You wouldn't need a combat rifle for any purpose other than to kill law enforcement or military, and that's the point.
OK. Which are the 'Combat Rifles' in this photo?
IOW, which ones have been used by militaries in combat?
Thursday, July 8, 2010
"Combat Rifles"
From our old buddy "Grits Jr." aka Ladd Everitt of the CSGV on Huffpo:
OK. Which are the 'Combat Rifles' in this photo?
IOW, which ones have been used by militaries in combat?
OK. Which are the 'Combat Rifles' in this photo?
IOW, which ones have been used by militaries in combat?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
8 comments:
The two that DON'T boast the arbitrary cosmetic features deemed by the gun banners as definitive of "assault weapons".
Letter B is likely the only one that was issued to a soldier. Tho A may have as well, but overall they weren't issued as much as B. Other two are sporting rifles.
And of course the military rifle is also the basis for the vast majority of hunting rifles in America.
Ironic, Ne?
If A where a Yugo, it would qualify.
B most likely, but you'd have to find out if it ever left the shores of the US first.
They all are, obviously. Quick, ban them all!
I find it somewhat distrubing that some people think that there could never, under any circumstances, ever be a valid reason to kill law enforcement or military personel. A last resort, obviously, an unpleasant possibility, certainly, but the idea that someone who gets a badge or a uniform also gets a halo seems simplistic and potentially very dangerous to me. Someone so unwilling to question the validity of actions taken by the state strikes me as being foolish for a whole host of reasons which have nothing to do with firearms.
yes
I pick the shiny one!!!!!!!!
Technically, all 4 designs have been used on a battlefield somewhere in the world.
You need to take a look at how CA defines an "assault weapon", either by name or by certain eeeeeeeevil features to understand the anti's mindsets.
Post a Comment