Posted on 05/09/2008 1:07:47 PM PDT by holymoly
The Issue: A Philadelphia policeman is killed by a bank robber wielding an assault rifle.
Our Opinion: Congress should reinstitute the ban against assault weapons, which it allowed to expire in 2004.
Assault rifles have only one legitimate purpose: as weapons to be used by soldiers in combat. They are impractical and illegal for hunting game, and far too dangerous to have lying around the house where those who are young and inexperienced can get their hands on them.
But ever since 2004, when Congress failed to extend the federal ban on assault weapons, which had been in effect for 10 years, their illegitimate use by criminals has been increasing.
According to the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives, last year 8,547 assault weapons were linked to crimes nationwide, up 11 percent since the ban expired.
As a result, America’s streets have become increasingly dangerous, especially for the police who must confront the heavily armed criminals in many cases with much lighter weapons.
Last week a Philadelphia police Sgt. Stephen Liczbinski became the latest victim of the proliferation of assault weapons when he was riddled by bullets from a Chinese-made rifl e similar to an AK47 as he responded to a report of a bank robbery.
The alleged gunman was killed by police a short time later. Two other suspects were arrested. One of them had walked away from a halfway house in Reading.
Around the nation the response by police chiefs to the use of assault weapons by criminals is predictable and understandable. They want to arm their officers with similar weapons.
Last year a Dade County, Fla., policeman was killed and three others wounded by criminals wielding assault weapons, The policemen were armed only with handguns.
“It’s almost like we have water pistols,” said John Rivera, president of the Dade County Police Benevolent Association.
Police Chief Scott Knight of Chaska, Minn., chairman of the firearms committee of the International Association of Chiefs of Police, told The Associated Press following the Dade County shootings, “We are in an arms race.”
The Miami Police Department said 29 of its 139 homicides during the last two years involved assault weapons.
In response to the increased use of assault weapons by criminals, many police departments, large and small, are arming their policemen with more powerful weapons, increasing the potential of turning our streets into a shooting gallary.
Knight said he has ordered 10 assault rifles for his department, which protects a town of 24,000 residents.
Only days before the Dade County shootout, Miami Police Chief John Timoney had agreed to allow his officers to carry assault rifles.
Timoney blamed the necessity for his decision on Congress’ failure to extend the federal ban on assault weapons.
Although leaders of the then Republican-controlled Congress insisted, despite virtually all polls to the contrary, that most Americans were not in favor of the ban, police chiefs from around the country were pleading with lawmakers to extend the ban.
Charles H. Ramsey, at the time the police chief of Washington, D.C., and now the Philadelphia police commissioner, testified before Congress, “Our streets, our homes, our citizens and our police officers will face great danger unless the federal ban on assault weapons is renewed.”
Ramsey’s words have come true. Assault weapons have turned our streets into battle zones.
And since they have no legitimate use other than weapons of war, Congress should rethink the issue and ban their possession permanently.
I guess the bolt-action '03 Sprinfield, bolt-action Lee-Enfields, bolt-action Mauser 98K, bolt-action Mosin-Nagant, etc. should all be banned.
After all, they are, quite literally, "weapons of war", having been fielded by the armed forces of the United States, United Kingdom, Germany & Russia.
(Do I need to mention I'm being sarcastic?)
Maybe they should make murder illegal first.
(my 120 year old Argentine Mauser) from my cold dead hands...
The Justice Department stated, unequivocably, that the 1994 AWB had “no effect” on crime.
tards.
Then there are the "newsies" who serve only to make killings seem glamorous to the weak minded. Maybe we should abolish them as well.
To a firearm layman, an SKS looks nothing like an AK-47 or an AR-15 or an M16.
A Remington 597 would be mistaken for an "assault weapon" by most journalists simply because of its appearance, even though it is a hunting rifle.
However, an M1 Garand would be mistaken by most journalists for a hunting rifle, although it is an "assault weapon" that has likely inflcited more battle casualties than any other American "assault weapon."
Enforcement should be citizen based via hunting fees. It should be a 365 day open season on Assault Weapon wielding criminals...
Used to be said (don’t know if it’s true) that in Switzerland everybody is required to have keep their rifle, web gear and helmet with them in their houses.
Makes sense to me.
Hey and let’s ban illicit drugs too...that’ll stop people from taking them.
It fires a full house .30 '06 round.
It isn't select fire.
It doesn't have a short barrel.
It doesn't have a detachable magazine.
What a great home page you have made. Bookmarked.
We should freep the living hell out of that editorial. They have a comment section.
The old Lee Enfield WWI British bolt-action rifle probably has a faster rate of fire, in trained hands.
Maybe Philadelphia should issue weapons & radios to the citizenry & have them patrol the streets as a sort of militia. Seems to be working in Iraq.
There were 1,417,745 violent crimes in the USA in 2006.
Even if we restricted the field to violent crimes only - instead of all crimes - this would implicate "assault weapons" in 0.6% of crimes.
If we widened the scope from violent crimes to violent and property crimes it would be 0.07% of crimes.
3% of all murders in 2006 were committed with weapons described as "rifles" - less than the 3.5% of murders committed with "shotguns."
Looks like hunting weapons are more dangerous on our streets than "assault weapons."
Yup. A quick Google shows they keep their army-issued personal weapon (the Sig 550 5.56x45 mm assault rifle for enlisted personnel, the SIG 510 battle rifle and/or the SIG-Sauer P220 9 mm semi-automatic pistol for officers, etc.) at home. They keep the ammo for it at home, as well.
I didn't say it was.
I was pointing out that the whole notion of an "assault weapon" is a silly exercise in semantics.
Try it. We put up with the first ban with it's exemptions and sunset clauses. We won't put up with another "permanent" ban.
Want a REAL war? Try it...
Molon Labe.
Thanks. It’s a work in progress.
No legal rifle in America is.
Every rifle described in law as an "assault weapon" is only legally available in semi-automatic fire.
How about, “Cop Killers Found Guilty in a Court of Law Should be Swiftly Executed!”
Dear author of the article,
Where the hell does it mention hunting in the Bill of Rights?
love,
Btbd
This is funny!
After the AWB, we could buy the same long gun, except without the flash hider and bayonet lug.
Simply taking off these cosmetic items made them unattractive to thugs, who waited in the shadows until they could attack law enforcement officers with the flash hiders again.
Removing the flash hiders and lugs will once again inhibit the criminal element, who will all get jobs and stop shooting people.
Or just post a link to this thread. Ha!
They appear to have shut down comments... how Huffington Post-like.
"Assault weapon" or "assault rifle" ("Sturmgewehr") has a specific definition. None of the rifles covered under the "assault weapon" or "assault rifle" bans qualify.
They are all semi-autos, employing variations on a technology that's been around since the 1890s.
It's all a crock. And, as I said, a 100 year old bolt action rifle can probably achieve a higher rate of fire than the SKS type light rifles. Plus with the stripper clips and the 10 round magazine you could probably keep going indefinitely, given a large enough carton of Greek surplus ammo . . . .
Friend of mine has a Vickers. Talk about expensive to feed!
So they think if they just ban them they'll magically disappear.
The enemies of America never rest.
The point is that an “assualt weapon” at least by the definitions in the AWB only dealt with semi-automatic rifles, which the Garand certainly is.
The function of an “assault weapon” did not differ much from a typical hunting rifle. It was the aesthetic features, such as a pistol grip vs thumbhole stock, length of the barrel, etc that made such a weapon an “assault weapon” and therefore banned. And if I remember correctly, one of the items in the “bad list” by itself was fine, but if combined with another “bad item” then the rifle was banned.
The AWB had nothing to do with select fire, fully automatic weapons. With the proper permits and fees paid, a fully automatic rifle was perfectly legal. But with the AWB, a semi-automatic version of the same rifle was illegal.
I’m a police officer who works on the streets answering 911 calls.
I’ll skip the truth about the ban and the lies told about what it did and did not do.
But let me say one thing.
When you have a gal pull a knife on you from arms reach....let me tell you, the pucker factor is high.
You don’t see me calling for a ban on pocket knives and I seem to be a knife magnet.
If I’m ever killed at work it will be some drunk running into me or I’ll be stabbed by a drunken illegal alien who’s not happy about the fact that I just stopped him after he bought his cocaine.
“Last week a Philadelphia police Sgt. Stephen Liczbinski became the latest victim of the proliferation of assault weapons”
Good, at last they’re going to ban screwdrivers!
My Dad was assaulted and murdered by a criminal alien with a screwdriver in 1978.
If they cannot correctly spell a common word, one of the fundamental skills in their field of expertise as writers, how can these editors dare to make dictates about weaponry which is most certainly not their field of expertise?
Let's look here for facts:
Hmmm... I see figures like "1.4%" and "less than 2%" so I guess someone with a agenda is making fast and loose with figures...
The whole premise of this article is a very “red” herring. This is has never been about hunting or specific types of firearms. Americans need to be able to possess weapons of war just like they need freedom of speech and movement. The Second Amendment is about the right of every American to possess the best weapon he or she could afford. The premise is that America needs to protect itself from its enemies both foreign and domestic.
Do we wish to remain a free people?
Not only can they not spell gallery, but they ain’t even smart enough to use a spell-checker.
The price of Liberty is eternal vigilence. I’m sure the NRA will latch onto this one with their canine teeth, and never let go. If you’re not already an NRA member, become one !
BTW this editorial will be counterproductive, since it only reminds me and thousands of others to go out an buy another brick of 7.62x39 - before they try to ban that, too.
You stupid moron (the author not you holymoly). "assault weapons" are impractical and illegal in some States for game hunting because they aren't powerful enough!
In States or against where they are legal it is because the caliber and round used for those are identical those found in run of the mill hunting rifles that you don't have a problem with.
Besides that the 2nd Amendment has ZERO to do with hunting.
vaudine
Yes, thank God we're not England (or Japan), yet. I wish you well officer and hope that you retire and live to a ripe old age.
Typical liberal response to a problem: Ban something and make people give up some rights.
The average owner just pays a one-time NFA tax of $200 and submits to an FBI background check. That's it.
The push for civilian disarmament is real.
Many of our leaders and public servants do not appear to have a true American worldview. This should disqualify them from elected office or public service.
The elitist & statist presumption is that lawful gun ownership, possession, carry and use is in reality a privilege to be revoked on a piecemeal basis whenever the opportunity presents itself.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.