Can you believe the hypocricy?


PDA






zombieoutfitters
June 2, 2009, 09:55 AM
June 2, 2009. The United States Government is establishing a neighborhood watch program. They are granting residents 3 weeks training with AK47’s to protect their family and homes, basic security training, government issued assault rifles and continued supervision to help secure neighborhoods. Residents that participate are compensated with a monetary stipend and their community gets funds for further development.

Local government officials say, “This will be successful because people in the community defend themselves through their own hands…” US Special Forces commanders say, “It’s that perception of security that’s allowing the people to feel a change in their environment… That allows for the perception of security to continue, and the population now takes responsibility for their own security.”

Where is this happening? Wardak Province, Afghanistan.

That’s right. In times when US citizens fear that rights to bear arms are at risk from being taken away by our legislators, our very same government’s military arm is handing firearms (those dreaded “assault weapons” no less), training, and money to residents in other countries to defend themselves from “the bad guys”. Ironic? Yes.

Lawfully armed citizens of the United States have to fight legislation against firearms-related bans almost every day on the Federal, State and local level. In one breath US government officials say guns are the problem in Mexico and are why crime is so prevalent. In early 2009 this kick-off argument was used to test the waters for restricting or in some cases banning US citizen’s right to individually bear arms. Yet in another breath our US military is condoning, supporting and supplying foreign residents with the very same assault weapons for personal protection that legislators claim are “the problem” in Mexico and on our own soil.

That begs a ridiculous but pointed question. Why don’t we simply create legislation in Afghanistan to make all guns and explosives illegal? The Taliban will be forced to surrender their weapons and explosives and everyone will be safe, right? Hmmmm, not sure it works like that. It doesn’t seem to be working for Mexico. That is why anti-firearms legislation will NEVER work as a tool against crime in the US either.

All it takes is a look at our neighbors (Mexico) or across the globe (Afghanistan) to understand that an armed public is the key to a secure and TRULY free nation where individual liberties and freedoms are secure from those who would deprive us of them.

Quotes courtesy of June 2, 2009 NPR Article titled “U.S. Helps Afghans Assume Control Of Local Security” http://www.wbur.org/2009/06/02/afghan-security

If you enjoyed reading about "Can you believe the hypocricy?" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
shaggy430
June 2, 2009, 09:57 AM
Doesn't everyone in Afghanistan have AK47's anyways?

Marcus5aurelius
June 2, 2009, 11:19 AM
Along with training already....why don't they understand that giving them weapons and money will not secure the country...Didn't they notice that all the tanks they destroyed in Iraq were given to them to fight Iran....their loyalty is not to the US and giving them more money and weapons will not turn the loyalty, they will still hate us and try to kill us but now we give them guns....

DHJenkins
June 2, 2009, 01:01 PM
Yes, I can, because arming & training local citizens to protect themselves in the absence of an 'acceptable government' is a military tradition.

It sucks, but them's the breaks in a war zone.

Mohawk
June 2, 2009, 03:20 PM
To the original OP. Could you please be more specific as to who is actually trying to take our guns aways right now and curtail the 2nd. Ammendment? Oh I know the Brady Bunch has an ongoing campaign(that's their job) and some Senator named McCarthy (I think?) keeps introducing a bill every year that has no sponsors to speak of, and it goes right to committee, never to be heard from again. lets see now, the Heller Decision came down last fall, the CCW in National parks was instituted by the bush Admin also last fall and recently affirmed by the Obama controlled legislature last month. What exactly has happened that you are aware of, to raise the red flags right now? What inside info do you have concerning threats to our rights that I and others are not aware of? Thanks for any help you can provide. I've been feeling pretty good concerning the progress we have made regarding gun rights over the last few years, maybe I should get all paranoid and start worrying again. Oh, and please don't tell me what you think "might" happen. I prefer facts and actual threats rather than some lay person's postulations.

rbernie
June 2, 2009, 05:05 PM
FYI - I have deleted content that was nonsensical or unintelligible or that added nothing to the discussion. Let's try to keep this one on-track, please.

Questions about moderatin' should be PMed to the mods, as always.

mljdeckard
June 2, 2009, 05:07 PM
I have surprised a couple of antis who didn't know that we even let Iraqi homes keep automatic rifles for self-protection.

Prion
June 2, 2009, 05:16 PM
And we're making comparisons between the US and Afghanistan and their respective firearms situation because the countries are so similiar?

If the US was engaged in a civil war those on the governments side might also be issued arms.

Now what's for lunch? Apples or oranges?

bababooey32
June 2, 2009, 05:58 PM
I prefer facts and actual threats rather than some lay person's postulations.

Ask and you shall receive:

Well, as President Obama indicated during the campaign, there are just a few gun-related changes that we would like to make, and among them would be to reinstitute the ban on the sale of assault weapons.

-Eric Holder, Attorney General of the United States on February 25th, 2009 via CBS News (http://www.cbsnews.com/blogs/2009/02/26/politics/politicalhotsheet/entry4831751.shtml)

The Second Amendment Does Not Protect Firearms Possession or Use That Is Unrelated To Participation In A Well-Regulated Militia

and

Recognition of an expansive individual right to keep and bear arms for private purposes will make it more difficult for the government to defend present and future firearms laws.

- Eric Holder, Former Assistant AG of the united States in an Amicus Curiae brief in Heller Here is the brief in full (http://www.gurapossessky.com/news/parker/documents/BriefforFormerDOJOfficialsasAmiciCuriae.pdf)

With regard to now President Obama's voting record in the Ilinois senate:

Obama regularly supported gun-control measures, including a ban on semiautomatic "assault weapons" and a limit on handgun purchases to one a month.

He also opposed letting people use a self-defense argument if charged with violating local handgun bans by using weapons in their homes.

via CBS News (http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2007/01/17/politics/main2369157.shtml)

...the right to possess a gun is clearly not a fundamental right.

-Circuit Court Judge Sonia Sotomayor in United States v. Sanchez-Villar, 99 Fed.Appx. 256, 2004 WL 962938 (2d. Cir. 2004)(Summary Order of Judges Sack, Sotomayor & Kaplan

I think it is a scandal that this president did not authorize a renewal of the assault weapons ban.

-Junior Senator from IL, [B]Barack Obama - 2004 Illinois Senate Debate #4 (http://www.ontheissues.org/IL_2004_Senate_3rd.htm)


Ban the sale or transfer of all forms of semi-automatic weapons.
Increase state restrictions on the purchase and possession of firearms.
Require manufacturers to provide child-safety locks with firearms.


-Priciples agreed to by Barack Obama on 1998 IL State Legislative National Political Awareness Test (http://www.ontheissues.org/Barack_Obama.htm#Gun_Control)Jul 2, 1998


There's plenty more clear evidence of many politicians desires to dismantle our RKBA, if you'd like to see it. Whether it will actually happen or not is anyone's guess. Personally, I never thought the government would build Corvettes, but here we are!

rondog
June 2, 2009, 06:05 PM
http://i18.photobucket.com/albums/b150/rinselman/guns/poster4.jpg

rogertc1
June 2, 2009, 06:12 PM
President Obama is pro gun. I have not seen any changes in gun laws. No bans.

bababooey32
June 2, 2009, 06:15 PM
Just because he hasn't succeeded in implementing his desired legislation, doesn't make him "pro-gun". That's like saying Ahmadinejad doesn't want a nuke because he doesn't have a nuke.

See my post above for evidence of this adminstration's stance on the 2nd amendment. they are quite clear about it, even if they are currently unable to act on it.

If you enjoyed reading about "Can you believe the hypocricy?" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!