Posted on 07/28/2022 12:57:14 PM PDT by libstripper
Today the House Committee on Oversight and Reform held the first in a series of hearings designed to support efforts to enact new gun control laws. Invited to testify at the hearing were the CEOs of a number of prominent firearms manufacturing companies, including Daniel Defense, Smith & Wesson, Sig Sauer and others. If you find yourself wondering what these CEOs have to do with this ongoing process, you’re not alone, but most of them agreed to show up. Ahead of the hearing, the committee released a lengthy statement penned by Democratic Chairwoman Carolyn B. Maloney. In it, she indicated that they would be releasing their findings from an “investigation” into the sales reports of the various companies as if it was really all that difficult to find their sales records. Maloney announced what she clearly seemed to think was a shocking statistic. The combined companies racked up more than one billion dollars in sales of certain styles of semiautomatic long rifles that Democrats refer to as “assault weapons.” Oh, and they advertise their products. You’re shocked, I know. Here are a couple of excerpts from Maloney’s letter.
(Excerpt) Read more at hotair.com ...
Democrats are often not in their right minds.
Commonly used:✔
Military weapon:❌
Seems pretty clear to me.
CC
Democrats are tyrants. Tyrants always want helpless subjects.
The second amendment is about "Sic Semper Tyrannis" and as such it is specifically intended to protect military arms of ALL kinds.
Considering that the Left is going to the mat for grooming children it seems we know, or should know, what they ultimately want to do to the objects they seek to exercise their power on.
Bob Hope once joked that he was leaving California before homosexuality becomes mandatory ... I’ve really no doubt that the Antichrist will both be a flaming poofter and insist everyone else be open to it too.
And the republicans roll over.
Bingo!
That which is not prohibited is mandatory ... and you know damn well they won’t prohibit buggery.
It’s not unusual for previous generations of so-called military weapons being used for sporting purposes. How many Springfield 1903’s and Mauser 98’s became damn fine deer rifles? Tons and tons.
CC
And it’s all nice and lovely that We the People are able to do that. And it’s totally protected by 2A.
But that’s not why we have 2A and we better quit being afraid to talk about it.
Sic Semper Tyrannis.
And there’s noting “so-called” about that 1903 Springfield, or K98, or M1, or No.4 Enfield, or Mosin-Nagant, or SKS, or whatever being military arms. They’re absolutely military. Obsolete, perhaps, but military all the same.
I know. I’m just pointing out that today’s “military weapons” are often tomorrows sporting pieces. I get that the 2A is the “safety valve” for tyranny.
CC
I agree. In fact, we should start demanding to be as well armed as the military.
Screw them for trying to take away the paltry weapons we have.
The 2nd Amendment says
“...the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.”.
It does not say “non-military arms”, or “commonly used arms”. It just says Arms. “Arms” is a generic term for “weapon”, and includes not just firearms, but also knives, swords, spears, etc.
One may argue that it also includes artillery and grenades. Grenades were commonly in use in the 18th century armies.
Hopefully, at LEAST one of the CEOs testifying has the ware withal to make these congress critters look completely ridiculous.
Or better, completely humiliate them.
Maloney represents the borough of Manhattan, the center of snobbish New York City.
“Who in their right mind would own any kind of fierarm in that white castle of progressive thinking?”
answer: as one 1950’s movie said, “This is the city. There are 71/2 million stories a day to be told. This is one of them.”
“It’s not unusual for previous generations of so-called military weapons being used for sporting purposes. How many Springfield 1903’s and Mauser 98’s became damn fine deer rifles? Tons and tons.”
Because when the army decided on a new gun, they sold off the old guns cheap. Plus the factories that were making the old guns for the military could switch to supplying the civilian market.
That's what I was thinking. AR style rifles are the very definition of "common use." As per the SCOTUS decision that *should* put them out of reach of the leftist's civilian disarmament dreams... But when have laws ever meant anything to a 'rat / leftist?
I am 100% convinced the left doesn't give a rat's backside about public safety - at all. They want power. The left only wants "gun control" as an incremental approach to complete civilian disarmament. The left wants us disarmed because they have hopes/dreams/desires/plans for us so abhorrent to freedom-loving Americans that we would take up arms against them. Therefore they have to disarm us first.
Maybe I’m preaching to the choir, but sometimes the choir can benefit from hearing a bit. ;’}
If there were no NFA, how many semi-auto AR-15s do you think Americans would own?
I contend that the answer is zero. Gene Stoner designed it with a three position happy-switch, and that’s what we’d all have. And today’s military rifle would also be today’s sporting rifle. For reference, the same original Thompson SMG was marketed to Citizens as to government agencies. That was pre-NFA, before the government really got too big for its britches.
I’m sure you know all that ... just ranting.
But it’s true.
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.