MISSION: Debate Anti-Gunners - IN REAL TIME - HERE: REDUX

[dunndeal]

Oakland,, not (er),

How are we supposed to refute this bull**** when the ****ing local newspaer prints it? http://www.insidebayarea.com/news/ci_19653362

Read the the last sentence or three at the bottom of this article, ******* taks about assault weapons and handguns and says they should be banned.

Anyone who thinks 94601 - 94621 can be saved from itself deserves Jean Quan.

[Kerplow]

But assault rifles are legal in California now, too, and they can spew out more than 10 bullets a second on average.

totally sweet. 600 rounds a minute, that must have been a good old browning 1919. glad to see we're all prepared.

[Equis]

Standard newspaper sensationalism of an uninformed blogger, he thinks assault weapons are legal "now".

[GOEX FFF]

Thomas says handguns are to blame. "If we didn't have handguns, we'd be half as busy," he says.
But assault rifles are legal in California now, too, and they can spew out more than 10 bullets a second on average. These weapons are designed to kill people. I know: I've seen how they work in Iraq and Afghanistan and elsewhere. Thomas agrees.
"It's hard to make the case you need an assault rifle for hunting Bambi," he says.

At least you can comment and put the jack-hole in his place.

[GammaRei]

I want to state something under the facebook/comments. . . I dont know how much back up I will get from you all. . .

- G

[dominic]

I agree with one thing he says, "It's hard to make the case you need an assault rifle for hunting Bambi,", personally I use a Winchester model 70 with timney trigger and a leupold 3-9 vari x II and 95 grain spitzers, but thats just me.

[Norcal Industries]

i commented.

[pennys dad]

commenting is the best thing, commenting with intelligent thought, free from insult or attack is even better. Many, many, many commenting with intelligent thought, free from insult or attack rules the day. Get others to post their comments.

[SnWnMe]

My reply:

Your statement that assault weapons are legal in California is false. Assault weapons that are capable of spewing out 10 bullets per second as you claim are VERY TIGHTLY REGULATED weapons and are not available to the average you and me in CA.
Put down the Dr Dre headphones and pay attention: You cannot just march into a gun store and buy an AK. Meaning, any gun problems you have in Oakland that can be alluded to "assault weapons" were committed with illegally acquired ones. Meaning again, that the very few legally owned assault weapons extant in CA (worth tens of thousand of dollars to their owners) that you are trying to blame for gun violence, had nothing to do with these issues at all.
I wont get into the statistical and ballistic falsehoods you parroted from your "data expert". I will tell you that we the readers expect professionals who claim to be journalists to be responsible enough to check the facts before they regurgitate it. IOW, we expect you to do your job. Brick and mortar schools do a fine job of teaching critical thinking.

Sorry I had to put a few digs in. The guy sounded like a lifting device's behind.

[NytWolf]

It's just a blog.

[SnWnMe]

It's just a blog.

It was quoted from a blog but published in a news site with a bit wider reach.

[aGunForEachHand]

Lies and inaccuracies in anti RKBA article in Oakland Tribune today

Article by Scott Johnson, of the Oakland Tribune states "Assault rifles are legal in California now too, and they can spew out more than 10 bullets a second on average...".

This article appeared in the Hayward Daily Review today in local section (not in the opinion section) and I imagine appeared in in the Tribune and other bay area newspapers. Oakland Tribune should fact check these articles as this statement is false.

http://www.insidebayarea.com/oakland/ci_19653362

Note that the goofy BANG has decided to run their comments through FACEBOOK.

Since I refuse to get an account with that behemoth (stats yesterday suggested one in seven minutes of internet use, world wide, are connected to Facebook), I'm cut out of their commenting system.

And you may be, too.

// Librarian

[Rattlehead]

He forgot the "registered" part.

[NotEnufGarage]

I'd comment on the article and how poorly written it is and how the author just makes up his own facts, but I don't want to enable facebooks apps.

[r3dn3ck]

"Bullets fired from a handgun, however, travel about 500 feet per second. Once inside the body, they do all sorts of things." really? I thought they poked a hole and crushed tissue and dumped energy. When did they start doing so much more interesting things?

My bullets travel well over 500fps. I don't think even my .32S&W has such a low velocity and it's possibly one of the more archaic rounds. Hell my bb gun does better than 500fps.

The FUD in this article is huge. Let's go play with his blog.

EDIT: ohhhh jeebus, it got WAY WAY better: keep reading.

So he writes, "Less than 10 percent of the gunshot wounds at Highland come from high-velocity weapons. This is a good thing. A high-velocity round can travel almost twice as fast as a low-velocity round."

Really? Just twice as fast? My rifles all burn the air at 2000fps or better, not 1000fps. Hell most of my pistols hit 1000fps pretty easily.

He continues, "It will also tear a hole in you that may stretch from 50 to 100 times what a low-velocity tear would do. If you survive a high-velocity round at all, which is unlikely, you'll probably be left with a gaping cavity that will never fully close."

Well at least there was 1 correct fact provided he's talking temporary cavity volume.

"Thomas says handguns are to blame. "If we didn't have handguns, we'd be half as busy," he says."

Yeah but the morticians would be twice as busy. Is that what you really want?