Posted on 10/10/2002 6:26:34 PM PDT by Dallas
WASHINGTON --
The top Democrat on the House Judiciary Committee called on federal officials Thursday to investigate the marketing of sniper rifles, saying the weapons "pose a real danger to the civilian population."
The request from Rep. John Conyers, D-Mich., came as the Washington metropolitan area was being terrorized by a string of nine shootings, including seven deaths, by what police believe to be an elusive gunman. Each of the victims was hit by a single bullet fired from a distance, using a military-style rifle or hunting rifle.
Conyers wants the Federal Trade Commission to investigate the marketing of military rifles to the American public. "There is no legitimate purpose for a military rifle than to make war," Conyers said. "There is no reason these rifles should be marketed to civilians."
Conyers complained that ads for military style rifles boast of being able to shoot down airplanes and helicopters, and shooting through armored vehicles. "Sniper rifles pose a real danger to the civilian population," he said.
The FTC opened an investigation into the marketing of violent movies, music and video games to children after a series of school shootings, including the Littleton, Colo., massacre at Columbine High School in which two students killed 13 people before committing suicide, Conyers said.
The FTC said it would consider the request.
You don't see the issue very well at all.
First, you don't understand the Constitution and the Second Amendment.
Next, you are a bigot.
After that, you don't understand the those "gun nuts" are more than likely very well-to-do, not dirt-poor 'redneck' trailer trash.
Who the F do you think shoot competitions, buy big game safaris, and shoot class III's and .50 cal BMG's?
IF you were really a combat arms type, you would realize the importance of gun control in invading and occupying any country.
Perhaps you are actively working for this country to be disarmed and open to hostile occupation?
Good analogy, but don't give them any ideas.
BUMP
I suppose that leaves us with single-shot, non-rifled barrels... like circa 1776.
Jeeesh. And the democraps cried foul for Bush politicizing the War on Terror?
I don't NEED a Corvette either, but I do have a right to own one.
The Second Amendment talks about "militia" rather than private citizens. I have no problem with National Guard weapons.
To quote Jeff Cooper:
"The qualifying phrase of the Second Amendment refers to a well-regulated militia. A well-regulated militia calls for men who can 'shoot and salute' in Pershing's phrase. Since the militia, in the terms of George Mason, is made up of the 'whole people,' it would seem that the whole people should be well-qualified in the use of the national personal arm, which at this point is the M16. Thus, if we are to follow that line of thought, everybody should be qualified on the M16, which is in the eyes of some people, a machine gun. What a shocking thought."
There are two kinds of people: those who will handle guns responsibly and those who will abuse the privilige.
I don't believe for one moment that the solution to firearm deaths is to confiscate the firearms of the law abiding citizen. If you believe differently please see England and Austraila's recent crime rates.
So you're gonna punish potential lawbreaking? Tom Cruise did that movie this summer. It was meant to be cautionary.
Criminal background checks will not do it. The only solution I see is deny access to guns to everyone.
Myopia is curable.
Civilians don't NEED guns.
Yes they do. Quite often, to defend themselves.
The image of a solitary patriot defending liberty against government is pure fantasy.
Try telling that to the folks making their stand in the Warsaw ghetto during WWII. A few guns held off the Nazis for six weeks.
You wouldn't stand a chance against military weaponry. For evidence, see Afghanistan.
The Taliban were done in by armed opposition on the ground - the Northern Alliance. We greased the skids.
The Second Amendment talks about "militia" rather than private citizens. I have no problem with National Guard weapons.
The National Guard did not exist when the Bill of Rights was passed. Try reading up on history and 2nd A scholarship and get back to us.
You have a crusader mentality - someone does something to you, and you therefore want to deny rights to EVERYONE. That is the mark of a small mind.
That is exactly right. In fact, it's so right I felt compelled to repeat it in bold Italians.
Unfortunately, we aren't up against morons. They know exactly what they're doing and they do it very well. In my 65 year lifetime they have succeeded in enacting restrictions on gun ownership and usage that Americans living in the 1940's and '50's would not have believed possible in the U.S. We underestimate them at our peril.
No, I depicted 50 BMG shooters as being better well off than average citizens. Most gun enthusiasts have more disposible income than do average people. Collecting and shooting firearms is not an inexpensive hobby.
I used to work for a West Texas supermarket chain which had a gun counter in front of a few stores. On display were reasonable medium-priced models, mostly handguns selling for $300-500. But that's not what sold. Sales data revealed that 90% of sales were a .25 cal handgun made in Eastern Europe, selling for $50. We sold hundreds of them per week. Out of curiosity who was buying these junk guns, I hung around a counter for a few hours. Buyers were all housewives .. buying defensive weapons out of fear, paranoia.
What you have done is bolster my case. You have NOT described gun enthusiasts at all, but ignorant, uninformed, fearful people who buy the cheapest gun they can get. You definately did not describe gun enthusiasts.
You pretty much are a bigot and don't know dick about gun enthusiasts.
Conyers poses a real danger to ALL US citizens.
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.