I was listening to Air America today. Randi Rhodes was expressing her disgust at the idea of the AWB sunsetting on Monday. She mentioned a few things which damn near made me fall out of my car when I heard them.
I'll be paraphrasing a bit, so forgive any discrepancies.
According to Miss Rhodes, the use of "assault weapons" in crimes has fallen by two thirds since the ban went into effect. I wonder if she's seen this?
(Courtesy of Prof. Volokh) Or this?
She also made a statement that was a bit more shocking; partly because of its content & partly because I've never heard it before. She said that we shouldn't let "assault weapons" flood our streets; rather we should send them to our troops in Iraq because they don't have them.
Let me make that clear; she claims that our soldiers in Iraq do not have "assault weapons" & we should stop worrying about civilians having them until our troops have them.
Please. Take a few more minutes. I needed several.
Can you imagine the look on a Marine's face when his CO comes up to him & tells him to turn in his select fire M16A2 for a semi-auto only Bushmaster A2? Not that I'm a fan of the poodle shooter, but to say that our troops do not have "assault weapons" is so ludicrous as to not be believable. They have actual assault rifles. Note the lack of scare quotes; assault rifles. They are rifles that have many if not all of the features of the dreaded semi-auto "assault weapons" but are capable of select fire. That means firing either continuously or in bursts as long as the trigger is depressed. Semi-auto "assault weapons" fire one shot per each pull of the trigger.
Miss Rhodes has obviously not done her homework on either the AWB or what our troops carry into battle. The rest of the AWB talk had the usual cries for common sense gun control & was supplemented by claims that it did not hurt anyone's Rights. Of course "need" came up.
Thing is, I don't recall ever giving congress, let alone Miss Rhodes, any authority whatsoever to determine what I do & do not "need". She may find it unreasonable for me to have a magazine that holds 11 rounds, but I find it even more unreasonable for her to make any sort of determinations about what I may or may not possess.
The most depressing part of listening to her show however, was that I realized the same logical disconnects were familiar to me. I'd heard them before. Where you may wonder? I heard the same “logic” on C-Span 2 while the Senate was in session last February & March discussing the Lawful Commerce in Arms Act & amendments to it.
Let that sink in. Let it sink in good. Then call your Senators & demand they oppose any attempts at an AWB renewal.
Just FYI-Marines, at least Marine infantry, now use the M16A4. It's identical to the -A2, except that the carrying handle is removable as on the M4. Some Army units (I remember seeing pictures of 3ID troops during the invasion) also use the M16A4. The Army version features a railsystem front handguard similar to the M4's, which the Marines choose not to buy. (Rail system costs something like $225 per rifle; rifles cost $471 each.)
Learned this on a tour of the FN Mfg plant here in Columbia, SC.
Posted by: Heartless Libertarian at September 10, 2004 02:07 PM