A conservative with an AK47 leaves tragedy in his wake

[appleannie1]

Six-year-old Brooklynn Mayhle sometimes tells her mom that she wants to die.

Her sister, 8-year-old Jennifer, thinks about hurting herself so she can be with her daddy. She prays at night and asks God to help her quit thinking about Richard Poplawski.

"I want to tell her it's not fair that she should have to even know that name," said Shandra Mayhle, the girls' mother and widow of Pittsburgh Police Officer Stephen J. Mayhle.

She was the last of the prosecution's witnesses called to the stand Monday during the penalty phase of Mr. Poplawski's capital murder trial.

A jury Saturday convicted him of killing officers Mayhle, 29; Paul J. Sciullo II, 37; and Eric G. Kelly, 41, in a shootout April 4, 2009. That same jury now must decide if the defendant should be put to death by lethal injection or should live the rest of his life in prison.



Read more: http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/11179/1156710-53.stm#ixzz1QXzbncjU

[alfredo]

1. Give him death by incarceration. Dying of old age in prison is not

Getting off easy.

[provis99]

2. I don't know about that.

He's a copkiller; he'll likely be well-liked in prison; he could enjoy his stay there.

[alfredo]

15. We don't know how much contact he will have with others. It is the

Isolation and loss of freedom of movement that wears on prisoners. He may never see the sun again.

[appleannie1]

3. He destroyed children. Not just policemen.

[alfredo]

34. Even more reason to put him in a more isolated cell. Allowing

human contact puts him at risk, and as our prisoner we have a duty to protect him from harm. So if that means isolating him from human contact for 50 years, so be it.

[former9thward]

32. Richard Speck would disagree with you.

He raped, tortured and killed 8 nurses in Chicago. In prison he had access to drugs, alcohol and sex. (A video of him and other inmates partying was shown to the Illinois legislature.) He said that "if they knew how much fun I am having in here they would turn me loose".

[alfredo]

35. That situation was the fault of the prison administration.

[former9thward]

37. So?

The situation happens in all prisons all of the time. It is naive to suggest that life prisoners do 'hard' time. Most of them enjoy themselves. Only death penalty opponents think otherwise in order to justify their thinking that life imprisonment is a harsher penalty than death.

[alfredo]

38. Death penalty cuts short their captivity. Life sentences offer

no relief from captivity. One hour a day of supervised exercise/fraternization is not the life of Riley. A prison, no matter how clean and orderly, is still a prison.

[Bragi]

46. "Most of them (prisoners) enjoy themselves"

That's about as ignorant a statement as as I've seen here in some time.

This may be a bit beyond you, but you need to realize that being opposed to capital punishment isn't centrally about the convicted person. It's about our own decency as a society.

Civilized people and culture is not ennobled through state murder. State murder diminishes everyone's humanity. That's why it is routine in barbaric societies.

[Taverner]

48. Yeah, prison rape, really fun

The only people who "enjoy" prison are those high up in gang heirarchy, or made men from cosa nostra

And even then, they have a target on their backs

[Bragi]

49. Maybe the poster's info came from watching Goodfellas /nt

[former9thward]

55. Project much?

"Speck was not a model prisoner; he was often caught with drugs or distilled moonshine. Punishment for such infractions never stopped him. "How am I going to get in trouble? I'm here for 1,200 years!"

"In May 1996, Chicago television news anchor Bill Kurtis received video tapes from an anonymous attorney that had been made at Stateville Prison in 1988. Showing them publicly for the first time before a shocked and deeply angry Illinois state legislature, Kurtis pointed out the explicit scenes of sex, drug use, and money being passed around by prisoners, who seemingly had no fear of being caught; in the center of it all was Speck, performing oral sex on another inmate,<39><40> sharing a huge pile of cocaine with an inmate, parading in silk panties, sporting female-like breasts (allegedly grown using smuggled hormone treatments), and boasting, "If they only knew how much fun I was having, they'd turn me loose."

https://secure.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/wiki/Richard_Speck

[Bragi]

57. I'm not familiar with Project Much. Care to share?

Or do you expect me to get into a long drawn out urls-a-flyin' debate with you over this heinous and ridiculous mass killer? If that's the case, then I fear you are destined to be disappointed.

[former9thward]

53. Court ordered lawful executions are not murder.

But I would not expect you to go by legal definitions.

[Bragi]

58. Yes, state murder can be made "legal" /nt

[provis99]

71. is killing a house intruder murder too?

I guess any killing at all is murder to you.

[Bragi]

81. Yes, of course that could be murder

If there are non-lethal options to dealing with a house intruder, then yes, it would be illegal to kill an intruder, and it would be deemed to be murder (or manslaughter) under current laws.

If you're trying to make me out to be a pacifist, I'm not. If you are trying to justify capital punishment by claiming that the state has no option but to kill someone who commits murder, then you're wrong, there are many other options.

As I stated, I am opposed to state murder as a punishment for crime because I think it degrades any society that engages in it. It is barbaric and unnecessary.

[provis99]

85. so the War against Hiter was murder too. Okey dokey.

Some warped values system you have there.

[gratuitous]

83. Check the death certificate

Executed prisoners are listed as "homicide."

[Mimosa]

75. former9thward is right to a degree

Anybody who has actually known men (family and/or friends) who've done time are familiar with the recidivists. Quite a few don't mind prison because they are free of responsibilities.

I've known a couple of young recidivists. They essentially hated time on the outside because work was too demanding and not very rewarding financially. In prison nobody has to worry about paying rent, bills, transportation. I've heard it's fairly easy to get drugs in prison too. Ironic since many young men are incarcerated for drug related crimes.

[Taverner]

47. But The Unabomber and Scott Peterson would disagree with YOU

[emilyg]

4. How do you know he's a conservative?

[The Magistrate]

8. He Killed Them Because 'Obama Is Coming For My Guns'; Ma'am

This is a pretty well known case. A fairly typical 'Palin-McCain' voter....

[malaise]

17. 100% correct Sir!

http://www.salon.com/news/opinion/kamiya/2009/04/07/richard_poplowski
<snip>
It would be convenient to pretend that Richard Poplawski, who killed three Pittsburgh policemen on Saturday with an AK-47, was just a right-wing nutcase. A devotee of the white supremacist Web site Stormfront, Poplawski believed that the United States was controlled by a secret Jewish cabal that had a master plan to abrogate freedom of speech and use the U.S. military to police Americans.

It would be easy for us to cordon Poplawski off, pretend that his ugly and paranoid worldview had nothing to do with the Obama hatred spouted by the American right. But the truth is that Poplawski's hateful views cannot be separated from the increasingly extreme ideology and rhetoric that characterize the contemporary American conservative movement. As his friend, Edward Perkovic, told the Associated Press, Poplawski feared "the Obama gun ban that's on the way" and "didn't like our rights being infringed upon."

Such obsessions don't come out of a vacuum. Fox News, Rush Limbaugh and the GOP have been whipping up hatred and fear of Obama and "liberal Democrats" for years. Joined by the National Rifle Association, which has run false and irresponsible ads claiming that Obama is planning to take away Americans' guns, they have encouraged and helped to create a pathological right-wing subculture in which free-floating hatred of "the government" mixes with a maniacal fetish for guns. Poplawski is the diseased fruit of that ugly tree.

[MikeMc]

23. He posted to Glen Beck and Alex Jone's sites, too.

[The Magistrate]

70. The Level Of Denial regarding Republican Conservative Racism, Can Be Seen Below

In its full and depressing glory....

[BoWanZi]

5. I would consider Poplawski a white supremacist much more than a conservative

Poplawski was a member of Stormfront and other white supremacist groups and they are basically nazi sympathizers. They cannot stand Israel and Jews and people who support them whereas repubs and "normal" conservatives fully support Israel and the Jewish people. This guy seemed to HATE the Jews and Zion.

I really do not think its fair to lump extremely disturbed and damaged people such as Richard Poplawski with the great majority of repubs/conservatives which your thread title is intending on implying.

[MyrnaLoy]

6. with that being said

which member of the Paul family would he support?

[The Magistrate]

7. Republican Conservatives Are White Supremacists, Sir: This One Was Just More Honest

[emilyg]

10. Simply not true. Based on knowing people

who are Conservatives. Expected more from you.

[The Magistrate]

13. Some Hide It Better Than Others, Ma'am, But it Is Always Present --- Always

It is the base of modern conservative Republican policy and voting strength, and has been since at least 1964.

[TxVietVet]

19. The conservanazis push racism sublty. As for the Jews/Israel,

some of them will rant against them for being a 'welfare' state, dependent on the US for financial survival.
Bill Clinton once said about the conservanazi republiklans is that they are "subtly racist and overtly anti-feminist".

It's how the conservanazis get votes: using racism and "family values" to push their agenda. It's everywhere in the US.

[trotsky]

21. The Southern Strategy.

Correct as usual, sir.

[Name removed]

26. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Glassunion]

33. Well Sir... Thank you for trivializing racism.

I get it. You don't like conservatives. I'm fine with that. I'm not too fond of their politics either.

What I am not fine with is the fact that you are trivializing racism just so you may try to paint an evil face on something you don't agree with. Comments like these belittle an honest and real issue that I and others like me have to face every single day of our lives.

From your responses here you seem to be painting as racist something you don't like. Not because it is racist, but simply that you wish to paint a bad face on it.

Honest racism is not tied to one political party, nor is it tied to only specific ideals. Overall, our party stands up to racism more than any other. Does that make the other parties racist? No it does not. Overall, our ideals go against racism. Does that make other ideals racist? No it does not. Does this mean that the Democratic party is free from racism? No it does not. Does that mean that Democratic policies are free from racism? No it does not.

By broad brush painting of things you dislike as racist, you belittle the struggle of those facing racism every day. When someone screams racism or outrage at everything that wags in their face they dilute its real face into something it is not.

[The Magistrate]

59. No, Sir, Placing It At Its Actual Weight: Racism is the Root Of Republican Voting Strength

This has been the case ever since the election of 1964, when Sen. Goldwater's opposition to federal civil rights legislation won him states of the Confederacy that had not voted for a Republican in recorded history. Why you find the largest facts of political life in our country uncomfortable, or feel they should pass unspoken quite escapes me.

Conservatives are all, at bottom, white supremacist racists, and nothing more. They vote Republican because Republican politicians consciously court racist, and stoke racist sentiments.

'I'm taxed too much!' means 'I don't want one dime from me to go to some lazy ******.'

'Government spends too much!' means 'They're giving my money to lazy *******.'

'Get government off our backs!' means 'Stop helping lazy *******.'

'Crime is out of hand!' means 'Lock up all them damn lazy *******.'

'We're taking back our country!' means 'This used to be a White Man's country, damn it, and now look at it, we got a ****** in the White House!'

[Glassunion]

62. Interesting that you bring up the civil rights legislation of 1964.

Some facts you seem to have omitted...
1. You failed to mention Senator James O. Eastland a Democrat who sat as Chair of the Senate Judiciary Committee. Normally this bill would have had to pass through that committee, however Pres. Johnson knew that Eastland (D) strongly opposed the bill. So in a pretty deft move Mike Mansfield (D) (Senate Majority Leader) took a novel approach to prevent the bill from being relegated to Judiciary Committee. He initially waived a second reading of the bill, which would have led to it being immediately referred to Judiciary, Mansfield gave the bill a second reading on February 26, 1964, and then proposed, in the absence of precedent for instances when a second reading did not immediately follow the first, that the bill bypass the Judiciary Committee and immediately be sent to the Senate floor for debate.

So you have a Democrat, not a Republican who could have effectively killed the bill.

2. When the bill came before the full Senate for debate 18 Democratic Senators and one Republican Senator launched a filibuster for 54 days to prevent its passage.

So you have 18 Democrats and 1 Republican launching an almost 2 month filibuster against the bill. One Dem who personally filibustered in an address that lasted 14 hours and 13 minutes.

3. You forget the Democrats had the majority. So... How did they vote? It should have passed with ease. Right? Let's look at how the voting played out.
Original House Version
Total votes yea/nay: 290-130(69%–31%)
Democratic Party: 152-96 (61%-39%)
Republican Party: 138-34 (80%-20%)

Cloture in the Senate
Total votes yea/nay: 71-29 (71%–29%)
Democratic Party: 44-23 (66%–34%)
Republican Party: 27-6 (82%–18%)

The Senate version
Total votes yea/nay: 73-27 (73%–27%)
Democratic Party: 46-21 (69%–31%)
Republican Party: 27-6 (82%–18%)

The Senate version, as voted on by the House
Total votes yea/nay: 289-126 (70%–30%)
Democratic Party: 153-91 (63%–37%)
Republican Party: 136-35 (80%–20%)

This bill would have failed if not for the work of both parties. But the part you seem to overlook is that the Republicans gave more of their votes in support of the bills. No less than 80% of the Republicans supported this bill. The Dems could not even muster 70% and in the final version, they could only muster 63% of Democratic votes.

So for you to say: "Conservatives are all, at bottom, white supremacist racists, and nothing more." Is quite untrue. #1. It would require that all Republicans to be white. They are not. #2. If it were true, please explain the appointment of Condi Rice, Colin Powell, Rod Paige or the election of Michael Steele. All politics and viewpoints aside, why the hell would Republicans appoint or elect Blacks to such great positions if they are ALL, at bottom white supremacist racists?

Why you find the largest facts of political life in our country uncomfortable, or feel they should pass unspoken quite escapes me as well.

But please, do continue to belittle racism. It's your toy to play with, I only have to live with it.

[The Magistrate]

64. Do Not Try And Teach Your Grandmother To Suck Eggs, Sir

You have told me nothing not long familiar to me; the debates and votes were of consuming interest to me at the time. The split was on regional, not party lines, and northern Republicans certainly vote for these measures, while southern Democrats voted against them. The great fight in the Republican party during '64 was precisely the breaking of 'Rockefeller Republicans' of the sort who had voted for these laws, while the great fact of the subsequent elections was that 'dixie-crats' who had opposed these laws voted en mass for Sen. Goldwater, who had voted against them. This led to Nixon's Southern Strategy, predicated on the proposition that 'when it comes to Negroes, the whole country's southern.' From there, we proceed directly to our present pass.

[Glassunion]

68. So please answer my question Sir.

If it were true(that ALL Republicans are at their core "white supremacists"), please explain the appointment of Condi Rice, Colin Powell, Rod Paige or the election of Michael Steele. All politics and viewpoints aside, why the hell would Republicans appoint or elect Blacks to such great positions if they are ALL, at bottom white supremacist racists as your narrow view states?

[The Magistrate]

69. Not Necessary, Sir

You can continue your defense of Republican racism so long as you please, but you will have to do it by yourself....

"Say something once, why say it again.."

[Glassunion]

84. You start a conversation you can't even finish it

You're talkin' a lot, but you're not sayin' anything...

For one thing I am NOT giving a defense of Republican racism. I will never give any defense for any form of racism whether it wears a Republican face or not.

You are willfully missing my point.
Summed up, my point is this: Not ALL Republicans are racist. And, by crying racism at every little thing, the meaning becomes diluted.

If I'm met on the street by three people and the first person screams "nigger" in my face, I can label that man a racist. If the second person is a Republican and they say "Hi", I cannot say they are a racist. Just as if the third person is a Democrat and they say "Hi", I cannot say they are a racist either.

There are a few in the Republican party today that we can work with. We share similar values and can reach across the aisle to gain their support for our causes. Can we label them as racist? What about all of those Republicans that feel that they were dissed by Bush, totally bailed on the Republican party and joined us in electing Obama? Can we call them racist? Or are they Democrats formerly known as racists?

What happens when a Republican comes up with a bill that Democrats co-sponsor? Are these Dems now racist by proxy?

What happens when you have a Republican who is pro-choice, wants to increase spending in; education, public health services, environment, medical research, infrastructure and welfare, is against making the Bush tax cuts permanent, wants to impose stricter penalties for those convicted of corporate crimes, increase minimum wage, continue affirmative action, expand medicare/medicaid and expand on welfare? Is this person a racist simply because of their party affiliation?

But, if you wish to scream "racist" at anyone in the Republican party, just for the simple fact that they are in the Republican party, you soften the meaning of racism. Racism is not an excuse, it is not a cry to yell at all that fouls us. How many hearts and minds did we win in 2008? How many saw that their political view on war, taxes or even society was wrong enough to make them walk over to our side? How many do you think would have so willingly supported our party and our president had we pointed in their face and called them racist before they made their first step?

It was love that was preached during the civil rights battles of the 50's and 60's, and it worked. It was fought for, tooth and nail, but with love none the less. We were met with violence, but we showed only non-violence. We persisted and we persevered one small step at a time. I cannot say to hate those that hate me for nothing other than the color of my skin. I can say to love them so much that they can see the light. To see that I am not so different. To know that I feel. To know that they are more like me than they know. I can never label one who's character I do not know. It cheapens the label and it taints my character. I can only show them who I am, where I am going and ask if they would walk with me, not against. And only then will I see the person they really are.

[provis99]

72. Eastland was a conservative.

You're not helping your own argument.

[cherokeeprogressive]

45. I can't remember ever seeing such a narrow-minded blanket statement from you.

[emilyg]

52. It absolutely floored me. This is

not the kind of post I expect from the Magistrate.

[lonestarnot]

77. It is true, what is wrong with truth. Nothing.

[cherokeeprogressive]

79. Very few arguments using the words "always", "never", and "every" can be considered "true".

This is why I was surprised to see The Magistrate use one of them to support his point.

[lonestarnot]

76. Here here!

[Obamanaut]

18. +1 nt

[EOTE]

31. Not all conservatives are white supremacists.

But all white supremacists are conservatives. I'd think this would be patently obvious.

[emilyg]

9. Thank you.

[Confusious]

12. The support of Israel and the Jews is conditional

Only difference is that NAZIs want them to die now, most conservatives are hoping for their deaths when jebus comes back.

[TxVietVet]

20. CORRECT.

According to some of the conservanazi christian endtimers, the Jews are supposed to keep Israel until their Jesus comes back. Then, they have a choice, convert or go to Hell. Conditional support of the state of Israel and Jews is what they have. Pat Robertson and the rest of the pulpit pimps put out that message ever now and again.

[Tejas]

14. +1 Very well put

[DainBramaged]

30. Have you ever heard of any Liberals who belong to Stormfront?

Oh and this is DU, we can lump anybody with anyone we damn well fell like lumping.

[leftynyc]

42. Uh - no

The republicans support Israel for entirely selfish motives. The evangelicals believe Israel must exist for their end times fantasy to occur. Any Jew that doesn't accept Jesus as their savior at that time will burn in hell. That's not fully supporting Jewish people by any stretch of the imagination.

[JoePhilly]

87. The right wing LOVES these nuts ... and they SHAKE the crazy tree

to get these nuts to fall out.

That is the point of the GOP "anti-government" ranting ... to get crazies like this, like the guy who shot Giffords, to attack government officials.

The REASON that these different groups hate the government are irrelevant.

The goal is to get the crazies who hate the government to ACT on that hate.

And the GOP then looks around surprised when it happens.

[Kaleva]

11. The gun wasn't an AK-47

AK-47s are rare in this country and one in good condition can cost from $16,000.00 to $20,000.00.

"Poplawski was armed with a semi-automatic AK-47-style rifle and two other guns."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2009_Pittsburgh_police_shootings

[proud2BlibKansan]

24. But the cops are still dead

I don't understand why it matters whether the gun is called by its correct name. That's really not the point here.

[malaise]

25. +1,000

:fistbump:

[Upton]

27. Well if facts don't matter..

how about we misidentify the perpetrator too? After all, "the cops are still dead"...

[Kaleva]

28. Which makes trying to sensationalize the story rather senseless doesn't it?

Reading the title, one would imagine the three police officers were mowed down in a hail of automatic gunfire. The story is tragic enough without some some Hollywood writer wannabes trying to juice it up.

[DainBramaged]

29. Are you trying to sugar coat this?

[yesphan]

54. yup

7.62mm x 39mm.

[Kaleva]

65. The Tiger tank fired an 88mm shell...

but one would be amiss in calling every German anti-aircraft gun that fired the same shell a Tiger tank.

[provis99]

73. You'd still be just as dead.

I would think a soldier killed by Nazis wouldn't worry too much about whether the 88mm shell was from a Flak gun or a Tiger tank.

[fascisthunter]

88. thank you

[krispos42]

80. It matters in the broader context for future regulation considerations

However, it was definitely an AK-pattern rifle so the article isn't far off.


But if the facts are reported poorly, it leads for misplaced (or even missing) public action and thus bad legislation.


Witness the hoopla over banning .50-caliber sniper rifles because, it is said, they can shoot down airliners.

[negativenihil]

36. uh no?

16-20k? Have you ever been to a gun show? The AK-47, and its various (and just as good (due to the simple stamped metal design) clones) can be purchased for anything from a few hundred dollars to a grand or two depending on the country of origin and condition.

[Kaleva]

39. AK-47s are regulated by the National Firearms Act of 1934

"The first attempt at federal gun-control legislation, the National Firearms Act (NFA) only covered two specific types of guns: machine guns and short-barrel firearms, including sawed-off shotguns."

http://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/National+Firearms+Act+of+1934

The AK-47, capable of full automatic fire, is considered to be a machine gun.

The 1968 Gun Control Act barred imports of guns such as the AK-47

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_Control_Act_of_1968

The Firearm Owners Protection Act added further restrictions

"...that would ban a civilian from ownership or transfer rights of any fully automatic weapon which was not registered as of May 19, 1986. The amendment also held that any such weapon manufactured and registered before the May 19 cutoff date could still be legally owned and transferred by civilians."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Firearm_Owners_Protection_Act

Thus the only legal AK-47s available are those which were either imported in this country prior to 1968, manufactured within the US prior to 1986 and registered with the ATF prior to the cutoff date of May 19, 1986.

And even if one can find an AK-47 for sale, one must go thru and pass an extensive background check which can take months to complete.

You say that the AK-47 clones, which one can find at gun shows, are just as good as a real AK-47. Then why does no nation in the world equip its soldiers with such weapons if they are just as good and so much cheaper? The US could save alot of money if it equipped our troops with the "just as good" AR-15 rather then the M-16A4.

Edit: I'd like to add the the Assault Weapons Ban had no impact on the availability, cost, sale, and ownership of the AK-47 because it's an assault rifle and not an assault weapon. The WASR-10 used in this crime was controlled by the AWB and would be again if it were ever to be renewed.

[negativenihil]

40. they do!

"You say that the AK-47 clones, which one can find at gun shows, are just as good as a real AK-47. Then why does no nation in the world equip its soldiers with such weapons if they are just as good and so much cheaper? The US could save alot of money if it equipped our troops with the "just as good" AR-15 rather then the M-16A4. "

you ever notice how fighters in 3rd world nations all seem to be using and carrying ak-47 style rifles? This is because they are cheap, and easy to manufacture in even the most basic of industrialized nations.

Have you ever fired a Chinese or Romanian ak-47 clone? do you really think you'd be able to tell the difference unless it was pointed out to you?

That said, if you'd like - we could just find some rulers and measure our junk to see who's bigger.

[Kaleva]

43. AK-47s were manufactured by the millions in the USSR, China, and the former Warsaw nations

Thus they are easily available and cheap for third world nations to buy. But to buy one in the US is another story as they have been heavily regulated and restricted for decades. Just to have one that was imported into the US after the Gun Control Act of 1968 was passed can land you in prison for a very long time.

Some info on the availability and cost of the AK-47s:

"In some countries, prices for AKs are very low; in Somalia, Rwanda, Mozambique, Congo and Ethiopia, prices are between $30 and $125 per weapon, and prices have fallen in the last few decades due to mass counterfeiting. Moisés Naím observed that in a small town in Kenya in 1986, an AK-47 cost fifteen cows but that in 2005, the price was down to four cows indicating that supply was "immense""

"The World Bank estimates that out of the 500 million total firearms available worldwide, 100 million are of the Kalashnikov family, and 75 million of which are AK-47s."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AK-47

[Kaleva]

56. Here's a gunshop that has an AK-47 for sale for $16,995.00

http://www.westernfirearms.com/wfc/ak47?sz=800x600

The AK-47 is a class III weapon.

"In 1986, the United States government banned the future importation and domestic manufacture of machine guns for civilian consumption, and the already limited inventory of Class 3 weapons has since diminished substantially."

http://www.westernfirearms.com/wfc?set=01&sz=800x600

Here's a cheap one for sale at the price of $14,500.00

http://www.atfmachinegun.com/

[negativenihil]

82. *yawn*

And here's a link with listings for American made ak-47 clones - many for under $1000.

http://www.ak-47.us/USmade.php

[petronius]

86. I think you're missing Kaleva's point. A true AK-47 is a select-fire assault rifle,

capable of fully automatic fire (a machine gun). That's what we're familiar with from war movies and current conflicts around the world. These rifles are tightly controlled in the US, rare, and very expensive - but when the name "AK-47" is used without qualifiers, this is what most people think of.

The rifles you've linked to, and in the OP, are semi-automatic variants of the AK-47 - externally similar, but not fully automatic and no more or less dangerous than any other semi-automatic rifle in a similar caliber. Referring to these rifles as AKs, without any modifier, is not uncommon but it often leads to confusion with the real thing, as Kaleva is pointing out.

You may consider it a nitpick, but since tragedies like this one are often used as arguments for policies and restrictions, it's beneficial to define our terms and ensure we're all meaning the same thing...

[Marengo]

89. *Cookie Monster Voice*: "One of these things is not like the other"

Hint: the rifles featured in the link you provided are missing a function found in the true military AK-47/AKM/AK-74, etc.

Can you guess what that is?

You're out of your element on this subject, I think it best for your reputation to accept that others on this board are far more knowledgeable on this issue than you.

[Tejas]

90. Make up your mind.

you ever notice how fighters in 3rd world nations all seem to be using and carrying ak-47 style rifles? This is because they are cheap, and easy to manufacture in even the most basic of industrialized nations.

Are fighters in 3rd world nations using and carrying AK-47 style rifles, or are they using and carrying AK-47 rifles?

[malaise]

16. This was the RW moron who listened to Rush

Fucking terrorist.

[aikoaiko]

22. I'm OK with the death penalty in this case.

FURP

[FreeJoe]

41. I just don't see killing as the answer

n/t

[Bragi]

50. State murder degrades any society

I've been opposed to capital punishment all my life not because of any compassion for a convicted person.

My opposition is based on my belief that state murder degrades any society that condones it.

There's a reason why it was/is a feature of all barbaric societies.

[provis99]

74. well, that's your opinion, then.

Punishment is a feature of all "barbaric" societies too...

[fascisthunter]

44. WTF.... another Right Wing Ding Bat

[True Earthling]

51. His conservative ideology is not to blame... his upbringing was filled with domestic violence

sad story really - abandoned by his father when 3 yrs old to be raised by an alcoholic, violent, maniac grandfather...

Sister Mary John Cook, principal of Immaculate Conception school in Bloomfield, told the jury deciding the fate of her former student that he was a straight-A student.

"I was married to (Margaret) 25 years ago. I guess the marriage lasted about 2 1/2, 3 years," Richard Poplawski, who has the same name as his son, testified. "Things didn't work out. It was just too much. Too much bickering, too much fighting." Poplawski's father testified that Margaret Poplawski stabbed him on two occasions during fights.

Poplawski's father testified along with several other relatives, who detailed Poplawski's rough home life. Many of Poplawski's aunts and a cousin talked about Poplawski's grandfather's penchant for beer and guns. "Charles Scott (Poplawski's late grandfather) was very violent man. One Christmas he was shooting guns through the ceiling and the roof," said William Duffy, Poplawski's second cousin. "I can remember him pointing guns at people." "Did he point guns at you?" Brennan asked. "Yes, he did," Duffy said. Richard Poplawski's grandfather was a deadbeat alcoholic who beat his wife and other family members, a relative testified.

Debbie Devine, Poplawski's great aunt, was the first witness called today by attorney William Brennan, who is representing Poplawski during the penalty phase of his murder trial. Brennan intends to call eight or nine witnesses today who will present mitigating evidence in an attempt to gain a life sentence rather than the death penalty for Poplawski. Devine said Charles Scott, the grandfather who lived in the same house as Poplawski, was a violent man. He worked for a short while in an auto body shop, then quit work and spent his days drinking up to two cases of beer per day, she said. He also maintained a cache of firearms in his home.
He beat his wife, Catherine Scott, and assaulted other relatives, including Devine, she said.
http://www.pittsburghlive.com/x/pittsburghtrib/poplawski_trial/s_744268.html#ixzz1Qb2nuQKb

[Blasphemer]

60. My heart breaks for those children

I hope they are getting the help they need to deal with such an unbelievable trauma. They will carry those scars for the rest of their lives and all for what?

[RagAss]

61. No healthcare for the rest of his life !...Like the rest of us motherfuckers !!!

[RamboLiberal]

63. His own attorney on this piece of crap

Brennan described how Poplawski was a young man who became lost in a world related to Stormfront — where he viewed himself as a patriot who didn't trust the government.

"Is it an excuse? No, but the context is very important," Brennan said.

Read more: Jury now discussing whether Poplawski will live or die - Pittsburgh Tribune-Review http://www.pittsburghlive.com/x/pittsburghtrib/news/breaking/s_744268.html#ixzz1QbzaEMOl

I wish the judge would've allowed more into evidence. His online rants were excluded. His books were excluded. The books that were shown in a pic didn't seem all that out of the ordinary nor any Beck or the other hateful talkers books. But I wanted to see a list. Our stupid local news media didn't follow up.

Tempers became short this afternoon during an exchange between Tranquilli and the judge while the jury was on a break.

The argument was the introduction of what prosecutors say is Poplawski`s personal library, containing books such as "Give Me Liberty: A Handbook for American Revolutionaries" and "Ethics of Homicide."

Defense attorney Lisa Middleman objected to the evidence and the judge ruled it couldn`t be used until the penalty phase, if the trial gets that far.

"How is that relevant?" the judge asked.

Read more: Poplawski trial: Day 3 - Pittsburgh Tribune-Review http://www.pittsburghlive.com/x/pittsburghtrib/poplawski_trial/s_743346.html#ixzz1Qc0rLbcZ


Among the titles Mr. Tranquilli listed were, "The Politics of Force," "The War on Our Freedoms," and "The Ethics of Homicide."

"Do you know what 'The Ethics of Homicide' is about," the judge asked the prosecutor. "The underlying theme is a presumption against killing."

As he argued, Mr. Tranquilli said, "This is an individual who is not happy with authority."

But Judge Manning stopped him, "Reading a book doesn't say it influenced my mind."

Read more: http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/11173/1155403-100.stm#ixzz1Qc1SzlHy

[Rex]

66. DAM. I bet those three were vets...years of knowledge destroyed

by an insane Palin Follower bent on killing innocent people! And the children are always left to suffer, without understanding why. Yes little Brooklynn, the world if full of stupid, evil people.

[RamboLiberal]

67. Poplawski is sentenced to death

Richard Poplawski, who was found guilty of ambushing three Pittsburgh police officers as they arrived at his Stanton Heights home for a simple domestic dispute, should be put to death.

That was the decision tonight of the jury of five women and seven men who weighed the evidence against the 24-year-old during this week's penalty phase of his capital murder trial and chose to impose three death sentences.

After deliberating for about two hours, the jurors told the judge they had a verdict. The courthouse hallway near the courtroom was cleared. Pittsburgh and suburban officers streamed into the courthouse, bounding up the stairs.

At 6:59 p.m. the verdict came: Mr. Poplawski, 24, should die by lethal injection for the April 4, 2009, shooting deaths of Paul J. Sciullo II, Stephen J. Mayhle and Eric G. Kelly.


Read more: http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/11179/1156805-100.stm#ixzz1QcEeIewA

Though I doubt the sentence will ever be carried out unless he gives up his appeals. Another POS Richard Baumhammers who killed his Jewish female neighbor, 2 men from India in an Indian grocery, 2 Chinese workers in a Chinese restaurant & an young African American man in a karate school in a racist spree killing has been sitting on death row for about 10 years now. That piece of crap even advertises for pen pals.

PA hasn't executed a death row inmate for a very long time. Only consolation is Poplawski won't be in Genpop where he'd be a hero to the NeoNazis.

[Supply Side Jesus]

78. good. kill him twice.