Video - CCN Gun “expert” says .223 is great for elephants

[ericire12]

Sensationalism at its best. They go on and on about why us civilians have no place owning an evil assault rifle. They go on a "Sporting rifle" bashing spree as well. Oh no.... The bullet kills you even before you hear it! That should be illegal! :

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IKiihNCECcU

[shooter32]

CNN Gun "expert"..... Please!!   

Sensationalism big time!! 

[TAB]

um, any super sonic bullet is going to hit you before you can hear it...  even the sub sonic stuff will hit you before you can react too it.

[garand4life]

If only hunting idiots like this bozo was in any way legal. I better not say that CNN would come after me for being a RIGHT WING RADICAL... In seriousness this guy is in no way credible. Especially when he says that he doesn't care what anyone says there is NO reasonable need for a civilian to own a "Sporting RIFLE". Ever been to Camp Perry. Seems like a pretty reasonable sport to me.

[fightingquaker13]

Oh no.... The bullet kills you even before you hear it! That should be illegal!
Thus deprivng you of a chance to duck? WTF?
FQ13
PS He is right in that most people (me included) don't need them. Guess what, I get to decide what I need. That's one of the perks of living in a free society. What keeps it free? The 1A and the 2A. Gee, maybe we do need EBRs after all.

[Sponsor]

[TAB]

while I agree that you should be able to determine what you need, but only up to a point.  The real question is where do you draw that line.  I think most people would agree that you don't need and should not have a WMD.

FWIW I don't have a prob with you being able to buy say a true m16 or a SAW.  After all that is what the miltary are using right now.  I would however draw the line at say hand gernades. Its not becuase I don't think you should beable to own one.  its do to the fact that some idiot will be playing with one around other people... I don't care if they blow themselfs up, but I do care if they hurt other people.

[jnevis]

while I agree that you should be able to determine what you need, but only up to a point.  The real question is where do you draw that line.  I think most people would agree that you don't need and should not have a WMD.

FWIW I don't have a prob with you being able to buy say a true m16 or a SAW.  After all that is what the miltary are using right now.  I would however draw the line at say hand gernades. Its not becuase I don't think you should beable to own one.  its do to the fact that some idiot will be playing with one around other people... I don't care if they blow themselfs up, but I do care if they hurt other people.

Unfortunately TAB, any one of us that reloads and has a can of powder has, under the current definition, a possible WMD.

Within U.S. civil defense organizations, the category is now Chemical, Biological, Radiological, Nuclear, and Explosive (CBRNE), which defines WMD as:

(1) Any explosive, incendiary, poison gas, bomb, grenade, or rocket having a propellant charge of more than four ounces [113 g], missile having an explosive or incendiary charge of more than one-quarter ounce [7 g], or mine or device similar to the above. (2) Poison gas. (3) Any weapon involving a disease organism. (4) Any weapon that is designed to release radiation at a level dangerous to human life.

[TAB]

smokeless powder does not even burn very well, its not until its in a very contained space that it becomes dangerous.  the plastic jugs its sold in don't blow up even if they are in a fire.  they are not even listed as explosives, they are propelents.




Now black powder is a diffrent story.  BP is a exposive.

[fightingquaker13]

(3) Any weapon involving a disease organism. (4) Any weapon that is designed to release radiation at a level dangerous to human life.

So, if I stab you with  my steak knife from yesterday and didn't wash it, its a WMD? Leave it to some prosecutor to argue that it was. Its like this five foot nothing flamer that was charged with attempted murder for spitting blood at a cop because he was HIV positive back in the '80s. The thing is, he was cited for Jay Walking, and no one ever asked WHY he had a a bloody mouth after the cops were done with him. Then, it was just karma getting twisted into a murder charge, now terrorism.
FQ13 who still doesn't trust the government much.

[Ichiban]

What a maroon!  I'd bet his explanation of an internal combustion engine is a hoot.

Did I detect a Boston accent?  Not that there is anything wrong with that.