the law-abiding citizen gun owner alone for the benefit of both the government and the citizens it rules.


TOPICS: Miscellaneous
KEYWORDS: assaultrifles; bang; government; semiautomatic
Just an idea.
1 posted on 04/12/2003 7:11:11 PM PDT by MeneMeneTekelUpharsin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: All

Put a smile on your face, donate to FR today!

(Thanks Chance33_98 for the ad)

2 posted on 04/12/2003 7:13:16 PM PDT by Support Free Republic (Your support keeps Free Republic going strong!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: MeneMeneTekelUpharsin
Gun control=people conrtol....
3 posted on 04/12/2003 7:15:01 PM PDT by Teetop (democrats....... socialist.........whats the difference?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Teetop
Gun control=people control....

Believe you're right. Headed more and more that way. If some foreign power misuses even the smallest weapon, they're obliterated. However, criminals here seem to have pretty much free reign. If they're caught, tried and imprisoned, many are let out to do it all over again. I simply don't get it.

4 posted on 04/12/2003 7:17:47 PM PDT by MeneMeneTekelUpharsin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: MeneMeneTekelUpharsin
Ho hum. Wake me up when you can convince everyone else that the U.S. government is run by a foreign occupying power, rather than by, for, and of Americans.
5 posted on 04/12/2003 7:20:45 PM PDT by Cultural Jihad
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: MeneMeneTekelUpharsin
The essential question Americans have to ask involves the concept of principal and agent. We the People are the principals. Our employees; those who work for us in government, are the agents. An agent cannot have any more authority than the principal had to delegate to him in the first place. If I, as an individual fellow citizen and principal, cannot force you to grovel before me for permission to exercise the unalienable right of self-defense, exactly how is it that our employees can claim a power that we, as principals, never had to delegate them in the first place? Think about it. It's really a simple concept :)

By the way, do not be confused by the usual sophistry of lawyers shaking chicken bones over their heads and reciting the chant "Compelling State Interest!" - legal witch doctors are still witch doctors.
6 posted on 04/12/2003 7:23:18 PM PDT by agitator (Ok, mic check...line one...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: MeneMeneTekelUpharsin
As MeneMeneTekelUpharsin undoubtedly knows, once a gun control measure is in place, it is very hard to repeal. And repealing the existing "assault weapons" ban is what is being proposed. If the Bush administration lets it be pegged as turning back the clock on gun control, you are just handing the Dems a BIG issue. Then when they get in, it will just go back to the way it is now, at best.

People won't like this, but here is what I think. By running increasingly big deficits, the GOP has already handed the Dems a big issue on a silver platter. Add on what MeneMeneTekelUpharsin proposes, and you are looking at tremendous Democratic gains in congress and President Hillary Clinton come January 2008.

7 posted on 04/12/2003 7:23:38 PM PDT by Steve Eisenberg
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: MeneMeneTekelUpharsin
WHY IS THE U.S. GOVERNMENT (OR SOME IN IT) WORRIED ABOUT SEMIAUTOMATIC RIFLES?

Because Michael Moore says guns are bad, Rosy told him.

8 posted on 04/12/2003 7:24:23 PM PDT by Mister Baredog ((They wanted to kill 50,000 of us on 9/11, we will never forget!))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: agitator
lawyers shaking chicken bones

You said it. Lawyers have stepped in and basically have assisted in the looting of our freedoms. I can't state my opinions about the crooked lawyers I've known here in public.

9 posted on 04/12/2003 7:25:21 PM PDT by MeneMeneTekelUpharsin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: MeneMeneTekelUpharsin

Semiautomatic rifles? Since you failed to support the 2nd Amendment right to own and carry C4 plastic explosives in our sneakers on planes, you must be one of those goobermint persons. ;)

10 posted on 04/12/2003 7:31:29 PM PDT by Cultural Jihad
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Steve Eisenberg
First of all, if you think we're going to get Democrat votes we haven't already been able to convert, you're deluding yourself. It doesn't matter what you stand for, they're NOT going to vote Republican. Accept it. If you stand up for what is right, some more people with a bit of decency and common sense WILL vote Republican.

Check out this quote from the Yahoo Finance message boards (what it was doing there I don't know).

As for the Iraqis here is the cost of Liberation: 75,000 Iraqi troops KILLED, YES KILLED. They are humans too. Unfortunately, 99% were forced into fighting without surrendering. They had absolutely no weapons that match US technology (Get back to this subject later in the post) 10,000 Iraqi soldiers wounded and or injured. All Iraqi army weapons destroyed.

Especially not the comment They had absolutely no weapons that match US technology. And, that is a LIBERAL posting that diatribe. They KNOW the rifles/handguns we have are no match for the authorities. They KNOW it. So, why do they want them? The Republican party and gun owners must begin their own "Psy-ops" program to educate the public to the value and proper use of rifles and handguns and advocate severe punishment for misuse thereof. Back to you.

11 posted on 04/12/2003 7:35:33 PM PDT by MeneMeneTekelUpharsin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: MeneMeneTekelUpharsin
Why are we a threat with semiautomatic rifles of ANY configuration against the U.S. government?

It only takes a derringer to assasinate a politician, ask Abe Lincoln..

Thats really the bottom line, the ones that want to control us must first disarm us, plain and simple.

12 posted on 04/12/2003 7:35:40 PM PDT by Rome2000
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Rome2000
Good point and it reinforces the argument about the real reason. It has nothing to do with OUR welfare, does it?
13 posted on 04/12/2003 7:40:46 PM PDT by MeneMeneTekelUpharsin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: MeneMeneTekelUpharsin
You're missing a very important point here. Many of these leftist idiots, being idiots, don't know the difference between a semi-auto and a full. How many times have you heard some bonehead reporter make reference to a "machine gun", when the weapon in question is a semi-auto.

It's not that they have a problem with machine guns vs. semi-autos; it's that they have a problem with GUNS. They draw no distinction between one to the other.

14 posted on 04/12/2003 7:47:54 PM PDT by yooper
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: MeneMeneTekelUpharsin
The 2nd Amendment -- the real "Power to the people".
15 posted on 04/12/2003 7:49:19 PM PDT by oyez (Is this a great country or what?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: MeneMeneTekelUpharsin
Bush Backs Renewing Assault Weapons Ban ^

Bush Supports New Extension Of Assault-Weapons Ban ^

16 posted on 04/12/2003 7:54:04 PM PDT by Teacher317
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Teacher317
Thanks for adding the links. That is why I wrote and posted what I did. The story inspired my response. Thanks again.
17 posted on 04/12/2003 7:58:55 PM PDT by MeneMeneTekelUpharsin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: MeneMeneTekelUpharsin
The same sons of bitches that disarm us vote against the death penalty for criminals that murder us, then vote to abort babies at will.

Sick evil corrupt leftist bastards all.

18 posted on 04/12/2003 8:30:37 PM PDT by Rome2000
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: Teetop
The Demos keep harping on disarming us out of force of habit. When the light of reality is shined on these schemes they slink off to ambush us down the road. Right now they’re lining up to push a ban on .50 caliber arms that semantically bans most shotguns.
Please write your representatives if you want to make this slope less slippery.
19 posted on 04/12/2003 8:42:13 PM PDT by NewRomeTacitus (And keep 'em in the Ten Ring.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: MeneMeneTekelUpharsin
I simply don't understand the continuing push to outlaw SEMIAUTOMATIC "assault" rifles which are close to becoming usless in a war against a well-equipped military force with air power at it's disposal.

I agree, going up against the U.S military would be scary.

But could anyone imagine an army of 23 million armed citizens, that look just like those that are regular military and many thousands who are former.

Taking on the U.S. people, would be many times more difficult if not almost impossible for any army. If the regular folks were really mad, Iraq would seem manageable or a small problem in comparison. IMHO that is....

20 posted on 04/12/2003 9:02:26 PM PDT by Joe Hadenuf
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Teetop
"WHY IS THE U.S. GOVERNMENT (OR SOME IN IT) WORRIED ABOUT SEMIAUTOMATIC RIFLES?"

......?

21 posted on 04/12/2003 9:03:52 PM PDT by BenLurkin (Socialism is slavery.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

Comment #22 Removed by Moderator

To: MeneMeneTekelUpharsin
First of all, if you think we're going to get Democrat votes we haven't already been able to convert, you're deluding yourself.

I may be deluding myself, but not about this. Right now, with bare GOP majorities in the House and Senate, with a Republican president, and with most Supreme Court justices being Republican nominees, the GOP is at a high water mark. I hope it lasts for a long time, but given that rotation in office is a fundamental characteristic of our form of government, it won't.

Am I a defeatist? Well, not about military matters.

23 posted on 04/12/2003 9:38:40 PM PDT by Steve Eisenberg
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: MeneMeneTekelUpharsin
I see your point regarding Joe Schmo and his AR vs GI Joe and his homies, but I think that is kind of a tangent that may or may not ever even happen.

IMHO, it boils down to this: Jack Booted Federal Pigs like to shoot you dead. From the point of view of those in government, from the pistol packing EPA agent to the full Swat thugs in the BATF & DEA it's just a silly notion to let Joe Schmoe have a semi.

Put another way: It's a good vs evil thing and evil doesnt like getting its ass kicked.
24 posted on 04/12/2003 10:19:20 PM PDT by FreeRadical (Buy Your Kids Lots of GUNS and Teach them to HATE the Feds)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: FreeRadical
I just don't believe in resorting to profanity, name-calling and harsh terminology. It accomplishes nothing to make comments along those lines. I have my convictions about the issue, but prefer to argue on a more intellectual level. I know some people who work in government and law enforcement and they are fine people. It is NOT everyone in government who has an evil mindset and all should not be lumped into one general category. My only argument is that law-abiding gun owners are NOT a threat to government, rather are supporters of same.
25 posted on 04/13/2003 6:41:48 AM PDT by MeneMeneTekelUpharsin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: MeneMeneTekelUpharsin
I just don't believe in resorting to profanity, name-calling and harsh terminology. It accomplishes nothing to make comments along those lines. I have my convictions about the issue, but prefer to argue on a more intellectual level. I know some people who work in government and law enforcement and they are fine people. It is NOT everyone in government who has an evil mindset and all should not be lumped into one general category. My only argument is that law-abiding gun owners are NOT a threat to government, rather are supporters of same.

We have a lawless federal government. That makes me less than nice. Deal with it.

Everyday we hire federal pigs into unsanctioned, lawless agencies to enforce unconstitutional “laws.” Indeed, it is a rare job in federal govt that is actually a Constitutionally sanctioned job.

Moreover, it is nigh on impossible to be in Federal Law Enforcement and actually be a good guy. Yeah, maybe he doesn’t beat his wife and takes care of his kids. But, at the end of it all, he is still wrong. He is taking money from you and me to do things not allowed by the law of land.

I would never say you don’t have decent friends that work in govt and L.E., but it is a safe bet they are frequently stuck whoring themselves out to conduct work that should not be done, could not even be dreamt of being done, if we actually followed the rule of the land. It would be a better world if they produced something.

Yes, one could go all intellectual with the argument and talk about basic concepts of individual responsibility and private property and basic human rights and how the average federal l.e.o. not only despises these things, but also perverts hearts and minds into believing he is not really a bad guy. But, the average new hire federal pig isn’t bright enough to argue at this level. He was ‘educated’ in public school, still suffers from Ritalin withdrawals, grew up in a one parent home and just flat doesn’t get it. All he wants is your money for his paycheck. And, the ability to kill you easier than you can kill him.

If your question is: Why do the feds hate semi’s, I’m telling you the answer is because it is not in their interest for you to have a semi. It weakens their power, increases yours and generally tilts the game in a way that scares bad guys in govt.

26 posted on 04/19/2003 2:49:46 PM PDT by FreeRadical (Buy Kids Books & Guns. Help them love liberty & hate the nanny state.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: FreeRadical
It comes down to the people remaining able to neutralize the existing government's lock on military superiority if that military was willing to revolt. The disarming schemes and indoctrinations from modern education and the media have gone far toward neutering the general public. If you are not prepared to shoot people wanting to remove your civil and constitutional rights you do not deserve those rights. Right now the Iraqis are saying they want us out of there so they can set up an Islamic government under Sharia Law. The followers of other religions would be dogmeat if we caved to this. I say no way and shove the 21st Century down their repressive gullet. The very arrogance of a people just freed from a monster demanding that we leave progressive measures in Allah's hands defies reason.
The oil wouldn't begin to pay for the expenses and the people don't seem to believe anything but Al Jazeera. Why are we wasting our time & resources on scorpions determined to waste their lives on hatred? These resources would have been better spent helping Canada defend itself from the terrorist influence it is now in thrall to.
27 posted on 04/19/2003 7:44:38 PM PDT by NewRomeTacitus (Reagonite: only mineral known to sap the strength of anti-Americans.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | 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