50cal guns, You choose, The NRA or terrorists with airplane killing guns?

[billbuckhead]

The 50cal sniper rifle puts us all at risk when we fly in an airplane. Which is more important to freedom, being able to fly freely or being terrorized by by gunwackos like Christian Identity or alQueda with 50cal sniper rifles? The NRA wants them to be bought easier than a handgun.
<http://www.50caliberterror.com/index2.html>

[mikehiggins]

1. Big gun has been around for a long time.

How many times has it been used?

I think the idea of selling something like that is ludicrous but making it a major concern is hardly called for.

Nobody without a whole bunch of specialised training is going to be accurate with this weapon at any great distance. It isn't like the movies (SWAT comes to mind) where guys blocks away shoot down helicopeters.

I'd much rather see more effort placed on closing the borders than on issues such as these.

A terrorist who wants to bring down a jet is going to use a stinger missle, all sorts of which were made available by the US government to our "allies" in the middle east and South America over the years. They are a lot easier to use.

[The Doctor.]

2. Well, to be fair...

A .50 cal rifle is unlikely to cause a serious enough problem with an aircraft that it and it's passengers could not survive the emergency landing.

Even older planes are so well fitted with monitoring that a high-calibre round that could disrupt function would set off warnings in the cockpit.

I also doubt Al-Qaeda has access to snipers who could pull off the job and be willing to die for the cause.

The likelyhood of your being in a plane which is fataly damaged by a couple of .50 cal rounds to such a degree as to kill the passengers is very low.

If anyone knows better - I'll be happy to listen, but I think it's very unlikely.

[Silverhair]

3. Alarmist gun-grabber horsecrap.

The average person knows little about guns, so this is intended to scare them into getting on board some gun grabbers legislation.

A .30 rifle can do almost everything that the .50 can do. The .50 does have greater penetration and greater range. However, even accurate shooters are usually unable to take advantage of the greater range to be able to hit the same sized targets.

You would have great difficulty in bring down an airliner with either one. They just don't come down with a single hit.

If the gun grabbers manage to get the .50 outlawed, then they will go after the higher powered deer rifles next. They will not be satisfied until they have outlawed all guns from civilian ownership.

[Terran1212]

6. "Gun Grabbing" is part of building a more civilized and peaceful society..

The more the civilian gun ownership, the more the unneccesary culture of violence and killing will grow...

[starwolf]

10. That just Sarah Brady nonsense

[Dave Reynolds]

21. Oh, Utopia,

where guns are banned and the government can be trusted to not march in and lock down the nation because NO ONE CAN FIGHT BACK.

Sounds like heaven.

[Cuban_Liberal]

34. What a crock!

:eyes:

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

11. "Gun-grabbers"? Sounds like NRA Bullshit.

[Cuban_Liberal]

35. He just calls it by its proper name.

The o/p sounds like Sarah Brady bullshit.

[KharmaTrain]

17. Didn't Malvo Have A .50 Cal?

I agree with some, not all, of the alarmist nature of someone attempting to shoot down a jetliner with a gun that's, from my knowledge, is not designed for that purpose.

I live not far from a major airport...jets pass over heavily populated areas where someone with a heat-seeking missile (ala Stinger) or some other improvised device with a more powerful payload and more accurate firing system could be used.

Having seen a .50 cal for myself, I can't see how it's accurately operated without lots of training and that if a person has that much knowledge on weaponry, they'd choose something more accurate and lethal.

That said, there is the issue of these large guns being used to create domestic terror ala a Malvo or someone who could slip into neighborhoods or atop a large building and hold a city in fear for days or weeks on end. I find this a far more reason for concern and that the sale of this gun and automatic weapons have to be restricted and monitored.

As the pro-gun types state, it's not the gun, it's the criminal, but when the criminal can have easy access to the gun and the ammo, there's a problem that isn't a second ammendment one, but of just common sense.

Cheers

[Silverhair]

18. Malvo used a .223 for his sniping

Further, he didn't even have a telescopic sight.

[Selatius]

66. All you need is a hunting rifle to inflict the kind of terror Malvo did

[lateo]

49. I agree...

This is just knee-jerk BS put forward by someone who obviously have NEVER handled a .50.

[formernaderite]

54. You said that very well....

and you're right...it is meant as a scare tactic, but I don't think it's worked in a while.

[geomon666]

4. Excuse me.

But what exactly does this have to with the Pope?

[billbuckhead]

5. Barrett Firearms brags that a single $10 bullet can destroy airplanes

"Marketing to the Snipers and Terrorists
Sales literature from Barrett Firearms Manufacturing and E.D.M. Arms, respectively, tout the .50 caliber sniper rifle as capable of "destroying multimillion dollar aircraft with a single hit delivered to a vital area" and to "attack various material targets such as parked aircraft, radar sites ammunition, petroleum and various thin-skinned material targets."<9> Additionally, manufacturers themselves advertise these weapons as "sniper" rifles and use slogans such as "When your mission objective is further than the eye can see."<9> The World's Sniping Rifles, a catalogue of various caliber rifles and accessories, explains how the Barrett Company even promoted the weapon's ability to destroy jet aircraft: "There was a good deal of skepticism at the thought of using such a heavy weapon for sniping but, after Barrett pointed out that the object was to wreck several million dollars' worth of jet aircraft with one or two dollars' worth of cartridge, the whole thing began to make more sense and the idea spread."<10>

<http://www.bradycampaign.org/facts/issues/?page=50cal>

Which is it, a gun manufacturer is lying or gunwackos in the NRA are lying?

[Zynx]

7. How about the Brady campaign is taking something out of context? *shock*

The comment in question refers to military-issue .50 cals - which use ammunition similar to cannon shells - AP, HE and incendiary, all in one. This ammo is not available outside of the military and you'll go to jail for attempting to buy it because its a "destructive device."

Also from a military point of view, the Barrett is an anti-material rifle - it's meant to be able to damage stuff. "Wreck" is being used to refer to that. You can punch holes through stationary or moving ground vehicles and stationary or hovering aircraft. This is primarily for being able to hit someone using one as cover - its an incredible waste of time and ammo to try to blow something up with a very loud, comparatively weak single-shot weapon - call an airstrike instead or use explosives.

With what the weapon is actually *capable* of, the Barrett quote can only be referring to the idea that you could fire a couple long-range slugs into the engine of a parked aircraft and disable the engine. This would still frankly have a low probability of success - punching a hole without hitting any goodies does nothing. Once again, you're better with the airstrike, a mortar, or some C-4.

As far shooting at any *moving* aircraft with anything less than a rapid-fire cannon, this is beyond asinine. The aircraft will be out of anything that would be considered effective range, it will be moving so quickly that guaging distance and lead will be impossible, and it's beyond "Golden BB" (term - an incredibly unlikely shot that takes out a heavy target) to actually knock down an aircraft with said bullet.

It pretty much cannot be done and as far as shooting down a multi-engine jet, that *absolutely* cannot be done.

~~~

Btw, I also think Barrett firearms was somewhat dishonest when they were pushing these guns on the military because their anti-material capabiltiy *is* frankly overrated/is better done with heavier equipment/is not significantly different from high-powered upper .30 cals like the .338 Lapua with AP rounds. The M82's (the Barretts) are most certainly not equal to the .50 cal machineguns in damage potential because of the difference in rate of fire.

Not to mention snipers shouldn't be fighting it out with armor columns or airbases with a very loud, very "flashy" weapon in the first place.

[billbuckhead]

8. Are you questioning Barrett's own bragging? i'm shocked!

Destructive Power

The 50 caliber sniper rifle's threat is a blend of long range and massive power. Here is Barrett's description of the power of its Model M82A1, widely available on the civilian market:

This revolutionary .50 caliber semi-automatic rifle allows sophisticated targets to be destroyed or disabled by a single soldier. Armored personnel carriers, radar dishes, communications vehicles, aircraft and area denial submunitions are all vulnerable to the quick strike capability of the Barrett 82A1. With decisive force and without the need for the manpower and expense of mortar or rocket crews, forces can engage the opposition at distances far beyond the range of small arms fire....The 82A1's light weight makes transportation as easy as walking....With night vision equipment, the weapon is even more effective under cover of darkness. The muzzle brake reduces felt recoil to no more than that of a 12 gauge shotgun....The advantages are obvious when you consider that many of the same targets for rocket and mortar fire can be neutralized with M33 ball, API M8 or Multipurpose ammunition.21

<http://www.vpc.org/studies/duckone.htm>



An excerpt from the U.S. Army's manual on urban combat emphasizes the 50 caliber sniper rifle's ability to destroy materiel targets:



These heavy sniper rifles were originally intended as anti materiel weapons for stand-off attack against high-value targets, such as radar control vans, missiles, parked aircraft, and bulk fuel and ammunition storage sites....It is their ability to shoot through all but the heaviest shielding material, and their devastating effects, that make them valuable psychological weapons.22

[Zynx]

9. Once again, yes, that is bragging - and using military ammo.

It also has a good degree of BS in it because a lot of the stuff mentioned simply wouldn't work in practice, or if it did work would be a massive waste of time and effort that would endanger the people trying it.

The reason the M82 is effective at all in the role of destroying material is because the military has the specialty ammo I mentioned -this makes it useful against vehicles because it starts fires and generally behaves like the explosive shell it is.

It's not a normal bullet and is not the Barrett's normal bullet.

Other than that, the Barrett's capabilities fall in two catagories:

1. Extremely unlikely/waste of time/waste of ammo/not important. This includes things like the ability to put a bullet through a cinder block wall at half a mile and take out vehicles - both really have no military purpose - shooting through a wall with a decent probability of hitting something is extremely rare and you won't take out a vehicle with most shots you hit it with - outside of Tom Clancy books. Vehicles, particularly the military type, are rather difficult to stop.

The comments about it replacing mortar or rocket fire are just retarded - if the shooter misses me by six inches with the M82, I'm just fine. If he misses me by six feet with a mortar, I'm playing a harp.

2. Better done with a more practical sniper rifle such as the .308 Winchester, .300 Winchester or .338 Lapua. This includes shooting at people and general combat issue - these are lighter and *much* easier to conceal and will penetrate a good amount of cover with AP ammo anyway. Their ammo also weighs less and takes up much less space.

These are simply much more sensible military weapons.

[Dave Reynolds]

22. Umm, the last I knew,

gun manufacturers did not call the gun-buying public "soldiers".

snip
This revolutionary .50 caliber semi-automatic rifle allows sophisticated targets to be destroyed or disabled by a single soldier.

[MrSandman]

23. Parked aircraft and area denial...

Make them "psychological weapons"

300 mph skeet at 1km with a single 1/2 inch projectile?

Barretts specifically, or .50 BMG's in general, have been used how many times?

[DoNotRefill]

29. Fine. Go into a gunstore and try to buy a RAUFOSS round...

and see what happens and how long you spend in Club Fed.

[BrightKnight]

70. Navy Seals use the .50 caliber sniper rifle

I saw a documentary in which the Seals were praising the weapon. Apparently it was a useful tool for projecting massive fire power. They appeared to be happy with its long range anti personnel and its anti materiel capabilities. They gave specific examples of its effective use.

I wonder if a weapon that Special Forces reaches for when they want to project massive fire power is something that should be sold in the civilian market.

I don't think that this is a slippery slope. Common sense tells me that that the weapon may not be properly categorized. You can not walk into Walmart and buy a Stinger Missile.


This is a wedge issue and it might be best to avoid this game.

[Silverhair]

72. You dont know the difference between "massive firepower" and...

precision shooting. Massive firepower is putting a huge number of rounds in an area. Precision shooting is put one or two rounds exactly were they are needed.

The Navy Seals are super highly trained - far beyond any level of training that terrorist groups are able to do. They would also have the special military explosive ammo. They would also be using it in combination with other weapons. For their purposes it would be used to place a shot with high precision and great penetration.

They would NOT try to use it to shoot airplanes out of the sky.

[DS1]

16. 60 Minutes bought a dozen of those rounds off the internet

Illegal or not, someone had them.

[DoNotRefill]

30. there are many different kinds of .50 BMG ammo...

There's ball, AP, API, and APIT. You can buy WWII surplus of these rounds for between $1 and $20 each. NONE of these are the current issue RAUFOSS round, which is actually explosive and considered to be a "destructive device" all by itself.

[Zynx]

48. If 60 Minutes bought RAUFOSS, they broke the law big time.

They are classed as "destructive devices." Even attempting to buy a DD is a major violation of federal law.

[Silverhair]

12. Are you taking the word of a corporation as gospel????

It suits your agenda at the moment to claim a corporation is being totally honest in it's claims. I would not be surprised if at other times you have automatically doubted a corporations word.

[billbuckhead]

19. If Chrysler says a Hemi will do a 13 second quarter mile, yeah.

Performance is measurable. The performance of these guns is measurable and Barrett is just saying what it is. Al Queda isn't buying these babies cause they're good gun porn.

[Silverhair]

31. How do YOU know that AQ is buying them?

That is interesting news. Do you have sources inside AQ? Are is that just more gun-grabber hype.

I seriously doubt that AQ is going to go into a gun shop, ask the store to order one, (A gun shop will not have them on hand. Too much capital to invest in a gun that will rarely be purchased.) wait while it comes in, and then try to use it. That is too traceable.

I would suspect that AQ would go to the black market for their guns. For that matter, in the first WTC bombing, they used homemade explosives.

[billbuckhead]

40. Because the New York Times tells me so

U.S. .50 Caliber Sniper Rifles Exported to Afghans
10/15/2001


Afghanistan's Al Qaeda, the terrorist network led by Osama bin Laden, acquired 25 .50-caliber sniper rifles in the U.S. during the 1980s, the New York Times reported Oct. 7.

The Barrett .50-caliber rifles -- available for sale commercially in the U.S. -- are capable of shooting down helicopters, piercing armor, or destroying fuel tanks from long distances. The weapons were used by militias trained by bin Laden to fight Soviet troops in Afghanistan.

"Osama bin Laden and his Al Qaeda network have understood the destructive power of the .50-caliber sniper rifle for more than a decade," said the report released by the Violence Policy Center. "It would be absurd to think that they have forgotten it."

The report suggested that the rifles are probably still available to Al Queda members for attacks inside the United States or against American troops in Afghanistan.

The Violence Policy Center plans to reference the report when lobbying for support for legislation that would require buyers of .50-caliber rifles to be licensed by the federal government. In addition, the measure would prohibit the sale of armor-piercing ammunition and ban the export of the weapons to civilians.

<http://www.jointogether.org/gv/news/summaries/reader/0,2061,546110,00.htm>

[Silverhair]

41. What a load of hype.

The NYT has suffered major credibility hits in the last few years.

Yes, the .50 can shoot down helos, as can also any .30 rifle.

IF AQ is so enthralled by the .50, why haven't they used it?

So called, "armor-piercing ammunition" could easily include almost all rifle ammunition above .22 caliber.

[Silverhair]

32. Muzzle velocity, bullet weight & type are measureable, rest is hype.

NT

[BrightKnight]

27. Police cars, helicopters, body armor...

I have a libertarian streak and I own a few guns. Fifty Caliber sniper rifles are best left to the military.

The weapon is specifically designed to take out vehicles. Vehicle hunting is illegal in most states.

[DoNotRefill]

28. Heh...and Barrett has started REFUSING TO SERVICE guns....

owned by the LAPD because of the bullshit they were saying about them. Serves them RIGHT.

Question: Why did the LAPD have .50 caliber sniper rifles?

[Silverhair]

13. Remember the Glock?

The gun-grabbers were screaming that it was a terrorist dream gun. According to your crowd it was supposed to be all plastic, (It wasn't) and able to pass airport metal dectectors with ease, (It couldn't)and Libya was supposed to have ordered thousands of them. (Was that supposed to prove anything?)

Of course the reality was that it was a 9mm handgun with a ceramic frame, the rest of it was metal. The ceramic frame made it a bit lighter for the person who had to carry it strapped to them and reduced corrosion on some of the gun. That's all the ceramic frame did.

The actual legislation that the gun-grabbers were using the Glock scare to push would have had a far greater reach than merely the Glock. The gun-grabbers were trying to scare the public with lies.

While I will grant that I have not seen the legislation that you are pushing, I strongly suspect that it would ban far more than the .50 Barret. I would not be surprised to find it also effected ordinary hunting rifles too.

[DistressedAmerican]

14. If You Ask Me, It Is About Time That Someone Stood Up To The Plane Menace!

They have oppressed us too long. Blast away!

Probably effective against black helicopters coming over the hill!

Not black but this police chopper was buzzing my otherwise quite neighborhood for 7 or 8 hourse yesterday:







Maybe I need one of these things for a little homeland security?

Holy Crap! What's Next? Stingers?

[solinvictus]

20. That copter in the pictures..

can be taken down by a century old bolt-action rifle. The entire .50 caliber threat is nonsense.

[Pawel K]

52. If you can come anywhere close to actually hitting that

let alone hit it in the small area needed to disable it, I will give you a huge medal and maybe some money for the lawyer you will need when you are unsuccessful.

I have a feeling most of these gun grabbers never actually grabed a gun and fired it, you all seem to watch too many movies. In real life most people have a problem hitting a stationary target 30 feet away, let alone a moving target at 80 MPH from 2,000 feet away.

[BrightKnight]

67. A helicopter is bigger than a duck.

I can hit a duck. I can hit skeet with a 410 slug.

I remember a documentary where VC talked about taking out US helicopters with 50 caliber weapons. 50 caliber weapons have been used to shoot down aircraft since aircraft were invented.

I might buy the argument that there a more important political issues. It is absurd to assert that the weapon is not a threat.

[deadcenter]

68. intriguing

Impressive shooting.

Hal Moore in his book We Were Soldier's Once and Young, talks about the VC's antiaircraft technique. Basically, when they heard a helicopter, every body in the area faced it, aimed slightly in front of it, and opened fire. The VC didn't use .50 caliber weapons, 12.5 and 14.7 mm russian machine guns along with a wide variety of long arms.

So, after the .50 caliber rifles are banned, what's next? the .458 Winchester magnum? The .50s are inanimate objects, if you don't like 'em, don't shoot 'em, and let's get back to regulating bad behavior rather than inanimate objects.

deadcenter

[Silverhair]

71. You have demonstrated your ignorance of weapons.

You said: "I can hit skeet with a 410 slug."

Bullcrap!! You may be able to hit skeet with shot shells, but not with a slug. Nobody is that good of a shot.

Also you said: "I remember a documentary where VC talked about taking out US helicopters with 50 caliber weapons. 50 caliber weapons have been used to shoot down aircraft since aircraft were invented."

They used MACHINE GUNS. Genuine belt fed machine guns !!! Guns capable of firing around 500 rounds per minute. That is a hell of a lot different from a Barrett.

[Solar]

15. the 50 cal rifle is so big

The 50 cal rifle is so big I doubt you could even fit one in a car, much less conceal it. Not to mention the fact you have to be laying prone while firing it or else fly back about 10 feet from the recoil. Even someone with a death-wish would be reluctant to spend the money to buy one. The thing is too much of a behemoth to be practical.

[BrotherBuzz]

25. It would fit in the cab of my truck...

and the M82A1 weighs only 13.6kg (30 lbs) so I guess that's why they call this low recoil beauty the 'light fifty'.

[nolabels]

62. I wonder how the lipstick looks in full color

:loveya:


http://www.au.af.mil/au/afhra/wwwroot/photo_galleries/merhar/TOC/Miscellaneous_Photos.htm

[Silverhair]

64. Probably bright red. In the 1940's red was the style in lipstick.

Judging from the fashions, hairstyle, and the picture of the plane in the background, and the theme of the picture, I would say that is an old WWII photo. Probably some lady workers at a defense plant of some sort. Maybe they were even helping make the M2 shown in the picture.

[BrightKnight]

65. Smaller than a shoulder launched SAM

and designed for the same purpose

[Silverhair]

73. LOL.

Designed for the same purpose??? NO WAY.

I am a Vietnam veteran, & nine years of active duty (Five of those as a commissioned officer). I know guns very well, from experience.

The idea of deliberately trying to shoot down an airplane, even a piper cub, with a Barrett is PURELY HOLLYWOOD, not real life.

[Jack_DeLeon]

24. if I flew....

and I dont, I would be more worried about terrorists smuggling in man portable surface to air missiles from Russian client states than I would be about a terrorist attempting to shoot down a plane with a .50cal rifle.

[lonelysoul2020]

26. All I got to say is

Show me 10 times were the .50cal was used in ANY crime (in the past 50 years) and I might support you.

[Silverhair]

33. The site you link to has numerous misleading statements.

Since the general public doesn't know much about guns, they are easily mislead by the BS on that site.

Here's one:

A.) ".50 Caliber Sniper Rifles have effective ranges up to 2,000 yards, or in other words, 20 football fields laid end to end. Deer hunters generally shoot at ranges of 150 to 200 yards."

This is designed to make it appear that current deer rifles have ranges of only 200 yards. In fact, the .30-06 cartridge, which is 99 years old, and is a very common deer cartridge, has been used in military sniper kills at ranges of over 1,000 yards. Further, although the .50 does have a greater range, the ability of even a highly trained shooter to hit a human sized target at 2,000 yards is very difficult. The bullet will take over two seconds to travel 2,000 yards, and during that time it will drop over 70 feet from the point of aim.(Exact amount of drop will depend on numerous factors.) That means that the shooter would have to aim 70 feet above something to hit it, or offset the sights that much. During that time the bullet will be subject to crosswinds which cannot be predicted precisely and will cause unpredictable drift in the bullet. In other words, it is damn difficult to make a precise shot at 2,000 yards. At that range, you begin to shoot at areas, not precise points.
----------

B. ) "US aircraft still vulnerable to terrorist attacks: report, AFP, March 14, 2005"

The article talks about aircraft not being secured in guarded hangars. It doesn't say a thing about being shot down in flight. Of course any headline will be used by the gun-grabbers to deceive the public and scare them.
-----------

C. )".50 Caliber ammunition is the largest round available on the civilian market and highly destructive armor-piercing, incendiary, and explosive rounds are easily available."

Flat out lie. Explosive rounds are NOT easily available. The rest is hype.
------
D. ) "a bullet from a .50-caliber rifle, even at one-and-a-half miles, crashes into a target with more energy than a bullet fired at point-blank range from Dirty Harry's famous .44 Magnum."

Of course it does. The .50 is a RIFLE. The Dirty Harry's gun was a HANDGUN. Handguns simply can't generate much power, (Despite what the movies show.) from a small cartridge and a 6 inch barrel.
------
That is enough for now. I have demonstrated that your side is willing to deceive the general public to accomplish your agenda. Therefore, I strongly suspect that your target is NOT merely the .50 Barret, but that the legislation intended would probably reach far beyond it.

[Silverhair]

36. Another misleading aspect of the site you link to:

".50 Caliber Sniper Rifles have effective ranges up to 2,000 yards, or in other words, 20 football fields laid end to end. Deer hunters generally shoot at ranges of 150 to 200 yards."

That implies that deer are the biggest game hunted. Bighorn sheep, elk, and antelope are normally taken at much greater range. That is due to the terrain of the western states.

Also, although most deer are taken at shorter ranges, some are taken at longer ranges. I have personally made a deer shot at about 600 yards.

[One_Life_To_Give]

37. Better ban the Springfield rifle

It has a confirmed kill of a Torpedo Bomber.

12/7/41, USS Indianapolis

[Oldpals]

38. Gun debate

I am amazed that people argue the merits of something like this. One poster was talking about lead range and speed of an airliner and how difficult the shot would be to pull off. Truly amazing. There is no sign of responsibility on the part of the gun crowd.Any call to them to at least consider removing these terrible weapons is ignored and as another poster states these people are called "gun grabbers"...an NRA mantra.

After Margaret Thatcher escaped the bombing in Brighton the IRA in a statement said; "We have to be lucky once, she has to be lucky always." So too to the person with the .50 caliber rifle that plans to take out an airliner or do some other harm.

[OrlandoGator]

44. There's a slight difference between "luck" and "one in a billion chance"

Tell me, what exactly makes the .50 rifle caliber more dangerous than the .308 or .223 calibers? Do you know? Do you care?

[MrSandman]

55. And the Barrett has been used how many times in a crime?

Please, justify banning it. I would like to see the reasons that exist for banning this weapon.

I'll never afford one, but I'll never afford a Corvette either.

[Wcross]

39. The sky is falling!!!!!!!

Terrorists "might" "maybe" "could" ! Oh boy. I think we have had enough of the "gun grabbing" wing of the democratic party.
This kind of B.S. is what costs us elections. Most gun owners will see this and think- what about my hunting rifle? Is that the next item on the gun ban agenda? If .50 caliber rifles are banned do you think that maybe Mr. Barrett will roll out his .499 caliber version?
Attempting to ban a rifle like this does not do anything to convince people to vote Democrat. It may however, convince some NOT to.

Lets face it, people that advocate banning guns will never be happy. The guns are either too big or too small, I doubt they would find any gun to be acceptable for an honest citizen to own.

[billbuckhead]

42. The sky isn't falling but tens of thousands of Americans are

falling down after being shot in a land with the weakest gun laws of any comparable nation.

"It really is true," she says, "that in the U.S., there are politicians and policymakers who would look advocates, victims, and survivors of gun violence in the eye and say, `I know that you're right, that we should be tightening gun laws. But I'm afraid to do it.'"

<http://www.jointogether.org/gv/news/features/reader/0%2C2061%2C574860%2C00.html>

[Wcross]

45. How many were killed with a .50 rifle?

You are going to solve the gun violence problem by banning a gun that is almost NEVER used to commit homocide and has NEVER been used to commit suicide? I guess we can solve the speeding problem by banning cement trucks huh?
If logic fails- switch to emotional pleas right?
BTW- Verify your claim that "tens of thousands of Americans" are being killed by guns. You have to twist the figures a bit to do that. I don't consider people who choose to end their life using a firearm to be victims.

This crap belongs in the gun dungeon. I could look in the eyes of any "advocate" and say they are full of crap. I could look into the eyes of any survivor and say " a criminal shot you", its too bad we don't have tougher laws in place to punish criminal misuse of firearms.

Lets say we ban all firearms. Will the criminal element comply with the law? Think about it...............

[billbuckhead]

59. My neighbor has a wolf-huskie hybrid, let's wait till he attacks to build

a fence. Sometimes humans are smart enough to use their good sense to avoid problems, something extremist gun wackos tragically lack.
Criminals never comply with laws by definition but we can do things as a society to make them weaker and more obvious. Some nations do a better job at keeping it's citizens free of gun terror and like many things American, chauvinism doesn't make our problems go away. The rest of our advanced nation peers do it different and have far better results as far actual murders, percentage of imprisonment and freedom to about their nation.

A man can't be at his freest when he's holding a weapon, it's fairly obvious. Everything you own, also owns you. Guns are a very jealous dominatrix.

[deadcenter]

60. let me get this straight...

you're comparing a wolf/dog hybrid capable of locomotion and with the potential for attacking an innocent without assistance and without warning, to an inanimate object that cannot possibly attack anything unless it is being wielded by a living, breathing human being.

Every Swiss male between 21 and 32 must live in constant terror that the government-issued machine gun they are required by law to store in their homes will someday jump out, load itself, and pull its own trigger while aiming itself at the "master" of the house.

By the by, Thomas Jefferson on shooting:

"A strong body makes the mind strong. As to the species of
exercises, I advise the gun. While this gives moderate exercise
to the body, it gives boldness, enterprise and independence to
the mind. Games played with the ball and others of that nature,
are too violent for the body and stamp no character on the mind.
Let your gun therefore be the constant companion of your walks."
THOMAS JEFFERSON, Encyclopedia of T. Jefferson, 318 (Foley, Ed.,
1967)

deadcenter

[OrlandoGator]

43. Nice try, Chicken Little.

I'll give an expert marksman 100 tries to hit an airplane in flight with a semi-automatic rifle. And I'll bet anyone $1,000 he can't hit the plane once.

Any takers? I could use the free money.

[Wcross]

46. The golden BB?

I bet I could hit a plane taking off if I was lined up with the runway and had 100 chances at it. First, would I be able to bring it down? It would take a very lucky shot- fighters in WW II took numerous hits from 20mm rounds and made it home.
Would a hit from a .50 be any more effective than a .30 cal? I don't think so.

[One_Life_To_Give]

47. Remember the Aloha Airlines incident

The 737 took a bit more damage than a single 50 is going to do.
link
Although since seeing this I have been partial to flying 737's

[Wcross]

53. Did they ever solve the rudder problem they had?

Remember the crash outside of Pittsburgh? It was either a rudder or elevator design flaw. Oh no! We have to outlaw design flaws now!

[Lone Pawn]

50. Airplane killer? Not quite.

Airplanes aren't made of paper and rubber bands. You *could* take down a plane with one of these, in the same manner that you *could* take down a plane with a .22 rifle. If you got really damn lucky.

[Ilovestout]

58. a 50 cal could penetrate a fuel tank, and depending on the plane

it could be very likely to hit a fuel tank if they hit the plane at all.

[Zynx]

61. And airplane fuel tanks are self-sealing.

So the bullet wouldn't do anything.

Unlike in the movies, hitting a gas tank with a bullet does nothing other than make the tank leak gas - if it isn't designed like almost all aircraft fuel tanks.

[Fescue4u]

51. LMAO

Propaganda can be funny as well as wrong.

But since you asked me to choose. I will

I choose freedom.

[sendero]

56. Just pass a law..

... and those nasty .50 cal guns will just dissappear.

And while you are at it, pass a law that says you have a 12" ****.

Yeah, that will work.

[Ilovestout]

57. it only needs to be used once to kill hundreds on the plane

and they don't need to be overly accurized "sniper" rifles, there's little reason for owning anything 50 caliber.

[Silverhair]

63. You have been watching too many movies.

You have a highly exaggerated opinion of what a .50 can do to an airborne plane. The truth is that it would be very hard to hit and bring down even a piper cub with one, and you simply can't do it to an 747. First you have to hit the plane while airborne. Then the hit has to bring the plane down. Not gonna happen, even if the shooter manages to get hold of explosive ammo. A 1/2 inch bullet just can't hold very much explosive.

And they are used in a sport. It is called the Boomer Shoot. Of course, you are very willing to tell others what sports they can and can't do.

[Selatius]

69. Barretts weren't made to bring down flying airplanes

The mentally unstable and would-be terrorists exist, and this should be dealt with; however, if we enforce the laws that are already on our books, we wouldn't have to worry about .50 caliber sniper rifles falling into the hands of religious fundamentalists like Eric Rudolph or Malvo or the angry Timothy McVeighs running around pissed off at the government because it screwed them over or school shooters like Dylan Klebold and Eric Harris of Columbine infamy or even Al Qaida terror agents. Besides, last time I checked, it didn't take a Barrett .50 caliber to blow away doctors at abortion clinics. It just took a hunting rifle with a scope.

Onboard bombs and smuggled shoulder-launched anti-aircraft missile launchers are far more dangerous a threat to flying jetliners than sniper rifles. All those helicopters and planes in Iraq in the past three years didn't all crash because of mechanical failure. Some number of them were blown out of the sky by inexpensive shoulder-fired missiles. An Israeli El-Al passenger plane was almost blown out of the sky by a missile fired from the ground a couple years ago.

The point is .50 caliber sniper rifles are far more easily regulated than American-made stinger missiles on the black market or Russian-made Grouse or Gremlin missiles. All three of these missiles are man-portable and capable of bringing down aircraft flying at least as high as 10,000 feet.

You should advocate keeping regulating guns tight, but you should be more worried about missiles being smuggled into the US.