Wondering if this may be an inauguration policy of long standing that transcends administrations, Gun Rights Examiner made a cursory search and found something even more curious. In the 2009 Inaugural Parade, the United States Navy marched with rifles that had not been so disabled... [More]Today's Gun Rights Examiner report notes a public statement about trust that has thus far remained under the radar, as per the administration's M.O.
Saturday, February 09, 2013
Disabled Marine rifles at inauguration signal shift in administration policy (Photos)
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
5 comments:
Huh. Didn't watch the coronation, so I never caught that.
Not sure if that level of distrust is bad sign or a good sign.
An argument the antis like to use is that civilians don't stand a chance against the military, so we don't need rifles that make some people pee themselves.
Then we see this.
In 2008, President Bush went to Ft. Bragg and visited a review of the 82nd Airborne. They all had their firing pins removed, mag springs and followers removed, and I seem to recall their bayonets zip tied into their sheaths.
Anon, I have no problem believing disabling guns in the presence of the president has been a longstanding practice. The difference here is it has been done in such a highly visible way so that others could notice it, and that is a change from the last inauguration parade. I believe the decision was deliberate and had a reason if not a message.
Just indulging my weird sense of humor and playing devil's advocate, but...
Maybe the message was from the Marines: "If screaming hordes of Al Qaeda come for ya, Prezzie, yer own yer own." [grin]
Post a Comment