Posted on 02/11/2013 5:50:34 AM PST by shortstop
Why is the government disarming us at the same time it is arming itself?
Not wanting to sound paranoid, or like a conspiracy theorist, I think it is nonetheless fair to ask: What foe is the federal government arming itself against?
And should the American people be concerned about a federal government that takes away their guns while simultaneously stockpiling hundreds of millions of rounds of ammunition for its own domestic security use?
As the president and Democratic politicians do their best to geld the Second Amendment, which was intended to protect the people against government oppression, the government they lead is building an arsenal of domestic arms that rivals both Nazi Germany and the Soviet Union.
Since last spring, the Department of Homeland Security has contracted to buy more than 1.6 billion rounds of ammunition. That’s enough bullets to shoot everyone in the United States five times.
A nation with a Defense Department as large as ours needs ammunition, clearly, but these 1.6 billion rounds weren’t bought by the military. Very little of it is in calibers that the military uses, and almost all of it is of a type banned for military use by the Geneva Conventions.
These bullets aren’t for foreign battlefields, they are for domestic control.
Here are some of the recent purchases: 450 million rounds of .40 caliber jacketed hollow point – enough to shoot every man, woman and child in the United States, Canada and Mexico – another 200 million rounds of .40 caliber jacketed hollow point; and just last week, a request for bids to purchase 10 million rounds of .40 caliber jacketed hollow point, 10 million rounds of 9mm jacketed hollow point and, finally, 1.9 million rounds of 9mm full metal jacket ammunition.
Of those 671.9 million bullets, only 1.9 million – under international treaty – could be used by our military against a foreign enemy.
That leaves 670 million for us.
And one might justifiably ask what purpose the federal government has in mind for all that ammunition.
Enough ammunition – if you extrapolated from the worst month of the combined Iraq and Afghanistan wars – to sustain the daily heated combat of a raging war for some 25 years.
No government has ever so extensively armed itself against its citizens.
Which, from the perspective of history, should be alarming. No culture or nation, in any continent or time, has long been free of government tyranny. Sometimes it has been tribal warlords, or feudal princes, or chancellors and kings. But it has always been somebody. Even today, it is clear that large portions of the global population live under tyranny.
To presume that an oppressive or tyrannical regime could not rise in the United States is to deny human nature and history. It is ironic that liberals who mock the belief in American exceptionalism steadfastly claim that a totalitarian or dictatorial lust could never grip the heart of an American leader -- even though such evil runs like a river through the whole of human history.
The founding fathers and leaders of both parties through the 1980s warned of an over-powerful government and of the possibility of tyranny. History and heritage teach us that government can become a cancer, and that Hitlers and Stalins and Castros and Maos can spring up at any time among any people.
So why not us?
Why do we automatically presume our government and its operators are benign, and those who warn of oppression are insane?
Yes, we have rule of law. Or at least we have in the past. And, yes, rule of law is designed to restrain the tyrant. The checks and balances of our Constitution, and the liberties of the Bill of Rights, were all intended to keep governments and megalomaniacs on a very short leash.
But rule of law is ignored, rights are restricted, the balances of power within the federal government and between the state and federal governments are all ignored and perverted. The mechanisms of restraint have been stripped from our government.
And now they are buying bullets.
Incomprehensible quantities of bullets.
Bullets that cannot be fired at our enemies. Bullets that can only be fired at us.
And at the same time they are buying these bullets, they are taking away ours. Legislation is afoot to strip some types of rifles from private ownership, and to outlaw the magazines which make modern firearms effective. In the Democrat states, ammunition sales are registered and recorded, gun ownership is harassed and confiscation is discussed.
Even the massive government purchases, by hogging resources and production capacity, serve to disarm citizens, by making civilian ammunition scarce and expensive.
The Second Amendment was put in the Constitution to make sure the people could replace by violent means, if necessary, an oppressive government. It includes and affords many other privileges as well, from hunting to national defense, but it is fundamentally about self-defense – about the ability to fight to protect yourself, your family, your home, your faith and your freedom.
Against all comers, including the government.
And just as it expands in an unprecedented fashion its domestic offensive capability, the government is seeking to strip us of our already-limited defensive capability.
And that makes you wonder why.
Wondering such things doesn’t make you a kook, or an extremist, or some other vilification so quick to fall from Democrat lips.
It makes you a concerned American.
Who grows all the more concerned by the fact our questions go unanswered, and our rights go unprotected.
So, from what companies are they purchasing the weapons to fire these bullets?
Someday soon, I’m hoping to see one hell of a surplus sale.
Not to worry, for when the GW crowd finds out how much carbon this will spew into the atmosphere...
Following DHS employees home would be easy for a nutcase like Dornan.
Why s mnay?
They’re lousy shots.
I think it’s called “cornering the market.”
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.