Cal .45? 1.5 seconds
You do the math...
Posted on 10/17/2002 7:47:59 AM PDT by Stand Watch Listen
I get the feeling advocates of total firearm confiscation are turning cartwheels over the recent murders perpetrated by the miscreant known as "The Beltway Sniper."
Rather than calling for the apprehension and punishment of a serial killer, anti-gun groups are instead joining with an ever-eager liberal media to attack the National Rifle Association and the Constitutional rights of law abiding gun owners.
Of course, we shouldn't be surprised. These same groups -- most notably the Coalition to Stop Gun Violence -- were positively giddy in the wake of events such as the Columbine High School murders. Every incident of deadly criminal activity presented them with another opportunity to spread their lies, and the press, time after time, responded with unlimited, one-sided coverage.
However, the anti-gun contingent seems to have forgotten one salient point. We no longer have an aspiring dictator in the White House. We no longer have a leader who takes his marching orders from Hollywood celebrities or obese lesbian talk show hosts.
Politicians are not quite so quick to jump on the confiscation/registration bandwagon as
in years past. After all, even Bill Clinton himself has admitted that it was likely the animosity of NRA members who cost Al Gore the presidential vote in his home state of Tennessee.
Before the 2000 election, gun-hating liberals tended to live in a very insular world, surrounding themselves with other liberals, all of whom agreed that America's crime problems could be blamed solely on gun ownership. Stupidly, they neglected to take into consideration that a hefty percentage of the 90 million American gun owners might
take umbrage at attempts to defile their civil rights. Apparently, that lesson still hasn't sunk in.
The latest blather from the CSGV is a call for a national system of ballistic fingerprinting. Their plan is to force gun makers to test-fire a cartridge through every weapon they manufacture, and then file the allegedly "distinctive" markings left on the casing into a
law-enforcement database. "Ballistic fingerprinting increases the chance of you getting a lead that can take you one step closer" said Eric Gorovitz of the CSGV.
There's only one problem with Gorovitz's theory. Ballistic fingerprinting doesn't work. The very act of firing a bullet through a barrel -- the high temperatures, velocity and pressure -- change the "distinctive" markings with nearly every shot.
Moreover, there are two states that already require ballistic fingerprinting -- New York
and Maryland. In case anybody forgot, Maryland is where these shootings began. If ballistic fingerprinting is so effective, then why isn't the Beltway Sniper already behind bars?
That's easy. As I said, the technology is faulty. The CSGV knows this, and they also know that such a requirement would do nothing to aid in the apprehension of killers. But, a national database of guns would be the first step toward a national database of gun owners.
Such a list would make things very easy should another gun-grabbing president take office and decide to arbitrarily repeal the Second Amendment. Just send out the jack-booted thugs and check off the names.
But as I said, we're lucky. President Bush is completely ignoring the liberal shouts for KGB style observation and harassment of the populace. Through his spokesman Ari Fleischer, Bush uttered in a couple of simple sentences what should be the true definition of "common-sense gun laws."
"There is an issue about fingerprints (of fingers...not guns) as a very effective way to catch people who are engaged in robbery or theft," said Fleischer. "Is that to say that every citizen of the United States should be fingerprinted in order to catch robbers and
thieves? These same issues are raised here. The President does believe in the right of law-abiding citizens to own guns."
Fleischer went on to say that the issue was not guns at all, but rather those who commit crimes with guns.
"In the case of the sniper, the real issue is values. These are the acts of a depraved killer who has broken and will continue to break laws, so the question is not new laws."
There you go. Probably the most common sense we've heard out of Washington since 1992. Bush correctly identifies criminal behavior, rather than ownership of firearms by honest citizens, as the root-cause of crimes involving guns. Duh. That is so obvious as to be ludicrous; however, liberals can never understand such simple logic. It's both too direct and too correct for their nanny-state mindset. It doesn't involve higher taxes, social programs or draconian measures upon innocent civilians, and thus is not worthy of consideration.
Do these people really think that new gun laws would be respected and obeyed by those who are already actively engaged in breaking gun laws? That's just amazing.
Of course, there are many liberals in Congress who have both veiled, and not so veiled agendas when it comes to the right to keep and bear arms. Some of them, those who advocate the rights of the state over the rights of the individual, believe the Senate should consider the possibility of ballistic fingerprinting.
"I don't think there's any question that it's important for us to review all of those laws and find ways to ensure that law enforcement has every tool available to them," said one senior Senator.
I suggest that all gun owners remember those words from Tom Daschle when they go to the polls.
(Ron Marr is the founder of The Trout Wrapper, the official magazine of Montana's Tobacco Root Mountains. The publication believes in "big guns, big dogs and big bar tabs." Founded in 1994, The Trout Wrapper says it is "dedicated to hunting down and publicly tormenting the humor impaired," and it espouses the "wholesale abuse of all things politically correct.")
Then they can use road blocks, gun dogs, test for residues, and require all politicians who seek office to take residue tests. That would stop all this silliness about a so called “right to kill.”
Gun grabbers will take good hardworking law abiding men and women all to hell rather than work to punish the lawbreaking evil doers.
Many gun grabbers would march in protest against the war on Saddam and at the same time work to disarm lawful American citizens.
I wonder too, just what these gun grabbers would do if it were their own families at risk, or even themselves? I do realize that some of the biggest gun grabbing fanatics are themselves protected by massive security personnel, so are they erecting themselves into an aristocratic class where the peasants get sticks and brooms to protect themselves from the whims of the aristocratics and evil doers?
Would the results be the same if say these killers tried this in say, Montana?
IMO the folks in a rural state are more likely to have a firearm than a cell phone. Instead of calling 911 they are likely to return fire.
Cal .45? 1.5 seconds
You do the math...
Just call them the Brady Borg - for their amazing ability to all be bleating the same propaganda simulataneously - must have some pretty significant orchestration behind the scenes for them all to be using the same buzzwords, the same attacks, all within hours of Sarah Brady issuing her position on the matter.
Would the results be the same if say these killers tried this in say, Montana?
IMO the folks in a rural state are more likely to have a firearm than a cell phone. Instead of calling 911 they are likely to return fire.
Good questions. I submit we'll not see such attacks in any state with concealed-carry AND away from a very large metro area.
These terrorist shooters would be well advised to stay out of the South, most of the Mid-west and West.
The difference between an interview with a witness in Montana;
LEO... Can you describe the vehicle.
Witness...It was a white van with a ladder rack on the top and six bullet holes in the drivers door.
It might narrow the search down some.
Congressman Billybob
"Moreover, there are two states that already require ballistic fingerprinting -- New York and Maryland. In case anybody forgot, Maryland is where these shootings began. If ballistic fingerprinting is so effective, then why isn't the Beltway Sniper already behind bars?
"That's easy. As I said, the technology is faulty. The CSGV knows this, and they also know that such a requirement would do nothing to aid in the apprehension of killers. But, a national database of guns would be the first step toward a national database of gun owners."
Replacing irrational political-agenda law with honest objective law:
"Fleischer went on to say... "In the case of the sniper, the real issue is values. These are the acts of a depraved killer who has broken and will continue to break laws, so the question is not new laws.""
10-4 on .308 for these scum. Works like a champ in anti-personnel role. Talk about one-shot stop! If they stand still, just like working a deer from a tree stand IMO.
We're ready here too (KY.)
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.