Brady Campaign on Huffington Post
The head of Brady Campaign has a post at the Huffington Post about its plans & hopes.
One new one: "restricting sales of military style weapons and the ammunition that's used in those weapons."
Notice the abundance of anti-gun commenters over there!
Maybe this is why none of the anti-gun blogs or forums allow comments.
Posted by: Sebastian at November 29, 2006 03:39 PM
Uh dude, page down a bit. There are comments, 99 percent of which are quite hostile to the Brady position.
Everyone who cares about the issue recognizes that the Bradies are a bunch of incrementalists who want to eventually grab everyone's guns.
Posted by: Beerslurpy at November 29, 2006 04:28 PM
What exactly is a military caliber?
.223 Iraq War, .9mm Nato Cold War, Iraq War, .45 WWI &II, .308/ 30.06 WWI&II; Korea, Vietnam,45-70 Plains War, .58 caliber Civil War, .69 Cal Revolution, War of 1812, Mexican War, Civil War, .75 cal Revolutionary War.
Did I leave any out? :)
Posted by: Rudy DiGiacinto at November 29, 2006 09:13 PM
Just about every common caliber and most of the uncommon calibers have been used for military purposes, .22 long rifle is used by our military for training does that make it a military caliber? Marines in Iraq use 12 gauge shot guns, does that mean the one of the most popular hunting cartridges is a military cartridge and should be baned?
Posted by: Joat at November 30, 2006 01:20 AM
I was being sarcastic. I actually tagged it as such but it looks like the software stripped it out. My long standing theory as to why anti-gun sites don't allow comments is because they'd quickly be overwhelmed by people arguing against them, and since many of their positions rely on deception, they have nothing to gain by doing so.
Posted by: Sebastian at November 30, 2006 08:04 AM
Rudy, you missed a lot. You only counted *our* miliary - have to worry about those 7.7 Jap and the .303 Brit, etc, etc, etc.
And you forgot the best one for the US. The good ol' .22. A lot of WWII (and, to a lesser extent, later) preliminary training for high caliber gunners was done using our little friend.
I think we all see the point - it's yet another attempt by our friends to find a way to do an end run; to find an issue that seems "reasonable" and then depend on anti's within the regulatory agency that would enforce (read: BATFE) to contort it into a broad-based ban.
Posted by: bud at November 30, 2006 10:39 AM
Let's not forget that the Brady Center's idea of "reasonable" gun control is the total ban on private ownership of handguns. They don't admit it in their press releases, but they have been known to file "friend of the court" briefs in favor of municipalities that have enacted handgun bans.
Posted by: King of the Cows at November 30, 2006 11:29 AM
Rudy in addition to .22 you left out .25,.32, .38 Special,.380 (9x17), 7.62 Nagant, 7.62x25, 7.62x39, 7.62x54, 7.62x51 (really almost .308), 9mm Makarov, 9mm Largo, and .50. I have miltary issue guns in all of those except the .50. You also left out the shotguns, 410ga and 12ga which have been used by the US military. The 12ga I believe is current. 410 was used by Confederate cavalry pistols. I think BB guns were used for training in WWII also. (Daisy used to advertize this back in the '60s)Only thing I can think of that is not a military cartridge is .17 varment rounds. There might be some large game loads also.
Posted by: Ron W. at November 30, 2006 11:48 AM
Military rifles and rounds are the only ones worth having in a real fight...ask any of the Jews in the Warsaw Ghetto uprising how much better they'd have done with a few more Mausers and maschinenpistolen (sp?).
Posted by: Doug In Colorado at November 30, 2006 04:16 PM
When my dad was at Annapolis and learning to be a crewman on a Dauntless, they trained them to lead the tareget by practicing skeet and clay shooting - so yeh, all shotguns and ammo has a military purpose and background, or in the Brady parlance - a "style"...
What a bunch of runway prancing fashion-hosers, it's always style over substance with them.
Posted by: DirtCrashr at November 30, 2006 05:09 PM