If ‘Assault Weapons’ Are Bad…Why Does DHS Want to Buy 7,000 of Them for ‘Personal Defense’?
WASHINGTON, DC – DECEMBER 19: Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano. Credit: Getty Images
The Department of Homeland Security is seeking to acquire 7,000 5.56x45mm NATO “personal defense weapons” (PDW) — also known as “assault weapons” when owned by civilians. The solicitation, originally posted on June 7, 2012, comes to light as the Obama administration is calling for a ban on semi-automatic rifles and high capacity magazines.
Citing a General Service Administration (GSA) request for proposal (RFP), Steve McGough of RadioViceOnline.com reports that DHS is asking for the 7,000 “select-fire” firearms because they are “suitable for personal defense use in close quarters.” The term select-fire means the weapon can be both semi-automatic and automatic. Civilians are prohibited from obtaining these kinds of weapons.
The RFP describes the firearm as “Personal Defense Weapon (PDW) – 5.56x45mm NATO, select-fire firearm suitable for personal defense use in close quarters and/or when maximum concealment is required.” Additionally, DHS is asking for 30 round magazines that “have a capacity to hold thirty (30) 5.56x45mm NATO rounds.”
Republican New York state Sen. Greg Ball also issued a press release this week bringing attention to the weapons purchase request.
Calls made to DHS seeking information regarding whether or not the RFP was accepted and fulfilled were not immediately returned on Saturday.
Sen. Diane Feinstein (D-Calif.) on Thursday introduced legislation that would enact a so-called “assault weapons” ban. The bill would ban more than 150 firearms and limit magazines to 10 rounds. There is no expiration date on Feinstein’s bill.
Get all the details on the bill, including a list of firearms that would be banned, here.
Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif. speaks during a news conference on Capitol Hill in Washington, Thursday, Jan. 24, 2013, to introduce legislation on assault weapons and high-capacity ammunition feeding devices. Congressional Democrats are reintroducing legislation to ban assault weapons but the measure faces long odds even after last month’s mass school shooting in Newtown, Conn. The measure being unveiled Thursday is authored by Democratic Sen. Dianne Feinstein of California, who wrote the original assault weapons ban. That law expired in 2004 when Congress refused to renew it under pressure from the National Rifle Association. Credit: AP
Critics of such a ban on semi-automatic rifles are already arguing that the government is showing its hypocrisy by essentially saying they are good “personal defense” for them, but not for American citizens. When civilians own semi-automatic rifles, they somehow become “assault weapons.”
That being said, it is reasonable for the Department of Homeland Security to request these rifles as they are indeed effective personal defense weapons. The agency is tasked with keeping Americans safe from those who wish to do the country harm, and its officials should be equipped with all the tools they need to do so effectively.
But what about Americans who want to keep themselves and their families safe from threats? Is a semi-automatic rifle unacceptable for a civilian’s “personal defense” in his or her home? According to some Democratic lawmakers, like Sen. Feinstein, it appears the answer is yes.
Just last week two students in Rochester, N.Y. scared off a pair of home intruders by simply brandishing an AR-15 semi-automatic rifle. One of the students said he believes the weapon saved their lives.
Editor’s note — The author of this post, Jason Howerton, discussed this story with TheBlaze Editor-in-Chief Scott Baker on Monday’s BlazeCast:
In CONTROL, Glenn Beck presents a passionate, fact-based case for guns that reveals why gun control isn’t really about controlling guns at all; it’s about controlling us. Find out more HERE.
Popular Stories
Obama Doesn’t Return Marine’s Salute, Shakes Hand Instead — Is This a Protocol Misstep? 441 Comments
Game-Changing Bombshell? There’s a Major Twist in the Story About a High School Student’s Lesbian Relationship With a Minor 386 Comments
Is the Boy Scouts’ Gay Amendment the ‘Beginning of the End’ for the Group? (Plus: Tell Us Where You Stand) 337 Comments
Church vs. State Complaint Leads City to Remove Christian Crosses on Water Tower — Now See What They’ve Been Replaced With 314 Comments
This Could Be the Most Haunting Statistic You’ll Ever See 264 Comments
Faith
-
Priest Gunned Down by Italian Mobsters Now Beatified
Read More
-
Game-Changing Bombshell? There’s a Major Twist in the Story About a High School Student’s Lesbian Relationship With a Minor
386 Comments
- Is the Boy Scouts’ Gay Amendment the ‘Beginning of the End’ for the Group? (Plus: Tell Us Where You Stand) 337 Comments
-
MSNBC Hosts Martin Bashir and Chris Hayes Claim London Machete Killers Aren’t Terrorists: ‘These Are Just Murderers’
166 Comments
-
Did You Catch the Possibly Policy-Changing Ft. Hood Reference in Obama’s Terror Speech?
102 Comments
Business
-
Have You Had Scotch at a NJ TGI Friday’s Lately? You Might Have Been Drinking Rubbing Alcohol
Read More
-
Venezuelan President Blames Toilet Paper Shortage on the Rich
100 Comments
-
This Terrible Chart Shows the Change in Food Stamp Participation Over the Last 10 Years
Read More
- Disney Makes Absolutely Mortifying Photoshop Mistake Read More
-
Trey Gowdy at It Again — This Time with a Jack Bauer Reference!
121 Comments
Technology
-
LOOK: Woman Claims to Have Photographed UFO in California
120 Comments
-
Lion Named ‘Bonedigger’ and Small Dog Make Most Unlikely Companions
Read More
-
Rocket Bike Sets Land Speed Record — and Uses a Fuel You Wouldn’t Expect
Read More
-
How 3D Printing Technology Created a Special Part for Baby’s Windpipe and Saved His Life
Read More
-
6 Fascinating Spy Gadgets You’ll Probably Want (and Can Have) After Seeing
Read More
Submitting your tip... please wait!
Comments (471)
m14guy
Posted on January 26, 2013 at 4:22pmThe article does not define what “select fire” is in the RFP. Is it 3 round burst or full auto? Frankly if it’s full auto I like my chances. Very, very few can control a full auto rifle or even a semi auto at rapid fire. Just watch a night fire and see where those tracers go. They go about everywhere except where your target is. Back to the article. Looks like the Aparachik is getting very nervous of the Proletariat. They should be nervous…very nervous. You poke a rattlesnake enough you get a response.
Report this comment
rootytoottootin
Posted on January 27, 2013 at 2:26pmDitto!!!! And there are a LOT of rattlesnakes in America!!!
Report this comment
ChiefGeorge
Posted on January 26, 2013 at 4:18pmIts clear to me atleast, that this regime cannot wait for us die hard patriots to…well….just die off.
They are determined to go for the “big erase” of our values, traditions, love of God and country by making sure they do not get passed along. They have come far in their struggle to be turned back now. This is why you see top brass being removed, a maligning of people who are WASP’s by the mass media machine, race division, class warfare.
If we are allowed to continue the peaceful civil culture war and follow it through to its end, they know they will lose it. Because as people begin to migrate away from gun hating high tax states to ones which embrace low taxes and gun ownership, they know this will spell and end to their blue state takeover.
So, its with that that they know they must act and act quickly before we can figure out that the above aforementioned are things we can do as a recourse to their agenda. Look at the EU where even Sarcozy has scrambled to London to escape high taxation. Soon you will see taxes for leaving a state. I think Cali already has something like this in place even if your residence was brief during a year.
Report this comment
TheFederalist
Posted on January 26, 2013 at 4:14pmDamn government hypocrites! Oh yeah… they are “personal defense weapons” to protect government goons, but they are “assault weapons” for civilians made only for killing.
Report this comment
Glock29
Posted on January 26, 2013 at 4:13pmDo you really think they will not confiscate your weapons? History repeats itself and many have already forgotten this.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tta1qhQZWSE&sns=em
Who is the biggest threat to the current administration on our own soil? If you watch the state run media it is the terrible legal gun owners…think about it folks.
Report this comment
outrider
Posted on January 27, 2013 at 4:35pmThe New Orleans gun seizures probably were an experiment so govt could observe how citizens would react. What do you think they learned? That we are a force to be reckoned with? No. They learned that they can get away with it.
What did we learn? We learned that the men and women we’ve hired to protect us and to uphold our Constitutional rights cannot be counted on to do the right thing. The officers in the New Orleans gun confiscation knew their orders were unlawful and unconstitutional, but they obeyed them anyway. And clearly, many of them enjoyed the power.
We learned the bitter truth that our peace officers and military WILL carry out illegal orders against us, the law abiding taxpayers who pay their salaries. We saw that officers were willing to draw down on innocents in order to steal those firearms, and from that we can safely infer they would’ve fired on anyone who resisted.
The N.O. officers had no way of knowing the degree of danger they were creating in the lives of those whose firearms they seized, and they didn’t care. We will never know how many people were injured or killed because the weapons they needed for self-defense had been seized.
We learned that when an officer shows up to seize our guns, no matter what uniform he wears, or which neighbor’s son, or church member’s or co-workers son he is, he is no different than any other intruder who means to injure or kill you and your family. Plan accordingly.
Report this comment
texanpatriot
Posted on January 26, 2013 at 4:13pmWhy would a civilian federal police force order automatic weapons? What is the need? Who is the enemy that such firepower is needed>
In the first revolution there were citizens who were loyal to the king and citizens who were yearned for liberty (their rights would come from the Creator not a king).
What do you think happened when these two groups met in battle? Could one raise his gun and shoot the other? Did one come to the other’s farm and ambush him or demand his weapons? When the militia was formed did the loyalists spy for the king? Were militia members arrested and tortured?
Will those who love liberty in the 21st century face the same questions? Are these posts being monitored? Is there even a secure method on which the liberty forces can communicate?
A lot to think about. Meanwhile automatic weapons are on order for the government to protect itself from the citizens.
Report this comment
ChiefGeorge
Posted on January 26, 2013 at 4:25pmAll very good questions!
I expect the knock on the door any day now.
We may one day see the Chicoms and Russians as liberating forces….think it cannot happen?
5 short years ago, no one would have predicted a Marxist community organizer would be our next president and that we would be dumb enough to elect him again. No one 5 years ago would have predicted all that he has managed to do in such a short period of time. No one! Those who predicted his boot from office were all wrong. I knew he would get a 2nd term and predicted the first election would go in his favor. We are all socialist now! The deal is sealed. Time will tell if we stay free.
Report this comment
searching for the Truth
Posted on January 26, 2013 at 4:13pmFox News front page – not the Blaze.
Report this comment
Chaz208
Posted on January 26, 2013 at 4:10pmCome on y’all….of course they need these firearms. It’s supply and demand. They have some big backorders to fill. DHS and Holder’s DOJ can turn over a hefty profit selling them to Mexican drug cartels.
Report this comment
Glock29
Posted on January 26, 2013 at 4:01pmBetter wake up America! DHS operates within the USA boarders and who lives there? Why is the administration asking our military leaders now if they would fire on American citizens and when they say no they are quietly being removed?
http://www.infowars.com/nobel-peace-prize-nominee-obama-asks-military-leaders-if-they-will-fire-on-us-citizens/
Report this comment
afishfarted
Posted on January 26, 2013 at 3:59pmMove along people ! Nothing to see here !
Signed Officer Barbrady
Report this comment
B-Neil
Posted on January 26, 2013 at 3:56pmWe have more then enough designated Security Departments. We don’t need homeland security. We olso don’t need the Department of (propaganda teaching) Schools. Homeland security combind with the TSA is no more then the begining of the Brown shirt Army, I feel it’s coming. I’d say call me crazy, but please don’t. I don’t want Homeland security to take my rights away.
Report this comment
k8ti
Posted on January 26, 2013 at 3:55pmBecause they only want to take them away from regular American citizens….makes you wonder why.
Report this comment
rootytoottootin
Posted on January 27, 2013 at 2:35pmIt’s like M14GUY said, ‘you poke a rattlesnake enough, you get a response’, well, they, are gearing up because they have poked the rattlesnakes one too many times!
Report this comment
calmandcents
Posted on January 26, 2013 at 3:50pmGiven all of the recent rack ado — e.g. Bank of America freezing the accounts of gun providers — I think the only legitimate response should be that the gun providers should STOP SELLING GUNS TO THE GOVERNMENT. Ultimately, guns in the hands of an irresponsible government will only be used against YOU!
It is time to defund government. . . . . . don’t you think?
Report this comment
rootytoottootin
Posted on January 27, 2013 at 2:37pmDitto & ditto!!
Report this comment
David-FL
Posted on January 26, 2013 at 3:47pmScrounge. Sounds like the BrownShirts huh?
Report this comment
Ghandi was a Republican
Posted on January 26, 2013 at 3:47pmOkay- They gave 2,000 to drug lords and a couple 10,000 to enemy combatants who also use ieds and make assault on U.S. embassies,. But you cannot have one to defend your home, whether you live on the border or not. Whether you live in a high crime neighborhood or not. Whether you are a target for rape or other assault because you are a woman or the elderly or handicapped or just plain small – you may not defend yourself, even with a knife if these socialists get their way.
This is a war on the weakest among us! Forget the war on women.. This is the whole shebang..
Report this comment
neverending
Posted on January 26, 2013 at 3:39pmDoesn’t take a rocket scientist to figure out where this is all going. Would be willing to bet all of this has been in place for some time just waiting the second inauguration of the ruthless thug – and of course this still is just the tip of the iceberg.
Report this comment
MCGIRV
Posted on January 26, 2013 at 3:39pmThese despicable bastards make me sick!
Report this comment
Snowleopard {gallery of cat folks}
Posted on January 26, 2013 at 3:37pmThey want the ‘assault weapons’ for one reason alone – for maximum advantage over the disarmed citizenry of America. We have a tyranny coming and soon under Obama.
Report this comment
Outlaw_Josey_Wales
Posted on January 26, 2013 at 4:08pmA guerilla war against the government of the United States is winnable! The Revolutionary War was guerilla warfare. George Washington’s ragtag army fought the most powerfull army in the world and won. And we all know how Vietnam turned out.
Report this comment
truthnstuff
Posted on January 26, 2013 at 3:34pmThey are arming their civilian army. The gangs, the racist mobs, lowlife welfare thugs, brown shirts. The regime is all about separating the decent, law abiding folks, from the sub human trash they control.
Report this comment
grimmster
Posted on January 26, 2013 at 3:34pm“Where maximum concealment is required”,yea, an m4a3 can be concealed,if you’re wearing a duster.This is all in preparation for the upcoming “disarm Americans” movement,with the help of the UN of course.Hey janet, intidation like this, isnt working, we are ready, and prepared………And truth is, all DHS had to do was go to the military and get the m4′s they about to get rid of,no need to buy new ones……
Report this comment
PIGSWILLNEVERFLY
Posted on January 26, 2013 at 3:26pmHere is a sign written in english, held up in Egypt…telling 0bama what they think of him NOW. It is priceless: It starts out: 0bama, you Jerk………
http://www.mypetawa.nu.mu/archives/214945.php
Report this comment
PIGSWILLNEVERFLY
Posted on January 26, 2013 at 3:29pmbad link above: http://www.mypetjawa.mu.nu/archives/214945.php
Sorry, I need to proof-read my post better before posting. I was missing the j in the link above. My bad
Report this comment
ltdan
Posted on January 26, 2013 at 3:19pmBingo! That’s what we need to do , change the narrative. No longer should we call them assault weapons but but personal defense weapons.
Report this comment
skunkbear
Posted on January 26, 2013 at 6:29pmYou are correct. Language is crucial to any debate. And TPTB are masters of language manipulation. We must turn this to our advantage. Personal Defense Weapons must become our phrase in any discussion with the useful idiots. And we must link the term to the human right of self defense. We must stress the point that self defense is a human right – a right in all of nature actually.
Report this comment
oldjackpinesavage
Posted on January 27, 2013 at 12:56amNow that the Government has labeled these (select fire firearms) personal defense weapons how can the state of New York ban their non auto fire cousins ? What would the Courts make of that?
Report this comment
Sicialian Eyeball
Posted on January 26, 2013 at 3:19pmRead between the lines. That’s where the the real answers are. Seems these people have told so many lies,they have forgotten this rule. I really wish it was 30 years ago.Who’s fooling who?
Report this comment
macpappy
Posted on January 26, 2013 at 3:18pmThe artifcle ask a retroical question, for what reason? To gather hits for the ads. Of course the govenment will always have more guns than any group of citizens that might gather in defience of said govenment. This is not news, it is faux news. This is what The Blaze feeds you now instead of real news. There is real news in the world today, but you won’t find it here.
Report this comment
grimmster
Posted on January 26, 2013 at 3:35pm@smacpappy aka encinom.
Stfu you little puke…….
Report this comment
searching for the Truth
Posted on January 26, 2013 at 3:16pmFox News just released an editorial saying, ” Thousands rally in Washington for gun control.” I promise: If I find that Fox News embellished facts on the numbers , however small, I will stop watching Fox News!!!
Report this comment
piplovestheUSA
Posted on January 26, 2013 at 3:29pmGlenn is saying let them take your guns and fight it in court. I saw an ad here on the Blaze.com to donate to Al Frankens 2014 reelection campaign. I have lost all trust in this place now. Maybe it was a joke but I would not click on it to find out.
Report this comment
grimmster
Posted on January 26, 2013 at 3:37pmFunny searching, i didnt see that editorial, got a link?
Report this comment
grimmster
Posted on January 26, 2013 at 3:40pm@PIP, the franken add is real,my guess is, Beck has no clue what the huffpo rejects have done to the Blaze website.Then again, maybe he doesnt care……
Report this comment
BOUGHT YOUR SILO YET?
Posted on January 26, 2013 at 3:50pmYou still watch Fox? I stopped long ago and very near to dropping GBTV and the Blaze as well. I do not like what I am reading and hearing. Granted, I am not for some knee/jerk reaction; where we all meet down by the big oak with shot guns and torches. But, I would rather die than give up another ounce of freedom.
Report this comment
piplovestheUSA
Posted on January 26, 2013 at 3:52pm@Grimm- Thanks. That is unbelievable. All I needed to know. What a shame. Or sham or something. Glenn better get a handle quick. Also he needs to explain himself much better on the gun taking thing.
Report this comment
searching for the Truth
Posted on January 26, 2013 at 3:58pmUnder headline comment for guns -top right corner.
Report this comment
searching for the Truth
Posted on January 26, 2013 at 4:05pmFront page.
Report this comment
searching for the Truth
Posted on January 26, 2013 at 4:15pmFox News front page editorial – not Blaze.
Report this comment
searching for the Truth
Posted on January 26, 2013 at 4:26pmI’m so angry with the attack on the Second Amendment sometimes, that I wake up sometimes with lip bleeds.
Report this comment
Ghandi was a Republican
Posted on January 26, 2013 at 3:15pmThey need them for the “youth civil defense force, better armed than the military” This “defense” force will be led bu obama handpicked refugees from the crisis torn middle East..
Can’t let it go to waste. Must disarm the citizenry.. This is it.. “Fun-da-mental change”
Report this comment
sillyfreshness
Posted on January 26, 2013 at 3:28pmIf we make Amerika a “gun free zone” then the Secret Service can be gun free, law enforcement can be gun free, even the military can be gun free. Make the White House, Capitol Building, Pentagon, DHS, FEMA, DOJ, ATF, etc. all “gun free zones”. If it’s good enough for the citizens, it’s good enough for the leaders.
Report this comment
DSN397
Posted on January 26, 2013 at 3:49pmObama doesn’t need to go the the middle east to find instructors on urban warfare for his civilian defense corp. (KGB), the south side of Chicago will do just fine. In fact not only will he find experts in the field of murder, but many of them will be black muslims as well. A paring which he will undoubtably find near and dear to his heart.
Further, he won’t have to worry about getting them into the country through our steel trap border security, they’ll already here and in all probibality don’t need the weapons, allowing Obama to laud the reduction in entitlement saving, thus allowing him a raise taxes (increase revenues).
You must give something to recieve something, so not furnishing the thugs in Chicago M16′s will show republicans his good faith regarding entitlement spending, thus requiring them to increase the debt ceiling to $25 billion immediately and allowing for Obama to raise it further without their consultation.
Report this comment