Stupid or Evil:
Politicians Writing Laws on Topics They Know Nothing About
By: David Deschesne
Editor/Publisher, Fort Fairfield Journal
October 9, 2019
There is no topic where the ignorance of its opponents is more displayed than that of gun control as spewed forth by the rabid, left-wing progressive Democrats. To listen to what they are saying to support their position, one would have to conclude they either have no idea what they’re talking about (stupid) or they know exactly what they’re talking about but are being deliberately misleading in order to achieve their goals (evil).
As heavy as ten moving boxes
Democrat Congressional representative, Sheila Jackson-Lee, from Texas, said at a recent anti-gun press conference that she picked up an AR-15 and said it felt as heavy as “ten moving boxes.” She also said the weapon was chambered with the .50 caliber round, which should be licensed. The news reporters there - most of whom are as ignorant about guns as she appears to be - nodded in agreement.
Those of us with even a rudimentary knowledge of firearms will smile with amusement at Jackson-Lee’s statements. First of all, an AR-15 only weighs in at around 6.5 pounds empty or 7.5 pounds with a full 30 round magazine attached. I’m not sure how heavy her “ten moving boxes” were in her imagination. If you want to give her the benefit of the doubt -- a dangerous thing to do for a politician, Republican or Democrat - perhaps she was referring to ten empty moving boxes.
Now, on to her comment about a .50 caliber round. The AR-15 is a small arms weapon. It is ordinarily chambered with the .223, which is a bullet around a quarter of an inch in diameter - about the diameter of a small pencil. The .50 caliber BMG round is very much larger. It is around a half inch in diameter - about as big around as the larger markers our children use to color with. The .223 can kill a person, but its design was initially introduced by the military to maim by creating small holes and bouncing around off the bones inside the body and tearing up the insides of the enemy. This would create a situation where an enemy soldier is severely wounded and it would require one or two additional soldiers to be taken out of action to render him aid and get him back to the aid station. Using this tactic, you can quickly reduce the effectiveness of the enemy force’s numbers without having to shoot all of them.
The .50 caliber BMG round is a much larger, more powerful round that was designed to be more anti-material. That is, it can punch a hole through an engine block when fired from two miles away.
Some have said perhaps Jackson-Lee was suggesting the AR-15 could be chambered to take the .50 caliber round. Well, that would require changing the barrel, receiver, bolt, and firing pin. In other words, you’d have to change out every part of the gun except the stock and it would no longer be an AR-15, it would be a clumsily coddled together .50 cal. (would it then be an AR-50? Ha, ha.)
A Barrette M-82A1 is a common .50 caliber weapon that weighs in at around 35 pounds. Could this be the weapon Jackson-Lee picked up, thinking it was an AR-15? Perhaps.
While AR-15s have been used in some mass shootings by FBI and CIA mind controlled patsies to demonize that weapon, the .50 caliber BMG rifle has definitely not been the tool of choice for mass shooters. It is a much heavier gun to tote around and the semi-automatic version (one round fired per one trigger squeeze) costs around $8,900. As for the fully automatic “machine gun” versions - any of those manufactured after 1986 aren’t even available for sale to the general public anyway, only the police and military have those guns and they are stringently monitored and inventoried. The pre-1986 machine guns have become collectors items and fetch anywhere from $10,000 to $30,000 or more for pricing - if you could even find one for sale. That’s a little outside of the budget for your typical mass shooter, I would think.
As an aside, the AR-15 is not a fully automatic weapon. It is not a “machine gun” like the media claims. It is a semi-auto, which means you have to squeeze the trigger every time you want to fire a shot.
Now, Sheila Jackson-Lee is either woefully ignorant of guns, or she knows exactly what she’s talking about and is being deliberately misleading to her constituents as she attempts to sell her gun confiscation agenda. She’s either stupid, or evil. Either way, is this a person who should be in charge of writing laws on anything? Probably not, but the fools keep electing her.
30 rounds in half a second
California Democrat State Senator, Kevin de Leon betrayed his ignorance of guns during a press conference on his gun control bill, SB 808.
Holding what appeared to be a military-issue M-14 with pistol grip, he said, “this right here has ability with a 30 caliber clip to disperse with 30 bullets within half a second.” In the video clip I watched of this statement, the police officer standing guard in the background looking on was able to keep a straight face even among that snafu.
Politics aside, let’s do some simple math to work on his “30 bullets within half a second” statement. 30 rounds in half a second multiplied by 2 would give us 60 rounds per second. Multiply that by 60 seconds in a minute and you get a gun that can fire 3,600 rounds per minute. Impressive! But is it true for this particular weapon?
The M-14 is an improvement on the M-16; it has a shorter, 14.5 inch barrel which is better suited for the modern close-quarters combat the U.S. military is now engaging in (the M-16 has a longer, 21 inch barrel but 14.5 inch barrels are available for it) and it fires a larger .308 round. A few years ago, the U.S. Marines switched over to the M-14 for its obvious advantages. For post-1986 manufactured M-14s, the fully automatic “machine gun” version of it isn’t even available for sale to the general public, anyway. Pre-1986 full auto versions, however, are available for a lot of money, a $200 transfer tax to the BATF and additional approval by your local police chief, (or if your town doesn’t have a PD, State Police) after one passes the FBI’s background check, which is required for all conventional firearms purchases to begin with.
Now, for his statement that it can “disburse 30 rounds in half a second.”
The M-14 and the more modern M-16A2 are designed for an absolute maximum rate of fire of 750 and 950 rounds per minute, respectively - a far cry from the 3,600 rounds per minute suggested by this California Democrat. However, while those guns are designed to, in theory, fire at those rates, they can’t because you have to stop to change the magazine, reload the receiver and allow a little bit of time for the barrel to cool down. This is why their “Practical Rate of Fire” is specified at around 40 to 100 rounds per minute.” If you were able to fire off 700-900 rounds in a minute the barrel would get so hot it would expand and warp, thus rendering the weapon useless.
There are guns that can fire 3,600 rounds per minute or more. They’re called Gatling guns. A Gatling gun has a cluster of barrels which revolve around a central axis as it’s being fired. Only one barrel at a time fires a round as it comes into position with the receiver, but these guns can fire at amazing speeds.
For example, the General Electric 30 millimeter GAU-8 Avenger weighs in at 620 pounds empty and can fire an astounding 4,000 rounds per minute. You won’t find any of these at your local gun store, though, since they are designed to be mounted in the A-10 Warthog anti-tank airplane used by the U.S. military. Even if you could buy an after-market version, a 620 pound gun would be pretty heavy to drag around to your next mass shooting.
There’s also the MK15 Phalanx Close-in Weapons System. This bad boy can fire 20 millimeter rounds at a rate of up to 4,500 rounds per minute. You won’t be toting this rig to your next mass shooting, either. It weighs in at 13,600 pounds and is designed to be used as a missile defense system mounted on the decks of U.S. Navy warships. But, I wouldn’t expect an anti-gun Democrat to know anything about this. Perhaps these Democrats are getting all their information about guns from surreal Hollywood movies. In this case, do you really want this group of people legislating on guns? Probably not. Now, either Senator de Leon is just plain stupid, or he knows what he’s talking about and is being deliberately misleading. Either way, is this the type of person you want to put in charge of people’s lives? I don’t think so.
Legal to Hunt Humans
During a debate on gun control bill S.150, U.S. Senator Diane Feinstein (D - Calif.) said, “It is legal to hunt humans with 15 round, 30 round, even 150 round magazines.” She can’t be accused of misspeaking with these snafus because she was reading from a prepared statement which was presumably proofread ahead of time.
There are a couple of problems with her statement. First, it is not “legal to hunt humans” in the United States with any gun. There is no law that allows one human to hunt another so she is simply being criminally overdramatic in her zeal to demonize a particular type of weapon. Secondly, the “150 round magazine” isn’t really a magazine it’s more of a barrel drum type. Regardless of which capacity magazine you have in your weapon, it is most definitely not “legal to hunt humans” as the Senator says. I can’t offer the option that she’s stupid in this case (which she really is, otherwise) because she was reading from a prepared statement. It’s more likely in this instance that the Senator knows full well it’s not “legal to hunt humans” but chose that phrase to be deliberately misleading.
Stupid voters?
Why are voters electing politicians who are either completely stupid, or willing to be deliberately misleading? If voters were of a sane mind and able to think rationally and objectively, these politicians wouldn’t stand a chance of being elected. But, the mainstream media, public education system and the college/university system in the U.S. have seen to it to produce an entire generation of voters who don’t know how to think and reason; don’t know how to research; and therefore don’t know how to call out a politician for inaccuracies in their statements.
Having a populace in this crippled state of mind is bad enough if one wants to maintain a free and efficiently functioning society, but couple that group of people with the ability to walk into a voting booth and vote for politicians to be in charge of the lives of the rest of us is a recipe for disaster.
Now, I’m sure I could go on and on about stupid politicians and expand the field from the gun control debate into the climate debate, public education debate, finance debate, health and fitness debate, or any other genre you care to discuss. But, this is an editorial, not a book. So I’ll have to leave it up to you all (or, y’all if you’re one of my Southern readers) to do that work for yourself.
But keep one thing in mind, the intellectual level of any given societies’ leaders is merely a reflection of the level of intellect of the voters who put them into office. While the media is making stupid and misleading look “cool” to the masses, those attributes can never contribute to the maintenance or longevity of a free and successful society.
