December 19, 2003

It amazes me how many supposedly intelligent folks continue to parrot the ignorance deliberately being spread by the leftist anti-gun media concerning an accurate and truthful definition of so-called “assault weapons.” The only legitimate and authorized “assault weapons” are those used by military and police in America. They have several firing options, the least deadly of which is semi-automatic single trigger pull firing. This is defined as a shot being fired every time the trigger is pulled, and this type of firing option has been available on American firearms since the late 1800s.

Military assault rifles, also used by a variety of American police agencies, must be capable of semi-automatic single trigger pull firing, limited-automatic multi-shot “bursts,” such as bursts of three shots with each trigger pull, or just continuous uninterrupted fire for as long as the trigger is depressed and until the magazine runs out of ammunition. Such a multi-firing capability, along with a flash suppressor, bayonet stud, and other minor military features, is what truly constitutes a military assault rifle.

Such multiple firing options would render any such weapon classifiable as a machine-gun. That is not what the Clinton and Bush administrations seek to ban. They are seeking to ban a totally legitimate rifle action, which allows a shooter to fire each time the trigger is pulled, and which has been in use for well over one hundred years. These weapons that were formerly classifiable as military assault rifles have been rendered inoperable as regards limited-burst and continuous fire fully automatic. Such converted former military assault rifles are now returned to fully legal semi-automatic firing actions and sold as surplus. They are not limited or continuous fire machine-guns.

Clearly, military surplus “assault rifle” remarketers incur expense to render these weapons acceptable as civilian grade semi-automatics. Remarketers have in the past, sold these completely legal firearms with minor military features in place, such as the flash suppressors and bayonet studs. How would these in any way affect the firing capability of the weapon? How would these in any way convert a legal semi-automatic rifle to a multi-purpose military grade machine-gun? The obvious answer is that they wouldn’t.

Yet, when remarketers of military surplus rifles failed to remove these minor military characteristics which have no bearing whatsoever on a military surplus rifle’s firing capability, and these features were included in Clinton’s “assault rifle” definition, remarketers removed them. Now liberal propagandists, especially those in the media pushing hardest for a total ban of ALL firearms, offer that sellers of military surplus civilian-legalized, semi-automatic former assault rifles are “making minor changes to these ‘assault rifles’ to get around the law.” All that they are really doing is making cosmetic changes to the firearm. The media lefties are now offering these changes as “gimmicks” to “get around the law.” This charge, just like the false term “assault rifle,” is a media gimmick to trick Americans into thinking that evil gun manufacturers and the NRA are trying to sell machine-guns. It is nothing more than propaganda to weaken the resolve of law-abiding citizens tired of the constant media caterwauling.

How easy is it to establish the real facts in this matter? At one time, the NRA used to acquire surplus military firearms, such as the prestigious Garrand M-1 Rifle of World War II fame, and make them available for resale to private citizens. This rifle is a military relic, weighing more than ten pounds, not concealable or able to be reduced in barrel length, and certainly not convertible to a saw-off stock considering the powerful recoil.

But Bill Clinton, a draft-dodger who never served in the military, disallowed the re-importation of these surplus military semi-automatic “assault rifles” into the United States after they were used in a war by a Third World ally and sold back to a US remarketer. M-1s were developed in the mid 1930s, yet 60 years later, our illustrious former president was terrified of these cumbersome antiques being allowed back into the nation that developed, manufactured and used them to preserve our Second Amendment and other Bill of Rights-ensured freedoms.

Leftists have abolished the NRA’s Director of Civilian Marksmanship program. They would rather see taxpayer dollars used to build these fine weapons wasted by their complete deactivation and destruction rather than allowing the taxpayers who paid for them to buy them back. It seems they hate both guns and the Constitution. Come to think of it, it is becoming increasingly apparent that they hate everything else about US as well!

Theodore E. Lang

© 2003 THEODORE E. LANG All rights reserved

Ted Lang is a political analyst and a freelance writer.

Archives

Another Champion for Ignorance! Bill O'Reilly

Saddam for Christmas – How Convenient!

The "Gun Issue"

Complete Archives for Ted Lang

Visit Etherzone for other articles by Ted Lang