The Ohio Coalition Against Gun Violence, with their usual propensity for lying, is claiming they have proof that Columbus' "assault weapons ban" which expired three years ago was smart legislation. Posted on 09/11/2009 11:45:35 PM PDT by Still Thinking
The Ohio Coalition Against Gun Violence, with their usual propensity for lying, is claiming they have proof that Columbus' "assault weapons ban" which expired three years ago was smart legislation.
Monday, a police officer was shot during a high speed chase by what is being reported as an "AK-47" (I remain dubious). Another was shot with a handgun by the drunk driving suspect.
Since nowhere in any of the reports can I find any statement confirming it was an automatic rifle, I am forced to assume that it was not. Real AK-47s are quite rare in this country, having been all but banned since 1934. The last time the media reported a machine gun was found, it turned out to be nothing of the sort. That was in the city of Lorain when a councilman reported finding a machine gun, which was later confirmed to be a semi-automatic pistol that only looked like one.
Most likely, what was used was a semi-automatic rifle that looks like an AK-47. These are similar to the common AR-15 rifles, which are semi-automatic versions of the M-16 that the US military uses. These rifles are not illegal, were not illegal under the "assault weapons ban," and are functionally no different than many hunting rifles. Because they look scary, they are both desired by criminals who mostly want them for intimidation, as well as demonized by anti-gun politicians and the media.
You certainly can't take the Ohio Coalition Against Gun Violence's word for it. In their argument against these types of guns and as evidence for the need to a renewed "assault weapons ban," they point to their own study which they say proves that 1 in 5 law enforcement officers killed is shot by an "assault weapon." Yet, if you look at their study, they barely try to disguise the fact that they are stretching the truth. For each instance, they show a picture of a rifle and note that "each weapon shown is representative of the brand or model of assault weapon and is not a picture of the specific weapon used in the shooting described in the narrative." In other words, they found the scariest picture they could that was close enough.
When reading stories like this it is important to keep in mind that they have an agenda to push and aren't above lying or intentionally misleading to further it. You can easily find airsoft guns that look like machine guns, that doesn't mean that they are. And since these "assault weapons" are exactly the same as other guns that don't look as evil, ask yourself this: if the gun control movement got their way and the guns that looked scary were banned, would the criminals commit crimes unarmed or use the less scary looking ones? The answer is clear.
oh man, right before turning in; talk about nightmares! Yikes.
Well, I would hate to be beaten with one of those. Or with whatever IT was beaten with.
i clicked on the story to help his salary, but returned to your post only to view a picture of some rare, repugnant, feral, washingtonian beast.
A better way of dealing with this is to get the thugs who cause these crimes off the streets.
Should I get a license for it? Is it even legal, you know, with a picture of a very lethal weapon on it?
It could scare someone or hurt their feelings, despite the “Fabulous” Daisies. Should I be more sensitive.
Sorry, I know this post is going to get me criticized but, I don't want to scare anyone or hurt their feelings. /S
I had a perfectly legitimate and sissified post that was going to garner plenty of attention until I saw this.
You are the winner and now I have to wash my eyes out.
I am a fellow Freeper and hope to post again in the future but, who knows with the damage I recently suffered to my retinas.
I wish I had worn sunglasses at midnight like all the other cool idiots in Hollywood.
Ouch!
Greet him with one of these in your hands...
My truck has machetes, shovels, and a bush hook, among other tools- can you kill a man with these- you betcha! If you are strong, and fast.
Of course, the generic "what I drive" is even deadlier-- about 50,000 people are killed every year by cars...
Whatever. the one on the bottom looks like a blade from Sham Wow!
“You watchin’ me camera man?”
/S
And these two weapons would be classified as AK-47s (one is a Norinco Type 56 and the other an Ingram MAC-10)
While trying to eat breakfast, I stumbled upon this thread...suddenly I’ve lost my appetite...
***A picture as an assault weapon of mass destruction. ***
Please refrain from throwing visual acid in people’s eyes. It burns the corneas and retinas!
Maybe we should have a rule that people need to issue a visual warning posting first before posting a picture of any of those Leftist hags [’hags’ means – ummm.. okay: heavenly angelic girls, yeah that’s the ticket, so don’t get offended]
People really need to have a warning before they scroll past such Ugl... “beauty”......
BTW, where can a person get a copy of that ‘Journalist’s guides to Firearm Identification’ image?
Never mind, I found that myself:
http://blog.robballen.com/2009/09/08/p3717-because-im-nothing-if-not-helpful.post
http://www.arizonarifleman.com/2009/09/07/the-citizens-guide-to-small-arms/
Helen Thomas. The Freeper joke that never gets old.
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.