Previous Post
Next Post

RFB and boar (courtesy

“We all know that hunting rifles are offensive devices. With them, we can bring down an animal from a distance. All the high-profile assassinations of the 20th century done with long guns were effected with the common hunting rifles or nearly identical military surplus bolt actions. So we know the congressional creatures who want us disarmed are more worried about weaker, shorter range but faster handling defensive arms. In other words, they don’t expect Americans to take the initiative and go after them personally with a bolt 30-06 or a lever 30-30, but they do want us stripped with the ARs and AKs suitable for fending off freelance or government criminals. They view us as prey and themselves as meta-predators.” – Oleg Volk, My hunting rifle and Katyn forest [via

Previous Post
Next Post


  1. Of course.When the dollar crashes,and it will,they do not want you to be capable of defending agaist mob attacks.What TPTB want is you to beg for govt intervention.Submit.God help us when the cork pops.

    • [OT] I read that last sentence as “… when the pork cops” … and spent a couple of seconds wondering where the verb went.

    • for a simple thought experiment: What happens when 51% of the voting population becomes ‘net receivers’ of government money? Print baby Print.
      not that we’re not doing that already, but it becomes a black hole from which there is little chance of turning back. See Europe.

  2. “In other words, they don’t expect Americans to take the initiative and go after them personally with a bolt 30-06 or a lever 30-30,”

    Not so sure. I think a sawed off 12 gauge, a couple of concealable pistols, and a good long range bolt action with 10x scope would be the most heckling weapons during any offensive scenario. Remember, the colonists kicked ass with their rifled muskets, far away from enemy lines.

    Not that i ever think about that kind of stuff.

  3. This is an interesting take on why they’re going after scary black rifles but in my humble opinion, you’re giving them (gun-banners) way too much credit for thinking this through. My opinion is that they see something that they can maybe get public opinion behind and they’re grabbing at that straw knowing full well that the next tragedy will make the push for the next evil weapon that much easier. The only high level strategy in play here is incrementalism. Beyond that, they’re playing checkers not chess.

    • I agree. They’ll ban whatever they think think they can get away with at this point. The term “assault weapon” has nothing to do with pistol grips, or telescoping stocks, or bayonet lugs. It’s a Rorschach test. It’s meant to represent, in the minds of each individual voter, the firearms they think are too scary to leave in civilian hands, wherever that particular individual chooses to draw that line. Like “common-sense” or “reasonable” gun control, it’s a means of manufacturing the illusion of consensus.

  4. Actually, RFK was shot with 2 or 3 HANDGUNS. And it’s at least possible Sirhan’s gun wasn’t one of them. Not a sure thing, but possible.

  5. That picture is clearly a photoshop, RFB’s don’t exist in the wild, nevermind an OD green one. Next they will be trying to convince us someone actually has a KSG…

    • That is, scrap the constitution and renege on your duties as an American and public servant to instead become an instrument of a (so far, future, thank God) corrupt state force. I pray to God that day never comes and these (evil black) rifles never have to be put to use (which is what they are meant to do, to keep a gov in check so they never even try to disarm the people in the first place, which actually gives them two purposes, one: a threat, and two: an action).


Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here