Posted on 04/12/2013 10:38:25 PM PDT by neverdem
It has been widely reported that the killer in the shootings at Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown, Connecticut last year was a semi-automatic AR-15 stolen from its rightful owner. In fact, it was for precisely that reason that President Obama said that gun control will be a "central issue" of his last four years in office.
But on Thursday, reports began circulating that at a Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee fundraiser in San Francisco on Wednesday, Obama claimed that the AR-15 used in the Connecticut crime was a fully-automatic firearm. At first, we wondered if the reports were accurate, or whether the president might have had a slip of the tongue.
The president was quoted as saying: "Now, over the next couple of months, we've got a couple of issues: gun control. I just came from Denver, where the issue of gun violence is something that has haunted families for way too long, and it is possible for us to create common-sense gun safety measures that respect the traditions of gun ownership in this country and hunters and sportsmen, but also make sure that we don't have another 20 children in a classroom gunned down by a semiautomatic weapon – by a fully automatic weapon in that case, sadly."
However, that is precisely what Obama said, as verified by the transcript of his speech, posted on the White House's website.
On top of Rep. Diana DeGette's (D-Colo.) claim the day before (see related article above), that once rounds are fired from a magazine, the magazine becomes inoperable, and similarly foolish statements by other anti-gun legislation sponsors, we are left wondering whether anyone at the core of the anti-gun campaign in Washington, D.C., knows which end of a gun is up.
I’m no expert, so you certainly could be right. The only reason I even thought of it is I ran accross an old discussion of it, I think from around 2005. Natually, I didn’t keep the link because I assumed (possibly incorrectly) that this was common knowledge in gun-lore. Anyway, thanks for the feedback. More to think about.
Moron. Not you, neverdem, honey!
I agree that gun violence has haunted families for way too long. Especially those who had family members killed by gang violence in places like Chicago. They’re so haunted they’re afraid to go outside.
I think obama and his stupid followers in congress should ban fully automatic rifles like the AR15-FA (the FA stands for fully automatic) and DISPOSABLE gun clips that hold more than 9 rounds.
Here's a way to look at this issue.
How hard is it to convert a fully-automatic M-16 into a semi-automatic rifle which would operate similarly to today's generic AR-15 semi-automatic rifles?
The answer is: put the select fire switch into the semi-automatic fire position. No modification of the rifle is necessary.
I say this to point out that the difference between an M-16 and what we call an AR-15 is accomplished by trivial modifications to very tiny parts in the trigger mechanism of the rifle. The part which legally makes an M-16 a "machine gun" is the sear, and possession of this sear is a serious federal crime without the tax stamp which is required to possess such a machine gun.
It's my understanding, (which may be wrong), that the government insisted many years ago that any semi-automatic AR-15 type rifle manufactured must be made such that a machining operation on the receiver must be done in order to allow that receiver to use the key M-16 parts which make an M-16 operate in full-automatic mode.
Before my unfortunate incident on the Costa Concordia, I owned a rifle which was constructed almost completely of M-16 parts which were abundant after the VietNam war. The exception was the lower receiver which was not compatible with an M-16 and the trigger parts needed to make this modified receiver function.
It's my understanding that modifying that rifle to operate fully-automatic using M-16 parts would be a substantial task far beyond simply replacing a key trigger part or two. I have read comments which suggest that even the bolt carrier in a generic AR-15 is different from that of the M-16. For the record, I have never attempted to study, modify, obtain, or otherwise modify my rifle so as to violate the unconstitutional Firearms Act of 1934 or any of the later infringements of my right to keep and bear arms.
It's perhaps worth noting that it would be relatively easy for someone to design what you described so that a generic AR-15 could operate fully-automatic. It's not rocket science and a machinist with some engineering skill could do so. The resulting "kit" would then probably not be compatible with an M-16.
The idiot opened his mouth and thus he made an idiot of himself yet again.
Wow. Thanks for the very beneficial input. More to ponder.
So even just studying the modification can get one in trouble? Intriguing.
He shout stick to skeet
We live in interesting times. The slaughter of innocents at Ruby Ridge resulted after government agents successfully encouraged a man to shorten the barrels of two shotguns without purchasing the required government tax stamp. This was sufficient to begin a persecution which resulted in three deaths.
If you own guns and ever have them confiscated and also have instructions on how to convert them to full auto, do not be surprised if you are charged and CONVICTED for conspiracy to violate the National Firearms Act of 1934. You would have to be thankful if the government agents didn't kill your kids and pets.
LOLOL! Thanks for the ping!
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.