Posted by ORION on May 31, 2004 at 11:19:59:
In Reply to: Assault Weapons Ban Idiocy posted by L. J. on May 31, 2004 at 08:32:07:
( "All the rhetoric behind the bill gave the impression we were outlawing military machine guns, an impression fed by references to the need to get AK-47s off the streets." )
I totally agree with getting all those evil AK's off our streets.
Send them all to me instead, and I'll make sure they don't fall into the wrong hands by storing them next to the other "EVIL" weapons I already own, many of which "DO" have bayonet lugs! (Oh yes,...and those deadly "folding stocks" too! LOL!!)
Can anyone even think of a time, EVER, when a bunch of American school kids or unlucky postal employees were endangered by a bayonet? Maybe in 1812???
( "The Million Mom March charges that these weapons are "far more powerful than conventional guns" and "able to pierce body armor." But as Don Kates, co-author of "Armed: New Perspectives on Gun Control," points out, "All rifle rounds (except mere .22s) will pierce body armor." )
As has been demonstrated by R. Lee Ermy on the program "Mail Call", the 7.62x39 M43 round, (the AK47 cartridge), "WILL NOT" pierce the U.S. armored vest that contains the hard plates. They just bounce off. However, the 300 Winchester Magnum, (available in "conventional" bolt action hunting rifles, and not available in any known so-called "Assault Rifle"), will do so easily! The purpose of attacking "scary looking" firearms is an attempt to divide gun owners, not make the streets safe. If they're successful in eleminating military-looking firearms, those hunting rifles, (which will then be referred to as "Sniper Rifles"), will be next on the list!
Post a Followup