Enthusiasts Eye Assault Rifles as Ban Nears End

[ericz 0]

Pathy

Quote[/b] ]My argument is not a total ban of guns, but tigher regulation for all gun classes (as Shinraiden said, there are alot of people with zero concept of gun safety, guns cannot teach responsibility, only training and experience can) and no assault rifles or high caliber weapons. In my opinion, there is nothing you can do with a .50 cal rifle that you cant do with a lower caliber rifle, unless your planning to take out an armoured car, in which case its an illegal act anyway.  

In the same way, there is no need for assault rifles and SMG's. A gun that can shoot a high volume of FMJ rounds is just too powerfull to be in civilian hands IMO, no matter what regulation there is.

Understood.  But if you refer to my previous post or two ago and to the kindly Ralph Wiggums reply.  There are several hard fought regulations in place that make  firearms safety, background checks, residency requirements mandatory now currently.

The only .50 caliber rifles I know of that are available for sale to the public are extremely expensive ($2,000-6,000), the rounds are expensive ($1.50 ea), the recoil is monstrous, they are incredibly heavy and very long, besides they are BOLT action.  For all these reasons, I believe they would be useless for a criminal endeavor.  Although some madman might have use for one, banning them for that remote possibility seems unnecessary.

"Assault" rifles of the variety that could be sold pre-ban were semi-automatic, meaning one shot - one trigger pull.  No burst function or automatic switch were present.  A true modern military rifle has these items.  The current U.S. military M-4 has a semi-automatic and burst function.  The AK-47 has a semi-automatic and automatic function.  The burst or automatic function is what causes concern due to the increased rate of fire.  Semi-automatic is the same across the board, whether its a handgun or a rifle ,1 for 1.

I will agree with you that true SMGs and Automatic or true burst rifles shouldn't be sold to the general public.  But they haven't been since the 1920's or 30's and probably never will.

[sputnik monroe 102]

I read some where a year or two ago that only one person has been murdered with a 50 caliber rifle in the past 50 years.

   

[ralphwiggum 6]

Quote[/b] ]I just need the black suitcase and do a simple procedure, and I just annihilated a nation.

I always knew it. Evil Raplh goes for the world  

http://cabanedebart.free.fr/grabpics+other/Ralph%20wiggum%201.gif

PS:

Preorder Ralph Wiggum World Domination jackets right now !

http://fp.entertainmentearth.com/AUTOIMAGES/CH95252235.jpg

Make yourself friend with the new leader.

Thanx a lot for exposing my plan. Germany will be the first one to feal the pain.

The percentage of murders committed with "assault rifles" in the U.S. pre and post ban were very small and changed very little. Most murders were committed with the use of HANDGUNS. Handguns, handgun magazines and cartridges are convenient, concealable and very portable.

One has only to look at the restrictions of assault weapons ban to realize it is a farce. It bans weapons simply on the basis of cosmetic features as has been alluded to in previous posts. My feeling is that this piece of legislation was a way to pacify the uninformed and those opposed to private ownership of firearms in general. I can only imagine that it gave peace of mind to many that are afraid of firearms.

looking back at the californian gun control, you can only be astonished at all the manuovers put on forth by gun lovers to circumvent the law. CA started with specific ban, then moved onto 'cosmetic' ban. the need for the 'cosmetic' ban appeared since most manufacturers would stick a finger at the CA DOJ and use slightly different, but essentially same model. and just to get there, the legistlation faced a big battle. when 'cosmetic' criterion was made, then it pretty much made most guns no elgible for sale. thus no more circumvention of the law or the spirit of it.

whether you like it or not, majority of people are not gun owners and democracy favors majority.

Quote[/b] ]Another culprit in the disinformation campaign waged against legal firearms were the journalists from many of the media outlets who reported on crimes committed with firearms. The use of the words "assault", "automatic" in place of semi-automatic and phrases such as "large caliber" used to describe something is mundane as an AR-15 in the .223 caliber would always get a chuckle out of me. All these made for headlines and sensational coverage but also implied that these weapons were more lethal, more dangerous than any other firearm available. If so the statistics would bear this out, but they do not.

i would not call .223 a mundane caliber. as some lunatic drove around the east coast, people were in fear. if a .223 was not more lethal it would not have been used in war compared to say....oh i don't know.. .22 magunm

Quote[/b] ]Many have given the example of the North Hollywood robbery as a clear example of why assault weapons should be banned. But the truth is this event was and remains an isolated incident. These criminals modified their carbines illegally and turned them into automatics. They fired thousands of rounds at very short ranges and killed no one. How effective really were they?

they killed no one, but several officers were badly injured and most of them decided to retire. how much of a human resource cost is that? veteran of LADP retiring is not something that can be instantaneously replenished.

Quote[/b] ]A much more deadly incident occurred this year in Los Angeles were a geriatric driver ploughed his vehicle into a "farmers market" killing +- 8 people.

Santa Monica street promenade did not have those vehicle stop blocks there. and to say that's a typical case is a nonsense. the driver never had a driving problem until he reached certain age, which was about a year before the incident. if you want to equate guns and cars, you'd also want to equate the regulatory practices, which will include revocation of ownership, should the person fail periodic check up. can gun lovers swallow that? i think not.

first contituionally, it is against the amendment, second it causes more government spending.

You can drive, right? A car is more complicated to operate than most guns. If you don't know how to operate a gun, leave it the hell alone. (By the way, I read that the suitcase nuke was bogus and does not exist.)

the suitcase i'm talking about is not a nuke suitcase, but the black suitcase that contains a procedure for using nuclear weapons by the president of USA. even Dubya can do it.

a car only needs two things steering wheel, and pedals(clutches added if you want to). however, a safety procedure, and avoidance of is a lot simpler in cars. for example. how do you clear a semi-auto handgun? think of the procedure, and think of driving. in driving you need to step on brakes and occasionally use steering wheel. for hand guns, take the magazine out, move the slide, lock it open, and visually(and preferably manually) check chamber. that's way more things to do.

[ozanzac 0]

Anyone have figures on 'death by gun type'?

To me, it makes more sense to have tighter controls over pistols, which can be easily concealed, than large, bulky assault rifles.

[Ares1978 0]

I read some where a year or two ago that only one person has been murdered with a 50 caliber rifle in the past 50 years.

   

IRA sniper, to quote some magazine: "mortally wounded five British soldiers".

I wonder if it should be classed as warfare or as murder..

[ralphwiggum 6]

.

http://www.cnn.com/2004/US/09/12/gun.ban.ap/index.html

Quote[/b] ]Feinstein was horrified by the 1984 shooting rampage at a McDonald's in San Diego County that killed 21 people and the massacre of five people five years later at a Stockton elementary school yard.

But it was the shooting at a law firm in San Francisco in 1993, in which eight were killed and six wounded, that persuaded her to push for the assault weapons ban.

hmm.. i guess it was better to have handguns, right? after all it could have killed more than 21 in McDonald's in one incident, five at a school yard, to 8 killed in a building.

wonder what the death per shot ration is for hand guns and assualt rifle.

[Drill Sergeant 0]

Anyone have figures on 'death by gun type'?

To me, it makes more sense to have tighter controls over pistols, which can be easily concealed, than large, bulky assault rifles.

There are already. Much more paper work and a background check waiting period and so on. Belive me, get a class 3

permit and the feds will know what you eat for breakfast.

This ban deals with the construction and importation of

guns not the avalability of preban models which have

always been legal.

Another point which is failed to be seen. We go on and

on on how evile these "Assualt" rifles which as ozanzac

said are hard to conceal.

First time with a .44 mag and you do double taps with a

"automatic reflex"? Come on another urban legend?

Also try folding your hands and flipping them all the

way behind you really fast.

It's possible as is any damn thing, but most likely a

.44 would catch you in the head. On the way back.

(Magazines on pistols? GMAB)

Though heres a good philiosiphy, don't like our laws? Don't

live here.   Of course that even applys to something as

"backwards" as driveing on the "Wrong" side of the road.

*edit* once again heres the point of this "Ban"

"Gunsmith Justin Davis holds a Ruger mini-14 rifle, illegal to manufacture under the assault weapons ban."

ILLEGAL TO MANUFACTURE, not own. Wrong ban wrong idea.

Also look since 1984 all they can come up with is 2 incidents

in the US where "Assalt Riffles" in the definition of high cap mags were in use?

[shinRaiden 0]

Archives at seattletimes.nwsource.com and seattlepi.nwsource.com.

Quote[/b] ]

Tuesday, April 22, 1997

Section: News, Page: B2

A 21-year-old Redmond man was fatally shot last night at a gun range while trying to instruct a woman in firing a pistol, police Lt. Bill Ferguson said.

The incident occurred about 8:45 p.m. at Wade's Eastside Gun Shop. The woman, who had some experience with rifles, was shooting a .44-caliber revolver. The man was standing behind her and to her left, and after one shot the recoil of the weapon brought it back over her head. The weapon fired and the man was struck in his neck.

Paramedics tried to treat him, but took him to Overlake Medical Center where he was pronounced dead, Ferguson said.

About two miles or so on arterial roads.

Quote[/b] ]

And in what police are investigating as an accident, Chumney, 24, was fatally shot about 8:45 p.m. by a powerful .44-Magnum revolver, fired by a 30-year-old Kirkland woman he apparently was trying to help.

Chumney died on the way to Overlake Medical Center.

Shooting range owner Wade Gaughran said Chumney appeared to be coaching the woman, ``who may have been a novice but seemed to hold the weapon like an old pro, arms out straight, like she knew what she was doing."

Exactly how the gun killed Chumney remains a primary focus of the investigation, police spokesman Bill Ferguson said.

Police are exploring several scenarios. The woman told investigators that the revolver's powerful recoil forced her to bend her elbows past 90 degrees so the weapon's barrel was pointing up and over her shoulder when it went off, striking Chumney in the neck.

Ferguson said tape from a surveillance video camera at the range provided some answers, but was not conclusive. The video shows Chumney standing behind and slightly to the left of the shooter shortly before he was hit. But the camera only exposes several frames every four seconds and did not show how Chumney was struck when the pistol fired.

Ferguson said police will need the medical examiner's autopsy report before better assessing what happened. He said evidence collected to date suggests a second possibility: The gun might have discharged as the woman turned to her left to face Chumney.

Quote[/b] ]The weapon was a .44 Magnum Smith & Wesson Classic, a revolver that has a 6 1/2-inch barrel and weighs about 3.25 pounds. The trigger requires 10 to 15 pounds of pull, Gaughran said.

Police did not say who owned the revolver.

Gaughran said the group was not attending a shooting class but appeared to be split between those who had experience with guns and those who did not. They were otherwise under the general supervision of a range master, who gave them instructions but remained on duty outside the shooting area behind bulletproof glass, he said.

Gaughran doubts the first scenario involving the recoil.

``Not in 30 years have I heard of a recoil reaction that made the weapon turn nearly 180 degrees," he said. ``It just can't happen."

Quote[/b] ]John Clifford, who launched the Weapons Safety Inc. range in the Factoria area three years ago, said gun accidents are rare at shooting ranges, which he described as ``among the safety places to be."

Weapons Safety Inc. was the seventh indoor shooting range to open in the Puget Sound area since the Marksman opened in Puyallup 18 years ago.

``I will not speculate about what happened at Wade's," Clifford said, ``but it looks like the person with the gun broke all the fundamental rules of gun safety."

Clifford's conjecture was echoed by Marksman manager Carrie Mills.

Quotes from Seattle PI articles, Times coverage was crappy and Eastside Journal doesn't have online searches back that far.

The only time I ever shot a pistol was a custom 400 special that had just been rebuilt. I'd shot shotguns and rifles before, but having never shot a pistol previous, I'm grateful the owner had the gumption to only hand me one round and the chamber open for inspection, and an inspected empty mag. Then he stepped back and well to the side. You can get yourself in trouble so fast, the first recoils more than you expect, so you panic on the second and who knows where the third will go.

----------------------------

On a lighter note, the first time I ever heard a 44mag was on a pack trip in the mountains when the outfitter blasted a huge porquipine ~3m from where I was sleeping. He had a beautiful pair of long-barreled ivory-grip six shooters he got from his dad from back on the ranch. That wakes you up in the morning like nothing else.

[Balschoiw 0]

Quote[/b] ]I read that the suitcase nuke was bogus and does not exist

Well...the US government thinks different about this...

Suitcase Nukes

Quote[/b] ]A suitcase nuke or suitcase bomb is a very compact and portable nuclear weapon and could have the dimensions of 60 x 40 x 20 centimeters or 24 x 16 x 8 inches. The smallest possible bomb-like object would be a single critical mass of plutonium (or U-233) at maximum density under normal conditions.

The Pu-239 weighs 10.5 kg and is 10.1 cm across. It doesn't take much more than a single critical mass to cause significant explosions ranging from 10-20 tons. These types of weapons can also be as big as two footlockers.

The warhead of a suitcase nuke or suitcase bomb consists of a tube with two pieces of uranium, which, when rammed together, would cause a blast. Some sort of firing unit and a device that would need to be decoded to cause detonation may be included in the "suitcase."

Another portable weapon is a "backpack" bomb. The Soviet nuclear backpack system was made in the 1960s for use against NATO targets in time of war and consists of three "coffee can-sized" aluminum canisters in a bag. All three must be connected to make a single unit in order to explode. The detonator is about 6 inches long. It has a 3-to-5 kiloton yield, depending on the efficiency of the explosion. It's kept powered during storage by a battery line connected to the canisters.

[CrackerJack 0]

So the battery sends a electric shock to the exlposives then the bullet breaks open the neutron containers and hitting the plutonium and causing a fission? The neutrons got to have a higher speed then what a bullet can drive them shouldnt the explosives be closer to the plutonium? If so then it might be a bogus  

That aint tought to make.. only getting the plutonium but still it´s easy if you got the "contacts".

Sorry for bringin the topic to a stop

[sputnik monroe 102]

Quote[/b] ]whether you like it or not, majority of people are not gun owners and democracy favors majority.

That's called mob rule and it's unAmerican. "There are four of us and one of you give us your weapons!". The American system is a constitutional democracy, it's supposed to protect the rights of the minority from the majority.

The majority is never a justification. If every one believes a lie, it's still a lie.

[shinRaiden 0]

Grandpa worked at Los Alamos immediately after ww2 back when they still did tests by hand. He wrote in his autobio about the test to determine the critical mass of uranium. The lab guy had about a softball size lump of (enriched?) uranium and a bunch of beryllium shells. He propped the last two apart with a screwdriver while the geiger counter was humming, not beeping. Then he sneezed and the screwdriver fell out and the shells connected. Room started glowing blue, things got melty, but the guy managed to 'hot-potato' it around to knock off enough shells. That guy died a couple days later.

Soundbite this morning from Kerry said this was putting AK's and Uzis on the street. Was he talking about the full auto ones? Here's a copy of the National Firearms Act of 1934 that says thats out of line. If he'd stay on his press release and stop adding words he'd stop proverbially shooting himself in the foot.

The Brady group also has a concise overview too:

Quote[/b] ]

A: On September 13, 1994, domestic gun manufacturers were required to stop production of semi-automatic assault weapons and ammunition clips holding more than 10 rounds except for military or police use. Imports of assault weapons not already banned by administrative action under Presidents Reagan and George H.W. Bush were also halted. Assault weapons and ammunition clips holding more than 10 rounds produced prior to September 13, 1994, were "grandfathered" in under the law and can still be possessed and sold.

The bill bans, by name, the manufacture of 19 different weapons:

* Norinco, Mitchell, and Poly Technologies Avtomat Kalashnikovs (all models);

* Action Arms Israeli Military Industries UZI and Galil;

* Beretta Ar70 (SC-70);

* Colt AR-15;

* Fabrique National FN/FAL, FN/LAR, and FNC;

* SWD M-10; M-11; M-11/9, and M-12;

* Steyr AUG;

* INTRATEC TEC-9, TEC-DC9, AND TEC-22;

* revolving cylinder shotguns such as (or similar to) the Street Sweeper and Striker 12.

The bill also bans "copies" or "duplicates" of any of those weapons. The failure to include a ban of these "copies" or "duplicates" would have opened the door for widespread evasion of the ban. Even so, some unscrupulous gun manufacturers have tried to evade the law by making minor changes to their assault weapons in order to skirt the restrictions.

The 1994 law also prohibits manufacturers from producing firearms with more than one of the following assault weapon features:

Rifles

* Folding/telescoping stock

* Protruding pistol grip

* Bayonet mount

* Threaded muzzle or flash suppressor

* Grenade launcher

Pistols

* Magazine outside grip

* Threaded muzzle

* Barrel shroud

* Unloaded weight of 50 ounces or more

* Semi-automatic version of a fully automatic weapon

Shotguns

* Folding/telescoping stock

* Protruding pistol grip

* Detachable magazine capacity

* Fixed magazine capacity greater than 5 rounds

Again, under the 'named' section, aren't most of those already covered by the NFA1934 Once again the politicians would rather murder trees than allow us to get lead contamination at the range.

Finally from the Washington Times

Quote[/b] ] "We cannot clearly credit the ban with any of the nation's recent drop in gun violence. And, indeed, there has been no discernible reduction in the lethality and injuriousness of gun violence," said the unreleased NIJ report, written by Christopher Koper, a professor at the University of Pennsylvania.

"It is thus premature to make definitive assessments of the ban's impact on gun violence. Should it be renewed, the ban's effects on gun violence are likely to be small at best and perhaps too small for reliable measurement," said the report, a copy of which was obtained by The Washington Times.

The report also noted that assault weapons were "rarely used in gun crimes even before the ban."

NIJ is the Justice Department's research, development and evaluation agency — assigned the job of providing objective, independent, evidence-based information to the department through independent studies and other data collection activities.

[kerosene 0]

Why would you start someone out, espically a woman, who on the odds, has a smaller, lighter build than the average man such a huge gun to practice with?

[DanAK47 1]

Quote[/b] ]a car only needs two things steering wheel, and pedals(clutches added if you want to).

I hope you don't ever change lanes, back up, drive in inclement weather, drive in the dark, or park.

Maybe the suitcase nuke is feasible. Maybe it isn't. You are not a nuclear scientist and neither am I. I trust my source more than that web site, official or not.

As for the McDonalds massacre, maybe it wouldn't of happened if more citizens were armed and could shoot back at criminals.

And the .44? I guess we should ban those too? After all, someone could make a mistake with one. We should ban computers while we are at it.

[Balschoiw 0]

Quote[/b] ]Maybe the suitcase nuke is feasible. Maybe it isn't. You are not a nuclear scientist and neither am I. I trust my source more than that web site, official or not.

It is true. Or haven´t you heard of the nuke cases gone missing after USSR fell apart ?

I am no nuclear scientist also, but I know that there are such suitcase bombs as colleagues of me tried to find some and the russian officials confirmed their existance.

I guess there are still 3 or 4 wich are missing.

Quote[/b] ]That's called mob rule and it's unAmerican.

Haha !!!

I´d prefer an unarmed mob to some wannabe gunswingers on an NRA rampage.

Jeez...why do you hate america so much ?

"Un-american" Haha !

You´re so backward sometimes...

[DanAK47 1]

Did a Russian official say it to your face?

I really think the suitcase nuke thing is just a big urban legend.

[ralphwiggum 6]

Quote[/b] ]whether you like it or not, majority of people are not gun owners and democracy favors majority.

   That's called mob rule and it's unAmerican. "There are four of us and one of you give us your weapons!". The American system is a constitutional democracy, it's supposed to protect the rights of the minority from the majority.

    The majority is never a justification. If every one believes a lie, it's still a lie.

so when majority decides something it's a mob rule? i guess democracy is a mob rule! no wonder Bush got elected.

I hope you don't ever change lanes, back up, drive in inclement weather, drive in the dark, or park.

all those driving activities you mentioned are equivalents of how to drive or use the car, not mechanical complexity. your argument was that a gun has a lot less part, and thus is safer. i showed you that it may not be the case. with your logic, a knife is a safer tool so i can just give it to a child.

Quote[/b] ]As for the McDonalds massacre, maybe it wouldn't of happened if more citizens were armed and could shoot back at criminals.

how many more would have needed to stop massacre? 1? 3? 10?. perhaps concept of everyone armed is coming to mind, but as my sig says, look at fallujah. marines were killed despite having M16s.

Quote[/b] ]And the .44? I guess we should ban those too? After all, someone could make a mistake with one. We should ban computers while we are at it.

slippery slope argument, or as i personally call, cry baby argument. one thing is wrong and the argument presenter cries that all things be banned. in fact, with your rethorical question, pro-control groups would be welcome to accomodate it.

computer is NOT something made to kill. again, fallacy of comparing a gun to another object has struck again.

[Balschoiw 0]

Quote[/b] ]Did a Russian official say it to your face?

I really think the suitcase nuke thing is just a big urban legend.

No, no russian official said it to my face...

I work for the UN military branch a couple of years now

and KNOW that they have/had those suitcase/backpack nukes.

Well, you don´t believe your own government, so what shall I say?

If you want to believe there are none, do so.

I know different.

Ignorance is bliss.

So let me ask you what source you have ? You mentioned a source. So enlighten me.

Edit:

Google helps...

Quote[/b] ]Alexander Lebed described the devices as Special Atomic Demolition Munitions that are designed for sabotage behind enemy lines - blowing up bridges or command centers, for example. The 1-kiloton nuclear bombs, which weigh 60-100 pounds and can fit into a suitcase or backpack, can kill 50,000-100,000 people and devastate a portion of a city, according to Lebed.

In May, Lebed told a congressional delegation led by Rep. Curt Weldon, R-Pa., that as Yeltsin's top defense expert last year he discovered the Russian military couldn't account for 48 of 132 of suitcase bombs.

If you should see such a case....just ignore it. It can´t be a suitcase nuke, as such don´t exist

[DanAK47 1]

Quote[/b] ]your argument was that a gun has a lot less part, and thus is safer.

I specifically said controls. Blinkers, parking brakes, they are controls. I did not say a gun had less parts.

Marines had M16s, similar to the weapon that was used in the massacre, and were killed by armed resistors.

The .44 comment was sarcasm.

I could argue that the assault rifle was created to keep the user alive, not explicitly to kill other people. So you could say it is designed to keep you safe.

SADM is not a suitcase nuke.

My source is something an EOD tech has posted.

[shinRaiden 0]

A local crackhead was just sentanced to life for emptying the clip of an officer's handgun into the officer during a fight last year iirc. Should we disarm the cops so this doesn't happen again?

Lets say that most of my friends think I'm a bit off my rocker. Fine, but what if they are the ones that are crazy and I'm ok? How do you manage that? Thats why the laws are such to allow everyone some breathing room. America is not a democracy, it never was. It is very much a federalist republic, because the powers that be believed that the whims of the populace are far too unsteady and easily manipulated to allow for a true democracy. Complaints about nothing being done were viewed as ultimately far safer than concerns about too much being done and yo-yo government.

Mob rule is the punditpeople running back and forth screaming "the sky is falling!!!" when they know if they don't get you all worked up they don't get their money.

As for dangerous items, how about sharp or pointy sticks? My brother and I were lightsaber-fighting with 6ft wood tomato stakes and I broke mine across his face. Well he got a shovel and chased me around the yard so I grabbed the peavy (log-turner, big nasty swinging hook) and we had a standoff in the backyard until my mom thumped us both. Should we ban shovels and peavy's? I hunt slugs with a pitchfork. Should there be a waiting period and background check before you can buy a hayfork?

My dad works with comps all day, and he hates them. I use them all day and I love them. The difference is I view the computer as an idiot tool that normally doesn't work, so if it does it's a good day, but 99.99% of the problems are of my own creation. (How my boot.ini disappeared the other day I still have no clue.)

[Balschoiw 0]

Can you read ?

Quote[/b] ]The 1-kiloton nuclear bombs, which weigh 60-100 pounds and can fit into a suitcase or backpack,

Ok and what about the EOD tech you are referring to ?

Give us a link. I want to read it on my own.

So a SADM can be a suitcase nuke along others.

Oh and you might want to check the congress report about them as Jelzin´s former science minister testified it in front of your congress...

[DanAK47 1]

"Suitcase" like the one in the first picture. The diagram.

The second picture is not what I would call a suitcase.

The EOD link is gone. I read it a long time ago.

[ralphwiggum 6]

Quote[/b] ]your argument was that a gun has a lot less part, and thus is safer.

I specifically said controls. Blinkers, parking brakes, they are controls. I did not say a gun had less parts.

more controls, but they don't produce deadly effect by themselves. a trigger pulled cannot be stopped. an acceleration can be stopped.

Quote[/b] ]I could argue that the assault rifle was created to keep the user alive, not explicitly to kill other people. So you could say it is designed to keep you safe.

the consequence of use is that the shooter is alive, but the primary function of assualt rifle is not protecting, but killing whichever it was supposed to kill. if an assault rifle had some sort of mechanism that pops out a kevlar shield out from its barrel instead of a bullet and protect the shooter, then it protects the shooter.

[DanAK47 1]

Quote[/b] ]don't produce deadly effect by themselves

That is irrelevant if you are saying a car is less complicated.

Quote[/b] ]pops out a kevlar shield out from its barrel instead of a bullet and protect the shooter, then it protects the shooter.

More of a symptom solution like someone was talking about earlier.

It does not eliminate the threat.

"Designed to kill" yes, but why was it designed to kill?

[Balschoiw 0]

Here you go sir. Reconstructed by your own investigators:

You want to see a russian backback bomb also ?