Skip to comments.CNN: Washington FBI Confirms no AR-15 was used in Navy Yard Attack
Posted on 09/17/2013 7:07:53 AM PDT by Perdogg
click here to read article
Here’s another vid
FBI confirms Aaron Alexis did not own AR15 & entered Navy Yard with valid ID
You get it!! What goes out first sticks!!!! So the AR15 report will stick even though it is now admitted to be erroneous a fabrication or a lie
I wouldn’t be surprised if Di-Fi should calls for allowing cops and guards to only have single shot pistols. Only a two guards and two others would have been killed.
Her and all the other gun grabbers are o.k. with the police, and them, having guns. they just don’t want you to be able to defend yourself when they decide it is time to “resettle and relocate” you. And who will do the resettling and relocating? The local police departments,
He bought the gun in the navy yard? That’s funny.
AR-15: Anti-Gun Narrative Blows Up In Face of CNN, Daily News [ Shotgun used not AR15 ]
That was it.
You learn so much from the media about weapons! /s
An adorable, but delusional, FOX News talking head told us that “the AR-15 is the civilian version of the M-16. Unlike the M-16, which is fully automatic, the AR-15 is a semi-automatic that is limited to firing three-shot bursts with each trigger pull.” She said that when witnesses reported hearing “pop pop pop” gunfire, that was the semi-automatic AR-15.
Meanwhile over on MSNBC, Andrea Mitchell said that the weapon was an AK-15! Who knew!
Even while the AR-15 was still being widely reported yesterday as the prime weapon of the killer, a Marine Corps officer (the one who had been standing next to a man shot in the head) said that the primary weapon was a pistol.
I took that to the bank.
It has to be blamed on an AR 15. It is the most feared rifle (by liberals). I used to wonder why, when the M1A, Mini 14 and Mini 30 were still legal in Kalifornia. (They won’t be much longer).
I recently began studying the AR 15 and its variants. I found out why they fear it most, and I bought one shortly afterward.
Don’t walk past ANY high rise window where Piers Morgan may be working for a few days... He may be saddened enough to leap out.
Seems he was one of the FIRST - if not THE first - to start spreading that story.
(...OK, just kidding everyone...calm down...)
As a veteran Im aware of the issues you note. My position is that if we can afford to bomb aspirin factories with million dollar bombs and if we can afford to execute "very small" strikes against Syria with cruise missiles costing 10s of millions then there is enough money laying around to to have both available to our troops along with the money necessary for them to qualify on more than one weapon. True, most troops simply don't require M16s. Then again, Im not the type to try to drive nails with a screwdriver. Different tools for different tasks. A sidearm isn't going to get in the way of latrine duty, weed n seed, or stirring oatmeal in the mess. I am proposing either/or for the majority of service members, most getting sidearms. Infantry, security, and similar troops should ALSO have a sidearm available along with their M16. Im aware of the issue of the weight of the total combat gear that infantry soldiers struggle with, they should still have the option to carry both.
As far as losing the weapon...all I have to say is that 18 year old Israeli girls seem to be able to find a place in their bikinis for their compacts during a day at the beach with their friends and still remember to not lose their rifle. I cant imagine why properly trained American troops on base shouldnt somehow be able to pull off a task as simple as not losing a sidearm in a latrine. (Place a hook near the handle for hanging the belt so that they have to reach past it to open the door. Im sure there is a contractor out there that should be able to produce them for only $37,000 per unit.)
Unless you were looking for "a section 8", I doubt you were standing up front using your .45 as a pointer for your unit to follow. I suspect the unfortunate reality is that he day an infantry officer "needs" to personally shoot someone in the field there should be plenty of M16s laying around for them to use. Maybe a marksman such as yourself should have been issued something more capable than the M16 all along, yet still have had the option to carry a sidearm. The rest of the days in your career you should have had access to a sidearm instead.
Then it must have been an Assault Shotgun.
Of course it does... Everything does to you people. If an airplane, you are one, lands 15 minutes late, you would scream cover-up.
That's all probably true today, since we've been on a war footing for so many years, like the Israelis have since .... ummmm 1948. When I was on active duty in the 1980s, though, it was the Cold War and the troops were almost universally more scatter-brained. A buddy of mine, another platoon leader was doing a water crossing and one of his guys just lost an M60 machinegun (precursor to the M249 ? 7.62x51) into the Nisqually River. Just "OOPS!" Never recovered a belt fed weapon that was in pristine shape. I sometimes wondered if the kid went back on his own time with a scuba tank and made some great money on his "loss." Or if he did that and just kept it for a SHTF rainy day.
you people ???
your not as intelligent as you believe yourself to be..sad.
Says the guy with tin foil on his head? Yes, you people.