"KMAN" wrote in message
...
in article t,
rick at
wrote on 2/20/05 12:35 PM:


"KMAN" wrote in message
...
in article , Scott
Weiser at
wrote on 2/19/05 10:10 PM:

A Usenet persona calling itself Wilko wrote:


Wilko

P.S. I'm still laughing because of the image of a bunch of
fat, out of
shape middle aged men with shotguns, pistols and hunting
rifles trying
to take on well trained troops with fully automatic
weapons,
grenade
lauchers, tanks, helicopter gunships and all kinds of
sophisticated
weaponry bought with the tax that those old men paid.

Not only would the U.S. version of the secret police
probably
pick up
most of them before they could fire a shot,

Well, that's impossible because we do not have a "secret
police" force and
we take great pains to ensure that even the local police do
not have access
to what records might exist on who owns what arms. That's
the
point of the
2nd Amendment. There are more than 300 million guns in
private
ownership in
the US, and the government has pretty much no idea
whatsoever
where the bulk
of those guns are or who has them. That's not a flaw in our
system, it's a
feature specifically intended by the Framers.

LOL. Yeah, that's what the "Framers" had in mind.
==================
I'd dare say yes, as compared to your model of confiscation
and
bans.


Hoods and angry
ex-husbands walking around with assault weapons that you can
buy on street
corners.
====================
You do like strawmen, don't you? What's an "assault weapon"?

Have you heard of George W. Wush aka George Junior? Apparently
he's the
President of the United States of America. He ssems to know
what an assault
weapon is.
==================
LOL Thanks for acknowledging that YOU don't have aclue, eh.







http://www.usatoday.com/news/politic...t/2004-10-14-d
ebate-fact-check_x.htm

Bush said he favored extending the ban on assault weapons that
expired last
month but had not pushed Congress to do so because he had been
told the bill
couldn't pass. "Republicans and Democrats were against the
assault weapon
ban, people of both parties," Bush said. In fact, most
Republicans opposed
extending the ban; most Democrats supported it. The last time
it came up for
a vote, on March 2 in the Senate, it was passed, 52-47. Only 6
Democrats
opposed it, along with 41 Republicans. The tally shows that
most of the
opposition came from Bush's own party.

http://www.jayinslee.com/index.php?page=display&id=44

Assault weapons are commonly equipped with some or all of the
following
combat features:

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.

A folding stock on a rifle or shotgun, which sacrifices
accuracy for
concealability and for mobility in close combat.

A pistol grip on a rifle or shotgun, which facilitates firing
from the hip,
allowing the shooter to spray-fire the weapon. A pistol grip
also helps the
shooter stabilize the firearm during rapid fire and makes it
easier to shoot
assault rifles one-handed.

A barrel shroud, which is designed to cool the barrel so the
firearm can
shoot many rounds in rapid succession without overheating. It
also allows
the shooter to grasp the barrel area to stabilize the weapon,
without
incurring serious burns, during rapid fire.

A threaded barrel designed to accommodate a flash suppressor,
which serves
no useful sporting purpose. The flash suppressor allows the
shooter to
remain concealed when shooting at night, an advantage in combat
but
unnecessary for hunting or sporting purposes. In addition, the
flash
suppressor is useful for providing stability during rapid fire,
helping the
shooter maintain control of the firearm.

A threaded barrel designed to accommodate a silencer, which is
useful to
assassins but clearly has no purpose for sportsmen. Silencers
are illegal so
there is no legitimate purpose for making it possible to put a
silencer on a
weapon.

A barrel mount designed to accommodate a bayonet, which
obviously serves no
sporting purpose.

====

I'm sure that's what the Framers had in mind...
======================
Actually, yes. The fact that military and hunting weapons were
not that much different then(or really now either)means nothing.
The fact is they were protecting the right to arm for military
purposes, not hunting.




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. Yep, that's an important freedom to
protect. In fact, I
understand that the USA is one of the best places for a
terrorist to pick up
an AK-47 these days.