Sooner than you think. :-) 
Posted on 03/02/2005 3:41:31 AM PST by SLB
There needs to be a BS topic so we can add it.
BTTT
Yeah, I cook 'em up in my hall closet.
</sarcasm>
Wow! I'll bet there's a lot of Green Party folks out there who are scared sh*tless by the misinformation and silliness found on this website. That initial vid clip with the site coming to rest on the plane and then the sound of a shot being fired ... powerful imagery if you're a weenie.
Who is behind that website?
Yes, and they soon will be able to carry small nuclear warheads as well!
At $2.00/round, the .50 is no bargain to shoot. I was out at the gun range and there was a guy trying to sight one in. It was hysterical. After ten shots the guy was flinching so badly he couldn't hit a two foot circle at 100 yards. As dusk approached there was this huge flame coming out with every shot. We could hear the guy bitching about spending so much on ammo. LOL!
As well as the "exploding bullets" that gun grabbers use their proxies in the MSM to "warn" the public about. A Glaser slug is designated as an "exploding round", wouldn't that make every glass vase or coffee mug an "explosive" because it will fragment upon impact if it falls off the breakfast table?
I'm highly uninformed on this topic. Are .50 cal rifles really legal to buy and own? And if so, what possible "sporting" use could one find for such a weapon?
You can't hunt with a glass vase don't you know...
/sarcasm
Answers:
Yes, in most states.
What does "sporting use" have to do with the price of eggs? Although many people like to accurately place holes in things at very long distances, and consider doing so "sport".
.50 BMG rifles can be a wonderful instrument for doing this.
Sooner than you think. :-)
Yeah, but if you've ever seen a suicide bomber who took one of these rounds in the forehead it is quite the gory, but beeooootiful, sight.
You certainly weren't born in Georgia if you are asking a question like that. Sounds more a like northeastern progressive mindset composed that interrogative.
Lawmakers seek ban on .50-caliber rifles
Monday, February 28, 2005
By Brian Mackey
of Copley News Service
SPRINGFIELD - Rifles that can accurately pierce half-inch armor from more than a mile away are as legal as most other firearms in Illinois, but several state lawmakers want them banned.
House Bill 1098 would make it a felony to manufacture, distribute, transport, import or sell .50-caliber rifles and ammunition. The bill would make it a misdemeanor to possess up to two of the weapons or any .50-caliber ammunition. The felony would be punishable by three to seven years in prison, while the legislation specifies a first offense of possession would be a "petty offense," punishable by a $500 fine.
The .50-caliber rifles can be up to 5 1/2 feet long, weigh 35 pounds and cost $2,500. The rounds are nearly 5 1/2 inches long, more than a half-inch in diameter and are available in armor-piercing and incendiary varieties.
Thomas Mannard, executive director of the Illinois Council Against Handgun Violence, portrayed the proposed ban as an anti-terrorism measure. He described the .50-caliber as the most powerful rifle available on the civilian market.
"It is so powerful that it threatens airplanes - taxiing on the runway, taking off or landing - from hundreds of yards away," Mannard said.
Gun-rights groups counter that the weapons have never been used in a crime. And National Rifle Association lobbyist Todd Vandermyde said couching the ban in the language of anti-terrorism was "fear mongering to try and create an issue where none exists."
Vandermyde said "Saturday night specials" and assault weapons were in vogue among gun-control activists a decade ago, and that the ban on .50-caliber weapons was just the "gun ban du jour."
Rep. Elaine Nekritz, D-Northbrook, is the bill's chief sponsor. She recounted the 1993 standoff between Branch Davidians and federal law enforcement agents at an armed compound in Waco, Texas, during which the Davidians fired .50-caliber rounds at agents. The government brought in armored Bradley fighting vehicles but found that even those could not stop the bullets.
"These are not hunting weapons. These are in fact weapons of war," said Rep. Harry Osterman, D-Chicago, a chief co-sponsor of the bill. He called the NRA's statement that no crime has ever been committed with a .50-caliber rifle an "interesting criteria," and said he hoped the General Assembly would not wait until there is a homicide.
Despite objections from the NRA, the bill has attracted one Republican co-sponsor. Rep. Elizabeth Coulson of Glenview said, "There are certain pieces of legislation that I wish we could discard the party labels and sponsors and affiliations, because this is really a bipartisan issue to protect the citizens of the state of Illinois."
One Republican to discard his party labels was Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger of California, who last year signed the first .50-caliber ban in the nation.
Why haven't we banned boxcutters yet?
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.