Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Big Rifle A Terrorist Tool? [See BS's 60 minutes on the Barrett 50 caliber]
CBS ^ | May 29, 2005 | CBS Worldwide Inc

Posted on 05/29/2005 11:43:58 PM PDT by John Filson

Go to CBSNews.com Home



Big Rifle A Terrorist Tool?
May 29, 2005


California Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger decided there’s a weapon that’s too dangerous to be in the hands of private citizens.

This year, a new law went into effect in California banning that weapon. It’s the .50-caliber rifle, the Rolls Royce of sniper rifles. It’s a big gun, a favorite of armies around the world, and it’s still available in 49 states in this country to anyone over 18 with a clean record.

It is, without a doubt, the most powerful weapon you can buy. And, as Correspondent Ed Bradley first reported last January, it's powerful enough to kill a man or pierce armor from more than a mile away.
A Senate report said that a bullet from a .50-caliber rifle, even at 1.5 miles, crashes into a target with more energy than a bullet fired at point-blank range from Dirty Harry’s famous .44 Magnum.



The .50-caliber rifle, one of the world’s best combat weapons, was invented 22 years ago in Murfreesboro, Tenn., by Ronnie Barrett.

How did he come up with the idea? "I was just a 26-year-old kid, and didn't know any better," he says.

But he knew enough to design a weapon that today is used by the armed forces of 35 different countries. He showed 60 Minutes a semi-automatic 82A1 rifle. "This was the first rifle that I designed, and has been our most popular rifle," he says. "This is the one that the United States Army ordered. Matter of fact, this is a U.S. Army rifle here."

Even though the .50-caliber rifle is a military-grade weapon, federal gun laws treat it like any other hunting rifle, and Barrett can sell the gun to civilians. He says he needs to, because military sales vary widely from year to year.

"If it weren’t for the civilian sales, I wouldn’t be here. There’s a lot of defense contractors that would not be here," says Barrett.

He has sold thousands of .50-caliber rifles to private citizens who, he says, want the guns for target shooting and big game hunting.

But he scoffs at critics who claim that .50-caliber rifles are too dangerous in the hands of civilians. "The .50 has an excellent record. You know, as far as the abuses with .50-caliber rifles, they are so few, if any, that all other calibers ought to aspire to have as good a record as it has," says Barrett. "And it's a long rifle. When you hear people say it’s a criminal’s weapon, this is 5-and-a-half feet tall, or something like that. This is not a weapon that a criminal would use."



It’s not convenience store robberies that worry Tom Diaz, a gun control advocate who was an expert witness in the California campaign to ban the gun.

Diaz says the .50-caliber rifle made by Barrett and other manufacturers is a menace in the hands of terrorists. "This gun is designed and built to smash things up and to set things on fire," says Diaz. "It’s a battlefield weapon. Yet it is sold as freely on the American civilian market as a .22 bolt action rifle."

What's wrong with Barrett's product?

"I'm glad Ronnie Barrett makes his rifle for our military forces. I think it's a great thing on the battlefield," says Diaz. "I just think that there are certain occasions when we say in our society, this product is such a threat to our health and safety, and in this case, our national security, we will not allow it."

But isn’t any gun in the hands of a terrorist a threat?

"Well of course any gun is. But it is a gun that is unparalleled by any other small arm available to civilians," says Diaz. "We control every other kind of weapon of war you can think of – machine guns, plastic explosives, rockets. But this thing has flown under the radar for about 20 years."

Why would you need a weapon this powerful if you're not fighting a war? "It's a target rifle. It's a toy," says Barrett. "It's a high-end adult recreational toy. Any rifle in the hands of a terrorist is a deadly weapon."

But New York City’s Police Commissioner Ray Kelly says the .50-caliber rifle is in a class by itself. He agreed to show 60 Minutes just how powerful the .50 caliber is.



First, a police sharpshooter fired the NYPD’s own .30 caliber sniper rifle at a steel target. Downrange, three football fields away, the three shots from the .30 caliber rifle bounced off the half-inch thick steel.

"You can see it hasn’t penetrated it," says Kelly.

Then the sharpshooter fired three rounds from a Barrett .50-caliber rifle at the same target.

"Went right through," says Kelly. "It is clearly a weapon of war, a round to be used in a wartime situation. It’s appropriate for the military. The effective range is about 2,000 yards. It’s a very formidable weapon."

In other words, if the NYPD’s range had been 20 football fields long, instead of three, the .50-caliber rifle – firing ordinary ammunition -- still would have been devastatingly effective.

"Clearly, it is a very powerful weapon. We saw what it could do as far as going through armor," says Kelly. "It would be a weapon that could do a lot of damage – no question about that."

This is exactly what the FBI learned in 1993 at Waco when Branch Davidians fired a Barrett .50-caliber sniper rifle at them.

In response, the FBI deployed Bradley fighting vehicles for protection. But even that wasn’t sufficient, and heavier armor was brought in.


What happened at Waco was one of the arguments made for banning the weapon in California. Other states are now considering a similar ban for fear of potential terrorist attacks.

"If you go through virtually any industrial state, you’ll see right off the highways all kinds of highly toxic and or flammable materials stored in big tanks. These are ideal targets," says Diaz. "The point is you can plan your attack from a longer distance. It’s the combination of range and power."

The standard .50-caliber bullet is four times heavier than the .30-caliber bullet, and 10 times heavier than the M16 bullet.

In addition to the standard .50-caliber bullet, some bullets are designed to pierce armor, some to set things on fire. Those are all legal to buy. But the most devastating .50-caliber bullet is an armor-piercing, incendiary and explosive round sometimes called Raufoss, after the company that makes it.

Barrett says he’s not concerned about Raufoss because it’s illegal. "It's a high-explosive round," he says. "It’s not available commercially. I can’t even buy it."

In fact, 60 Minutes found a number of sites on the Internet that claimed to be selling the explosive Raufoss ammunition. On one site, it witnessed someone making an apparent transaction of the illegal round.

Barrett said he was surprised. "If it is out there and if someone other than our military has it, then it is stolen," he says. "And those people need to be prosecuted. We have laws against that. Passing additional laws, you know, is just a redundancy."


But, according to Diaz, the threat posed by legal ammunition is frightening enough. There are many potential targets, he says, but the most obvious is commercial aviation.

"Do I believe I could shoot an aircraft at altitude? Of course not, but on takeoff and landing, I could take you to places in Washington, D.C., where I’m absolutely certain you could shoot an aircraft with one of these guns," says Diaz.

"Clearly, with the range that it has, and the impact capability that it has, it would put an airliner or an airplane at risk if it hit that plane," adds Kelly.

Could the gun be used by a terrorist to shoot down a commercial airliner?

"It'd be very difficult. It would if it were a tactic that were even remotely possible," says Barrett. "Then our military, who happens to use the rifle, would be training their troops to do such."

But in his sales brochures, Barrett advertises the .50-caliber as a weapon that can take planes down.

"There's some military brochures that we had early on that showed that you could damage aircraft on a runway or Scud missiles and things like that," says Barrett. "Yes, you could if you have a parked target."

But not in the air? "That's correct," says Barrett.

Just this past year, the Rand Corporation released a report identifying 11 potential terrorist scenarios involving Los Angeles International Airport.



In one scenario, “a sniper using a .50-caliber rifle fires at parked and taxiing aircraft.” The report concludes: “We were unable to identify any truly satisfactory solutions” for such an attack.

Diaz told 60 Minutes about other much more specific scenarios in which terrorists might use the weapon, which we chose not to broadcast.

"I consider some of the stuff Tom Diaz lays out irresponsible," says Barrett. "I know a lot of things, but I’m not going to go on the television and tell people what the capabilities of equipment are and possibly give ideas to people."

Is what Diaz is saying accurate? "Yes, it could be. But it also, seeming begging someone to commit this crime. Somebody please commit this crime so I can validate what I’ve been saying so long," says Barrett. "And it’s repeated over and over, and I fear that somebody will answer that call."

Diaz disagrees. "Its kind of a classic gun-industry argument," he says. "First, they deny there’s a problem and then when something happens, they point the finger at people who tried to warn about it and say you guys caused this and you just hoped it would happen."

Federal agencies responsible for preventing terrorist attacks declined to be interviewed about the .50-caliber rifle. But last June, the Department of Homeland Security told the Dallas Morning News, “We remain concerned about any weapon of choice that could potentially be used by a terrorist, including a .50-caliber rifle.”

"Any rifle could be used to engage a target that it might stand a chance of hitting, of course," says Barrett. "You know, you don’t want to shoot any high-speed projectile at an airplane. It’s illegal."



"A terrorist is not concerned about what’s legal or not," says Bradley.

"That’s correct," says Barrett. "And a terrorist is not concerned if you pass, or Tom Diaz passes, another law."

Diaz wants Congress to pass a law requiring, at a minimum, records to be kept of who’s buying .50-caliber rifles.

"The real question here is we do not know who has these terribly destructive rifles," says Diaz. "No one in the United States government knows who has these guns."

"Aren't records kept when a gun is sold," asks Bradley.

"The answer is no," says Diaz.

Under the Brady Bill, centralized sales records of guns used to be kept for 90 days, which enabled the FBI to check the names of gun purchasers against terror watch lists.

A year ago, at Attorney General John Ashcroft’s initiative, Congress reduced the period of record keeping from 90 days to 24 hours. That’s the policy that’s in effect today.





© MMV, CBS Worldwide Inc. All Rights Reserved.


Feedback  • Terms of Service  • Privacy Statement


TOPICS: Business/Economy; Constitution/Conservatism; Culture/Society; Government; US: California; War on Terror
KEYWORDS: 50; 50caliber; bang; banglist; barrett; bmg; cary; vpc
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 181-200201-220221-240241-249 last
To: Lazamataz

LOL This from the person who started the bad-mannered attacks! LOL! You're very entertaining! Keep it up! :)


241 posted on 05/31/2005 3:50:28 AM PDT by Dr.Hilarious (If Al Qaeda took over the judiciary and mainstream media, would we know the difference?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 238 | View Replies]

To: Lazamataz
So you keep saying. How can I miss you if you won't go away, cap'n?

Now please go lie about more people and start more arguments you then lose, and whine that others started. I will be reading your posts with great pleasure, not commenting but laughing at you.

242 posted on 05/31/2005 3:52:38 AM PDT by Dr.Hilarious (If Al Qaeda took over the judiciary and mainstream media, would we know the difference?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 239 | View Replies]

To: John Filson
That's not a big gun!

This is a big gun! (and a terrorist's weapon!)

243 posted on 05/31/2005 3:56:24 AM PDT by airborne (Dear Lord, please be with my family in Iraq. Keep them close to You and safely in Your arms.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Dr.Hilarious
I've been coming here without posting long enough to think it is a site about a broader range of issues than just guns.

Agreed. But I think what separates most FReepers from other citizens is their passion. Most people have only a passing interest in the major threats we are experiencing to our republic. You can count on FReepers to take them very seriously, if they recognize them.

Recognizing the threat to our second amendment rights is something you've clearly demonstrated. Whether or not you take up the cause as passionately as we have is one of Laz's issues with you. Your arguments with him (to me) suggest that you haven't gotten quite as worried as he is about losing our rights.

We figure you have other worries, much as we do, regarding the plight of our God given rights. Stay around a while and see if you don't get as passionate as we are, even if it's about other issues as well as the sacred right to be armed.

244 posted on 05/31/2005 11:12:32 AM PDT by John Filson
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 237 | View Replies]

To: John Filson
Your arguments with him (to me) suggest that you haven't gotten quite as worried as he is about losing our rights.

Actually he's so clogged the issue with his personal weirdness that my position couldn't be clear to anyone. If this thread were specifically about losing our gun rights, there would be no doubt as to where I stand. We'll just have to wait for a purer opportunity, unmuddied by paranoia.

245 posted on 05/31/2005 11:22:19 PM PDT by Dr.Hilarious (If Al Qaeda took over the judiciary and mainstream media, would we know the difference?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 244 | View Replies]

To: Sender
Good catch. Last I heard was that the ATF was crappin their pants because the Branch Dividians were firing 223 at them, versus their 9 millimeter.
This sounds like a fish story. The fish keeps getting bigger as time goes on.
246 posted on 05/31/2005 11:30:09 PM PDT by planekT (Go DeLay, Go!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: papertyger; All
Man you just don't know when to quit, do you?

Probably not, but I do know when to apologise! I had to go away for a few days after I made my last post and have just now been able to catch-up on this thread. I jumped into this discussion hastily without fully thinking matters through and fired-off at you unjustifiably when I suggested you were being disingenuous. A less hurried and more careful reading today clearly shows I was in the wrong. Again, I sincerely apologise.

247 posted on 06/01/2005 2:51:51 PM PDT by tarheelswamprat (This tagline space for rent - cheap!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 186 | View Replies]

To: tarheelswamprat

No problem, FRiend. Glad we're not at cross-purposes.


248 posted on 06/02/2005 4:06:42 AM PDT by papertyger
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 247 | View Replies]

To: John Filson; All

FYI, 60 minutes is running a story on this rifle Sunday July 17th.


249 posted on 07/16/2005 6:02:42 PM PDT by Sybeck1 (chance is the “magic wand to make not only rabbits but entire universes appear out of nothing.”)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 181-200201-220221-240241-249 last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson