Assault weapon? We’re not even allowed by law to own the modern day equivalent of a musket! That would be an M-16 or M-4 – they’re banned! We can only have semiauto imitations of those, with no bayonet lugs where I’m at, and there’s not even any argument against bayonet lugs – bayonets were around long before the Second Amendment. These ban happy lunatics need to take a hike!
Wolfwood nailed the first sloppy error in that article; his citation of Wisconsin as no-carry is the other, as it’s been shall-issue since November.
I also don’t care for his unilateral certainty of “the solution” he presents. Involuntary commitment laws have their own dangers should they be strengthened too far; how many times have you seen mere political dissent labelled as “derangement”?
I keep hearing rumors that the AR wasn’t used in the Newtown shooting. The promised Coroner’s report seems to have disappeared. I’m not a conspiracy guy, but what is going on here?
Almost all the not-gun-people I know on Facebook (as my easiest sample) seem to think that “Assault Weapons” are a Real And Special And Extra-Dangerous Thing.
I am no conspiracy guy either. I believe the best report we have is the count of spent shell casings from teh .223 was 76-79ish. But the coroner’s report will most likely be a long time coming. The issue will be decided before then.
I want to laugh whenever I read people on Facebook talking breathlessly about how certain cosmetic features on “Assault weapons” increase their lethality (pistol grips, folding stocks, bayonet lugs); Magazine capacity maybe, but someone with enough skill could quickly re-load an SKS with a pouch full of stripper clips…and a levergun in .30-30 hits somewhat harder than a .223
January 2nd, 2013 at 12:49 pm
“Dumb lane”
Did this guy text the article to the publisher, or what?
January 2nd, 2013 at 1:15 pm
Assault weapon? We’re not even allowed by law to own the modern day equivalent of a musket! That would be an M-16 or M-4 – they’re banned! We can only have semiauto imitations of those, with no bayonet lugs where I’m at, and there’s not even any argument against bayonet lugs – bayonets were around long before the Second Amendment. These ban happy lunatics need to take a hike!
January 2nd, 2013 at 2:26 pm
Wolfwood nailed the first sloppy error in that article; his citation of Wisconsin as no-carry is the other, as it’s been shall-issue since November.
I also don’t care for his unilateral certainty of “the solution” he presents. Involuntary commitment laws have their own dangers should they be strengthened too far; how many times have you seen mere political dissent labelled as “derangement”?
January 2nd, 2013 at 3:43 pm
Sloppy error #3: he gets the expiration date of the Clinton ban wrong (2003 vs. 2004).
@Seerak, Yup. Someone, somewhere recently linked to this: http://schizophreniabulletin.oxfordjournals.org/content/36/1/33.full
January 2nd, 2013 at 4:08 pm
I keep hearing rumors that the AR wasn’t used in the Newtown shooting. The promised Coroner’s report seems to have disappeared. I’m not a conspiracy guy, but what is going on here?
January 2nd, 2013 at 4:40 pm
And it works.
Almost all the not-gun-people I know on Facebook (as my easiest sample) seem to think that “Assault Weapons” are a Real And Special And Extra-Dangerous Thing.
January 2nd, 2013 at 5:20 pm
Bram,
I am no conspiracy guy either. I believe the best report we have is the count of spent shell casings from teh .223 was 76-79ish. But the coroner’s report will most likely be a long time coming. The issue will be decided before then.
January 3rd, 2013 at 1:34 am
I want to laugh whenever I read people on Facebook talking breathlessly about how certain cosmetic features on “Assault weapons” increase their lethality (pistol grips, folding stocks, bayonet lugs); Magazine capacity maybe, but someone with enough skill could quickly re-load an SKS with a pouch full of stripper clips…and a levergun in .30-30 hits somewhat harder than a .223