Sunday, June 18, 2017

Let the Non-Debate Begin!

The Milwaukee (Wisc.)  Journal Sentinel's position has been well known for years; they're against current "gun control" laws, and think there should be more of them.

Their "Editorial Page Editor", David D. Haynes, has some scathing comments in his screed regarding the blame due to the National Rifle Association

What gun debate? There is no gun debate in Washington, D.C.:
There is zero chance that the shooting of U.S. Rep. Steve Scalise earlier this week will change anything about the gun debate in Washington, D.C. That’s because there is no gun debate in Washington, D.C. The NRA has won. Not the debate — the gun lobby remains very wrong on the facts. But the group had won the politics — big time.
So apparently Dave's outrage is based on on laws which were enacted due to the urging of the NRA, which has as one of its primary goals to protect our Constitutional rights to "Keep and Bear Arms".

I'm not sure if he is equally adamant in his condemnation of the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU), which shares some of these goals.   Haynes didn't say.

But Haynes is certain that the NRA has goals which he cannot support.  And he purports to speak as an "insider" in the firearms owners' community:

I have been a gun owner all my life. I’ve shot long guns of every kind and a variety of handguns. I have no problem with people owning them for legitimate purposes. I own a half dozen of my own firearms, several of which have been handed down for generations within our family.
But as a gun owner and outdoorsman, I also have no concerns with
expanded background checks or limits on the kinds of firearms an individual can own. Civilians don’t need military-style assault rifles, which are nothing but tools for killing people. Civilians don’t need easier access to silencers or armor-piercing bullets, either, which a bill that was to be debated Wednesday in a House committee would allow. After the shooting, the debate was canceled — for now.
[emphasis added]

Let's ask Dave.

Legitimate Purpose:

Dave, how do you define "Legitimate Purpose"?   Judging from the rest of the comments you've made, I suspect that you define that as shooting Bambi and Donald Duck, and plinking at beer cans.

As a life-long gun owner, Haynes is not concerned that expanded background checks include the serial number of the firearm, and while that practice by the Federal Government is regulated by law ... the records must be deleted so that they will not result in ipso facto registration (which is contrary to federal law!)   But nobody knows how reliably the State Governments, which have begun to impose similar checks on transactions between private parties, protect the anonymity of their citizens and their privately owned firearms.

It is a common understanding that when the government collects serial numbers of weapons, that leads to registration.  And registration leads to confiscation, down the road.  Ask California about an Attorney General named Locklear.

Which calls the whole concept of "Legitimate Purpose' into question, since .we do not yet have a nation-wide consensus on the restrictions of individual states to violate the Second Amendment Rights of their citizens.

Well, Haynes doesn't much care.  As he says, he has got his, so it's not a problem for him.

Unfortunately, Haynes got his facts wrong.

Almost all of them, but especially the parts about:
  1. 'Armor Piercing bullets' and
  2. 'Assault Rifles'

Armor Piercing Bullets:

  That "Armor Piercing Bullet Act" he refers to is HR1358 (2015

It is highly regulated, and intended for .22's only, and for "Sporting Purposes" only.

Dave's article implies that this is a General Thingie.  We are invited to visions such as Oprah Winfrey on her talk show waving at her captive audience and screaming:
"YOU Get Armor Piercing Bullets!   And YOU Get Armor Piercing Bullets!    And YOU Get Armor Piercing Bullets!  And .... ".
 So, just as Hayes accuses the NRA, Dave "...remains very wrong on the facts".

Assault Rifles:

And while he is incensed  about the wide variety of firearms which are available to the law-abiding general public, there are a few Americans who think that the imposition of the National Firearms Act of 1934 (regulates purchase and ownership of fully automatic firearms) and the Firearm owners Protection Act of 1986 (forbids private sale or transfer of fully automatic firearms)  represent the last full measure of crow they are willing to eat.

Which suggests that Haynes himself hasn't bothered to confirm that the rifle used by the attacker (whose name we refuse to publish), doesn't meet the definition:

An assault rifle is a selective-fire rifle that uses an intermediate cartridge and a detachable magazine.
The attacker's rifle was not "Selective Fire", which means the operator can select either "Semi-automatic mode",  or "Full-automatic mode", or "Safe mode" by flipping a switch. (Some versions also feature a "Burst mode", which means a measured number of rounds ... 3 to 5 .. fired with a single pull of the trigger.)  
It was only a ("Semi-Automatic" or "Safe") rifle .. one trigger pull, one bullet, or it won't fire at all;   and so does not meet the criteria for the term which Hayes so freely uses:
 It was a legal purchase!   Even Dave could have bought that rifle!  In RED with lots of Exclamation Marks so Dave can see it! Jeff Dunham Is Going To Sue You!

From the article: 
 Scalise, a Louisiana Republican and House majority whip, was shot with a legally purchased assault rifle and remains in critical condition. If you wondered why he could be in such rough shape after getting shot in the hip, read Leana Wen's chilling description of what happens when a bullet from a high-powered rifle enters the body. The emergency room physician wrote in today’s New York Times: 
[emphasis added]

From Hayes' article:
“A handgun bullet enters the body in a straight line. Like a knife, it damages the organs and tissues directly in its path, and then it either exits the body or is stopped by bone, tissue or skin. This is in contrast to bullets from an assault rifle. They travel three times the speed of handgun bullets. Once they enter the body, they fragment and explode, pulverizing bones, tearing blood vessels and liquefying organs.
That description is essentially accurate and correct.

What Hayes is describing here is a typical of a medium-to-large caliber bullet which, when propelled from a rifle, combines both mass (weight) and velocity (speed) to result in a much more deadly momentum than from most pistols.

PRACTICAL PHYSICS: Mass times Velocity = Momentum
So yes, Hayes IS generally correct in the description he offers of the damage imposed when hit by a rifle bullet rather than a pistol bullet.   But he cleverly obscures the details to make his point when he ascribes the damage to "the bullets from an assault rifle".

Depending on a variety of factors, a rifle is much deadlier than a pistol bullet, depending on bullet placement and other variables.  Here, Hayes is advancing his agenda by referring specifically to "the bullets from an assault rifle".   These effects are not predicated by their delivery by an "Assault Rifle"; which was not used in this cowardly attack, anyway; they may be typical for most medium caliber rifles.

What Does It Mean, Dean?

 But to lawmakers in safe seats who enjoy broad support for gun rights — and get lots of money from the National Rifle Association — these descriptions have no meaning. If the NRA demands that every American be allowed to buy a howitzer to protect the backyard grill, these lawmakers would push that bill through. All in the name of the sacred Second Amendment.
Oh, come ON!   That's argument by extension to absurdity.
It's the kind of thing that people say when they know they're wrong, so they make some inane comparison and try to convince you that it's the same thing!
(Dave, you're beginning to sound very much like a Liberal!)

Hayes reveals himself as a tool of the Gun Control Lobby!

 If the horrible deaths of 20 first-graders in Newtown, Conn., wasn’t enough to move Congress to action, a few terrified Republicans cowering in a dugout on a ball field in Alexandria, Va., won’t be enough, either. And that bill to make it easier to buy armor-piercing bullets? It will be back. Count on it.
Way to obscure the issues by bringing up other, unrelated issues, Dave.
I love you like a brother, and I mean that sincerely. ;But Dave, you have GOT to quit lying!
It makes the whole family look bad, and Mom is telling Dad that "Honey, we have got  to find Dave a girlfriend!"
So how does it feel to be attacked by unfounded innuendo, Dave?)
(Oh ... and if I made a few typos, I hope you don't hold it against me, Dave; I don't have a fact checker, which you and all the reporter at The Sentinel do!   Man, I sure wish I had a competent Editor!  But then, I imagine everyone else on the Sentinel's editorial stage feels the same way.)

Congratulations, Dave!

You have IGNORED facts, OBFUSCATED facts, MISINTERPRETED facts, and downright prevaricated!

You are the very model of the Modern  Opinion Editor of a Major Liberal Newspaper.

Walk with pride, Dave!
 David D. Haynes is the Journal Sentinel's editorial page editor. Email: Twitter: @DavidDHaynes

1 comment:

Anonymous said...

I like my AR, and would like to have a suppressor, or two or three. I just don't want to put up with the paper work, long wait hassle, the cost of the critters.