Big market for 49 calibers
More 50 caliber lies. California recently banned the sale, distribution and manufacture of 50 caliber rifles (signed into law by a Republican). Other states are making a push to. This NYT article discusses the issue:
The new law limits possession to those who already own the rifle; they have until April 30, 2006, to register it or face a misdemeanor charge.
Gun rights advocates fear that the California legislation will prompt other states to follow – similar efforts have been undertaken in New York, Connecticut, Illinois, Massachusetts and Virginia, but have failed – and enthusiasts are already devising ways to alter the gun and so circumvent the law without breaking it.
Another result of the law is that in the weeks before it took effect, people rushing to buy the limited supplies of .50 BMG’s descended on gun shops throughout California. Now that it is in force, some of the gun’s out-of-state makers and distributors have threatened not to sell any of their firearms or services here.
“We all think it’s the first step toward banning sniper rifles,” said Michael Fournier, owner of the Gun Exchange, a shop in San Jose. “They keep chipping away a little at a time. Eventually they’ll try to get them all.”
They were doing so well with the article but then the lies, hysteria and misrepresentations kick in:
Manufacturers say the rifle is accurate at a range of up to 2,000 yards, more than a mile. It fires bullets five and a half inches long described as powerful enough to rip through armor, much less the thin aluminum skin that covers commercial airliners.
The shell is 5.5 inches long. The actual bullet (the projectile part of the shell) is probably about 1.5 inches long.
“They can pierce the skin of an aircraft,” said Daniel R. Vice, a lawyer with the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence, a central supporter of the law. “It could be used to shoot down an airplane. And we certainly don’t want to wait until a terrorist buys one before we ban it.”
Your grandpa’s 30-06 can pierce the skin of an aircraft. A 9mm handgun can pierce the window of an aircraft.
The legislation’s author, Assemblyman Paul Koretz, a Democrat from West Hollywood, concedes that street criminals would most likely view the .50 BMG as too much gun for the typical robbery or drive-by shooting. Rather, the law is intended to help keep the weapon out of the hands of “terrorists, general nut cases and survivalists,” Mr. Koretz said, citing government reports suggesting that it had been used in assassinations overseas and that at least 25 had been bought by Osama bin Laden.
The terror angle is totally baseless. I doubt someone could shoot at a moving plane accurately. The article even notes that these weapons have never been used to commit a felony. I’d more concerned about terrorists getting a nuke, rocket launcher or a laser. And what is the impact of this on muzzle loaders? It’s not uncommon for muzzle loaders to be in excess of 60 caliber.
And criminals won’t buy a $15,000 rifle to rob someone. Another pointless ban.
January 4th, 2005 at 9:14 am
God forbid a “survivalist” got ahold of one of these weapons of mass destruction.
January 4th, 2005 at 9:57 am
I think they say “survivalist” because they don’t want to say “militia.”
Hitting a moving airliner with a .50 BMG sniper rifle could, at least in theory, be done. It’d be mighty damn tricky, though. Lots of math involved. First and easiest number to figure is the distance from your firing position to the point at which you want the bullet to intersect the plane, and how long it will take your bullet to get there. Easy enough to do.
Now you have to figure out how fast the target aircraft will be going, and figure out how far away from the targeted spot the aircraft needs to be when you fire the shot. This can be tricky, because there are a good number of variables. Safe landing speed varies by aircraft type, and is affected by other factors. Add in the fact that airspeed and groundspeed aren’t usually the same thing, due to the effect of the wind.
Then add the complication the the approach path isn’t a stricly defined line, but a zone in which the plane needs to be.
You’d have to be extremely skilled and quite lucky to pull the shot off.
However, .50 BMG machine guns were used by US forces in WWII. But those were full auto bullet hoses.
If I wanted to destroy an airliner with a .50 BMG sniper rifle, I’d go for one that’s waiting in line for takeoff. put an Armor Piercing Incendiary (API) round through a wing fuel tank and you’ve got a nice fireball. Of course, a .308 tracer round can do a similar job.
Other notes: IIRC, the PRK law was crafted pretty specifically to apply only to the .50 BMG, to avoid entangling muzzleloaders and shotguns. But this also begs the question: why not build a rifle in 12.7 Soviet (12.7x107mm?)
And I’m pretty sure a .223 will penetrate an aircraft skin.
January 4th, 2005 at 11:40 am
I always thought they would make the perfect weapon to rob an armored car. But that’s just me.
January 4th, 2005 at 12:10 pm
But the .50s I have seen were beautiful. The first on I saw in 1950 was a Russian single shot anti-tank rifle.
January 4th, 2005 at 12:16 pm
The most amazing wording in the article:
“Gun rights advocates fear . . .”
This was written by a NYT reporter and passed the editor too? AMAZING progress!
BTW, my experience being shot at with .3006 and 9MM while piloting a helicopter leads me to belive that you won’t be scratching the paint if I am going faster than 30 Knots. Well, unless I am trailing and you are trying to lead an aircraft in front of me š