February 15, 2005
I always like to read a story where an armed citizen foils would-be robbers and ventilates a couple in the process. Here's good one.
My only problem is with THIS BULLSHIT:
With not one but two assault rifles pointed at his head, Fixler says he was able to lunge away grabbing hold of his personal handgun firing off several rounds. Once the smoke cleared, one suspect was hit and the second man got away.
The emphasis on "assault rifles" is mine. A description of the actual "rifles" is missing from the article--- but I'll bet you a large sum of money that the perps weren't carrying actual assault rifles. They had scary-looking guns, that's all, and the one I saw in the video appears to be a semi-automatic handgun.
But most reporters believe that ANY spooky-looking gun is an assault rifle and they consistently misuse that term. Sometimes I have to wonder if they do it from sheer ignorance or because of an anti-gun political agenda.
I don't know much about guns but from the video the "assault rifle" is about the size of a handgun.
Or perhaps a combination of the two?
I like the story but it seems fishy. How the hell does one lunge for a gun, grab it, point and shoot all while two guns are pointed at your head? If it happened in a movie I’d say, “oh come on!” and my GF would say, “hey, it’s just a movie,” and I’d be like, “yeah, but in real life he’d be dead meat.”
"Sometimes I have to wonder if they do it from sheer ignorance or because of an anti-gun political agenda."
Don't wonder. It's because of an anti-gun political agenda. In the nanny-state, big gummit will protect you - you have no need for guns.
In my local paper I have never read the term rifle. The press here always, always uses the term assault rifle. They also have dropped all the hunting articles from the sport page.
When they did that, I dropped them. Of course the editor looks like Nancy Pelosi.
The assault weapon thing pisses me off too. I think about all the assault weapons I own: I have one of the first that we ever bought as a country - the model 1795 musket - it has a bayonet and a flint lock mechanism for firing. But it's an assault weapon. So is my M1842. You have to shove a .69 caliber bullet down the barrel and put a cap on it to fire the single shot, but by golly it was an assault weapon when it was made. Hmmm, let's see, my '03 Springfield? Yep, state of the art assault weapon during WWI. M1 Garand? You bet! They were still using those in Viet Nam.
No, wait a minute. I don't own any guns. Forget I said that.
But, if I did, they would be assault weapons...
It's ignorance, most of them can't tell a Derringer from a Howitzer.