Rep. Thomas Massie (R-KY) has a question for Congressional Democrats who are seeking to ban so-called “weapons of war” from citizens:  Why would the Department of Education or the U.S. Department of Agriculture want or need such weapons?

The Congressman from Kentucky recently shared a video on X of a debate that took place in the 117th Congress when Democrats were in control of the House.

Massie offered an amendment to H.R. 1808 which purported to ban “weapons of war” by restricting semi automatic assault weapons and large capacity ammunition feeding devices from private ownership while exempting government agencies like the IRS, USDA and Dept. of Education.

Massie questioned then Chairman Jerrold Nadler and others as to why government agencies tasked with education and helping farmers would require what Democrats were referring to as “weapons of war” in order to fulfill their responsibilities.

In the video, Massie makes a tongue in cheek observation about understanding why the Food and Drug Administration might need weapons of war since they have been regularly conducting armed raids on Amish farmers over the alleged sale of raw milk.

Massie is also backed up by Rep. Jim Jordan (R-OH) who also presses for answers as to why agencies that have no military mission would need weapons of war to do their jobs.

The committee responses are quite revealing as to how Congressional Democrats tend to view government agents compared to the citizenry.

Massie drives his point home by reminding his colleagues that “We’re from the government and we’re here to help” takes on a rather sinister tone when those government employees are showing up with what Democrats refer to as “weapons of war” to do their jobs.

H.R. 1808 ultimately went nowhere, but it’s clear the the Harris/Holz presidential ticket is still making the banning of commonly owned firearms a campaign priority.