|
America has long had the dubious distinction of
being the world's most violent industrial nation. Violent crime
skyrocketed in the U.S. starting in the late 1960s, a trend that continued
into the early 1990s. It's no wonder that crime has consistently been one
of the public's major concerns over the past three decades.
VIRGINIA TECH POLICE
IDENTIFY SHOOTER AS SOUTH KOREAN STUDENT
Al Qaeda is watching and
waiting, you can bet on it. Like 9/11 they will plan a mass suicide attack
in this manner with a waive of homicide-suicide bombers on major campuses
everywhere in America. It’s time to take the guns off the market now!
The shooter filed off the
serial numbers on both handguns used in the massacre. The reason was
probably to flee and not have authorities tie the gun purchase to Mr. Hui.
April 16: Injured occupants
are carried out of Norris Hall at Virginia Tech in Blacksburg, Va.
BLACKSBURG, Va. — The gunman responsible for at least the second of
the two Virginia Tech attacks that claimed 33 lives to become the
deadliest shooting rampage in U.S. history has been identified as Cho
Seung-Hui, a campus student and native of South Korea, Virginia Tech
police said Tuesday.
But police are still searching for a motive.
"He was a loner, and we're having difficulty finding information about
him," school spokesman Larry Hincker said.
Virginia Tech Police Chief Wendell Flinchum said the shooter was a
23-year-old resident alien who was an undergraduate senior English major.
He had a residence in Centreville, Va., but was also living on campus in
Harper Hall.
While authorities say they don't have evidence to confirm yet that Cho —
now dead after taking his own life — was also the gunman in the first
shooting at West Ambler Johnston residence hall, they have made clear they
don't believe there was a second shooter.
"It's certainly reasonable for us to assume Cho was the shooter in both
places but we don't have the evidence to take us there at this point in
time," said Virginia State Police Superintendent Col. Steve Flaherty said
during a press conference Tuesday. "We also have no evidence to indicate
there was an accomplice at either event" but officials are still
investigating whether the shooter had any help during the day.
The pain that the parents of the slain
students feel hits deep into everyone's hearts. At the University of
California, Los Angeles, students are talking about little else. It is not
that they feel especially vulnerable because they are students at a major
university, as is Virginia Tech, but because they are (to be blunt)
citizens of High Noon America.
"High Noon" is a famous film. The 1952 Western told the story of a town
marshal (played by the superstar actor Gary Cooper) who is forced to
eliminate a gang of killers by himself. They are eventually gunned down.
The use of guns is often the American technique of choice for all kinds of
conflict resolution. Our famous Constitution, about which many of us are
generally so proud, enshrines -- along with the right to freedom of
speech, press, religion and assembly -- the right to own guns. That's an
apple and oranges list if there ever was one.
Not all of us are so proud and triumphant about the gun-guarantee clause.
The right to free speech, press, religion and assembly and so on seem to
be working well, but the gun part, not so much.
Let me explain. Some misguided people will focus on the fact that the
23-year-old student who killed his classmates and others at Virginia Tech
was ethnically Korean. This is one of those observations that is 99.99
percent irrelevant. What are we to make of the fact that he is Korean? Ban
Ki-moon is also Korean! Our brilliant new United Nations secretary general
has not only never fired a gun, it looks like he may have just put
together a peace formula for civil war-wracked Sudan -- a formula that
escaped his predecessor.
So let's just disregard all the hoopla about the race of the student
responsible for the slayings. A Korean did not kill these students; they
were killed by a 9 mm handgun and a .22-caliber handgun.
In the nineties, the Los Angeles Times courageously endorsed an
all-but-complete ban on privately owned guns, in an effort to greatly
reduce their availability. By the time the series of editorials had
concluded, the newspaper had received more angry letters and fiery faxes
from the well-armed U.S. gun lobby than on any other issue during my
privileged six-year tenure as the newspaper's editorial page editor.
But the paper, by the way, also received more supportive letters than on
any other issue about which it editorialized during that era. The common
sense of ordinary citizens told them that whatever Americans were and are
good for, carrying around guns like costume jewelry was not on our Mature
List of Notable Cultural Accomplishments.
"Guns don't kill people," goes the gun lobby's absurd mantra. Far fewer
guns in America would logically result in far fewer deaths from people
pulling the trigger. The probability of the Virginia Tech gun massacre
happening would have been greatly reduced if guns weren't so easily
available to ordinary citizens.
Foreigners sometimes believe that celebrities in America are more often
the targets of gun violence than the rest of us. Not true. Celebrity
shootings just make better news stories, so perhaps they seem common.
They're not. All of us are targets because with so many guns swishing
around our culture, no one is immune -- not even us non-celebrities.
When the great pop composer and legendary member of the Beatles John
Lennon was shot in 1980 in New York, many in the foreign press tabbed it a
war on celebrities. Now, some in the media will declare a war on students
or some such. This is all misplaced. The correct target of our concern
needs to be guns. America has more than it can possibly handle. How many
can our society handle? My opinion is: as close to zero as possible.
Last month, I was robbed at 10 in the evening in the alley behind my home.
As I was carrying groceries inside, a man with a gun approached me where
my car was parked. The gun he carried featured one of those red-dot laser
beams, which he pointed right at my head.
Because I'm anything but a James Bond type, I quickly complied with all of
his requests. Perhaps because of my rapid response (it is called
surrender), he chose not to shoot me; but he just as easily could have.
What was to stop him?
This occurred in Beverly Hills, a low-crime area dotted with upscale
boutiques, restaurants and businesses -- a city best known perhaps for its
glamour and celebrity sightings.
Oh, and police tell me the armed robber definitely was not Korean. Not
that I would have known one way or the other: Basically the only thing I
saw or can remember was the gun, with the red dot, pointed right at my
head.
A near-death experience does focus the mind. We need to get rid of our
guns.
ASSAULT
RIFLES & HAND GUNS
Assault
rifles are primary offensive weapons of modern troops. Today's AR (Assault
Rifles) usually have calibers ranging from 5.45mm to 7.62mm, magazine
capacity of 20-30 or more rounds, selective full auto and single shot
modes of fire, plus, in some models, 2 or 3 round burst mode. Effective
range of fire is some 600 meters or so effective rate of fire - up to
400-500 rounds per minute in full auto mode. Many assault rifles shown
here are, in fact, parts of whole families of assault firearms (from short
carbines to light machineguns - Steyr AUG is a good example). Almost all
AR's may be equipped with bayonet, optical or Night Vision scope/sight
and, some of them, with under barrel grenade launcher or rifle grenade
launcher (rifle grenades usually are put on the barrel and fired with a
blank cartridge). Today’s trends in AR design are wide usage of hardened
plastics and lightweight alloys and built-in holographic (collimator) or
optical scopes with magnification of 1X to 4-6X (usually 1X or 1.5-3X).
Most of
the worlds' recent assault rifles are designed in bull-pup configuration.
This means that butt plate is attached directly to the receiver and handle
with the trigger placed ahead of the magazine veil. The only major
countries that still stick to conventional AR design are Germany (their
latest G36 looks a little bit more 'conservative', comparing to Austrian
AUG or latest Israeli Tavor), and Russia, where latest ARs are developed
in both 'classic' (AN-94, AK-10x) and 'bull-pup' (Groza OC-14) styles.
The
history of the concept
of the assault rifle started in the early 1910's, when the famous Russian
armorer, col. Fedorov designed a small-bore selective-fire rifle with
detachable box magazine. Initially, Fedorow designed a brand new
small-caliber 6.5mm cartridge for his rifle, but, due to WW1, switched to
the Japanese 6.5mm Arisaka load, which was less powerful than the Russian
7.62x54R and available in quantity. This rifle was acquired by the Russian
army in small numbers in 1916 and served (in very limited quantities
though) with the Russian and Soviet (Red) Army up to 1925. While the
design of the selective-fire rifle was not unique for that time, the
concept of the "lightened" cartridge, more suitable for full-auto fire,
was new. Also, col.Fedorov invented the idea of infantry weapons families
(assault rifle, light machinegun, medium machinegun, vehicle and/or
aircraft mounted MGs) based on the same actions and receivers.
The
next step in this history was made by Germany - in the 1930's, they began
research to develop a medium-power cartridge, which would be much lighter
than 7.92mm German and easier to fire accurately in full-auto mode. This
development led to the 7.92x33mm cartridge (Pistolenpatrone 7.92mm). The
Germans developed some weapons designs for this load, including the MP43
and Stg.44, but this was too late for Germany... Further development of
such designs was made by German engineers in Spain, and later in West
Germany, and led to the HK G3/G41 family of battle&assault rifles.
The
United States also put in some effort to this idea, and before WW2
developed a special less-than-medium powered cartridge .30Carbine and a
rifle for this cartridge - a
 so-called "baby-Garand" in semi-auto M1 and
selective-fire M2.
But the
largest stride forward was made by the USSR, when, in 1943, the Soviet
Army adopted a new cartridge - the 7.62x39mm medium-power load. In 1945,
the Soviet Army adopted the
semi-auto SKS rifle in this chambering, and, in 1947 - the AK (known for
the
West as AK-47). The AK was Worlds'
first
successful assault rifle, and one of the most widely used. The Last major
step on this road was made by US again - in the late 1950's, the US Army
adopted a new (for the US) concept of military selective-fire rifle using
a small-caliber cartridge. The first of such weapons adopted was the
Armalite AR15/Colt M16, designed by Eugene Stoner. This adoption lately
set the new world trend for small-caliber (5.45-5.56mm / .22in.)
high-velocity cartridges.
CONSTITUTION
OF AMERICA
2ND
AMENDMENT THE RIGHT TO BARE ARMS
Let’s ask
ourselves this question
Would the
creators of the 2nd amendment knowing the destructive force of
these weapons created that amendment then?
I DON'T
THINK SO AND KEEP IN MIND YOU CAN OBTAIN THE ABOVE WEAPONS BY ORDERING
THEM IN THE MAIL
Very soon the right to have and keep
weapons on mass destruction will be ruled allowable under the second
amendment. See the new ruling.
Highlights
- Appeals court cites Second Amendment
right to keep and bear arms
- Ruling says framers didn't intend to
limit gun possession to militias
- Washington mayor outraged, vows to take
argument higher
- Supreme Court has not addressed issue in
nearly 70 years
WASHINGTON
In a landmark legal victory for opponents of gun control, a federal
appeals court Friday struck down a District of Columbia ban on keeping
handguns in homes as a violation of the Second Amendment's right to keep
and bear arms.
In its 2-to-1 decision, the U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals for the District
of Columbia held that the amendment's guarantee belongs to individuals and
was not a collective right limited to members of militias -- something
gun-control proponents long have contended.
"The amendment does not protect the right of militiamen to keep and bear
arms, but rather the right of the people," the majority opinion said. "If
the competent drafters of the Second Amendment had meant the right to be
limited to the protection of state militias, it is hard to imagine that
they would have chosen the language they did."
Friday's decision marks the first time a federal appeals court has struck
down a gun law on Second Amendment grounds, according to the Brady
Campaign to Prevent Handgun Violence.
The gun-control group blasted the ruling as "judicial activism at its
worst."
Washington Mayor Adrian Fenty vowed the city will "do everything within
our power to work to get this decision overturned."
"I am personally deeply disappointed and, quite frankly, outraged by
today's decision," said Fenty, who said the city would first ask the full
circuit court to reconsider the case before deciding whether to appeal to
the U.S. Supreme Court.
The National Rifle Association, which opposes gun control, called the
ruling a "significant victory for individual Second Amendment rights."
"The District of Columbia Circuit Court today affirmed that the Second
Amendment of the Constitution protects an inherent, individual right to
bear arms," the NRA said in a statement.
According to The Associated Press, Washington is one of just two major
U.S. cities (the other is Chicago) with a comprehensive gun ban. It was
enacted in 1976.
The court struck down portions of the Washington law that bar keeping
handguns in the home and require other firearms to be stored disassembled.
The appeals court's decision noted that despite the ruling, the amendment
remains subject to "reasonable restrictions," such as gun registration and
ownership limits for certain individuals, AP reported.
The court did not address another portion of the law that prohibits people
from carrying unregistered guns on the streets, which Fenty said would
continue to be "vigorously" enforced.
Second Amendment's wording at issue
At issue in the case was the wording of the Second Amendment, which is
broken into two parts: "A well regulated militia being necessary to the
security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms
shall not be infringed."
Washington had contended that the reference to "people" in the second part
of the amendment should be considered as a collective right applicable
only to the "militia" referred to in the first part.
But the judges in the majority held that the phrase "people" is well
understood in constitutional law to refer to individuals -- and that the
first clause was an explanation of the major purpose of the second clause,
not a limitation on it.
"We ... take it as an expression of the drafters' view that the people
possessed a natural right to keep and bear arms, and that the preservation
of the militia was the right's most salient political benefit -- and thus
the most appropriate to express in a political document," the ruling said.
"I think this is well positioned for review by the Supreme Court,"
Jonathan Turley, a constitutional law professor at George Washington
University, told the AP.
The Supreme Court has not taken up the issue of the Second Amendment's
scope in almost 70 years, according to AP.
Attorneys general from 13 states filed a brief supporting the D.C.
residents who opposed the law, while four other state attorneys general
backed D.C.'s position, along with the cities of New York, Chicago and San
Francisco.
|
