Jan 272013

When a semi-automatic weapon is in the hands of the average law-abiding citizen, they are, so I’m told, Very Bad Things and should be gotten rid of. But when they are in the hands of government types… why, crank ’em up to full auto!

Personal Defense Weapons Solicitation

Solicitation Number: HSCEMS-12-R-00011
Agency: Department of Homeland Security
Office: Immigration & Customs Enforcement
This announcement is being placed in accordance with the Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) paragraph 5.207.  It is a combined synopsis/solicitation for commercial items.  5.56x45mm NATO, select-fire firearm suitable for personal defense.  This announcement constitutes the only solicitation and proposals are being requested.  See attachments for complete details.

Huh. 5.56mm? Why, that’s the same ammo that goes into the AR-15 Murder Machine, which I’ve been informed is not appropriate for “personal defense.” And yet Homeland security seems to think that full-auto version are fantastic for self defense. Hmmm. Maybe I’ve misunderstood the rather basic info on the solicitation web page. Let’s see what the actual RFP has to say:


The scope of this contract is to provide a total of up to 7,000 5.56x45mm North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) personal defense weapons (PDW) throughout the life of this contract to numerous Department of Homeland Security components.

Hmmm. But surely they don’t mean the 5.56mm ammo of evil repute, that nobody goes hunting with, and which is solely used for murder?

ANSI/SAAMI Z299.4-1992: Voluntary Industry Performance Standards for Pressure & Velocity of Centerfire Rifle Sporting Ammunition for the Use of Commercial Manufacturers

“Sporting Ammunition?”

And then:

3.1 General. DHS and its components have a requirement for a 5.56x45mm NATO, select-fire firearm suitable for personal defense use in close quarters and/or when maximum concealment is required.

“Close quarters?’ But surely they don’t mean within buildings. You can’t use an AR-15 for self defense in your *house,*, it’ll blow through the wall, through the school next door and halfway through that bus full of nuns and doe-eyed orphans!

3.9.10 The action shall be capable of accepting all standard NATO STANAG 20 and 30 round M16 magazines (NSN 1005-00-921-5004) and Magpul 30 round PMAG (NSN 1005-01-576-5159).

A thirty round magazine??? As Piers Morgan would bleat, “Why do you need a 30-round clip for your murder machine?”

Surely this call for government agents to be equipped with fully automatic assault weapons must be a fluke, right? Right?

According to the Huffington Post:

(Feinstein’s gun-grab bill) exempts more than 2,200 hunting and sporting weapons; any gun manually operated by a bolt, pump, lever or slide action; any weapons used by government officials and law enforcement; and any weapons legally owned as of the date of the bill’s enactment.

Note: Diane Feinstein is a “government official.”

So… once again it’s clear: one rule of law for you, another quite different one for them.


 Posted by at 9:44 pm
  • LordJim

    The government owns Minuteman III ICBMs, should you also be allowed to own them?

    • Anonymous

      So you honestly think the US FedGuv is going to use Minuteman missiles on the American public? Wow, you must be *some* kind of paranoid conspiracy whackjob.

      • publiusr

        Well, Elon Musk already has double the Titan IV capability. He has an effective ICBM right now.

        As for the gun thing, I think every soldier should look like Clint Walker and have BARs, if I had my druthers’

      • LordJim

        Why shouldn’t the government be allowed to use full automatic weapons within the United States? Criminals use them, so police need to the appropriate weapons so they won’t be outgunned.

        You, on the other hand, have no need for a full automatic weapon.

        • Anonymous

          > Criminals use them, so police need to the appropriate weapons so they won’t be outgunned.

          If a criminal has a full-auto AK-47, the appropriate weapon for the police to respond with is *not* a full-auto AK-47 or M-16. The appropriate weapon is a semi-auto or even bolt action, at some range.

          > You, on the other hand, have no need for a full automatic weapon.

          But you just said that the police need them. Since you think that the appropriate response to a criminal with a full auto is another full auto, since the first person on the scene of a crime is almost always a civilian, then the civilians should have a full auto.

          Secondly: if the government has full autos, then it’s appropriate for the citizenry to have full autos in the event that they need to go up against the government.

          Thirdly: It has nothing to do with what I “need.” The 1st Amendment protects your right (well, not *your* right, since you seem to be a Canuck) to go to whatever church you want. You don’t *need* to go to any particular church… nor do you *need* to *not* be forced to go to some specified church. If the only rights that are to be respected are the ones based on need, then the government can tell you to spend your Fridays at a Sunni mosque and to read only a certain official government newspaper. You certainly don’t *need* to comment on various and sundry personal blogs.

    • Herp McDerp

      The government owns Minuteman III ICBMs, should you also be allowed to own them?

      Does the Department of Homeland Security own ICBMs?

      Who does the United States government intend to fight with ICBMs? Who does the U.S. government’s Department of Homeland Security — you know, the people who do their thing here inside the United States — intend to fight using automatic weapons?

      By the way, check the Constitution — Congress is authorized to issue letters of marque and reprisal. In other words, the Constitution expressly enables the ownership and use of privately owned warships and their armament. Now, that particular clause hasn’t been used for a long time, but it’s still there … and it definitely indicates Original Intent.

  • Ken R

    I’m not going to argue about this being a ‘good’ gun or a ‘bad’ gun, I’m curious what it is.

    With a purchase of 7,000 guns this isn’t going to be some all new design. So I figured its already out there already.

    A quick google search shows:

    Shortened M-4s

    New bullpup short rifle with lots of M4 parts.

    Seeing as the purpose of this little rifle is to protect America, and I took an oath to preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution from all enemies, foreign and domestic, I deserve one to help me keep my oath.

  • Rick

    methinks they’ll make sure these are SBR’d and suppressor-capable, just like the rifles no law abiding private citizen can own in Feinstein’s native California. And if they’re looking at the SCAR platform, folding stocks with a verboten OAL waay under 26 inches in a firing configuration.