Quote:
Originally posted by ctembreull
But that doesn't mean that they don't exist, does it? As near as I can remember, caseless ammunition is a slug set directly into a block of solid propellant. This propellant is more energetic and burns cleaner, so that a greater portion of the reaction energy is available to propel the slug from the weapon with greater velocity and efficiency. It also produces no "brass", the spent propellant casings ejected by semiautomatic weapons after the round has been fired. Brass, by the way, is a fairly critical tool in forensic analysis of gun crimes. There is no conceivable civilian use for this ammunition. But how long d'you think it'll be before it's the ammo of choice for people who don't want to leave behind clues? I'm pretty sure that I'm not the first to come up with that idea, either. What I can't be sure of is whether the other folks who've thought of it are as nice as I am.
|
I never said it didn't exist, just that it wasn't "military" (though our 120mm rounds are caseless
). I know about the technology, and also that there is only one production weapon in the world that fires it, and criminals arent very likely to have one (in fact probability=0.0). Most criminals who would think ahead to buying a weapon that fires caseless ammo could probably figure out that picking up their brass would work just as well...
Quote:
You can't possibly be serious in claiming that nobody in California is armed. Have you ever been to East Palo Alto? Oakland? Emeryville? East Los Angeles? Compton? Tracy?
|
California has the most restrictive gun laws in the nation. They also have the highest rate of gun crime. See a pattern?
Quote:
If this is true, then why not take steps to limit what they can "get their hands on?" Right now, they're getting their hands on guns. Your stated counter to that is to have more people get guns. That's an arms race.
|
And how do you propose to keep criminals from getting guns? Pass a law?
Quote:
General educational policy is not germane to a discussion on gun control. I'm talking here about the requirements we place on people to drive cars, and why we have nothing even remotely so stringent in the case of firearms. You have to have a license and insurance to drive a car, and that car must be registered. Why don't we do similar things with guns, which are vastly more efficient in killing people than cars are?
|
I was refering specifically to gun education, not general education. There should be mandatory gun safety classes for all students in public schools.
Quote:
That's a bit hypocritical, given the way you sidestepped the issue of gun education and insurance. But I'll let that slide with just a polite mention.
|
See above.
Quote:
My point is that laws are not black and white. I chose to make that point by drawing a comparison with another type of law. The plain point is that the words of laws take much longer to change than do the things those laws deal with. This creates gray areas. Gun laws are not nearly so black and white as you like to think they are. Neither are tax laws. Nor any other law, for that matter.
|
Ok, you just don't get it. Here is the text of the Assault Weapons ban, defining what an assault weapon is. I want you to point out to me the specific areas that are "gray". Help me out, because I'm not that sharp.
Quote:
(b) DEFINITION OF SEMIAUTOMATIC ASSAULT WEAPON.--Section 921(a) of such title is amended by adding at the end the following:
"(30) The term `semiautomatic assault weapon' means-- "(A) any of the firearms, or copies or duplicates of the firearms, known as -- "(i) Norinco, Mitchell, and Poly Technologies Avtomat Kalashnikovs (all models); "(ii) Action Arms Israeli Military Industries UZI and Galil; "(iii) Beretta Ar70 (SC-70); "(iv) Colt AR-15; "(v) Fabrique National FN/FAL, FN/LAR, and FNC; "(vi) SWD M-10, M-11, M-11/9, and M-12; "(vii) Steyr AUG; "(viii) INTRATEC TEC-9, TEC-DC9 and TEC-22; and "(ix) revolving cylinder shotguns, such as (or similar to) the Street Sweeper and Striker 12; "(B) a semiautomatic rifle that has an ability to accept a detachable magazine and has at least 2 of-- "(i) a folding or telescoping stock; "(ii) a pistol grip that protrudes conspicuously beneath the action of the weapon; "(iii) a bayonet mount; "(iv) a flash suppressor or threaded barrel designed to accommodate a flash suppressor; and "(v) a grenade launcher; "(C) a semiautomatic pistol that has an ability to accept a detachable magazine and has at least 2 of-- "(i) an ammunition magazine that attaches to the pistol outside of the pistol grip; "(ii) a threaded barrel capable of accepting a barrel extender, flash suppressor, forward handgrip, or silencer; "(iii) a shroud that is attached to, or partially or completely encircles, the barrel and that permits the shooter to hold the firearm with the nontrigger hand without being burned; "(iv) a manufactured weight of 50 ounces or more when the pistol is unloaded; and "(v) a semiautomatic version of an automatic firearm; and "(D) a semiautomatic shotgun that has at least 2 of-- "(i) a folding or telescoping stock; "(ii) a pistol grip that protrudes conspicuously beneath the action of the weapon; "(iii) a fixed magazine capacity in excess of 5 rounds; and "(iv) an ability to accept a detachable magazine.".
|
Quote:
Idealistic? Not so much. Hopeless? Not a chance. Pragmatic? Very.
|
I have yet to see your so called pragmatism suggest any solid course of action
that has any hope of working.