Posted on 02/17/2005 5:30:25 PM PST by Edward Watson
CNN just showed a report on how easy it is to obtain a 50 cal rifle through the internet together with armor piecing rounds, and how to bypass the federal restrictions by a private person-to-person cash sale.
Not only that, these idiots had the investigative reporter fire at an airplane door and discussed how easy it is for a terrorist to use these guns to shoot down commercial aircraft.
One thing Islamic terrorists are is most of them are incredibly stupid and wouldn't know how to go around acquiring a 50 calibre rifle with telescopic sights and armour-piercing rounds.
Now, thanks to CNN, every single terrorist who saw or will become aware of the program now know exactly how to circumvent the law in order to get these weapons.
What irresponsible journalism. Why don't these people realize there are certain things you have to keep your mouth shut on in order to protect the public.
Can any of the American freepers here do what you can to haul CNN on the carpet for this irresponsible report?
Didn't '60 Minutes" do a story a few weeks ago about how evil the .50 cal. weapons are? So what is going on? The liberal media has decided that .50 cal. weapons need to be banned?
And just how many crimes/terrorist acts have been committed with .50 cal. weapons?
Zero
Didn't exactly turn out that way.
Next it will be a segment on "How to make Meth!".
It wouldn't matter how many airplanes had been shot down with a .50 caliber rifle. Its a military "arm" and protected by the 2nd Amendment (at least as the amendment is written as opposed to how the amendment is interpreted by some black robed tyrants on the bench today).
Do you have a link to that story?
thanks for the link
Who cares? Someone using an object in a crime does not affect my right to own a similar object. If someone uses a car to get away after a bank robbery, should that make and model be "banned"?
"All CNN did was to expose a flaw in our security so that it could be fixed before it was exploited.
"
What "flaw" in what "security"? Are we in martial law or on a military base?
My father has an old Navy buddy who later flew for UAL, going from engineer to navigator to co-pilot to pilot of a 737, then later he captained a 757. This guy is a top-flight engineer who knows his planes inside-out. I once asked him about whether the Hollywood scenarios were at all realistic. After he got done laughing, looking at me for a second and then laughing again, he said, "NO WAY!" He explained that all commercial jets have an opening in the fuselage that can be (and often is) opened to a diameter of as much as 1 foot to help regulate pressure. For those who are "math challenged," that's 12 inches, meaning that the area of the opening is pi x radius (6 inches here) squared, which is roughly 113 square inches. A .50 cal hole has an area of roughly 0.2 square inches, or 1/565 of the area. IOW, a bullet won't do squat to a plane, and nobody will get sucked out of the hole...that is 100% Hollyweird BS.
The only thing that could happen is that a critical hydraulic line could be hit. OK, fine, so let's say that Mr. Mohammed Terrorist gets a lucky hit. STILL nothing will happen, since the critical systems on a plane are triplely redundant in order to allow it to continue flying until it lands safely.
FYI, every civilian jetliner is automatically part of the civilian air reserve fleet, which means that it MUST be constructed to milspec standards. Ever see films of a mil-spec bomber that got hit by flak or a missile land? Most of them do, and do so safely, despite having dozens or hundreds of holes in them that are bigger than a .50 could produce.
As long as we're on the topic, does anyone remember the plane that had to top front of the fuselage peeled back like a sardine can? The pilot still landed safely despite the plane having been at 30,000+ feet when the incident happened, and the only person killed was a stewardess who was serving the passengers in that section (i.e. she wasn't belted). Note that others on the plane were also unbelted, except that not being right there, they survived (though everyone on the plane probably needed new underwear).
CNN did this to help the fight to get the .50 banned. They are famously/infamously anti-gun, as anyone who saw their initial biased piece (OS) report on "assault rifles" back in May of 2003 can attest. Terrorists already know very well how to do things far worse than merely shooting down a jet.
I dont think you can check a weapon in your luggage ..Thats not true
CNN is trying to energize the left.
They are push reporting to revive the AWBan
Who wants to bet the story was written FOR CNN by some gun control group and CNN just cut and paste?
CNN is a joke. They should have to register as a 527.
you have to be VERY careful with leftist reporters.
During the 2004Olympics a British reporter was caught going into a secure area PROPERLY (x-ray, hand check bags, magnatometer, proper credential check) THEN he did a story on he he got in improperly.
Similarly it would not surprise me that CNN did a dan rather or dateline in order to promote the mission of their story.
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.