This video... those people...

augh...

I'm sorry. I couldn't watch it. I tried to do so, I really did. But there's only so much stupid I can handle and it exceeded that less than halfway through. And people wonder why people across the world have irrational fears of firearms? With shit like this being provided it's no wonder.

Abe Simpson: "How can you have a house without a gun? What if a bear came through that door?"

Super Soaker also AK-47?

"This is a weapon that kills."

Funny, I figured that was the point of a "weapon".

I dunno, the journalist was looking for insight and going for an angle on whether the gun can fire accidentally while the 'forensics expert' is rattling off these confusing details that...well, kinda make it obvious that he's the go-to guy for the prosecution in any gun-related case.

Forgot to add this, another recent CNN gun clip, a demonstration of the Jayson Williams shotgun case.

http://cnn.com/video/?/video/crime/2010/02/22/ny.vs.williams.gun.demo.insession

I like the way the bald guy breaks open the barrels to show the shell in the bottom chamber to the camera, then turns suddenly when he notices that the gun is then pointed straight at the head of the guy in blue beside him at around the two minute mark.

First: Who cleans a rifle at 2:30am?

CNN has had a noticeable bias against firearms for many years. The journalist had no idea about what he was 'reporting' on. The paid 'Expert' is saying the the rounds would be leaving the muzzle a 3 times the speed of sound and is constantly making assumptions about things that he should already know!

The amount of velocity that the expert claims is dropped over 800m is unlike anything that I have in my ammo tables. I could not trust this guy with a water pistol, let alone a real firearm

Using a .223 to kill a lion or an elephant is impractical under the most perfect circumstances, That is what big bore rifles are for.

The 'expert' cannot seem to understand that triggers are adjustable and can be set to amounts much less that 3lbs (3lbs is the minimum allowed under Australian law, and that can be set off with a hard sneeze!)

2 out of 10

To help those who don't know..

A .223 round is number 9 on this picture (Yes, there are differences between a typical .223 round you can buy at a store and the 5.56x45 in this image, but in terms of bullet size and what a novice can distinguish from the naked eye, there's no difference). Note particularly how the actual bullet length is smaller than the copper colored part of the battery on the far left.

>>14268
>First: Who cleans a rifle at 2:30am?

Regardless of that, how is cleaning that particular rifle any more dangerous than cleaning any other firearm? Oh wait, it's yet another SCARY BLACK RIFLE.

Not to mention the notion that you somehow need specialized training to maintain and operate a Galil as absurd. The basic workings aren't much different than a normal semi-automatic rifle. The most you'd need to do is flip through a simple manual.

>>14270
You forget that in today's society, flipping through a manual does constitute specialized experience.

>>14268

I don't have a rifle but there's been times late at night when I've been bored and I'll take out my guns to make sure they're cleaned and oiled.

Personally, I love shotguns though. 8D

>>14268
>Who cleans a rifle at 2:30am?

I do. It's a nice time to clean, if you're awake for whatever reason. People leave you alone, you can focus and you don't need to worry about missing out on hanging out with people. What's wrong with cleaning a gun at 2:30 am?

"THIS WEAPON IS A GUN."

... no. Is it? Damn. I thought it was a cheesecake.

I'm also impressed by this mention of special training being needed to fire a gun. In my experience, most guns work pretty well if you point the shooty end downrange and then pull the little triggery thing.

I think the tone of the interview was more analyzing the possibility that it wasn't an issue of cleaning the gun and dropping to accidentally shoot someone, but of willfully taking out the gun in the early morning and shooting someone with it.

It's just done with really shoddy 'all guns are ebil' journalism that gets sidetracked on the way the gun looks and how lethal it is to...well, anything else involved with the case.

>>14270
Actually, 5.56x45 mentioned is slightly different than the .223 remington and the two cannot really be used interchangeably.

>>14280
Special training not needed? What about guns with a kickback that'll break your shoulder if you're not prepared?

>>14498
None of those ones are the "evil assault rifles" they're fearmongering with, though. My AR-15s, SPAS-12, AK clones, Steyr HS-50, none of those require special training, since they have such a light recoil. On the other hand, my Remington 673 in .350 Rem Mag, Rem 700 in .300 RUM, CZ-550 in .500 AHR, and 3.5" hunting shotguns all have a pretty strong recoil that could hurt someone if they don't know what they're doing.

>>14498
You'd need a .50 cal or larger in order to get that kind of recoil, and aside from the fact that they're rather expensive, lots of states ban them.

>>14370
>and the two cannot really be used interchangeably.
Uhhh, no. They are the same, just one is a tiny bit higher pressure, though some of the match grade really heavy weight .223 remington is WAY higher pressure than standard flavors of either. I've had brass flow (amazing amounts of pressure there) on factory ammo in an AR and it didn't hurt anything.