Tag Archives: Aurora Shooting
The next time a right-wing fringe-type tries to claim the XM-15 Bushmaster isn’t a dangerous assault weapon share the following information:
Length 39.63 in / 38.25 in
Weight 8 pounds, 13 oz / 8.27 pounds
Gas system Direct Impingement / Direct Impingement
Maximum Range 3,600 meters / 3,534 meters
Maximum Effective Range 550 meters / 550 meters
Muzzle Velocity 3,100 feet per second / 3,260 feet per second
Rate of Fire (Semiauto) 45 rounds per minute / 45 rounds per minute
Rate of Fire (Burst) 90 rounds per minute / N/A
Magazine capacity 30 round magazine / 30 round magazine
Ammunition 5.56 mm / 5.56 mm
Specs were taken from the Army manual for the M-16 A2 and from the Bushmaster manual for the XM-15
The XM-15 is as much an assault weapon as the M-16 A2, and this is the time for serious discussion on gun control, and it’s going to require serious people; if all the right-wing fringe can offer is fantasy comparisons perhaps they should keep their mouths shut; I’ve no more patience for moronic diatribes. If one of those dead first graders was their child or grand-child I don’t think they’d be so flippant.
“A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.”
Why is it that conservatives only focus on the right to “keep and bear arms” portion of the Second Amendment but choose to ignore the “well regulated” part?
The Founding Fathers believed the United States would defend itself from within the civil populace, meaning all men capable of bearing arms would belong to local militias, keep and maintain their arms, ammo and accouterments and be ready to “bear” those arms in their nation’s defense at a moment’s notice – to be “minute men”. They never fore saw a huge standing military force being needed, because they couldn’t comprehend the world would change so much in 200 years, or that the United States would ever be the world’s police man.
Perhaps it’s time for Congress and the President to “well regulate” the “militia” of the United States by promoting laws requiring all persons of military age to “keep and bear arms” as specified by the government. But only those – as specified, and needed – to ensure we have a “well regulated militia”; or perhaps it’s time for the country’s populace to grow up and realize we have a standing Army, and the need of a “well regulated militia” is long past, and hence perhaps it’s time for it to be unlawful for the citizenry to “keep and bear” automatic or even semi-automatic weapons?
This isn’t the 18th or 19th century and the defensive needs of the nation when the Constitution was ratified are not the same. In 1787 the government lacked the fiscal wherewithal to provide for the “common defense” of the fledgling nation, and relied upon the male citizenry to bear the burden of providing arms, powder and shot, today that’s no longer the case, and in fact it hasn’t been the case since the Federal Government defeated the Confederacy in 1865.
For more than 150 years we’ve not depended on the “minute men” to rise up and fight our country’s battles as we once did.
Today’s “minute men” are the men and women of the National Guard and the Reserves and the government provides them with their weapons, and they’ve all sworn an oath to “protect and defend the Constitution against all enemies foreign and domestic”. They’re the “citizen soldiers” of today, and they’re not required to bear the burden of providing their own weapons and bullets. Truth is “We the People” no longer need to have the weapons to make war that our fore fathers did, and it’s about time we realize that. Are there reasons to have firearms? Yes, there are, but the arguments the individual citizen needs assault weapons, or automatic weapons is specious at best. Time to evolve as our nation has evolved, and please spare us the “original intent” argument, if that’s what you hang your case on then let’s rewrite the gun laws in this nation to require – and allow – each household to have one flintlock Brown Bess musket, bayonet and powder and shot for each adult male, but no more.
According to NBC News, Republican Tea Party (GOTP) presidential hopeful Willard Mitt Romney said during an interview that many of the weapons obtained by the shooting suspect in Colorado were obtained illegally and changing laws won’t prevent gun-related tragedies.
“This person shouldn’t have had any kind of weapons and bombs and other devices and it was illegal for him to have many of those things already. But he had them,” Willard mewed during the interview. “And so we can sometimes hope that just changing the law will make all bad things go away. It won’t.”
Alleged shooter James Holmes broke no laws when he purchased an AR-15 assault rifle, a shotgun and Glock handgun, and he passed the required background checks.
NBC News anchor Brian Williams asked Willard about when he – as governor of Massachusetts – signed a bill banning some assault weapons like the type Holmes is alleged to have used. When he signed the ban, Romney described such guns as “instruments of destruction with the sole purpose of hunting down and killing people.”
Asked if he stood by those comments today, Willard avoided answering the question directly misdirecting by saying he didn’t think current laws needed to change.
“I don’t happen to believe that America needs new gun laws. A lot of what this … young man did was clearly against the law. But the fact that it was against the law did not prevent it from happening,” he said.
So, first Willard misspeaks by claiming Holmes purchased the guns he used illegally – which was wrong, and second he obfuscates when asked about the gun ban law he signed while governor; standard operating procedure (SOP) for Romney, screw up the facts and misdirect if you can somehow be embarrassed by something; both all so presidential.