The funny thing about the people who will increasingly want to ban guns as the shootings continue is that they will bring this country to an end quicker and quicker.
Historically democratic governments have not lasted more than 200-300 years. What has always happens is that the masses start to vote for more and more benefits because they can, until the the government can no longer tax the people working to support those that don't. Our fore fathers knew this and that is why our federal government is a republic, not a democracy as taught in school. If you don't think that our current government dose not also understand this I would think you a fool. As our country falls deeper into debt with no way out I would assume that taking all guns away will be a top priority. As they will be blamed for all that has happened but most of the responsibility will be on our shoulders, incremently.
I would think that our fore fathers would think that we are already slaves to the federal government.
Will my kids live as free as I have? I have not lived as free as my parents, they have not lived as free as their parents.
It's a natural cycle with humans, freedom,oppression, usually oppression lasts far longer!
Are there more deaths per capita due to gun violence now than there were in say 1873, 1927 or 1957?
It takes as long as it takes. Sometimes longer.
"It is better to own a $50,000 dog and have an old truck and crummy equipment than to own $50,000 worth of new equipment and a crummy dog..." EdA
I think it has declined along with violent crime.
Any doctrine that weakens personal responsibility for judgment and for action helps create the attitudes that welcome and support the totalitarian state.
Associate yourself with men of good quality if you esteem your own reputation; for 'tis better to be alone than in bad company.
Gig'em Aggies!! BTCO'77HOO t.u.!!
Notice the term assault weapon or assault rifle is not used anywhere in the document. The “assault weapon” terminology is only used for non-LEOs and non-military who own those firearms.The scope of this contract is to provide a total of up to 7,000 5.56x45mm North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) personal defense weapons (PDW) throughout the life of this contract to numerous Department of Homeland Security components. …In paragraph 3.1 under requirements and testing standards we read…
DHS and its components have a requirement for a 5.56x45mm NATO, select-fire firearm suitable for personal defense use in close quarters and/or when maximum concealment is required.Isn’t that inconvenient for the gun control politicians? In requirement paragraph 3.9.10, they find a need for a 30-round magazine.
The action shall be capable of accepting all standard NATO STANAG 20 and 30 round M16 magazines (NSN 1005-00-921-5004) and Magpul 30 round PMAG (NSN 1005-01-576-5159). The magazine well shall be designed to allow easy insertion of a magazine.In paragraph 3.21.2, they again specify the requirement for a 30-round magazine.
The magazine shall have a capacity to hold thirty (30) 5.56x45mm NATO rounds.If you did not catch the interesting part in one of the quoted sentences above, let me point it out to you. The personal defense weapon should be select-fire capable.
DHS and its components have a requirement for a 5.56x45mm NATO, select-fire firearm suitable for personal defense use in close quarters…From the Fire Control Section, paragraph 3.10.1.
The action shall be select-fire (capable of semi-automatic and automatic fire).
The fire control selector shall have three positions; safe, semi-automatic, and automatic. The selector shall have positions which are clearly labeled for the mode of fire.This formal DHS RFP – which is specific concerning requirements – clearly indicates a select-fire rifle is appropriate for personal defense in close quarters. If it is appropriate for law enforcement, why is it not appropriate for civilian use? (Select-fire/automatic capable weapons are generally not used in situations where you need accuracy; like for home defense.)
Or maybe the Mass State Police?
They call it a "Patrol Rifle"
"We have found most officers have difficulty hitting the MPTC Q target with regularity using their service pistol at distances further than the 10 yard line. Now, factor in the stress level of a life and death encounter with rapidly evolving circumstances – the actual hit ratio drops even further. Beyond 15 yards the shotgun with multiple round projectile, may yield more hit potential however the recoil and manual operation of the shotgun has historically proved to be an issue with some Officers. If the load is buck shot, beyond 18 yards the shot spread will begin to exceed the width of the torso. This violates the accountability for all rounds down range rule. The slug round provides the logical alternative with longer range, more accuracy and no shot spread. It also has greater penetration which can be considered both a positive and negative factor when considering its use in urban areas or near thin walled homes. Conversely, the most popular patrol rifle round, the 5.56mm NATO (.223 Remington) will penetrate fewer walls than service pistol rounds or 12 gauge slugs.
The rifle is a superior tool. It allows the officer to either stand off from the threat or, if the situation requires, advance to the threat with the confidence that the tool in their hands can deal with almost any perceived threat. It has the power to deliver lethal terminal ballistics to the threat. It has a larger magazine capacity than our service pistol or shotgun. The longer sight radius makes it potentially a more accurate weapon which lowers the liability to the department."
Why wouldn't this also apply to non LEOs?