Posted by
Dave in Nevada on Tuesday, November 11, 2008 12:00:00 AM
The
following is a response to an article in the TYLERPAPER.COM: Certain Guns Only
Belong on The Battlefield.
Certain guns
only belong on the battle field. I assume that people are thinking of civilian
versions of military rifles when they make a statement such as this. Liberals
have been successful in portraying some semi-automatic rifles as military
weapons. A great number of people have been duped into believing this. Civilian
versions of military weapons are not suitable for the battlefield; that is why
the military doesn’t use them. Military weapons such as the M-16/M4 are fully
automatic. This means that when the trigger is pressed the rifle fires and
continues to fire until the trigger is released or the weapon fires a short
burst. In contrast, the civilian versions such as the AR-15 fire ONE round when
the trigger is depressed. The trigger must then be released to reset before
another round can be fired. This is called a SEMI-AUTO rifle. Further, the
civilian versions of the M-16 only differ in appearance to other rifles that
are generally considered to be acceptable. For example: the Ruger Mini 14 fires
the same ammunition as the M-16 and the civilian counterparts. The Mini 14 has
a wood stock whereas the AR-15 has a “plastic” stock. In practical terms, the
AR-15 and the Mini 14 are the same.
Additionally,
the ammunition for the M-16, the AR-15 and the Mini 14 is a weak and
underpowered cartridge. That is not to say it isn’t dangerous if misused, but
the same could be said for the .22 LR cartridge. One reason that cartridge, the
.223 Remington/5.56mm NATO, is effective on the battlefield is the shear number
of rounds fired at the intended target. Even the smallest, weakest round can
kill in sufficient quantity. But one must consider that a 12 gauge shotgun, a
firearm that liberals and democrats say they don’t intend to deprive us of, has
far greater destructive capability.
It is
bewildering that people don’t see a practical use for the AR-15 type
semi-automatic rifle. The fact is, people who don’t, can’t or won’t see the
practical uses of these semi-auto rifles simply don’t understand what there are
or are afraid of something they know nothing about, or are the willing dupes of
those whose only desire (as regards firearms) is to use this rifle as an
emotional wedge issue with which to incrementally disarm a law-abiding
populace.
As to the
practical use of a firearm that has no battlefield use consider a few
legitimate civilian uses: self-defense; target practice, varmint & predator
control.
Certainly,
a rifle is not always the best first choice for self defense, however, if these
are taken away by an oppressive government, there may be no stopping said
government from taking other types of firearms such as semi-auto handguns.
Semi-auto rifles could be the best defense in some cases.
Many
people enjoy the benign pastime on the range target shooting. What difference
does it make if the rifle is a .223 Remington or a .308 Winchester?
Farmers
and ranchers have a legitimate use for an AR-15 semi-auto rifle; varmint and
predator control. The light rifle and manageable recoil is ideal for this
purpose.
I find it
inconceivable that anyone can be so arrogant as to tell me that I shouldn’t be
allowed to own a particular type of anything. How dare you! I am a law-abiding,
former police officer, responsible gun owner.
One last
point; there are a number of automobiles that have no useful purpose except on
the racetrack. These automobiles are capable of traveling at speeds in excess
of 150 MPH. Explain to me the practical use for such a car, especially when one
considers the number of auto fatalities involving cars that can’t even come
close to 150 mph.
But we
don’t even consider banning really fast cars. Why not?