You Don’t Deserve a Machine Gun, Citizen—Because Freedom Is Dangerous!

The ever-so-enlightened argument from our benevolent overlords: “You don’t need a machine gun.” Translation? “You don’t deserve one either.” Because apparently, rights are no longer inherent—they’re doled out by Uncle Sam based on what the government thinks you need.

Let’s rewind the tape. In 1934, Congress passed the National Firearms Act (NFA), effectively regulating machine guns like they were radioactive plutonium. Then, in 1986, the Firearm Owners’ Protection Act added the cherry on top with the Hughes Amendment, banning civilian ownership of newly manufactured full-auto firearms. If your machine gun isn’t registered before 1986, sorry, it’s forbidden fruit—unless, of course, you’re a government agency. Because nothing says “liberty” like a two-tiered system where the state can have whatever it wants, but the people get table scraps.

So why don’t we “deserve” machine guns? Because, according to the anti-gun crowd, we’re just one caffeine-fueled rage quit away from turning into Rambo. Of course, that logic conveniently ignores the fact that machine guns are already tightly regulated, require FBI background checks, cost enough to make a banker wince, and are rarely—if ever—used in crimes. But hey, who needs facts when you’ve got fear-mongering and emotionally charged slogans like “weapons of war”?

Let’s be honest: the “you don’t need it” argument has never been about public safety. It’s about control. If the Second Amendment was based on “needs,” we’d all be limited to single-shot flintlocks, and the First Amendment would only apply to handwritten letters and smoke signals. But this government overreach gets dressed up in press conferences, sold with a bowtie of fake virtue, and delivered to the masses who’ve never even seen a machine gun in real life—yet somehow think they’re everywhere.

And while we’re here, let’s address the absolute hypocrisy. The same politicians protected by armed security with full-auto privileges are the ones saying you shouldn’t have one. It’s not about public safety. It’s about keeping power where they want it—with themselves.

But sure, let’s keep pretending a civilian with a legally owned, $30,000+ pre-1986 registered machine gun is a threat to the republic, while ignoring the endless gun-running scandals, SWAT team abuses, and billions spent arming foreign militants. Totally checks out.

At the end of the day, the Second Amendment wasn’t written so you could hunt deer—it was written so the government would think twice before overreaching. And that’s exactly why they don’t want you owning machine guns.