FR is funded solely by the freedom loving folks who love and use it.
Posted on 04/21/2013 8:53:29 AM PDT by School of Rational Thought
Impact of Boston on gun control
Well the argument goes (in New York) that an individual only "needs" no more than seven rounds.
But the law enforcement, numbering in the hundreds need so-called assault rifles, high capacity magazines to capture a single individual.
This kind of lays bare a major disconnect in the anti-civil rights crowds argument.
Also the number of rounds fired versus the number of hits is going to be available.
It has been reported that 200 rounds were fired at the brothers near MIT. One was hit twice we find and the dead one (killed by the brother running him over according the the police) was hit multiple times. No specific number has been given, but lets exagerate for the point and say ten times. That is 12 of 200.
Again how does than seven number sound?
The surviving brother was subjected to extensive fire while in the boat and was hit another two times and the affect of at least two flash bang grenades in the little boat.
When surrendering, he stood up and pulled up his shirt.
No count on number of rounds fired at him, but the video suggests hundreds.
How is that seven rounds sounding?
Since the Boston bombers had at least one gun, where did they get them in the toughest gun state in the country.
I thought I would post this thread again. It’s an excellent read.
http://www.bostonglobe.com/opinion/2013/02/17/the-nation-toughest-gun-control-law-made-massachusetts-less-safe/3845k7xHzkwTrBWy4KpkEM/story.html
They also had grenades and supposedly other military grade explosives. They could have just as easily walked into a gun free school zone and blown the legs off of hundreds of children. Instead, a child lost his life and other children and adults lost their limbs at the marathon.
The liberals need to wake up and stop coddling terrorists. Let the American people protect ourselves and not interfere with our constitutional right to bear arms.
I was thinking that too.
Looking at these numbers, and if this is similar to results one might expect to find throughout all federal agencies, the governments recent purchase of 1.5 billion rounds of ammunition becomes more understandable.
Gun control worked perfectly in Boston. Not a single person was shot when those bombs went off... killing three people and wounding approx 200 others.
next time they’ll know to do that.
Does anyone know what type of weapons the bombers had? I know that they had at least one pistol. The scanner said armed and dangerous with at least one rifle. Did they both have pistols? Was a rifle recovered from them? These are important questions and could have an impact on the gun debate IMHO.
During a video of the 200 round shoot-out, I heard gun shots from a pistol(s) and ARs. Most of what I heard came from the police. I think I heard distant pistol shots, presumably from the terrorists.
If they had grenades, why did they make one from a pot and some chaff ?
That’s actually surprisingly high for police officers.
Read about the FBI miami shootout or the recent pickup truck shooting in California.
Some cops are extremely fine marksmen, the majority of them are not firearms enthusiasts.
If anything, “gun control” after what has happened in Boston is DEAD.
Look for gun sales to really, really go through the roof BIBTIME.
With gun control and “cyber-security” bills presently being pushed for passage through Congress and state governments, this “greatest terrorist event since 9/11 plays perfectly into convincing(scare) the people into handing over more of their personal rights for protection by big daddy government.
Government just didn’t have enough data on these (how many?)guys to detect them “before they committed these acts of violence”. More cameras, more wiretaps, more access to your email, bank accounts, safe deposit boxes, purchases is needed and will be the rational for more regulation.
Remember Waco, the government attempting to “serve and protect” us, killed us.
Correction, BIGTIME.
Rather, I think it is going to push the gun sales to extreme highs.
The only reason we weren't attacked during WWII was because we were an armed nation. The enemy feared there would be a weapon behind every blade of grass - and they were right.
Because of anti-gun laws, our nation has become vulnerable. Thank God for those people and guns that are still around! They may be the only things saving us someday.
I believe obomas goal is to make the U.S. defenseless. Confuse our government and laws, destroy our finances, our military, and our ability to defend ourselves here in the U.S. all while importing jihadist on a record scale (allowing his muslim brothers to finish the job they started on 9/11)
In my opinion, oboma has declared jihad on America. (Please, some one prove me wrong.)
Has anyone reported on what kind of firearms these two characters were sporting? I’m guessing an AK or two.
My husband went to a sporting goods store yesterday to get ready for fishing season. He said the ammo shelves were bare. He's never seen anything like it.
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.