
Thursday, August 26, 2021 by: Lance D Johnson

(Natural News) The Biden regime desperately wants to put the “unvaccinated” on a “no fly list” — permanently segregating tens of millions of innocent Americans from air travel. The tyranny doesn’t end there. Once Americans are placed on a “no fly list” and labeled domestic terrorists, they can be put on a “no gun list” — leading to firearm confiscation and forever depriving Americans of their right to keep and bear arms.
This is all being done intentionally, step-by-step, and in a clandestine way, because it is so much easier to round up dissenting Americans and put them in internment camps when they are unarmed and stereotyped as a subhuman class of citizens.
The Department of Homeland Security has already claimed that anyone who opposes vaccines, masks, social distancing or lockdowns poses a “potential terror threat” to society. Their latest memo labels Americans as “extremists” if they do not go along with travel restrictions and bodily mandates.
The memo states, “These extremists may seek to exploit the emergence of COVID-19 variants by viewing the potential re-establishment of public health restrictions across the United States as a rationale to conduct attacks. Pandemic-related stressors have contributed to increased societal strains and tensions, driving several plots by domestic violent extremists, and they may contribute to more violence this year.”
The Democrats have already introduced HR 4980, directing “the Secretary of Homeland Security to ensure that any individual traveling on a flight that departs from or arrives to an airport inside the United States or a territory of the United States is fully vaccinated against COVID-19, and for other purposes.” The Atlantic and other controlled media outlets parroted the Orwellian proposal.
If this escalates, then tens of millions of Americans will be classified as “domestic terrorists” banned from travel, and then stripped of their firearms. First, they put you on the no-fly list, then they can automatically put you on a no-gun-buy list, as the Democrats have proposed for years. The No Fly, No Buy, Gun Control law has bipartisan support. Joe Biden, Barack Obama, Hillary Clinton, and Donald Trump have all supported a national security system that places Americans on a “no fly list” if there is reasonable suspicion to believe they pose a threat to public safety. These politicians all agree that Americans who are placed on this “no fly list” should also be put on a “no gun buy list” that would block them from purchasing firearms from a federally licensed dealer.
With tens of millions of Americans disarmed and wrongfully classified as domestic terrorists, the government can then round these people up and put them in the CDC internment camps. The CDC has proposed a “shielding approach” to future public health initiatives, establishing “a group of shelters such as schools, community buildings within a camp/sector (max 50 high-risk individuals per single green zone) where high-risk individuals (the unvaccinated) are physically isolated together.”
Once their firearms are taken and they are put on a list, unvaccinated people will be easier to confront, door-to-door, as the Biden regime initially planned. It will be much easier to physically overpower and take the unvaccinated to these CDC internment camps, where they can easily be reeducated, abused, forcibly inoculated, exterminated or forced into slave labor (like communist China).
Governments have already developed armies of contact tracers to track people down, monitor their whereabouts and confine them in their homes. Now, the National Guard is currently hiring people to work as “internment resettlement specialists” and “correctional officer, internment resettlement specialists.” The job description for these includes: supervision of confinement and detention operations; external security of facilities; providing counseling/guidance to individual prisoners within a rehabilitative program; and maintaining records of prisoners/internees and their programs.
Make no mistake about it: If these communist criminals can defraud, intimidate,and coerce millions of Americans to give up their body autonomy and inject a deadly bioweapon, then they are certainly capable of targeting those who don’t comply, stripping Americans of their self defense rights, and relocating them to internment camps that are already being approved through emergency order on American soil.
Sources include:
This is actually really funny and really embarrassing on behalf of liberals.
Hollywood actor Tom Arnold took to Twitter to encourage liberal men to take up arms (their dads’ hunting rifles to be exact) to confront Trump supporters.
He wrote, “[The] 2nd Amendment is for everyone including black men with long guns but it’s fucking time for us white liberal men to stand up for our brothers & sisters. Borrow our dad’s hunting rifles & go nose to nose with Trump’s gang of misfit tools. Let’s do it.”
This is embarrassing for the simple fact that these liberal “men” have to go borrow a hunting rifle from their fathers. Their fathers are likely either Conservative and won’t give them a gun to go confront other Conservatives, or they are liberal as well and probably don’t own a gun because the only packing they do is fudge.
It is also hilarious because if he truly thinks sissy boys with a rifle would stand any kind of chance against people who use guns on the regular and know how to load AND shoot them is laughable. If it came down to an armed confrontation like he is calling for, it would turn into a slaughter if shots rang out.
Perhaps what makes it even funnier is that fact that he also tagged Rob Reiner in the tweet as well. Reiner the whiner is another crazy never Trumper, so maybe they can brainstorm just how they will get their father’s rifles.














I am on vacation and I am using my baby laptop and blogging on this laptop is better than using my phone…but not by much, the curser will “wander” and if I am not paying attention, it will move and I will find myself putting my writings in the middle of the prior paragraph. And yes it happened several times on this blog post.
I always had a fascination with the Garand, and I have had Blogged about the Garand and had adventures with the rifle, …until my lamented kayak accident *Sniff, Sniff*
I had wondered about the fuss about the IH Garand, but I never asked “why”. After reading the article from “American Rifleman” I now understand the reasoning and the fascination
.At the conclusion of World War II, the M1 Garand had garnered a well-deserved reputation as the best standardized service rifle of the conflict. Large numbers of Garands were in inventory after Victory over Japan Day, and it was assumed they were sufficient to meet the needs of our armed forces for the foreseeable future. Five years later, though, this illusion was shattered when hostilities commenced on the Korean Peninsula.
Many of the M1 rifles left over from World War II were taken from storage and refurbished for issue to troops departing overseas. To augment the supply of existing rifles, the U.S. Ordnance Dept. elected to put the M1 rifle back into production. Springfield Armory ramped up its Garand production line as quickly as possible, but additional sources were needed. As was often the case in previous wars, the government turned to civilian firms for production of all manner of military items, including firearms.

On June 15, 1951, the Ordnance Dept. granted a contract for 100,000 M1 rifles to the International Harvester Co (IHC). The rifles were to be manufactured at the firm’s Evansville, Ind., plant with deliveries scheduled to begin in December 1952. The Evansville facility was built during World War II by the Republic Aviation Corp. for production of the P-47 Thunderbolt fighter.
In 1945, International Harvester bought the former aircraft factory and converted it for manufacture of farm implements and refrigeration and air conditioning units. The selection of International Harvester was, to say the least, a rather interesting choice. Although the company manufactured vehicles—including half-tracks, trucks and tractors—during World War II, the firm had never made firearms, either civilian or military.
One of the major reasons behind the government’s seemingly unusual selection of International Harvester to produce M1 rifles was the plant’s geographic location. All of the more than 4 million M1 rifles that had been previously made by Springfield Armory and Winchester were manufactured within a radius of about 60 miles (the distance between Springfield, Mass., and New Haven, Conn.).
This may not have seemed important in the late 1930s or early 1940s, but the dawn of the Atomic Age put it in an entirely different perspective. Since most of the established armsmakers were in the New England area, a nuclear attack on the Eastern Seaboard could conceivably cripple the manufacture of military small arms in the United States.
The Department of Defense established a policy of geographic dispersion of vital defense production to mitigate vulnerability to a nuclear strike. The fact that Evansville, Ind., and Springfield, Mass., are more than 800 miles apart was seen as an important reason for selecting International Harvester to supplement Springfield Armory’s M1 rifle production.
Actually, the selection of a commercial enterprise that had never previously manufactured firearms for the military was not without precedent. During World War II, nine of the 10 prime contractors that manufactured the M1 carbine had never produced firearms before the war (the sole exception was Winchester). As was the case with the carbine manufacturers, plans were formulated for IHC to utilize a number of subcontractors to assist its Garand production program.

It was soon widely acknowledged that the company’s barrels were of the highest quality. Line Material increased its capacity by adding a second shift to meet the demand for barrels for rebuilds and to supply IHC’s fledging Garand production program. It is reported that Line Material sent some barrels directly to ordnance units in Korea for use in overhauling M1 rifles in theater.
The barrels were marked “LMR” on the right side and were stamped with the drawing number (“D653448”), month and year of production, heat lot identification, “P” (proof) and “M” (magnetic particle inspection). Except for very early examples, the barrels made under subcontract for International Harvester can be identified by a punch mark between the “LMR” and the drawing number.
The high quality of the LMR barrels and their availability were among the few things to go smoothly with International Harvester’s M1 rifle production program. As IHC’s production problems became apparent, Springfield Armory dispatched John Garand’s chief tool and die maker, John Stimson, to Indiana to assist the company in setting up its production line. Once production was underway, a plethora of functioning glitches arose, including a serious jamming problem that completely shut down the assembly line for three months until the cause could be discovered and a remedy devised.

Most of these receivers were fitted with LMR barrels, although a few were fitted with Springfield Armory-made barrels. Collectors have dubbed this variant SA/IHC receiver as the “Arrowhead” due to the layout of the nomenclature markings which, with a bit of imagination, resemble an arrowhead with a broken tip.
This variant is known as the “Postage Stamp” SA/IHC receiver. Like the “Arrowhead” receivers, these were stamped
with the Springfield Armory drawing number (“D 652891”), revision numbers (“42” or “43”), and heat lot numbers indicating production by Springfield. Most of the rifles were assembled with LMR barrels (typically dated late 1952 or early 1953), but it is believed some Springfield Armory barrels (dated early 1953) were utilized as well.To its credit, Harrington & Richardson did a great deal to assist International Harvester throughout the latter entity’s M1 production program. As IHC was winding down rifle manufacture, the company needed additional receivers to complete its production commitments. To this end, a relatively small quantity of M1 receivers (approximately 4,000) was supplied to IHC by H&R.
Those receivers fall into the approximate 5,213,034 to 5,217,065 serial number range. Interestingly, the logo nomenclature on them was apparently stamped by International Harvester (“Postage Stamp” profile) while the serial number and the drawing number on the receiver leg were applied by HRA.
Following is a summary of the type and quantity of M1 receivers manufactured for International Harvester by Springfield Armory and Harrington & Richardson:
SA/IHC “Arrowhead” 4,440,000–4,441,100……………….1,100
SA/IHC “Postage Stamp” 4,441,000–4,445,600…800–900
SA/IHC “Gap Letter” 4.6 M 4,638,000–4,660,000…22,000
SA/IHC “Gap Letter” 5M 5,198,034–5,211,600……….13,243
HRA/IHC 5,213,034–5,217,065…………………………………….4,000
Although Springfield and H&R supplied International Harvester with a number of receivers, the vast majority of the company’s M1 receivers were made by IHC. All of those were of the “Postage Stamp” variety. The receiver drawing number marked on the right side of the receiver leg was initially “IHC D6528291,” which was later changed to “D6528291” (no “IHC” prefix).
The majority of barrels used by International Harvester were made by Line Material (“LMR” marked), although some Springfield barrels were used, mainly very early and, again, near the end of the company’s M1 rifle production program.

The major components such as the bolt, operating rod, trigger housing, hammer, gas cylinder lock screw and rear sight windage and elevation knobs were generally marked “IHC” along with the appropriate drawing number and/or subcontractor initials. Although unmarked, IHC M1 front sights were typically characterized by the noticeably wider space between the two flared protective “ears,” approximately 0.875″ across, wider than any other manufacturer.
As with many of the other components, the manufacture of stocks by International Harvester did not proceed as smoothly as originally envisioned. Initial plans were for IHC to make the stocks and fore-ends rather than using subcontractors—as was done for a number of other components. As events transpired, though, most of IHC’s stocks were manufactured by subcontractors, chiefly the S.E. Overton Co. A hallmark of IHC M1 stocks is the presence of numbers stamped in the “barrel channel.”
Although three-digit numbers have been reported, the overwhelming majority are four digits, sometimes with a letter prefix or suffix. These numbers are believed to represent a variation of the Julian dating system. International Harvester was the only manufacturer to utilize stocks stamped with such numbers. The profile of the stock behind the receiver heel on the IHC Garand was noticeably narrower than found on the contemporary H&R M1 stocks.

Early production IHC stocks were stamped with an Ordnance escutcheon emblem (“crossed cannons”) on the right side of the stock and a small—and often indistinct—“P” proof firing mark stamped on the bottom of the pistol grip. This was the only known case of a final inspection stamp on a post-war M1 rifle being applied to the right side of the stock.
In September 1955, IHC’s parent company negotiated a sale of the Evansville facility to the Whirlpool Corp. To add insult to injury, the sales contract mandated that Whirlpool take possession of the plant in January 1956. Since IHC had completed just over 300,000 rifles to date, it would have been impossible to finish the remaining 100,000 or so rifles called for in the contract in just two months’ time. This resulted in IHC having to negotiate an early “buyout” of the final contract. The following represents the total of rifles production from fiscal years 1953-1956:
Fiscal Year Quantity Delivered
1953 6,804
1954 82,897
1955 175,736
1956 72,186
Total 337,623

International Harvester’s M1 production program was obviously a source of consternation and almost continual headaches for the company. In hindsight, senior management (and likely stockholders as well) probably questioned the wisdom of getting involved in making military rifles. It was undoubtedly one of those, “It seemed like a good idea at the time” situations. Even though the company had to negotiate an early termination of its contract, it nontheless persevered and eventually made more than 337,000 M1 rifles by the time production ceased in December 1955.
The IHC people may not have been very proficient at making Garands but they can’t be accused of being quitters. Despite the numerous problems experienced by the company, an International Harvester M1 Garand is every bit as serviceable as those made by any other manufacturer. The International Harvester M1 has become one of the more popular examples of the genre among many collectors today due to the number of receiver variations and their relative scarcity as compared to Springfield Armory-made Garands of the same era.
Prior to the late 1970s, IHC M1s were rather hard to find on the domestic civilian market as compared to those made by other manufacturers. In the late 1950s and into the 1960s, many late-production Garands—especially Springfields and International Harvesters—were shipped to various countries under military foreign-aid programs. This accounts for the prior relative scarcity of the IHC rifles as well as Springfields in the very high number serial number range of 5.9 to 6.0 million.
While a few H&R Garands were also shipped to some allied nations, for some reason during this period, the bulk of these rifles seemed to be from International Harvester. Once the rifles were supplied to foreign governments, they could not be “re-imported” back into the United States for sale on the civilian market. Circa 1977-1978, a clause in the regulations permitted some of these former military rifles to be brought back to the United States, but sales were restricted to full-time law enforcement officers.
Quite a few rifles changed hands in this manner and, in the span of a couple of years, IHC M1s went from being quite scarce to being not particularly uncommon. The regulations were eventually tightened up to prohibit such sales, and the spigot was soon closed on the re-importation of IHC Garands. Not too many years later, the Director of Civilian Marksmanship and its successor, the Civilian Marksmanship Program (CMP), acquired significant numbers of Garands—including some IHCs—from overseas, and they were openly sold on to qualified buyers. As of this writing, the CMP periodically has IHC Garands available for sale.
Perhaps surprisingly, in light of the extensive production problems experienced with the M1 rifles, it has been reported that the Ordnance Dept. later approached International Harvester about the possibility of manufacturing M14 rifles under government contract. Perhaps not surprisingly, that did not come to pass. In hindsight, International Harvester likely wished it had stuck with making tractors instead of rifles. Regardless, an IHC M1 rifle is a sought-after collectible today and is a very interesting, albeit often confusing, part of the story of John Garand’s rifle.



Introductory Proviso: The following essay on possible gun confiscation is a purely conjectural gedankenexperiment about the future that extrapolates from recent history and current trends. Nothing herein is seditious (per 18 U.S. Code § 2384), nor a call to arms, nor a threat to our government or to any individual, agency, or group.
The current mass media-driven “debate” on firearms (actually more like paternalistic lecturing or chiding) seems to be leading toward greater restrictions by Congress. The collectivist gun grabbers have the dream of ignoring the Second Amendment and somehow magically removing all detachable magazine semi-auto rifles from civilian hands. But it is just that: a dream. If they think that they can disarm us, then they are thoroughly deluded. I’ll explain why, with some simple mathematics.
The United States has the world’s first or second most heavily-armed populace, per capita. (It’s possibly second only to Yemen.) The number of FBI firearms background checks for transfers by Federally-licensed dealers from November 1998 to April 30, 2018 totaled 287,807,015. That isn’t all new guns. It of course includes many second-hand sales that cycled back through FFL holders. But it is still a staggering number. And it does not include any private party (“not through a dealer”) sales of used guns. That is thankfully legal in most states. Nor does it include guns that are legally made at home. (Typically made with 80% complete receivers.) Those home “builds” are becoming quite popular. Their ownership is mostly opaque to any would-be tyrants who might covet seizing them.
There are somewhere between 370 million and 420 million privately-owned firearms in the United States. Let’s just call it 400 million for a nice round figure. Most of those guns are not registered to particular owners. That is why there are only rough estimates. It makes me feel good to know that Big Brother has no idea where those guns are, and who owns them. When I last checked, the total U.S. population is 327,708,500. So that is about 1.2 guns per person. The adult population is around 249,500,000. And according to Wikipedia, the “Fit for service” Military Age Male population (men, ages 16-49) of the U.S. is just 59,764,677. That equates to 6.6 guns per Military Age Male in the United States.
Of the 400 million American guns, roughly 20% are single-shot or double-barreled, 60% are manually-operated repeaters (e.g., bolt action, lever action, pump action, or revolvers), and 20% are semi-automatic. There are only about 175,000 transferable Federally-registered full autos. That number would have been much larger by now but production was sharply curtailed by a hefty $200 tax (starting in 1934) and then there numbers were effectively frozen in 1986. It is noteworthy that if it were not for the National Firearms Act of 1934, selective fire guns would by now be in what the Heller decision calls “common use“. After all, it costs only a few dollars more to manufacture a selective-fire M16 than a semiautomatic-only AR-15.
With every passing year, the predominance of semi-autos is gaining for both rifles and handguns. (In sheer numbers produced, revolvers are becoming almost passé.) The biggest-selling handgun in the country is the Smith & Wesson M&P 9mm, followed closely by the Glock Model 19 9mm. Gaining rapidly is the highly modular SIG P320, which was recently adopted by the U.S. Army. All three of these are semi-automatic. Standard magazine sizes for autopistols range from 13 to 20 rounds. And the most popular rifles of the decade are AR-15s and their clones. Their standard capacity magazines hold 30 cartridges. (That isn’t “high capacity”.)
AR-15 and AR-10 variants are truly generic and have been sold under more than 120 brand names. The number of ARs (AR-15s, M4s, AR-10s, and variants) sold from 2000 to 2014 was approximately 5,672,900. Since then, AR-15 clones have become even more popular and ubiquitous with approximately 1.2 million more produced in 2015, 1.6 million in 2016, and 1.5 million in 2017. At least 1.2 million will be produced in 2018. It can be assumed that 99% of the ARs produced since the year 2000 are still functional. There were more than 2.3 million other ARs produced for the civilian market between 1962 and 1999. It is safe to assume that at least 95% of those of that vintage are still functional. So the total number of functional ARs in private hands in the U.S. is somewhere around 11 to 12 million. (As of May, 2018.)
Next we come to the more fuzzy math on the wide variety of other models of semi-auto centerfire rifles in private hands. They include detachable magazine, en bloc clip, and stripper clip-fed designs. Here are some rough estimates. (Some of these estimates are based on my own observations of the ratios of different models I’ve seen offered for sale):
If a production and importation ban requiring registration were enacted, there would surely be massive noncompliance. For example, the registration schemes enacted in the past two decades in Australia, Canada, The Philippines, Indonesia, Brazil, and the States of California and New York have been well-documented failures. They have been met with noncompliance rates ranging from 50% to 90%.
Let us surmise that following several years of a registration scheme there were an outright “turn them all in, Mr. and Mrs. America” ban. I predict that even if $1,000 per gun were offered, no more than 11 million would be turned in, by compliant and history-ignorant Sheeple. (An aside: They’ll probably call this a “Buy Back”, but that will be a lie. They can’t “buy back” something that they’ve never owned.)
So let’s suppose that a full Federal semi-auto rifle ban were enacted with a gun confiscation order issued.
This is where the math gets very interesting: There are only 902,000 sworn police officers in the United States. At most, about 80,000 of them have had SWAT training. There are only 5,113 BATFE employees–and many of those are mere paper shufflers. As of 2017, there were just 2,623 ATF Special Agents. The FBI’s notorious Hostage Rescue Team (HRT or “Hurt Team”) has a cadre strength that is classified but presumably less than 200 agents. Together, they comprise the pool of “Door Kickers” that might be available to execute unconstitutional search warrants.
If they were to start going door-to-door executing warrants for unconstitutional gun confiscation, what would the casualty rates be for the ATF, HRT, and the assorted local SWAT teams? It bears mention that the military would be mostly out of the picture, since they are banned from domestic law enforcement roles, under the Posse Comitatus Act.
Next, let’s do some addition and then divide:
80,000 SWAT-trained police
+ 2,623 ATF Special Agents
+ 200 FBI HRT Members
= 82,863 Potentially Available Door Kickers
… presumably working in teams of 8, attempting to seize 9,000,000 newly-contraband semi-auto rifles.
Before we finish the math, I’ll state some “for the sake of argument” assumptions:
A lot of those are not safe assumptions. But for the sake of completing a gedankenexperiment, let’s pen this out on the back of a napkin, as a “best case” for an unconstitutional gun confiscation campaign. Here are the division equations:
9,000,000 ÷ 82,863 = 108 (x 8 officers per team) = 864 raids, per officer
Let that sink in: Every officer would have to survive 864 gun-grabbing raids.
Those of course are fanciful numbers. There will be a lot of false tips, and there will be many owners who keep their guns very well-hidden. Each of those raids would have nearly the same high level of risk but yet many of them would net zero guns. And it is likely that many police departments will wisely decline involvement. Therefore the “best case” figure of 864 raids per officer is quite low. The real number would be much higher.
Here is some sobering ground truth: America’s gun owners are just as well trained–and often better trained–than the police. There are 20.4 million American military veterans, and the majority of veterans own guns.
Without all six of those, the hostilities would continue.
Then there are the estimated 1.5 million unregistered machineguns now in the country. Except for a 30-day amnesty in 1968 that generated only about 65,000 registrations, they have been contraband since 1934. Their number is particularly difficult to accurately estimate, since some semi-autos such as the M1 Carbine, HK91/93/94 series, and AR-15 are fairly easy to convert to selective fire. Similarly, nearly all “open bolt” semi-auto designs are easy to convert to full auto. Large numbers of conversion parts sets have been sold, with little recordkeeping. Some guns can be converted simply by removing sear springs or filing their sears. Just a trickle of unregistered full autos are seized or surrendered each year. This begs the question: If Federal officials have been unable to round up un-papered machineguns after 84 years, then how do they expect to ever confiscate semi-autos, which are 15 times more commonplace?
As evidenced by the 1990s wars in the Balkans, when times get inimical, contraband guns get pulled out of walls and put into use. We can expect to see the same, here.
Now, to get back to the simple mathematics, here are some ratios to ponder:
I’ll conclude with a word of caution: Leftist American politicians should be careful about what they wish for. Those who hate the 2nd Amendment and scheme to disarm us have no clue about the unintended consequences of their plans. If they proceed, then I can foresee that it will end very badly for them. – JWR
End Notes:
Again, the preceding is a purely conjectural gedankenexperiment about the future that extrapolates from recent history and current trends. None of the foregoing is seditious (per 18 U.S. Code § 2384), nor a call to arms, nor a threat to our government or to any individual, agency, or group.
Permission to reprint, re-post or forward this article in full is granted, but only if credit is given to James Wesley, Rawles and first publication in SurvivalBlog (with a link.) It must not be edited or excerpted, and all included links must be left intact.