Three More Police Officers Dead
2009 April 4
Three Pittsburgh Police Officers were shot dead today by a 22 year old male who had reportedly just lost his job and was fearful of a ban by President Obama on gun ownership.
First, my prayers and condolences to the families of the three officers.
Second, neighbors reported that “hundreds” of shots were fired during the ensuing standoff. The shooters weapons, an AK-47 and several handguns.
Again it is time for the AK47 to be treated just like a fully automatic weapon.
Print This Post
OP - except that the AK47 is not sold as a fully automatic weapon and its performance is not much different from other semi-automatic rifles. The ‘assault weapons ban’ focused on ’scary’ weapons with certain characteristics - like bayonet lugs.
You previously suggested that these type weapons should only be available at an artificially high (licensed) price (reminding me that some are more equal than others).
I’m surprised you haven’t jumped on the California bandwagon to register ‘high capacity’ magazines.
The Brady Bunch always blames the gun. What’s next? Blame the fertilizer for the OK City bombing? Blame the airplanes for the WTC?
I beg to differ with you that the AK-47 “is not much different than other semi-automatic” rifles. The difference can be shown by compating two military rifles, the M-1 Garand of WWII fame and the AF-47.
The M-1 is also a semi-automatic rifle with a max capacity of 8 rounds. It had a rate of fire of 60 rouds per minute (assuming you didn’t have to stop to reload). In practical terms the gun will fire 1 round per second. This means two things, (1) yo could fire the full clip of 8 in 8 seconds, then you had to reload (2) because of the limited capacity it is impractical to convert it to full auto.
The AK-47 has a designed rate of fire in fully automatic of 600 rounds per minute (10 every second) and a semi auto rate of fire of 90-100 rounds per minute (1.5 rounds per second or 20 seconds to fire 30 rounds). Couple that with the standard 30 round magazine or the available 75 round drum and you have a weapon that can throw out a lot more lead than a standard civilian semi auto hunting rifle, even if it is not converted to full auto .
OK, let’s compare one of the most popular semi-automatic rifles in the USA - the Ruger Mini-14 (NATO 5.56) / Mini-30 (NATO 7.62) Ranch Rifle (available at WalMart’s “everyday low prices”) to the AK-47.
The Ruger is a descendent of the Garand (M1 > M14 > Mini-14). The Mini-14 has many aftermarket mod kits available (bayonet lugs, pistol grips, flash suppressors), as well as magazines holding 10, 20, 40, and 90 rounds. Some versions (police and military - available as surplus) of the Mini-14 have select-fire allowing fire at rates of 750 rounds per minute (better than the AK47).
BTW, the Mini-14 was excluded from the ‘assault weapons ban’ because it was ‘less menacing’ than the AK47 or AR15, even though it had comparable performance. Also, Mini-14s have been used in mass-casualty crimes.
Should the popular Ruger Ranch Rifle be banned or subject to prohibitive licensing taxes?
Yes, it fits my definition of an assault rifle (popularity does not alter that). Remember my initial argument was that all assault rifles should be licensed as Class III weapons. I picked on the AK-47 because it was used in the killing of three police officers referenced.
At least you’re honest about wanting to take away my guns.
From my cold, dead hands…
BTW, I appreciate your commentary and thank you for posting here. You make some good points, just not this time (IMO).
Reactionary - thanks for the compliment and this is an issue we will have to agree to disagree on.
For the record however, I did not propose banning assault weapons or taking them away but simply regulating them like the fully auto weapons they were designed to be.
Also for the record, I am a supporter of the 2nd Amendment, but I am not opposed to reasonable limitations like background checks for a CCW permit or to purchase weapons, prohibiting their purchase by felons and the mentally ill, and the discussed stricter regulation of assault weapons.
Finally I also enjoy your comments on this and other sites (I assume you are the “reactionary” on Docs)
Jesus. What a crock. You are either a supporter of the Second Amendment, or you aren’t. You aren’t. I’m sure you can rationalize that as long as spitballs and straws aren’t legislated out of existence, you’ve held true to the concepts the country was founded on.
Perhaps we could get some licensing put in place to keep you from espousing these opinions. After all, reasonable limitations on the first amendment are acceptable - and I see no reason I can’t decide what’s reasonable for you, since you seem to be perfectly willing to decide what’s reasonable for me.
First off you are correct in there are reasonable limitations on the First Amendment. For instance child pornographers argue their product is a form of Free Speech (usually from their jail cells). I am a supporter of the 1st Amendment, but I support the regulation of child porn. On the other hand, I assume thatsince you think the 2nd Amendment is not subject to reasonable limitations, you must feel the same way about “free Speech’ and therefore you must be a supporter of child porn.
See how asinine your argument is?
Good comeback.