"Police Officials, Republicans Clash on Assault Weapon Ban"
Police Officials, Republicans Clash on Assault Weapon BanBy Heidi Przybyla at Bloomberg
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-02-27/police-officials-republicans-clash-on-assault-weapon-ban.html
"SNIP.................................................
The Senate Judiciary Committee today heard from law enforcement officials who spoke in support of restrictions on semi-automatic assault weapons. Also testifying was Neil Heslin, the father of a 6-year-old boy slain at the Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown on Dec. 14.
1:15
Feb. 21 (Bloomberg) -- Gun-control advocates interrupt a speech by Connecticut State Senator John McKinney, a Republican, demanding that the state pass stricter gun laws. McKinney, the only Republican to speak at the rally in Hartford, represents Newtown, where 20 children and six adults were gunned down at Sandy Hook Elementary School. His district also includes the headquarters of gun manufacturer Strum Ruger and Co., part of an industry that employs more than 7,000 in the state. (This is an excerpt. Source: Bloomberg)
.
“I just can’t believe that that could happen,” Heslin told lawmakers while choking back tears. “Those weapons were used in the battlefields of Vietnam, in the Persian Gulf, in Afghanistan and Iraq. Their sole purpose is to put a lot of lead on the battlefield quickly.”
It’s “false logic” that a ban on assault weapons would strip Americans of their Second Amendment right to bear arms, said Edward Flynn, chief of the Milwaukee police department. “These weapons are designed for combat” and “to cause lethal wounds to human beings,” not for sporting or self-defense, he said.
“A lot of people make a lot of money selling firearms and ammunition,” Flynn said. “It’s time for Congress to pick a side. This time I hope it’s law enforcement.”
...............................................SNIP"
= new reply since forum marked as read
are political positions (even if they say they are "From the ranks"
. They will almost always parrot what the mayor says.
Also, why isn't a weapon developed for combat not good for self/home defense? Are the requirements for combat antithesis to the requirements for a self defense weapon? Combat weapons are chosen for reliability, durability, ease of use, accuracy..etc. Aren't those all requirements that one would want for a home defense weapon? Why would I want an unreliable hard to use gun?
Here is the real reason he uses the word "combat", it plays on pre-concieved notions and ideas of non-gun familiar people. When people think of combat weapon they think of rambo running with a big machine gun at his hip spray firing 100s of people. People in general assume "military weapons are designed to kill as many people as possible". This is far from the truth. Weapons chosen by the military are chosen for specific roles- yes there are weapons such as machine guns which are designed for that purpose, but other weapons arent. The military shotgun is designed for close quarter one on one combat in an urban environment.
On edit: I think people like Flynn don't mind citizens owning firearms for self defense- as long as they are "sporting guns". In their mind, it's okay for someone to own an over-under shotgun for self defense, just not a gun like a pump action shotgun with a 2 shot extension (cause that gun isn't really "sporting"
