General Wesley Clark is in good company

Via Sebastian I discovered something General Wesley Clark said:



If people want machine guns, let them join the military. We got em! But for public and personal use, absolutely not.


That is eerily close to something else said by a national leader a few decades ago:



If any citizen wants to possess arms, let him join the Party.


Adolf Hitler


That isn’t the only instance either. See also the Council of People’s Commissars a few decades before Hitler.


You can tell a lot about a person by the company he keeps.

10 thoughts on “General Wesley Clark is in good company

  1. I am just a big of a gun nut as the next reader, but I think that full auto is a bit over the line. I was an infantryman for 7 years and a machinegunner for most of that time. I am going to have to go with the general and say if you want a machine gun join the military. Also, there is a big difference between what Hitler said and what Gen. Clark said. And for all the haters out there, I do think we should be able to have “standard mags” and any black rifle we want, just not full auto. If you want full auto save you pennies and get a class 3.
    Infantry Leads The Way

  2. It looks like I stand corrected… I read the whole quote and it looks like he doesnt like our scary black guns either.

    I think we need to re-institute the assault weapons ban in the United States. If people want machine guns, let them join the military. We got em! But for public and personal use, absolutely not. That’s how they are getting across the border, and what the Mexican Government has asked of us is, “Please, cut off the flow of machine guns coming from the United States into Mexico.”

  3. I find that ex- egg-salad-hat Military guys like Clark are less and less reliable as defenders of a distinctly Civillian Tradition – The Militia Corps being all *us* public-people and non-professional defenders of property and Liberty. Even going back to the Federalist Era, from reading Stephen Halbrook’s The Founders’ Second Ammendment, the Militzry guys tend to look down their noses (past the acres of medals and campaign ribbons), upon the leetle peoples with guns. My direct knowledge of such types is only through my dad’s class association from Annapolis – which might reflect/skew towards the Navy, but includes and an Admiral’s (not my dad but his buddy) strong affinity for our current president (which my Lefty father shares)…

  4. I served for eight years – infantry and data processing. The problem with ‘joining the service to shoot machine guns’ is that they’re not yours, they belong to the Marine Corps. Also, they just don’t let you check weapons out of the armory and go shoot them any old time you want.

    Which always made me sad: I’m a good guy, why can’t I check out ‘my’ M249 on Saturday and go shooting? I’ll _buy_ my own 5.56 and find a range offbase. I’ll even clean it before Monday, honest.

    They never bought that argument.

  5. The similarities of Hitler and Obama are too spooky, some have compared him to Kennedy and Lincoln, not a comparison I would like given the ultimate ending, but the Hitler thing is a lot closer to truth than many would care to accept or believe…

  6. TexasFred is making a valid comparison (Hitler-Obama). I have studied Hitler and the Third Reich since high school. Obama and whoever pulls his strings is using the Hitler playbook down to the letter. I interviewed an “ex” Nazi tank commander when in college and he was also an SS officer. What he confided in me was astounding. Obama is on the same track including mirroring the destruction/take-over of the German economic system.

    Wait for the Obama internal “security” force to become operational. They will have allegience to BHO only. No US Constitutional limits or other laws will apply. ACORN with guns.

  7. Ben: I am just a big of a gun nut as the next reader
    Me: No you’re not. Quit fooling yourself and desparaging me.

    Ben: If you want full auto save you pennies and get a class 3.
    Me: Well which is it? Should us lowly civvies be “allowed” to have machine guns or not? Is it “over the line” or not? If it’s not, why should it cost an arm and a leg instead of being an option code?

  8. In this country the power belongs to the people (or so was the intent). Ben; you need to do a little more studying of the founding principles of this country, and of the constitution you were defending while in the service. I should be able to buy, over the counter, anything any infantryman or cop uses. Who’s in charge of this country– the people or the military? I hope you were fighting for the principles of freedom and liberty, not just to keep some enemy away from this or that hunk of dirt. Soldiers in every dictatorship and gang do the latter, but not the former.

  9. To put it another way, we can use pure logic. If machineguns are a legitimate tool of defense, why should I be deprived of them? Am I obliged to die in any situation where a machinegun might save my life? How would you reconcile that with the second amendment and all the purposes and ideas behind it?

    If a machinegun is not a legitimate tool of defense, what are soldiers, government agents and cops doing with them?

  10. Furthermore; we all know that criminals can get machineguns illegally. There’s probably an armory in your own home town you could break into, or infiltrate, of you were willing to break the law. We all know there are dirty cops. Police departments in large cities “lose” subguns and M-16 variants on a fairly regular basis. Then there is the international black market. If you can get a ton of cocaine, you can get an illegal machinegun far more easily.

    Are you saying, Ben, that (post ’86) machineguns in the civilian population should be reserved for criminals’ use exclusively?

Comments are closed.