Thursday, May 8, 2008

DC Metro Police get Uber Death Machines

DC Metro Police will get "assault rifles" for patrol. Most of us who have at least a fundamental grasp of firearms know that the term "assault rifle" is a farce, just like the term "assault weapon" is too.

It is commonly accepted that the term "assault rifle" describes a select fire rifle that is capable of firing both one round per trigger pull, or multiple rounds per trigger pull. I refuse to use such a stupid term in anything more than outright mockery, regardless of the logic. Automatic weapons are so misunderstood that it does no good to try to sort it out right now, so I won't even try.

The point that I want to make is that many, if not all, gun control groups like to spew this nonsense about militant looking weapons being used for the sole purpose of killing massive amounts of people. If that is the case, then why give them to police? Do we want cops killing mass numbers of civilians?

No, that's absurd. It is equally absurd to think that civilians would do the same with ownership of these weapons.

And if they are so damn dangerous, then why is everyone cool with cops getting them? Are Metro police officers that much more altruistic then us mere civilians? No, they're not. Cops are people just like anyone else. As far as receiving training to handle one of these bucking bronco "mayhem" rifles; there are so many US military veterans trained to use rifles like the M16 or Bushmaster that it cannot be counted. It doesn't take a state governments blessing to safely use them, so why the hysterics?

Simple misunderstanding, ignorance, and worst of all: hype.

Let's take a look at what the Violence Policy Center thinks of these weapons, and I'll comment on some of the hype:

Assault Weapons: "Mass Produced Mayhem"
The guns covered by the Assault Weapons Act were semiautomatic versions of fully automatic guns designed for military use. Whereas an automatic weapon (machine gun) will continue to fire as long as the trigger is depressed (or until the ammunition magazine is emptied), a semiautomatic weapon will fire one round and instantly load the next round with each pull of the trigger.
So semi-autos' don't fire as fast, right? That's what I'm hearing, until this..

Semiautomatic assault weapons fire with extraordinary speed.
"Extrordinary speed?" How ridiculous!

When San Jose, California, police test-fired an UZI, a 30-round magazine was emptied in slightly less than two seconds on full automatic, while the same magazine was emptied in just five seconds on semiautomatic.
So much for extrordinary speed if it takes two and a half times as long to empty a magazine.

The military features of semiautomatic assault weapons are designed to enhance their capacity to shoot multiple targets rapidly.
This is absolutely not true. The features that they are talking about have many uses, none of which increase lethality. If you need help grasping this, click here.

For example, assault weapons are equipped with large-capacity ammunition magazines that allow the shooter to fire 20, 50, or even 100 rounds or more without having to reload.
As often, and that doesn't mean a whole lot. Click here to see Jerry Miculek reload a six shot revolver faster than most shooters can draw from a holster.

Pistol grips on assault rifles and shotguns help stabilize the weapon during rapid fire and allow the shooter to spray-fire from the hip position.
This statement is pure fantasy. Do you think DC metro cops are going to use them to "hip-fire?" Didn't think so. The only "hip-firing" that is seen nowadays is from some starving, illiterate terrorist in third world country who is only seconds away from a righteous lesson in shoulder fired marksmanship.

Barrel shrouds on assault pistols protect the shooter’s hands from the heat generated by firing many rounds in rapid succession.
Yeah, it's a SAFETY DEVICE! Let's just take those plastic handguards off of those police officers weapons, you know, so they don't "fire off too many rounds in rapid succession." Wouldn't want things to get outta hand.

Far from being simply “cosmetic,” these features all contribute to the unique function of any assault weapon to deliver extraordinary firepower. They are uniquely military features, with no sporting purpose.
Actually they are mostly cosmetic, but there are a few items that are practical, like a collapsing stock. Here's just a taste of the "sporting purpose."

As ATF has explained:Assault weapons were designed for rapid fire, close quarter shooting at human beings. That is why they were put together the way they were. You will not find these guns in a duck blind or at the Olympics. They are mass produced mayhem.
You mean this ATF? They are as incompetent as it gets, so I won't bore you with the details. You can google them all night if you would like. As for "massed produced mayhem," how truly silly can you be?

These weapons “are not generally recognized as particularly suitable for or readily adaptable to sporting purposes” and instead “are attractive to certain criminals.”
And, like, millions of Americans. I never did read anything from our founding fathers on "sporting purpose," but I did read plenty on using firearms to overthrow a government that is too big for its britches.
The firepower of assault weapons makes them especially desired by violent criminals and especially lethal in their hands.
"Especially lethal?" Does their holding it make the bullets go faster?
Prior to the Act, although assault weapons constituted less than 1% of the guns in circulation, they were a far higher percentage of the guns used in crime. ATF’s analysis of guns traced to crime showed that assault weapons “are preferred by criminals over law abiding citizens eight to one....Access to them shifts the balance of power to the lawless.”
This is the biggest lie that I have heard in awhile. The AR-15 type rifles have become one of, if not the most, popular semi-automatic rifle in American history, thanks in part by Hillary Clinton's anemic "assault weapon ban." Google AR-15 and take a looksee at what you find.

I'm not against cops having a semi-auto rifle while on patrol; I am actually an advocate, but I'm also firmly for the same rifles in the hands of civilians. I was using this post to point out the double standard that is so often applied by gun grabbers. You can't have it both ways by saying that they are designed for mass killing, and then say it's OK to give them to police.

Update: Armed Canadian addresses an article in the Washington Post about the DC police and their acquisition of deadly assault thingies, because apparently, DC's illustrious gun laws have not prevented criminals from bringing guns into the district, specifically "high powered" weapons.

The bullshit flag has been raised, and rightfully so, because there is no evidence of any criminals in DC carrying "more powerful weapons." The media and DC officials do not have the slightest clue about what constitutes "high powered" in terms of firearms, and if they think they're on to something, then they must have bumped their head.

Update: I found this thread at The High Road which links to a Washington Times post about these weapons. The article has some interesting quotes, but this one stands out:
D.C. Council member Jim Graham said he would "be inclined to support" the use of assault rifles because he sees no alternative in the war on guns.

Emphasis mine. At least their coming out and saying it.
Post a Comment