Fox News:
The teenage son of a Harris County Precinct 1 deputy shot a home intruder Tuesday afternoon in the 2600 block of Royal Place in northwest Harris County, deputies said.
The 15-year-old boy and his 12-year-old sister had been home alone in the Mount Royal Village subdivision when around 2:30 p.m. a pair of burglars tried the front and back doors, then broke a back window.
The teenager grabbed his father’s assault rifle and knew what to do with it.
“We don’t try to hide things from our children in law enforcement,” Lt. Jeffrey Stauber said. “That young boy was protecting his sister. He was in fear for his life and her life.”
The home invaders fled, leaving a trail of blood.
There are two burglers who likely will be more careful when breaking into a house. If the 15 year old had a real assualt weapon, he would have likely empied a magazine and there would have been no need for the police to follow a blood trail.
That can’t be. According to those demanding such rifles be banned, they serve no useful purpose. Plus, the bad guy is still alive. He couldn’t have possibly survived a hit from such a “high powered” rifle.
(for you lefties, that’s sarcasm)
Since assault weapons aren’t all that different from any other class of firearm, why are so many people concerned about the prospect of firearms having a number of their defining characteristics being more tightly controlled?
Here’s how the former assault weapons ban defined the class in question (courtesy of Wikipedia):
I know an assault weapon when I see one. Do you need a flash suppressor, a bayonet mount, or muzzle suitable for launching grenades to defend your home? Do you need a weapon that accepts 60 or 100 round magazines? If you’re expecting your home to be attacked by the hoards of Attila the Hun, you probably don’t need an assault rifle. You probably need appropriate medication.
Which brings us to the main thing I dislike about assault weapons. They have a certain look, which in my opinion may appeal to the fantasies of immature males and the mentally unstable. They look like military weapons that were specifically designed for killing human being in a combat environment–because that’s the purpose they were originally designed for.
The kid in Harris County didn’t need an assault weapon to shoot an intruder. Any number of common firearms would have served him just as well. We shouldn’t be praising the assault weapon. We should be praising the kid.
@Greg: Greg, you wouldn’t know an assault weapon if you fell over one. Appearances do nothing to make a weapon an assault weapon. Pull up Ruger 10/.22 rifles and just look at the accessories you can get for it. No matter what you add to it, you still have a .22 rim fire rifle with semi-automatic loading. An assault rifle automatically fires 3 or more rounds at one pull of the trigger. Many are black or green because they minimize reflections that would warn game or enemies. Would you and your liberal buddies feel better if semi auto loader weapons were colored pink? Would that make them less violent? It seems like your concerns are of appearances rather than regulating true assault weapons. By the way, true assault weapons are already heavily regulated as many folks here have stated numerous times.
Also, the flash suppressor minimizes loss of night blindness. A pistol grip makes the weapon easier to handle in various situations. Your definition would outlaw semi-auto rifles with a thumb hole stock. These are frequently used for long range shooting of deer, elk and varmints. Folding stocks make the weapon easy to carry in a case and in restricted spaces. Are folding chairs more dangerous than those that do not fold? Do you know how much easier my vacuum cleaner would work if I had a pistol grip on the wand?
@Randy, #4:
I spent 1970 in the Khanh Hoa province of South Vietnam. I figure I know the M14 and M16 well enough to comment.
The question of appearances has to do with the psychology of some who are drawn to such weapons.
@Greg: So then Greg, we should be concerned about the mental processes of people instead of the more regulations to control law abiding people? I think you will find that is what most of us have been saying for most of our lives!
@Greg:
You SHOULD know what an assault weapon is greg, yet you get it wrong.
So per a marxist like greg, if someone has or wants some of those “assault weapons” as he incorrectly calls them, then they are mentally questionable individuals.
Scratch a liberal, find a fascist.
Wrong. They were intended to wound. A wounded soldier requires manpower to remove him from the field and burns up other supplies while increasing the burden on the enemy war effort. A dead man does not. Did you forget everything you were ever taught?
GREG
THE WAY IT’S COMING TOO
THE GUN MUST ADAPT TO THE NEED,
A MULTI ATTACK WILL DEMAND A MULT BULLETS WEAPON AND SO ON,
THAT WOMAN SHOOT ONE TO PROTECT HER AND THE TWINS, THE OTHER WOMAN
SHOT THE TWO ATTACKERS WITH A DIFFERENT GUN, TO EACH THE GUN NEEDED,IF THAT FIRST WOMAN WOULD HAVE HAD A SECOND ATTACKER SHE AND HER TWIN WOULD MOST LIKELY BE KILLED WITH THE CROWBAR,, GOOD THAT THE BLACK ATTACKER DID NOT KNOW SHE HAD NO MORE BULLETS,
HIS CROWBAR WOULD HAVE VICIOUSLY ATTACK AND KILLED, BECAUSE HE BROKEN IN THAT CACH
FOR A TERRIBLE CRIME TO BE HAPPENING,
AND IF YOU HAVE AN ATTACK B Y 8 BLACK WHO ATTACK THAT COUPLE IN THEIR CAR ,
YOU NEED A WEAPON WITH A BIG MAGAZINE, THEY WHERE BEATEN IN FRONT OF A MOB,
WHAT ABOUT THAT VET FROM VIETNAM 85 BEATEN BY 6 YOUNG BLACKS AND ONE YELLING KILL HIM TO THE OTHER HOLDING THE OLD MEN SITTING TO BOOT HIM, AND PUT HIM IN THE WOOD LEFT TO DIE, GOOD SOME ONE PASS BY AND SAVED HIM,
THERE WILL BE MORE BECAUSE OF THAT STUPID NEWSPAPER SO CALL JOURNALIST OF A SHIT PAPER WHO NOW NEED
ARMED GUARDS for a long time
Bees, want to bet the armed guards those newspaper people hired are carrying guns with high capacity magazines?
The Secret Service? They too use high capacity magazines.
Hard Right
yes YOU ARE SURELY RIGHT, THEY ARE DRESS TO KILL,
NOT TO PUNCH HOLE ON THE SKIN ALONE,
AND WHAT I heard is they might get the police to knock on door, to ask about weapon,
what if that police is not a police, you can get uniforms of any kind in the market, do they think the homeowner will open the door with the frightening happening now,
no they will shoot if the so call maybe police insist,
that black criminal rang at the door and rang and kept wringing to have the door open so to commit his crime, he end up breaking in with his crowbar
BYE
the invitation is made to criminals scum pederastes and other breed of nuts,
the news paper cannot fix the wrong and people will be killed, hope fully it will be the bad people who want to do wrong to good people, who now are learning to shoot to kill, and will be prepare,
@Hard Right, #7:
I’m not walking around with a head full of patent nonsense, such as the idea that the M16 was designed to inflict non-lethal injuries rather than kill.
Lethal Impact of M-16 Ammuntion
@Greg: #12
Actually, Greg, you have a valid point with your earlier observation that:
“Which brings us to the main thing I dislike about assault weapons. They have a certain look, which in my opinion may appeal to the fantasies of immature males and the mentally unstable. They look like military weapons that were specifically designed for killing human being in a combat environment–because that’s the purpose they were originally designed for. ”
Perhaps we would be better served in terms of safety to examine why these people are having these fantasies, and figure out a way to guide them in another direction.
As to your latest comment:
“I’m not walking around with a head full of patent nonsense, such as the idea that the M16 was designed to inflict non-lethal injuries rather than kill. “,
That’s pretty offensive, as I was the one who earlier made the point that military ammunition is, indeed, designed to wound, rather than kill.
The rational being that if you kill an enemy, you have taken one enemy out of the fight. If you wound that enemy, you have taken him out of the fight, as well as one or two of his buddies who must stop fighting to take care of him or carry him to safety.
Of course, this only works if your enemies are soldiers, not savages. Not so much with the Mujahdeen…
The most common “assault rifle” calibers, the 5.56x45mm, 5.45x39mm, and the 7.62x39mm are by no means high powered. They are among the least powerful cartridges available.
Anyway, my invitation still stands. If you’re ever near Savannah, let’s go to the range. I won’t buy you a beer, as I don’t drink alcohol.
And thanks for your service, Greg.
Petercat
hi,
one thing I learn is to get a more efficient gun than the 38 which that mother use
to repel the attacker and finding he his still alive and in front of her in the hideway cache where she was hidding with her twins, as he manage to open it with his crowbar, after ramsacking the house,
she then realize she had no more bullets, that is terrifying, but she kept her sense and that smart maneuver saved her and her twin,
this must be why we heard the last word from her husband on the phone,
that was NO,
IT WOULD BE BETTER TO HAVE A GUN THAT KILL ON THE FIRST SHOT, SPECIALLY FOR A WOMAN NEW TO THAT EXPERTIZE, HAVING TO REPETIVELY SHOOT WHILE BUILDING THE FEAR SHE MUST HAVE HAD TO NOT SEE ANY RESULT
@Greg:
Everyone here would disagree with your claim about a head full of nonsense.
Second, the military is the one that teaches they are designed to wound and not kill. If you have a problem with that, then take it up with the military.
I would also suggest that you talk with veterans of Somalia and Iraq/Afghanistan. They would likely disagree with the claimed “lethality” of m-16 ammo.
Petercat
yes that’s what I want and all woman should have
an m16, ONE SHOT AND YOU GO ABOUT YOUR DESTINY,
NO FUSS NO PROBLEM
BYE
Hard Right
I can see a neighbor hood get together, and the women out in front with their M 16
TAGETTING AN INTRUDER, each house have an alert button
to call the other out, A WARNING TO THE HUSBAND WHO LEFT
IN A BAD MOOD TOWARD HIS WIFE,
A NICE PLACE TO MOVE FOR SECURITY OF THE CHILDREN
PLAYING OUTSIDE WITH THEIR GERMAN SHEFARD GUARD DOG
@Hard Right, #15:
That’s not what I was taught when I was going through military training, nor did it seem to be conventional wisdom in the field. Anyone solidly struck by an M16 projectile traveling at half-a-mile per second generally doesn’t get back up. The bullet tends to turn and fragment, delivering all of its kinetic energy to the target.
Anyone who believes the U.S. military has kept a firearm demonstrating inferior lethal potential as its basic combat weapon for over 42 years really needs to give the matter a little more though. They haven’t kept the weapon because of its tendency to only inflict incapacitating wounds.
What constitutes “nonsense” isn’t determined by majority opinion. It’s a matter of what is fact and what is not. The fact is that an M16 is a highly lethal military weapon.
GREG
YES
that was the time when war meant war to eradicate ennemies, and shoot the traitors
now they bring them in the USA TO SHOW OFF, AND AFTER SPENDING
THE PEOLE’S MONEY FOR YEARS, THEY SEND THEM FREE, THEY MIGHT EVEN GIVE THEM A JOB WITH OBAMA AT THE WHITE HOUSE, WITH THE MANY FUNNY NAMES IN THERE,
SURELY NOT ALL AMERICANS