Sniper Coverage Questions & Conspiracy Question For Brad

[HDPM]

Here's a link to a NYT story on the sniper. web page (http://www.nytimes.com/2002/10/17/national/17SHOO.html?ex=1035432000&en=9b43b57def7a7c46&ei=5 006&partner=ALTAVISTA1) 2 main areas I will gripe about.

First is the story (and others I have read) refers to the .223 as a high-powered rifle. It is certainly adequate for 90 FOOT shots on humans (and longer ones of course) but the main complaint about the .223 is that is a varmint caliber. It has gotten acceptance since Vietnam and is adequate, but the traditional military .30 caliber rounds like .30.06 or .308 are a lot more powerful. Certainly snipers who use .50BMG rifles at ranges measured in kilometers not FEET would not regard the .223 as a real big round. Scary thing is that there is not a weapon made that won't take a human life at 90 feet. When the gun control folks realize that every elk hunter shoots a lot more cartridge than a .223 at ranges a lot longer than 90 feet, it could be a bad day for gun rights. I mean, I just was shown pictures of a 12 year old who made a clean heart shot that broke both shoulders on a big bull elk with a 30.06 at a range of between 200 and 250 yards. And some hunting mavens look down on 30.06 for elk. 90 feet on Home Depot customers is not a real tough deal. Not to sound like the guy in Full Metal Jacket extolling the virtues of Marine snipers or anything.

And what is the ATF doing arresting everybody for "illegal rifles"? WTF is an "illegal rifle" in this context. It must be a state law because the federal law didn't ban a whole lot of weapons, although some are now illegal. I guess normal stuff is illegal now in Cali, so if someone can fill me in on the extreme Maryland laws I'd like it. I can't think of very many that would be an "illegal rifle" in my state, except the few rifles banned by the feds. At any rate, it looks like the feds are using tips or whatever and the publiuc panic to arrest people in their homes. Yikes.

I've never bothered to buy an "assault weapon" before, but might have to part with some bankroll for an AR-15 or something now. Just to be sure I have one.

And yes, I think the sniper needs to be stopped as quickly as possible.

[B-Man]

I've never bothered to buy an "assault weapon" before, but might have to part with some bankroll for an AR-15 or something now. Just to be sure I have one.

Why would you need an assault rifle?

[HDPM]

Semi-automatic centerfire rifles are very useful for certain self-defense needs. Some of these weapons have been labeled "assault weapons." The term "assault weapon" originally came from Nazi Germany and was a translation of what they called their small caliber semi-automatic infantry weapons. The idea was that troops should be more concerned with how much ammunition they can carry rather than the caliber of that ammo. You can carry more .223 or 5.56 or whatever than of the .30 caliber military cartridges. That's one reason why I put quotes around "assault weapon", I don't like the origin of the term. Ironic it came from the government with the most extensive gun control. Another is that the term is used by gun control groups to scare the ignorant. The term is also incapable of an accurate definition which helps the gun ban crowd. Some advantages of the smaller caliber "assault weapon" are cheap practice ammo and relatively low penetration.

And besides, nobody needs to justify their exercise of a right. Do you ask why people need to read a certain novel? /forums/images/icons/grin.gif

[Ray Zee]

the 223 does shoot fairly long and flat, so qualifies as long range but like you say shoots a light bullet so isnt the best at killing although this guy does a good jog of it. it is used by the miliary as you say so they can carry alot of shells and they dont care if they just wound as a wounded soldier takes two more to care for him.
i have shoot many antelope at over 400 yards with clean kills with a 270 and 130 grain bullet. but antelope go down easily.
since this guy uses a 223 i suspect he was military from some place and not from the hunter type.

[B-Man]

Semi-automatic centerfire rifles are very useful for certain self-defense needs.

Such as?

And besides, nobody needs to justify their exercise of a right.

If you can show me where the Constitution says that you have the right to own assault weapons or semi-automatic rifles, then I'll concede you have that right. The right to bear arms is not without limitations. There are limits on every right, even free speech. People sometimes don't realize that.

I'm fully in favor of the right to self defense, and I don't think all guns should be outlawed. I do know that assault weapons have made it easier for some lunatics to commit mass murder. I don't believe that it is necessary for you to own an assault weapon to defend yourself. That is something to consider.

I also think that the gun lobby's opposition to requiring manufacturers to keep records of weapons' "signatures" is shameful. We may have already caught the sniper if we could have tracked where his weapon came from. People who only intend to use guns for lawful purposes should not have any objection to this, all it does is make it easier to catch criminals.

[HDPM]

Semi-automatic centerfire rifles are very useful for certain self-defense needs.

Such as?

How about if one of the lunatics you complain about is out committing mass murder. A .38 revolver is inadequate. How about in the L.A. riots where store owners bravely and justifiably defended their lives and property? How about when the LA cops needed rifles to take down that lunatic and didn't have them. Police have no rights that the citizens don't have. How about if you see a careless sniper shooting people at a Home Depot 250 yards away?

I am not at my home computer where I have a good website bookmarked. There is a lot of scholarly analysis out there that shows the 2d amendment is an individual right and clearly covers military weapons. The point of the second amendment is not deer hunting, it is armed human conflict, that between individuals and between citizens and governments. "Assault weapons" enjoy more 2d Amd protection than sporting weapons IMO, at least if we differentiate between types of weapons. I know this view of the Second Amendment is unpopular and scares some people. But I believe it to be accurate. As I have posted before, the problem with my (accurate /forums/images/icons/grin.gif) view is that if it were the legally enforced interpretation, we would probably repeal the 2d Amd and that would be a disaster. There is very little thought given to the philosophy underlying the 2d Amd. And the political philosophy which created this country is diminishing in popularity and practice all the time. It is a great loss, despite the imperfections in the country then, because of the imperfections in our country now.

[John Cole]

HDPM,

I tend to get strange looks on the MBTA when I spot someone clutching the latest Danielle Steel and ask, "Why do you need to read that sh*t?" Of course, to protect myself, I carry the Arden King Lear stuffed in my coat.

John

[HDPM]

So why do you read that stuff? Who needs it? Don't you have enough books? /forums/images/icons/grin.gif

[brad]

first of all military 223 rounds are super high velocity (i honestly cant remember anything but lets just say average .308 bullet travels 1200 fps, m16 bullet travels like 2000 fps.) also when hits target tumbles or something so really chews up victim (i guess).

second of all by illegal rifle id be willing to bet they found one or two guys with either sawed off shotgun (doubtful) or more likely someone with an expired or somekind of paperwork error for their legal fully auto stuff. in other words its just propaganda. (although ive heard maryland is very anti gun and i believe all gun dealers have moved out of state its so bad)

third of all you can get a AK-47 knock off for like 300 bucks. (from romania or whatever). i know what you mean here. i didnt even have any kind of firearm for like 15 years then i figured i should get one just in case. (was talking to mom, was telling her whats going on, i said something like, mom, what am i gonna do when they come around and confiscate guns, (told her i bought a gun for just that purpose) and she pretty much goes semi hysterical and says give it to them. women /forums/images/icons/frown.gif

fourth of all the federal constitution is quite clear in that any power not specifically delegated to the federal government is specifically reserved by the states or people. (and my state has in constitution where gun ownership is 100% A-OK). so , b-man, there you go.

brad

[brad]

p.s. so whats the question.

[andyfox]

In a review of the lateset Hannibal Lechter movie in The New Yorker, the reviewer noted that the killer they are looking for shows an inordinate literary knowledge and that, therefore, he was wondering why they didn't arrest Harold Bloom.

[HDPM]

first of all military 223 rounds are super high velocity (i honestly cant remembe anything but lets just say average .308 bullet travels 1200 fps, m16 bullet travels like
2000 fps.) also when hits target tumbles or something so really chews up victim (i guess).

Both move faster than that, you're easily satisfied. Heck, good 9mm. goes 1200.

[brad]

well actually i dont really know much about guns other than how to disassemble an m-16 /forums/images/icons/smile.gif

http://users2.ev1.net/~lertsman/ammo.html

5.56x45
Where used : Most assault rifles manufactured in Western Europe and the United States
Designation: M885
Bullet Weight: 62gr
Muzzle Velocity: 3100 fps
Muzzle Energy: 1323 ft. lbs
Dates Used: Mid 1960s to present

7.62x39
Where used: SKS and AK-47 series of Assault rifles
Designation: M43
Bullet Weight: 122gr
Muzzle Velocity: 2329 fps
Muzzle Energy: 1470 ft. lbs.
Dates Used: mid 1940s to present in third world countries

.22LR
Where used: Various military training rifles worldwide
Designation: ?
Bullet Weight: 40gr
Muzzle Velocity: 1255 fps
Muzzle Energy: 140 ft. lbs.
Dates used: 1887 to present

30.06
Where used: M1903 series, M1, light/medium machinegun role.
Designation: M2
Bullet Weight: 150 gr
Muzzle Velocity: 2740 fps
Muzzle Energy: 2500 ft. lbs.
Dates Used: Early 1900s to mid 1950s

[brad]

well i got the 800 fps more than AK /forums/images/icons/smile.gif

[B-Man]

How about if one of the lunatics you complain about is out committing mass murder. A .38 revolver is inadequate. How about in the L.A. riots where store owners bravely and justifiably defended their lives and property? How about when the LA cops needed rifles to take down that lunatic and didn't have them. Police have no rights that the citizens don't have. How about if you see a careless sniper shooting people at a Home Depot 250 yards away?

Law enforcement in this country is handled (for the most part, anyway) by the police, not private citizens. We are not a vigilante state. I'm not saying it would be wrong to shoot a criminal in the circumstances you stated, but I still don't know that you need an assault weapon in any of those instances. Killing someone with a regular gun isn't good enough?

[brad]

store owners in l.a. need them.

btw, what about my argument for owning rifles? (at least in arizona) are you convinced?

[B-Man]

I have no idea what the law is in Arizona. Does the Arizona Constitutuion, or Arizona law, give citizens the right to bear arms? Rifles?

What I do know is that the U.S. Constitution grants certain rights, one of which is the right to bear arms. I don't view this right as necessarily including the right to own assault rifles and semiautomatic weapons. The states are free to grant citizens even greater rights than granted by the U.S. Constitution if they so choose; the Constitution is simply the floor. Whether or not it is wise to do so with respect to assault weapons is a different question.

[HDPM]

"Killing someone with a regular gun isn't good enough?"

"Assault weapons" are regular guns.

Question for you - What is the difference between a pre-ban AK and a post ban version?

[Jimbo]

Fact: Most people killed with a gun neither care if it was regular, irregular, legal, technically an assault weapon, an accident, intentional or otherwise. I also believe all qualified people should be licensed to carry concealed weapons. Just the possible knowledge of immediate retribution may give many criminals second thoughts before committing a violent crime.

Just like the sign posted at the door of a biker bar:

Please check your guns at the door, if you do not have a gun one will be issued.

Jimbo

[The-Baron]

Why does, "need", enter into it at all?

[The-Baron]

Could you be kind enough to define, "assault weapon"? It's a term with absolutely no meaning in terms of defining ordnance. It's a fallacious buzz word that carries absolutely no factual content.
As for self defense, in terms of home protection, it's very difficult to imagine a more effective weapon than a small caliber, semi-automatic rifle. Markedly less recoil than any shotgun, less likely to penetrate construction materials than even the typical 9mm Parabellum cartridges used by many Law Enforcement Agencies and easier to operate effectively than any handgun. A rifle such as an AR-15 may well be the single closest thing we have to the, "ideal", home defense weapon.
As for the Constitution. Would you be kind enough to show where it says you can't own a small caliber, low powered semi-automatic rifle? The idea that these firearms somehow facillitate mass murder is specious at best. Consider a situation where the attacker is using a slide-action shotgun instead of the rifle. Look at nothing more than the volume of projectiles delivered to the target and then try to explain to me why it's somehow "better" than an AR-15.
As for tracking firearms. Let's see. How do we do that? How do we account for the almost 1/4 Billion firearms already in circulation in the US? What metric do we use? A bullet from each firearm kept in some warehouse? Digitize it's image and keep it in a database?
Go to your nearest 7/11 or equivalent convenience store. Take $2.00(US) with you and purchase a package of emory boards. They're used to shape fingernails. You've just purchased a system with which you can completely alter the identifying characteristics of any firearms bore, breach and chamber. Use the emory board to file down a single land of rifling at the muzzle and that firearm now has a completely different signature than before. Same goes for the breach or chamber. Why in hell should we spend the hundreds of millions of dollars to install a system that is, by the very nature of firearms technology, already obsolete and can generate minimal useful data?

The Baron

[The-Baron]

How is one of these mythical beasts, the "assault rifle", any different from a "regular gun?"

The Baron

[brad]

'What I do know is that the U.S. Constitution grants certain rights'

you are 100% completely wrong. the federal constitution 'grants' nothing. it merely enumerates the god given or 'natural' rights each man possesses. (which is one of the reasons god is being gotten rid of)

brad

p.s. its in the arizona constitution, as is the official language (english).