Posted on 02/25/2008 8:38:35 AM PST by kiriath_jearim
A battle is brewing between the Honolulu Police Department and the Hawaii Rifle Association over a proposed ban of a high-powered sniper rifle.
KITV's Catherine Cruz reported that the 50-caliber rifle is dubbed the most powerful rifle on the market today, and the HPD said it is their worst nightmare. That is why they said they want it out of civilian hands.
It's a weapon that's long been used by the military and law enforcement, but in most states, a person can buy it over the Internet or from a gun store, which is making law enforcement uneasy.
"There is nothing we have that can withstand this. If you look at an armored car, those things have a half-inch of steel. These can go through 1 inch of steel at a thousand yards," HPD Major Gregory Lefcourt said.
The rifle can fire 10 rounds in 10 seconds, and the bullets can travel for miles, police officials said.
They said that a shot fired from the rooftop at police headquarters could precisely hit a target at the state Capitol, four-tenths of a mile away.
The National Guard calls the weapon a threat to homeland security.
"It does concern us -- shooting down airplanes four miles distances," Hawaii National Guard Gen.Gary Ishikawa said.
The National Rifle Association said that a ban would infringe on the right to bear arms. It argued that the weapon hasn't ever been used in a crime in the islands.
"We haven't had any incidents of robbers at banks or terrorist shooting airplanes -- it just doesn't happen," HRA member Mark Plischke said.
But police said they don't want to wait until then.
They said the proposed ban will die in the judiciary committee if they don't get enough public support for the bill.
The rifles are outlawed for civilian use in California, New Jersey and New York.
The HRA maintained that their members use it for hunting or eradicating goats. Others users of the rifle said they enter long range firing competitions
The rifle is so powerful that it has been banned from the Kokohead Firing Range, range officials said. The rifle is only allowed at military ranges, which are off limits to civilians.
It is also very expensive. One rifle will fetch about $8,000, officials said.
There are 125 registered owners of the high-powered rifle in the state, with 90 owners living on Oahu.
If you follow the .50 roundup, that would be the eventual result. That’s the gun grabbers’ real agenda.
Well said, GS!
Read his about page, he says he will Protect and defend...
Obviously he is selective about what he will protect and defend.
"Being fun to shoot" IS a "legitimate" purpose. The big issue is once you have people taking upon themselves the task of deciding "legitimate" or "worthy" purposes, then no firearm is safe. Your scoped hunting rifle becomes a "sniper weapon". Your semi-auto handgun or rifle is an "assault weapon", etc, etc.
You still need to visit an FFL and get a background check”
I’ll S A Y IT A G A I N F O R Y O U R E A L S L O W..
You can buy them online and have them shipped to a local dealer. They do the simple transfer paper that takes less than 5 min. Most of them charge $20 for that.
Do you think you are buying a $1000 rifle from that dealer for $20 ? Or from the online dealer you gave the $1000 to?
It doesn’t matter that the local HWD store only has a couple single shot shotguns for sale, you can buy anything you want online and have it shipped to the local HWD as long as they agree and have FFL.
“Perhaps you’re mistaking freedom of speech with a guaranteed friendly audience. A common trait amongst the liberal and weak minded.”
Well said. They never believe in debate just capitulation to their demands.
1) I’m not a liberal - I just made a personal observation which did not have the intent to advocate any new laws regarding gun ownership. Just because I personally do not see the need to own a weapon such as the one from this article, doesn’t mean I’m advocating it’s ban (advocating a ban is an overt act and not an opinion).
2) I have not been scared away. I did, however, have work to do, and needed to be away for a while.
I do see how silly yours is.
“I would be in support of this weapon not being available for civilian purchase.”
Unfortunately you haven’t read the Bill of Rights. Theres no description needed for the type of arms the people can own.
You are the fodder that anti-gunners feed on. Once 50 cal. rifles are banned then it will be 458 cal, then 45 cal., the 38 and so on. Don’t delude yourself that anything given to anti-gunners will satisfy them except a total civilian gun ban.Watch California for the future of our gun rights.
My personal opinion of the 50 cal is that it is of limited use by civilian militia and so a ban on them would not be very damaging to the purpose of the second ammendment. BUt I don’t see why we should give up something like 50 cal rifles without getting something back in exchange. In the event of an armed uprising against the government, most of the fighting will occur in densely populated cities. Fully automatic assault rifles and machine pistols and grenade launchers are more useful. One could make the argument that in the rural areas the 50 would be invaluable. Well, maybe so, but the government has tanks and helicopters. A man with a barret 50 is no match against a tank or helicopter. And in a rural setting, there’s no hiding from a tank or a helicopter.
Right now the binding law, absent a constitutional amdment, is as I have described.
You have provided an argument in support of an amendment to the constitution to limit the scope of the second amendment.
Try to figure out how our form of government is supposed to work.
Huh?? Are you serious? Spoofing, right?
Yes, a 50 is a long range weapon. And a knife is and has been far more deadly at close range. Got any large kitchen knives?
Have you been to the range out there on the east end of Oahu? Seen any killers warming up for a nights work?
Why would you penalize someone for legal, and non harmful recreational activity? A 50 generates a lot of foot pounds of energy (about 16000); so does a boat.
I always know that they're worried about my safety when their first concern is an attack on armored cars and limos.
So, you wish to discuss me and my comments without the courtesy of a ping? It was my understanding that when you talk about someone and their comments that protocol was to ping them. Perhaps I was mistaken about that.
I will protect and defend - this country - from enemies both foriegn and domestic. My comment regarding this particular weapon was just an opinion - not meant to be taken as a desire to ban any firearm from civilian ownership - including this one. Hey, if you wish to and can afford to own it, buy it. I’m not on any overt campaign to rid firearms from this country. But, I do advocate that firearms be owned and used by people who will not abuse them. I’d hope others would feel the same way. If you see this as backing away from my original comment, then, I guess it is. I’m capable of admitting my original post was not as well thought out as I could have made it.
Hypocrisy amongst that those who are dead wrong on this issue is not that unusual.
Allow me to restate my position. I advocate the ownership of firearms by people who will use them responsibly and respectfully. I do not advocate gun ownership for people convicted of a violent criminal act.
My original comment was poorly thought out, and I’ll admit to that.
Your personal page indicates that you will “support and defend”- just what is it that you will suport and defend?
The constitution? That includes the 2nd Amendment, an enumerated right of the people. The teeth of this republic are contained therein; the only power to resist tyranny of government is for the people to be able to prevent it, just as our forefathers stated in so many words.
The 2A, therefore, does not apply merely to any sporting use, but certainly the military use of arms in keeping our government in check-any government, and for common defense and security (read anti-crime).
Okay, the 50 cal BMG is a powerful round, one that was developed for use in a heavy machine gun back in 1928 by John M Browning.
Indeed this caliber is effective out past 1000 yards, as are most high powered rifles of lessor caliber.
The idea that a 50 can “shoot down” an aircraft with a few shots is ridicuclous-thousands of archived accounts of WW2 with the M2 50 cal prove that it is indeed a rarity to knock down even a light aircraft with a few hundred rounds-shot to hit ratios exceed 2000 rounds-this during wartime with experienced gunners....
Also, “penetrate 1 inch of steel at 1000 yards”? Not likely. Mil spec standarads for 50 AP indicate the ability to penetrate .5 inch armor plate at a mere 200 yards, not anywhere close to 1” at a grand.
Your son uses or is involved in the use of M107 50 cal sniper rifles in the 10th Mtn, what does he think? Is the big 50 a wonder gun? Not in my rather extensive experiences. It just provides additional stand-off range to protect our ground forces while they do they heavy lifting.
Just what would constitute an appropriate level of power/range suitable for civilian use? A 22, a 30 cal, a 45 cal????? Is not the militia “the whole of the people, except for a few public officials” (Militia Act of 1792)?
Who cares about suitability for civilian uses, just what is a civilian use??
Barret Firearms, one of the largest makers of 50 cal rifles (over 3000 made for the US Army alone) now refuses to sell or service his rifles to any agency in the state of CA et al simply because he knows the deal-guns for the government, but not the people is a formula for oppression.
As to the good Gen from the HI National Guard; since when does the military engage in politics? Not done-poor form, shame on the him!! He should stick to just the facts, not his opinions. If this bill passes, then he will have to find other sources for his arsenal of 50s, as Ronnie Barrett should follow through and cancel his dealing with the state guard or LEAs. I hear Russia is making a knock-off 12.5 mm heavy rifle, the people of Murfreesboro, TN would appreciate it if they still can make the rifles for the state of HI....
Disarming the America people is the only step required to completely abbrogate the US Constitution-which is just what many in government(s) desire.
Admiral Yamamoto (sp-sorry if I butchered it) said about the Attack on the US at Pearl- “I think all we have done is awaken a sleeping giant”, and when asked about invasion of the US, he is quoted as stating “ It would fail, there is a rifle behind every blade of grass”.
Civilian ownership and the bearing of arms IS the deterrent to most hazards our country faces.
God Bless
If by this, you mean law abiding citizens (I have a problem with "civilians" somehow being a separate class.) I withdraw my prior criticism.
Againt a MBT you're right a .50 is useless, but against low performace aircraft hmg rounds are effective. The ZPU series caused a lot of helicopter havoc in Viet Nam. Further, police forces don't usually have MBTs they have things like M113s that are vulnerable to .50 rounds - particularly to SLAP rounds
I have posted that I errored in my original comment. I do not advocate the banning of firearm ownership. I reacted to the article without fully thinking, and I offer my apology for that.
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.