"The AR-15 "has firepower that police do not have available to them, except in extraordinary circumstances," Mayor Lang said."
This statement is an absolute lie. Every LEO in the country are armed with surplus military, usually the latest or better than the military.
Hizzoner is an idiot. And idiots make laws.
Why not a tank etc. If memory serves, much of the field artillery and naval guns were privately owned at the time of the Revolutionary war.
Excessive hyperbole alert!
"The AR-15 "has firepower that police do not have available to them, except in extraordinary circumstances,"
HAHAHAHAHAHA
Where do they find morons like this?
Sounds like I need to take my AR-15 out for a spin this weekend . . .
What a maroon. The AR-15 is an OK rifle. As was stated earlier, there are plenty of hunting rifles that are deadlier in terms that they have a greater impact and greater distance. The AR-15 is good for medium range and it is not as long (physically) as a hunting rifle, therefore good for street fighting. A good mix of distance and portability. I think just calling something an 'assault' weapon is misleading.
The NRA has to fight this stuff at every level.
Gun grabbers are increasingly trying to separate the right to keep and bear arms from its constitutional underpinnings. To everyone but liberals and gun grabbers the word militia implies a body organized for military use. The Supreme Court Miller decision of 1939 held that the militia was 'A body of citizens enrolled for military discipline.' And further that ordinarily when called for service these men were expected to appear bearing arms supplied by themselves and of the kind in common use at the time."
To begin with, only the national government was represented at the trial. With nobody arguing to the contrary, the court followed standard court procedure and assumed that the law was constitutional until proven otherwise. If both sides were present, the outcome may have been much different.
However, since only one party showed up, the case will stand in the court records as is. As to the militia, Mr. Justice McReynolds related the beliefs of the Founding Fathers when commenting historically about the Second Amendment. He stated that, ". . .The common view was that adequate defense of country and laws could be secured through the militia- civilians primarily, soldiers on occasion.
"The significance attributed to the term Militia appears from the debates in the Convention, the history and legislation of Colonies and States, and the writings of approved commentators. These show plainly enough that the Militia comprised all males physically capable of acting in concert for the common defense.
It is clear that the firearms that are most suited for modern-day militia use are those semi automatic military pattern weapons that the yellow press calls "assault weapons". Since nations such as the Swiss trust their citizenry with true selective fire assault rifles, it seems to me that this country ought to be at least able to trust its law-abiding citizenry with the semi automatic version.
Self-defense is a vital corollary benefit of the constitutional right to keep and bear arms. But its primary constitutional reason for being is for service in the well-regulated militia which is necessary to the security of a free state. WE must be prepared to maintain that security against even our own forces that are responding to the orders of a tyrannical government, and the only viable way to counter a standing army's qualitative advantage is with a huge quantitative one. Don't let the gun grabbers and their politician allies separate us from the constitutional reason for the right to keep and bear arms. Miltary pattern weapons are precisly the weapons that should be MOST constitutionally protected. Even defenders of the right often neglect the constitutional aspect of it, and concentrate on their near non-existent use in crime.
If we don't constantly emphasize the constitutional reasons for the Second Amendment than we shall surely lose it, because hunting, while a worthy enterprise, is too trivial a reason to maintain it has a constitutional protection. We need to emphasize to our hunting bretheren that maintenance of the second amendment's constitutional rationale serves to protect their rights to continue to own firearms for hunting. The second amendment is literally the final check for the preservation of our republic from the depredations of untrammeled tyranny. We need to constantly remind the people what the militia in the 2nd amendment is REALLY for..... A citizen body organized for military purposes and by extension, logically equipped with weapons of military utility. Just consider that the founders of our nation had just finished defeating the greatest military power on the planet, thanks in no small part to a citizen militia, armed with military weapons such as the smooth bore Brown Bess musket, and often technologically superior rifled muskets. It is the height of absurdity to think that the second amendment in the Bill of Rights is primarily concerned with shooting bunny rabbits.
The second amendment is literally the final check for the preservation of our republic from the depredations of untrammeled tyranny.
Welcome to Massachusetts, where you need to pass an NRA Safety course, submit two references, pass a background check and get the town police chief's permission to carry Mace.
Class A licenses to carry are very hard to get in MA. It's up to the sole discretion of your town's police chief.
Isn't "military weapon" redundant? Look around the round world, and there are entire villages massacred with small-caliber firearms, machetes, and even torches.
Mayor Lang said he is still in the process of talking to local legislators, but he expects "an enthusiastic response" to his proposed ban.
Strike while the iron's hot. Or, in this case, before the lead or the bodies go cold.
He also noted he has strong ties with federal legislators from the area and may discuss the idea of a ban with them.
Name dropper.
Both the mayor and Police Chief Ronald E. Teachman have noted that officers were outgunned at the Foxy Lady standoff, with only their sidearms and a single-service rifle.
WTF is a "single-service rifle?" Best I can decode this, it's a single ... service (i.e. issued) rifle, and if so, they weren't outgunned. Unless the rifle was in a smaller caliber than .223, which I find difficult to believe.
The AR-15 "has firepower that police do not have available to them, except in extraordinary circumstances," Mayor Lang said.
Then it's time to get with the program, Mayor. During the North Hollywood bank heist in 1997, police were outgunned by two heavily armed and armored robbers -- and I have to give props to the LAPD for having the presence of mind to borrow rifles from a nearby gun shop. It's a near-miracle that the two perps were the only two fatalities.
Since then, a lot of police departments have started replacing or augmenting the standard-issue "riot" shotguns with rifles. It requires extra training, but criminals don't sit still, and cops should be constantly in training anyway.
Although it lacks some of the M-16's capabilities, plans to modify the AR-15 so it matches its military cousin can be found on the Internet.
So can plans for an OKC-style fertilizer bomb or a nuclear device. Hell, I once found a recipe for ricin online. Guess where? The US Patent and Trademark Office. Turns out someone patented a ricin-producing process in the '50s, and they had to detail the process to protect it. Anyone with the skills to make a souffle and a bucket of castor beans could make a toxin potent enough that a pinhead-sized pellet would mean certain death, courtesy of Uncle Sam.
Scott C. Medeiros, 35, the Foxy Lady gunman, had a Class A license that allowed him to purchase and carry an AR-15, according to police in Freetown, where Mr. Medeiros lived and maintained his firearms permit.
Then we're all lucky Medieros was a dumbass. If he'd walked into the Foxy Lady with a shotgun, or a lever-action 30-06, the body count would likely have been higher.
The AR-15 was also used by John Allen Muhammad and Lee Boyd Malvo, the 2002 Beltway snipers.
Exactly right, except for the part where it's completely wrong. I mean, an AR-15 and the Bushmaster XM-15 are both chambered in .223, so I guess they're kind of the same, in the sense that an 8-shot Lady Smith handgun is the same thing as an Uzi because they're both 9mm.
"If (Mr. Medeiros) didn't get an AR-15, he could have used anything to cause that mayhem. He could have made a bomb."
He could have used a sword or a knife or a length of metal pipe, and probably harmed more people in a crowded place. But murder-suicides aren't usually about body count; they're about going out with the proverbial bang. By walking in with a macho-looking rifle, he got to live out his Rambo fantasy.
Mr. Folco said he does not own any military-style weapons himself.
I do. Not military-style, but straight-up military. A Walther P-38 my great-uncle, a captain in Army intelligence, took off a dead German officer in France in 1944. It's in perfect working order, and I've fired it. I don't think I will again. Its value is as an heirloom, not a weapon, and trust me when I say that recoil suppression has come a long way in the last 60+ years. For a 9mm parabellum, it kicks like a mother.
Mayor Lang said he is a supporter of the Second Amendment, but added, "Let's apply some common sense to the Second Amendment and modern technology. Why not a bazooka? Why not a tank? It doesn't make sense."
I'm surprised his "why not" list didn't include an aircraft carrier or an ICBM with a 10-megaton MIRVed warhead. I mean, of you're going to jump into hysterical hyperbole, why not go whole hog?
More silliness about "military weapons," a scare phrase that has no relation to actual power or utility. Any reasonably competent hunter with a passable deer rifle -- or even a varmint gun, for that matter -- would be more than a match for an unpracticed loon with an AR-15.
According to Chief Teachman, the bullets cut through the cruiser door panels "like a hot knife through butter."
So would handgun bullets. So would arrows or crossbow bolts, for that matter. The parts of modern car door panels that aren't plastic are thin aluminum. Ducking behind the door in a shootout is better than standing in the open, but only because it's harder to aim at an unseen target. Any cop who thinks that a car door is an effective shield ought to be taught otherwise.
Chief Teachman said police are not typically trained to deal with a weapon such as the AR-15.
Sounds like a deficiency in the training regimen, Chief. How about ya see to that?