There’s no reason to ban ‘assault’ rifles
By Andrew L. Jaffee, netwmd.com
… For the purpose of this article, we’ll focus on AR-15s since it is what CBS calls “the most popular rifle in America” and one often designated an “assault” rifle. An AR-15 is the civilian equivalent to the military’s M-16. So what’s the difference?
Kelly Alwood, a firearms trainer and consultant, told TheBlaze the only difference is that one [the military AR-15] is fully automatic and the other is semi-automatic [the civilian AR-15]. It’s a small yet simultaneously big distinction. Firearms for use by the military are able to shoot continuously with one pull of the trigger, machine-gun style. Civilian firearms, on the other hand, only allow one shot per trigger pull.
… [Calling the civilian AR-15 an "assault rifle" is] “a way to demonize something for a political agenda and misconstrue [the guns] and the public on the Second Amendment,” Alwood said.
TheBlaze, Jan. 11, 2013 (emphasis added)
There’s really no difference between the hyperbolic-named “assault rifle” and a hunting rifle, so all this talk of banning “assault weapons” is just another ruse and scare-tactic meant to disarm Americans — to destroy the Second Amendment to our hallowed Constitution. The current gun control push will punish law-abiding Americans the most, as street thugs, Mexican cartels, and crazies will always be able to find automatic or other deadly weapons on the black market. Our Founding Fathers knew all about what it meant to be the underdog trying to fight off tyranny, that of King George, leader of Britain, whose “forces were the best trained, most well equipped military in the world.” According to the New York Times (yes, the NYT):
RDF:![[Valid RSS]](http://israpundit.com/2008/wp-content/images/valid-rss.png "Validate my RSS feed")
Loading ...
