Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login
Posted: 10/24/2002 7:30:25 AM EDT
According to the news looks like they found a Bushmaster in the sniper's trunk. Too bad they didn't use it on them.
Link Posted: 10/24/2002 7:32:12 AM EDT
ban Bushmaster!!!
buy Armalite and Colt
Link Posted: 10/24/2002 7:38:21 AM EDT
i just see ".223 cal rifle".
do you have a link to a story that says it was a poodle shooter?
Link Posted: 10/24/2002 7:52:01 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 10/24/2002 7:53:45 AM EDT by crffl]
A bit down the page.

www.msnbc.com/news/816566.asp

.
Link Posted: 10/24/2002 7:54:15 AM EDT
http://www.msnbc.com/news/816566.asp
Link Posted: 10/24/2002 8:24:00 AM EDT
Crap, he used an AR, a Bushmaster at that. We need to pray they leave us alone on this one and that President Bush, etc. stands firm!
Link Posted: 10/24/2002 9:03:48 AM EDT
Could we make the argument that Bushmasters are 5.56 not .223?
Link Posted: 10/24/2002 9:10:45 AM EDT
That would explain why Bushmaster.com is giving me the "Too many connections. Try again in 5 minutes." error every so often. All the BM.com pages are very slow to load.

Figures.
Link Posted: 10/24/2002 9:12:16 AM EDT
AAAAAAAAHHHHHHHHHHHHH!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
So I'm browsing around on the web about AR15's... I try to go to bushmaster's website and I can't connect. I think "This is odd"... try it again... nope. Then it occured to me -- OH NO.

I type www.msnbc.com

there it is... they found a bushy on these guys they arrested. *sob* Now what?
Link Posted: 10/24/2002 10:36:26 AM EDT
i want to know if it is pre-ban or post-ban

it makes a difference, after all "assult weapons" were banned and if it is pre-ban then they have no case against the post-bans because the gun used is already banned.


if it is post-ban then they have no reason to extend the ban because this has shown that even "approved" guns are effective at killing too.

if fact i have discovered that ALL guns fire bullets and could possibly be used in a crime and since only one shot was fired in each shooting he could have just as effectivly used a Ruger single shot. So ALL guns need to be either banned or legalized.

i vote to leagalize all of them.

in fact, at the ranges the shots were fired from he could have used a bow and arrow, it would take more practice though to hit that good.

i still think it would be easier to ban the criminals than the guns.
too bad criminals don't obey laws so it is pointless.

arm the people and kill the criminals. thats MY solution.

sorry, i started rambling.
Link Posted: 10/24/2002 10:48:39 AM EDT
To 308wood; Hopefully your post on 'Ban Bushmaster' is meant in jest. I've been through 1986 ban, Brady Bill, and 1996 Clinton farce. All 'black rifle manufactures' are in for tough times ahead.
Link Posted: 10/24/2002 11:48:00 AM EDT
Be prepared... the rhetoric is going to be intense. What will make it agonizing for all of us is all the "dangerous high powered military rifle" nonsense. I can hear it now... "as was proved in the recent sniper shootings, these assault weapons do not belong in the hands of civilians."

Of course, they will ignore the very significant fact that had this animal chosen to use, say, the same kind of rifle that Sarah Brady bought for her son, it is very likely that the 3 victims who survived would not have.

We need to make a concentrated effort to calmly inform any non-gun enthusiast people we may know of the truth. Of course, battling "our children are dying" emotional rants from the left using simple logic and common sense is definitely an uphill battle.

--Mike
Link Posted: 10/24/2002 12:34:05 PM EDT
Muslims have killed more people in this country (9-11) than assault weapons. Why not ban Muslims!!!!
Link Posted: 10/24/2002 1:01:38 PM EDT
Its a post-ban. I want to know if it was illegally converted.
Link Posted: 10/24/2002 2:22:24 PM EDT
Banning Muslims is as extreme as banning firearms. I think some of us are forgetting what we all stand for: The Constitution of the United States and The Bill of Rights. These documents are the greatest achievement of human society in its entire history. They guarantee certain inalienable rights to all citizens of this great country. They do not discriminate because of race, religion, color,or gender. By disregarding the rights of someone just because of religion is the same as discriminating someone just because they own guns.

By making a statement like "ban all Muslims" you are becoming just as guilty as those who want to ban all firearms. If you make one exception to the Constitution, you might as well throw the entire document out. you might as well take away freedom of speech, the right to privacy, and our beloved right to bear arms. However, once you throw out the Constitution, this will no longer be the United States of America. It will no longer be the land our forefathers believed in, had dreams for, and loved so dearly.

I still have hope that this country can be what it once was. I have hope that the people of this nation will once again believe in the ideals set forth by the great men who founded this country. I have hope that people will put the greater good of this country before special interests. I can only hope that one day people see that by taking away any freedom they are destroying what makes this the greatest nation on Earth. That by restricting its citizens any rights damages the belief those people have in their country. If the people who we choose to govern our society do not have faith in their constituents to be responsible, then why should we have faith in them to decide how to govern us.

The hoplophobes who wish to disarm us are more interested in their self interests to see that disarming the citizens will only lead to the eventual subjugation of the commmon people. By restricting and discouraging the right of self defense and self preservation, you are only encouraging the death of human will and human spirit.

To all those who support weapom bans because of personal tragedy, I sympathize. The answer, however, is not to ban the guns. The answer is not to cripple the ability of the people to stand up for their rights, to defend their lives, and to protect their loved ones. The answer is stricter punishment for the basic laws that wxisted before any of these ridiculous bans that do not affect criminakl activity whatsoever. Criminals, by definition, are those that break the law. The number of laws will not stop crime. Strict policies against those that break the law may prevent potential criminals from making that step into a sinister lifestyle. No matter, what you do, there will alwys be those who will not respect the law. We can make the life of a criminal less desirable by making the rewards less appea;ing because of the severe punishment one would risk.

To all of you who may be joking about "banning whoever," I'm sorry I took your comments so seriously. However, I feel any attack on anyone's Constitutional rights is an attack on everyone's rights. I am a first generation Chinese-American born and raised in the great state of Alabama. My parents came here because they believed in the American dream, and they intilled that belief in me. I consider myself a great patriot and find I respect the Constitution and love this country more than most people I know whose families have been here far longer than mine. I take very seriously an attack on anyone's rights, especially before they have been proven of any crime. I take offense because every violation of the Constituion weakens it. Every right violated makes cheap everything that great document gives to us and disregards those lives and sacrifices made to preserve it. Our country may not be perfect, the world is less than perfect. However, this country still has hope of becoming the great institution our forefathers dreamed of building, so long as the Constitution of the United States and the Bill of Rights still exists and is never forgotten or ignored.
Link Posted: 10/24/2002 2:38:19 PM EDT
Looks like the gun is a Bushmaster XM-15 (recent model) A3 that was sold to a distributor in Washingtom state in June of this year. Not sure if it's a 16 or 20 inch barrel. It's the same model gun I own and thousands of other law-abiding citizens.
Link Posted: 10/24/2002 3:43:20 PM EDT

Originally Posted By Gun Guru:
The guy is guilty already? sheesh.
GG



Not guilty already, but he has a lot of explaining to do. The gun they found they have traced to the DC shootings. The sniper in a conversation with police was concerned that they were not taking him seriously so he told them to check out a fatal shooting at a liquor store in Alabama. The police did and found a print matching the guy's 17 year old son (that's how they knew which house to look for)
Link Posted: 10/24/2002 4:40:48 PM EDT
Well this certainly ain't going to get us more rights. I hope they don't try to make even more bans on AR15's.
Link Posted: 10/24/2002 4:58:44 PM EDT
Lets see... he choose an area that has hard gun restrictions (gun laws). Could he have felt safer where people are unarmed???
Mike
Link Posted: 10/24/2002 5:09:17 PM EDT
I don't think you'll see anything happen till after the elections. No liberal is going to jump on the anti gun bandwagon this close to the election.

The liberals are in panic mode over control of the senate & this issue will kill them. Right Al.

Did anyone see Carla Howell Libertarian for MA Gov. Tonight? She rocks!!! Too bad she doesn't stand a chance to win.

For those who don't have a clue what I'm talking about she stood on the debate floor and stated as Governor she would repeal all anti gun laws, arm all pilots and all passengers. I love it!
Link Posted: 10/24/2002 5:26:58 PM EDT
Heres my 2 cents: I heard on the news that it was Bushmasters LE only version of its M4.. they said that he obtained it from a dealer in Washington where he used to live. Now I dont know if this is true or not, I'm just saying what I heard, and im not trying to spread miss-information. It's more probable that he either put a preban only upper on the post-lower, or maybe he got a preban.
Hell, the media is already spreading how he had a flash suppressor on his rifle, which would "make it hard for anyone to see where he was shooting from" as they said.. I personally think that the liberals are just going to use this to try and get more of the so-called "assault weapons" bans.
My 2 cents... waitin for the 94 ban to expire
Link Posted: 10/24/2002 6:44:12 PM EDT

Originally Posted By frcrcn:
Heres my 2 cents: I heard on the news that it was Bushmasters LE only version of its M4.. they said that he obtained it from a dealer in Washington where he used to live. Now I dont know if this is true or not, I'm just saying what I heard, and im not trying to spread miss-information. It's more probable that he either put a preban only upper on the post-lower, or maybe he got a preban.
Hell, the media is already spreading how he had a flash suppressor on his rifle, which would "make it hard for anyone to see where he was shooting from" as they said.. I personally think that the liberals are just going to use this to try and get more of the so-called "assault weapons" bans.
My 2 cents... waitin for the 94 ban to expire



Where did you hear exactly that it was a LE only rifle? Where did you hear he had a flsh hider. If it was a LE only, how didi he get it? Didn't he buy it through a dealer? I would like to know where these reports came from.
Link Posted: 10/25/2002 11:34:25 AM EDT
The news reports I've seen call it a Bushmaster XM-15, but none of the pictures have been Bushmasters. I've pics of a Colt A2 with a Colt scope on the carry handle and also a bull-barreled gun with a free-float handguard and bipod. They keep talking about finding it with a "tripod" but they probably mean bipod.

I only heard "flash-suppressor" comments before they had caught the guys and identified the rifle. The set up they created, "firing port cut into the trunk with a fold down back seat" would suffice to mask the signature. However, must have been pretty loud.

I did hear one very short but favorable comment, which I think was on one of the CBS news programs. They said it was so hard to identify the exact caliber and type of weapon because these weapons are almost never used in crimes because they are too large to conceal. 99% of firearm related crimes involved handguns, not rifles.
Link Posted: 10/25/2002 2:28:44 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 10/25/2002 2:31:33 PM EDT by Parrot32]
It really does not matter what, where or how this cur had as a weapon!

The anti-gun crowd has never let a single fact get in the way of what they want and this will be no different.

He only fired a single shot, but they will insist that 10+ magazines must be banned.

He took his shots at about 100 yards, which any good pistol or shot gunner could have done. But they are already calling for banning “accurate” firearms.

They are calling for a national database of fired case & bullet from each gun. They are using names like “Ballistic Fingerprint” and “Ballistic DNA”, which implies irrefutable accuracy.

Truth, Logic and Common Sense will never stand in the way of the anti-gun group! This is what we are up against so be prepared and understand that all arguments will be in vain.

There are only two individuals that stand between you and a bad law. Your Senator and Congressman. Even if you have never voted, write them and ask them NOT to support any new law from this sad episode. These people vote based on what will get them reelected, very few actually have a spine.
Link Posted: 10/25/2002 8:10:24 PM EDT
There was a drawing in USA Today, but I'm not sure how much they really know. They showed and pointed out: 16" barrel , Flash hider, collapsable stock. (there was no bayo lug on the rifle in the drawing) It would be interesting to know what configuration they used. As far as being LOUD, I think it wouldn't be loud INSIDE the trunk. The muzzle blast would be outside the hole in the trunk, and I would think it would actually be less loud in the trunk.
Link Posted: 10/25/2002 9:39:20 PM EDT

Originally Posted By ScottG:
According to the news looks like they found a Bushmaster in the sniper's trunk. Too bad they didn't use it on them.



Gut shooting at less than 100 yds in not Sniping. Firing at non-hard targets is not Sniping. At no point did these two ever achieve any degree of Sniping. It was simply just another form of "drive by shooting" with no care for whom ever got in the line of fire.

What you have is one angry gay man, and one gay child who wanted to emulate the story of the old pervert had feed to him, regarding his make believe achievements.

On a positive note, One day in general population will bring this whole fucked up ordeal to a end(them). The fact that they used an AR-15 is just one more tarnished spot on the validity of the rifle in the hands of civilian .
Link Posted: 10/25/2002 9:45:18 PM EDT


If it was a pre-ban, they're allready banned



You don't even have to look at the AWB to find a reason why he legally shouldn't have had that rifle.

This guy had a divorce restraining order against him, and thus was ineligable to own any firearms (like that stopped him)...

It's a nice commentary on why gun control doesn't work, and that edge (hey, why pass more laws, this guy was allready banned from owning guns, and that didn't stop him) may be embarrasing enough to defeat any further banning attempts...

One thing we *do* know: The Senate is now 49 GOP, 49 Dem, 1 Ind, and 1 GOP VP, i.e. 50/50. So passing gun control just got 1 vote tougher (not that I'm glad he's dead, but facts are facts...).
Link Posted: 10/25/2002 9:49:22 PM EDT
The gun:"

His gun (as per the news) was a Bushy 16" A3 carbine, with a scope on the flattop and a bipod/tripod (they're calling it a tripod, I'm guessing it was actually a Harris).

There is some speculation that he used an unregistered supressor (violating the NFA & AWB) or a flashider (violating the AWB)...

CNN's 'AR-15 poster gun' (not the one he used, the one CNN showed) was a full pre-ban M4.
Link Posted: 10/25/2002 11:28:37 PM EDT
Dave_A - The VP only votes to break a tie. Jeffords is Democrat in all but name (and was, frankly before he "officially" changed to "Independent"). The Republicans are still outvoted 50-49. Hopefully that will change for the better in a couple of weeks ...
Link Posted: 10/26/2002 2:11:18 AM EDT
does not matter he used a really realy dangerous ar15 they all should be banned.
Top Top