"Scott Weiser" wrote in message
...
A Usenet persona calling itself KMAN wrote:
in article , Scott Weiser at
wrote on 2/20/05 6:53 PM:
A Usenet persona calling itself KMAN wrote:
Assault weapons are commonly equipped with some or all of the following
combat features:
Let's debunk this:
First, the term "assault weapon" was coined by the press to describe
semi-automatic long-guns that were visually similar to military BATTLE
RIFLES or ASSAULT RIFLES.
Modern military battle rifles and assault rifles are select-fire,
shoulder-fired firearms that can fire semi-automatically or
fully-automatically.
You better tell your President, he uses the term assault weapons. And I
think he knows what he means be it - he means weapons meant for killing a
whole bunch of human beings quickly, slightly modified so that the
trigger
has to be pulled repeatedly instead of just holding it down.
As I said, it's a coined phrase that's entered the lexicon for the express
purpose of demonizing particular visual aspects of certain semi-automatic
firearms. That the president may use it is not really relevant.
It's totally relevant. Most people who are not gun nuts understand what is
meant by "assault weapons" and that includes the president, who could hardly
be described as anti-gun.
A large-capacity ammunition magazine, enabling the shooter to
continuously
fire dozens of rounds without reloading. Standard hunting rifles are
usually
equipped with no more than 3 or 4-shot magazines.
This is true.
A folding stock on a rifle or shotgun, which sacrifices accuracy for
concealability and for mobility in close combat.
The "concealability" statement is empty rhetoric. No non-class III rifle
legal in the US is less than 26 inches from end to end when in an
operable
configuration. Hardly "concealable." This is why, contrary to
anti-gunner
rhetoric, "assault weapons" are not the "weapons of choice" for drug
dealers. In fact, rifles of any sort are very rarely used by criminals
of
any ilk.
As for mobility in close combat, this is true. It's also true that
folding
or collapsible stocks are useful for storage and when carrying the
firearm.
A pistol grip on a rifle or shotgun, which facilitates firing from the
hip,
allowing the shooter to spray-fire the weapon.
"Spray-fire" is a rhetorical nullity, and the claim that a pistol grip
"facilitates" firing from the hip ignores fundamental human mechanics.
It's
far easier to fire a Garand or a hunting rifle from the hip than to fire
an
AR-15 from the hip.
A pistol grip also helps the
shooter stabilize the firearm during rapid fire
Not just rapid fire, but at all times. Nothing wrong with stabilizing
the
firearm, it makes it easier to hit the target and gives the shooter
better
control over the point of impact, which make it safer.
and makes it easier to shoot
assault rifles one-handed.
Blatant hogwash and tripe! Only the Terminator can shoot a major-caliber
rifle with one hand and expect to even come close to hitting anything by
design.
A barrel shroud, which is designed to cool the barrel so the firearm
can
shoot many rounds in rapid succession without overheating.
Yes, so what? A "barrel shroud" is nothing more than a different sort of
stock, the purpose of which in any long gun is to provide a grip for
accuracy and protection from burns, which, contrary to this hogwash, can
occur after firing just a few rounds.
It also allows
the shooter to grasp the barrel area to stabilize the weapon, without
incurring serious burns, during rapid fire.
Or during any other sort of fire. Stabilizing the weapon is of primary
importance, and anything that facilitates it is good.
A threaded barrel designed to accommodate a flash suppressor, which
serves
no useful sporting purpose.
Except, of course, suppressing flash. Hunters and sportsmen do shoot
recreationally during low-light periods.
The flash suppressor allows the shooter to
remain concealed when shooting at night,
Complete bull****. A flash suppressor does absolutely NOTHING to reduce
the
flash signature from IN FRONT of the firearm. It's purpose is to reduce
the
flash visible to the shooter, to prevent blinding during low-light
shooting.
an advantage in combat but
unnecessary for hunting or sporting purposes.
Whether it is "necessary" is not up to this twit to decide.
In addition, the flash
suppressor is useful for providing stability during rapid fire, helping
the
shooter maintain control of the firearm.
Wrong. A "muzzle brake" performs that function, not a flash suppressor,
although devices may be designed to provide both functions. Once again,
maintaining control is a good thing.
A threaded barrel designed to accommodate a silencer,
Er, no, actually, they are threaded to accommodate a flash suppressor or
muzzle brake. That one can thread other objects on the same threads is
not
the same thing.
which is useful to
assassins but clearly has no purpose for sportsmen.
Now here is a complete anti-gun biased falsehood. Silencers have plenty
of
utility for sportsmen. The major utility is that it reduces the muzzle
report, which reduces or eliminates the need for hearing protection.
Sound
reduction is also useful in eliminating noise pollution and annoyance to
neighbors. They are also used frequently when shooting varmints and
vermin
to avoid scaring them off with the muzzle report.
Silencers are illegal
Another blatant lie. Silencers are perfectly legal in the US. Anyone who
is
otherwise qualified to possess a firearm can own one. All you have to
do is
file the tax paperwork with the BATFE and pay the $200 tax and you can
have
one.
so
there is no legitimate purpose for making it possible to put a silencer
on a
weapon.
Untrue editorialism. As I said above, there are plenty of legitimate
reasons
why a person would want a silencer and a barrel threaded to accept it.
A barrel mount designed to accommodate a bayonet, which obviously
serves no
sporting purpose.
Well, unless you get too close to a bear, where it might have some
utility.
Still, it's a harmless feature. And I do mean harmless. I defy this twit
to
provide a single example of a civilian crime committed with an "assault
weapon" with a fixed bayonet.
It's a cosmetic item that poses no danger to the public, but might be
useful
if the particular arm had to be used by the militia or the military in
close
combat.
====
I'm sure that's what the Framers had in mind...that a crack dealer can
arm
his posse with assault weapons with a trip to the gun shack on the
corner
and spray the local park with semi-automatic (or perhaps converted to
automatic) gunfire.
Ignoring for the moment that this almost never happens
BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
I note that you cannot refute any of my arguments.
he can only "arm his
posse" illegally, not from the local "gun shack," which is tightly
regulated
by the BATFE, and only if he can pass the background check, at which
point
the idea is that other law-abiding citizens will be similarly armed and
able
to take out the crack dealer before any harm is done.
Yep, that's an important freedom to protect.
The important freedom to protect is MY right to have an assault weapon
that
I can use at need to kill the deranged crack dealer and his posse if and
when he decides to shoot up the local park. That, and my right to have
an
assault weapon so I can defend the Constitution and my fellow citizens
against tyranny.
Heehee. You wish you were God, don't you?
Nope, I'm just an ordinary citizen who understands his duty to his fellow
citizens and his right to be armed for self-defense and the defense of
others against violent attack.
You are sitting in your living
room right now with a grenade launcher just cursing the fact that the
USSR
collapsed before you had a chance to take to the streets and defend your
fellow citizens.
Nah, I donšt have a grenade launcher. They're too expensive and the
ammunition's too hard to get. Besides, area weapons rarely qualify as
proper
self-defense arms.
As for defending my fellow citizens, I do it every day by carrying a gun
every day. It's often a pain, but it's my duty and my right and I take
both
seriously.
You are one of the scariest sounding people I have ever encountered on
usenet. I imagine I will read about you one day.
In fact, I
understand that the USA is one of the best places for a terrorist to
pick up
an AK-47 these days.
Wrong. AK-47's are fully-automatic battle rifles that are not available
to
the general public.
So much for this line of crap.
My yes, you've certainly made me feel silly. I neglected to put the word
phrase "a variation of" in front of "AK-47."
It's not even a variation. But you are indeed silly. You don't understand
history, technology or law when it comes to firearms in the US. This is,
of
course, because you are a brainwashed slave of your government, which
makes
your ignorance entirely understandable.
I don't think my government ever speaks on these issues, how are they
managing to turn me into a brainwashed slave?
FYI:
The AK-47 is currently unavailable to the general public in the U.S., very
few were imported into the country and those that did got snatched up by
collectors. If you desire a rifle that looks similar to the AK-47 we would
suggest that you purchase a stamped 7.62x39 post-ban AK in the
$200.00-$400.00 price range. Then purchase a U.S. parts kit from any of our
sponsors and install it in the rifle, tell them you want the wood furniture.
This will allow you to legally have a pistol grip mounted on the rifle. You
will then need to purchase a non-ribbed 30 round AK magazine from Global
Trades.
http://www.ak-47.net/ak47/akru/ak47.html
The AK Info Center is a collection of articles on AK related items. We
provide free information on different variants, parts, ammunition and
accessories for the AK. You are free to browse or download the printed
version, however none of the images/trademarks may be used without explicate
permission from their owners.
http://www.ak-47.net/ak47/index.html