| Re: Another gubster goes over the edge! |
|
 |
|
 |
|
 |
|
 |
Group: nashville.general · Group Profile
Author: Paul StevensPaul Stevens Date: Apr 20, 2008 10:35
>
> OK, I'll bite.
>
> What is a "sniper-type police rifle"?
>
> Georgia requires permits to own guns?
>
> "Whitfield was permitted to keep the weapons found in his home, but
> Moss said he doesn't plan to return them."? He was permitted to
> keep the guns, but the police chief doesn't plan to return them to him?
> They didn't take the guns, but they don't intend to return them?
>
>
> Perfect opportunity for an anti-gun article, painting gun owners as
> dangerous whackos, and the reporter can't even manage to write a
> simple sentence about whether or not the guy still has his guns.
Did a little searching and found a post from a local who saw a
TV report on the incident. He identified the rifles as a Keltec
Sub2000, a postban configuration AR-15, and a bolt action
hunting rifle.
The "assault rifle" label, used in the article, is a military term
for a rifle that has some form of selector to fire in either
semi-auto or full-auto(machinegun) mode. The "assault
weapon" label was created by antigun lobbyists and politicians,
and later defined in the 1994 Assault Weapons Ban. Since the
(semi-auto) Keltec Sub2000 and postban (semi-auto) AR-15's
were designed to comply with that ban, they do not meet the
'legal definition' of "assault weapon".
The "sniper-type police rifle" (apparently the bolt action
hunting rifle) is a new one on me. Why should the news media
promote the image of police officers being snipers?
Still, the poor writing of the article (no matter what the subject)
gives a very bad impression of not only the "journalist's"
abilities, but doesn't put too good a light on any editorial staff.
| 
