Free Republic
Browse · Search
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Assault Weapons Fraud
Sierra Times ^ | 23 December 2003 | Ted Lang

Posted on 01/07/2004 12:42:07 PM PST by 45Auto

It amazes me how many supposedly intelligent folks continue to parrot the ignorance deliberately being spread by the leftist anti-gun media concerning an accurate and truthful definition of so-called “assault weapons.” The only legitimate and authorized “assault weapons” are those used by military and police in America. They have several firing options, the least deadly of which is semi-automatic single trigger pull firing. This is defined as a shot being fired every time the trigger is pulled, and this type of firing option has been available on American firearms since the late 1800s.

Military assault rifles, also used by a variety of American police agencies, must be capable of semi-automatic single trigger pull firing, limited-automatic multi-shot “bursts,” such as bursts of three shots with each trigger pull, or just continuous uninterrupted fire for as long as the trigger is depressed and until the magazine runs out of ammunition. Such a multi-firing capability, along with a flash suppressor, bayonet stud, and other minor military features, is what truly constitutes a military assault rifle.

Such multiple firing options would render any such weapon classifiable as a machine-gun. That is not what the Clinton and Bush administrations seek to ban. They are seeking to ban a totally legitimate rifle action, which allows a shooter to fire each time the trigger is pulled, and which has been in use for well over one hundred years. These weapons that were formerly classifiable as military assault rifles have been rendered inoperable as regards limited-burst and continuous fire fully automatic. Such converted former military assault rifles are now returned to fully legal semi-automatic firing actions and sold as surplus. They are not limited or continuous fire machine-guns.

Clearly, military surplus “assault rifle” remarketers incur expense to render these weapons acceptable as civilian grade semi-automatics. Remarketers have in the past, sold these completely legal firearms with minor military features in place, such as the flash suppressors and bayonet studs. How would these in any way affect the firing capability of the weapon? How would these in any way convert a legal semi-automatic rifle to a multi-purpose military grade machine-gun? The obvious answer is that they wouldn’t.

Yet, when remarketers of military surplus rifles failed to remove these minor military characteristics which have no bearing whatsoever on a military surplus rifle’s firing capability, and these features were included in Clinton’s “assault rifle” definition, remarketers removed them. Now liberal propagandists, especially those in the media pushing hardest for a total ban of ALL firearms, offer that sellers of military surplus civilian-legalized, semi-automatic former assault rifles are “making minor changes to these ‘assault rifles’ to get around the law.” All that they are really doing is making cosmetic changes to the firearm. The media lefties are now offering these changes as “gimmicks” to “get around the law.” This charge, just like the false term “assault rifle,” is a media gimmick to trick Americans into thinking that evil gun manufacturers and the NRA are trying to sell machine-guns. It is nothing more than propaganda to weaken the resolve of law-abiding citizens tired of the constant media caterwauling.

How easy is it to establish the real facts in this matter? At one time, the NRA used to acquire surplus military firearms, such as the prestigious Garrand M-1 Rifle of World War II fame, and make them available for resale to private citizens. This rifle is a military relic, weighing more than ten pounds, not concealable or able to be reduced in barrel length, and certainly not convertible to a saw-off stock considering the powerful recoil.

But Bill Clinton, a draft-dodger who never served in the military, disallowed the re-importation of these surplus military semi-automatic “assault rifles” into the United States after they were used in a war by a Third World ally and sold back to a US remarketer. M-1s were developed in the mid 1930s, yet 60 years later, our illustrious former president was terrified of these cumbersome antiques being allowed back into the nation that developed, manufactured and used them to preserve our Second Amendment and other Bill of Rights-ensured freedoms.

Leftists have abolished the NRA’s Director of Civilian Marksmanship program. They would rather see taxpayer dollars used to build these fine weapons wasted by their complete deactivation and destruction rather than allowing the taxpayers who paid for them to buy them back. It seems they hate both guns and the Constitution. Come to think of it, it is becoming increasingly apparent that they hate everything else about US as well!

TOPICS: Constitution/Conservatism; Crime/Corruption; Culture/Society; Government
KEYWORDS: aw; bang; banglist; guns; rkba
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-35 next last

1 posted on 01/07/2004 12:42:08 PM PST by 45Auto
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: 45Auto
When flintlocks are outlawed, only outlaws will have flintlocks.
2 posted on 01/07/2004 12:46:25 PM PST by SpaceBar
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: 45Auto
Lang: Assault Weapons Ban the precedent for abolishing the 2nd

By Ted Lang

It has been pointed out to me by readers that I erred in going along with the description of so-called "assault rifles" as being "weapons." But the term "assault rifles" is a misnomer as well. And this is not by either accident or due to ignorance – these misnomers are crucial to the destruction of our Second Amendment.

Leftist gun controllers mislabel themselves as well. They’re not "controllers," but rather abolitionists. They even deliberately mislabel their leftist agenda as being "liberal;" it’s not. Liberals are what Thomas Jefferson, George Washington and Benjamin Franklin were. And not one of them would support today’s so-called "liberal" agenda characterized by the insanity that demands that all Americans turn their guns in to government, the latter strictly prohibited from enforcing such unconstitutional, freedom-crushing statism by the Second Amendment.

The first step in destroying freedom is in controlling the language. That aids greatly in controlling the minds and the will of the people. The next step is controlling the press. These are the First Amendment issues protected by the peoples’ right to own and carry firearms, recently abolished by the Ninth Circuit Court and ratified by the failure of the U.S. Supreme Court to come to the defense of the Constitution.

..... The squeeze play of the ever-increasing infringements on our gun rights on the one side, and the erosion of our protections from arbitrary police state persecution originating from citizen criticism of government, as well as skyrocketing police state tactics characterized by the killing of our pets, the confiscation our cars, homes and private property on the other, is threatening to blow up in all our faces. There are those who believe government can throttle US – they haven’t seen 300 million Americans on a rampage once it becomes clear to an enraged populace that this is the only option left.

The term "assault weapon," or "assault rifle," is valid only when describing long arms capable of firing fully automatic, in controlled bursts, or in single trigger-pull semi-automatic. Those long arms designated by Feinstein, Schumer, Clinton and now Bush as "assault weapons," are only capable of firing single trigger-pull semi-automatic. They are not machine-guns. The terminology was carefully engineered by Feinstein/Schumer and their ilk to set the precedent for disqualifying legitimate firearms that aren’t machine-guns on the basis that they are semi-automatic actions and rifles. The ultimate objective is to ban rifles and shotguns.

This will be accomplished by likening the semi-automatic actions of legitimate handguns to the banned semi-automatic actions of the banned and to-be dreaded "military assault weapons." And in New Jersey at this moment, the Feinstein/Schumer representative in the New Jersey Legislature, the state where the term "assault rifle" was originated and first legislated against, Assemblyperson Loretta Weinberg rammed her "smart gun" law past a collection of linguini-spined, despicable Republican wimps and wusses. Count on the Feinstein/Schumer ilk to cut orders for the Bush regime and the gutless wonders in Congress to adopt that stupid law as well!

As might be recalled, the "assault weapons" fraud was necessitated when the citizens in northern New Jersey threatened to resort to their rifles to stop then-Governor "Toxic Tom" Kean [yeah, that one!] from poisoning constituent-sparse farmland by transporting radon-infected soil from a high constituent city. Kean warned the residents not to interfere with the truck convoy and cautioned State Police would escort it. Residents faced Kean down, and the next thing you know, his successor, Democrat Jim Florio, introduced the "assault rifle" ban.

What is desperately needed here is an open debate to educate the populace who have been brainwashed by the leftist media and Bill O’Reilly into thinking that the subject of the ban consists of military machine-guns. Looks like a job for the NRA! Where are they? In New Jersey, just prior to Loretta Weinberg’s "smart gun" ban, the NRA was cutting a deal with James McGreevey when he was running for governor. He promised not to support the legislation in return for the NRA’s backing. Surprise! He lied! Loretta scared the hell out of him and he caved!

3 posted on 01/07/2004 12:46:32 PM PST by 45Auto (Big holes are (almost) always better.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: 45Auto
And then there's this little tidbit from none other than the "honorable" Senator from Wisconsin, Howard Feingold:

"A lot of gun owners are upset about some of the powers that have been given to the federal government," he said. "We're going to try to change that." When asked about the right to bear arms, Feingold acknowledged he originally voted in favor of banning so-called semi-automatic "assault weapons." But he said he hasn't sponsored legislation to continue the ban and is now "leaning against" renewing it. "At these town meetings over the years, I've heard a lot of people say there might have been some misinformation about what these weapons - guns - really are," Feingold said. "There are some semi-automatics that really aren't assault (weapons)."

4 posted on 01/07/2004 12:49:28 PM PST by 45Auto (Big holes are (almost) always better.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: 45Auto
I can't agree with the definition of "Assault Weapons" by the author.

"Assault Weapons" didn't exist until Congress and Klinton created them. Up until 1993, they were simply semi-automatic firearms of a wide variety of makes and models.

Assault RIFLES, however, is a technical description that has existed since the near-end of WWII with the introduction of the German MP44. Semi and Automatic modes (select fire), intermediate rifle cartridge, et al.

The real fraud of "assault WEAPONS" is when assholes like Bill O'Reilly INTENTIONALLY confuse them with CLASS III automatic firearms and "bazookas".
5 posted on 01/07/2004 12:50:58 PM PST by SJSAMPLE
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SpaceBar
When there was first discussion about making the doors to plane cockpits bullet proof, one of our local talking babettes on the TV news said "The door will be able to withstand bullets from a 25 millimeter hand gun".

I wrote her an e-mail and explained that a 25 millimeter hand gun would be pretty rough to handle. She responded that she did not want to do the story in the first place, that she thought guns were "icky" (her word) and did not want to discuss it any further.

6 posted on 01/07/2004 12:58:07 PM PST by Blue Screen of Death (,/i)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: *bang_list
7 posted on 01/07/2004 1:19:52 PM PST by Atlas Sneezed
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: 45Auto
Leftists have abolished the NRA’s Director of Civilian Marksmanship program.

Huh? It has been renamed, but it continues on today. I have no idea about the NRA's current or former involvement.
8 posted on 01/07/2004 1:23:39 PM PST by Atlas Sneezed
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Beelzebubba
Sierra Times doesn't always have all their ducks in a row.
9 posted on 01/07/2004 1:30:34 PM PST by need_a_screen_name
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: 45Auto
What are the damned politicians so afraid of, anyway?

10 posted on 01/07/2004 1:30:48 PM PST by Travis McGee (----- -----)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SpaceBar
Nahh, the outlaws will get illegal conversion kits and turn those flintlocks into caplocks, because if you're going to go down for the crime, you might as well go all the way.
11 posted on 01/07/2004 1:35:03 PM PST by kingu
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Blue Screen of Death
I was in Atlanta recently and heard more than one of the television stations cover an armed robbery and state that the perpetrator used a 45mm handgun.

Journalistic "expertise" in action.
12 posted on 01/07/2004 1:38:42 PM PST by George Smiley (Is the RKBA still a right if you have to get the government's permission before you can exercise it?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: George Smiley
45mm handgun?

WOW. Bet that recoil is something else. :)

13 posted on 01/07/2004 1:41:34 PM PST by Constitution Day (Iraqi blogger to President Bush: "The bones in the mass graves salute you, Avenger of the Bones.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: Constitution Day
A .50 is only 12.7mm


But checking the bore on a 45mm after you clean it has got to be a snap...

:^) :^)

14 posted on 01/07/2004 1:46:27 PM PST by George Smiley (Is the RKBA still a right if you have to get the government's permission before you can exercise it?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: Beelzebubba
You are correct. The DCM is now the CMP - Civilian Markmanship Program ( I've purchased several rifles from them in the last few years including M-1 Garands and '03-A3 Springfields.

15 posted on 01/07/2004 1:49:50 PM PST by Jaxter ("Vivit Post Funera Virtus")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Beelzebubba
I don't think it was an NRA program.

Civilian Marksmanship Program

"The CMP was created by the U.S. Congress. The original purpose was to provide civilians an opportunity to learn and practice marksmanship skills so they would be skilled marksmen if later called on to serve the U.S. military. Over the years the emphasis of the program shifted to focus on youth development through marksmanship. From 1916 until 1996 the CMP was administered by the U.S. Army. The National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1996 (TITLE XVI) created the Corporation for the Promotion of Rifle Practice & Firearms Safety, Inc. (CPRPFS) to take over administration and promotion of the CMP. The CPRPFS is a tax exempt not-for-profit 501(c)(3) organization that derives its mission from public law."

16 posted on 01/07/2004 1:50:43 PM PST by FormerlyAnotherLurker
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: SpaceBar
Not sure of the authenticity of this. It's an email that came through. FYI.

From: Ed Chenel, A police officer in Australia

Hi Yanks,

I thought you all would like to see the real figures from Down Under.

It has now been 12 months since gun owners in Australia were forced by a new law to surrender 640,381 personal firearms to be destroyed by our own government, a program costing Australia taxpayers more than $500 million dollars.

The first year results are now in: Australia-wide, homicides are up 3.2 percent, Australia-wide, assaults are up 8.6 percent; Australia-wide, armed robberies are up 44 percent (yes, 44 percent)! In the state of Victoria alone, homicides with firearms are now up 300 percent. (Note that while the law-abiding citizens turned them in, the criminals did not ! and criminals still possess their guns!)

While figures over the previous 25 years showed a steady decrease in armed robbery with firearms, this has changed drastically upward in the past 12 months, since the criminals now are guaranteed that their prey is unarmed. There has also been a dramatic increase in break-ins and assaults of the elderly.

Australian politicians are at a loss to explain how public safety has decreased, after such monumental effort and expense was expended in "successfully ridding Australian society of guns." You won't see this on the American evening news or hear your governor or members of the state Assembly disseminating this information.

The Australian experience proves it. Guns in the hands of honest citizens save lives and property and, yes, gun-control laws affect only the law-abiding citizens.

Take note Americans, before it's to late!

17 posted on 01/07/2004 1:53:59 PM PST by B-Cause
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: FormerlyAnotherLurker
At one point you had to be a NRA member to purchase from them. My how times have changed!
18 posted on 01/07/2004 1:59:07 PM PST by need_a_screen_name
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: B-Cause

"Claim: Statistics demonstrate that crime rates in Australia have increased substantially since the government there instituted a gun buy-back program in 1997.
"Status: False.
"Example: [Collected on the Internet, 2001] "

"An examination of statistics from the Australian Institute of Criminology) reveals that the overall homicide rate in Australia has changed little over the past decade and actually dipped slightly after the 1997 gun buy-back program."

Until someone with John Lott's methodology and tenacity says otherwise, it's pretty much an urban legend. Formerly...
19 posted on 01/07/2004 2:03:04 PM PST by FormerlyAnotherLurker
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: George Smiley; Constitution Day
"I know what you're thinking, punk. You're thinking, did he fire six shots or only five? Well to tell you the truth, I forgot myself in all this excitement. But being as this is a 45mm model 1942, the most powerful handgun in the world and will blow your head clean off, you've got to ask yourself a question: do I feel lucky? Well do ya, punk?"
20 posted on 01/07/2004 2:16:46 PM PST by Oztrich Boy (History repeats: The first time as tragedy, the second as farce)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-35 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794 is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson