After watching the talking heads asking “Why do we need assault rifles?” it should be obvious.
I will use David Gregory of NBC’s “Meet the Press” badgering Wayne LaPierre, National Rifle Association chief executive officer, as an example.
LaPierre was trying to use good common sense in explaining that gun-free zones are an invitation for psychopaths to prey on schoolchildren, and that a trained, armed officer is the best deterrent for stopping these evil people.
Politicians like U.S. Sens.Charles Schumer, D-N.Y., Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif., and others piled on, contending that “gun control” is the only alternative to tragedies such as the one in Newtown, Conn., in December.
Those politicians’ motives are strictly political. They know armed people are a threat to their goal of total government control.
This question arises each time we have a tragedy of this nature: “Why do citizens need assault weapons?” Allow me to answer that question.
The aforementioned senators were part and parcel to the violation of our Posse Comitatus Statute along with Attorney General Janet Reno when law enforcement used armored vehicles to incinerate 80 Branch Davidians in Waco, Texas, on April 19, 1993. Prior to that, three people were killed in August 1992 at Ruby Ridge, Idaho, for being white separatists.
The two accounts are called “tyranny,” and that is why we as citizens need to be armed.
By the way, no citizen owns an “assault rifle”; that is just a term to scare the uninformed into agreeing with the erosion of the U.S. Constitution.
President Barack Obama just won a second term largely by using class envy to continue to divide and conquer this nation. He promised the “have-nots” the wealth of the “haves,” knowing he could influence popular opinions and votes that way.
Roughly half of the population does not care about trading liberty for security; hence, they unwittingly become enablers to destroy the U.S. Constitution.