What’s in a name?
Used to be assault weapons. If the police used them, they were patrol rifles. And now, reader F-Stop emails this pic:
Now, they are police style rifles.
More at Ahab’s and Ravenwood’s.
11 Responses to “What’s in a name?”
Remember, I do this to entertain me, not you.
Uncle Pays the Bills
 |
|
Find Local
|
Categories
- ATF (769)
- Death Match (10)
- Eminent Domain (225)
- In the bag (9)
- Notes to Junior (546)
- Poker (74)
- Recipes (142)
- Shotgun Noob (11)
- The Airing of Grievances (19)
- uncategorized (47,725)
October 9th, 2007 at 8:07 am
[…] Uncle has the picture from CNN’s front page, when they still had it up. See it all here. This entry was posted on Monday, October 8th, 2007 […]
October 9th, 2007 at 9:55 am
“Police-style rifles” suddenly revert to “assault weapons” when they are in the hands of “civilians” as law enforcement and official types like to call their CITIZEN employers.
October 9th, 2007 at 10:11 am
Damn the propaganda is thick!!!
October 9th, 2007 at 10:15 am
Just think how hard those writers had to think to come up with that phrase – what was going on in their mind. Something like, “well we can’t call it an assault rifle or a machine gun be an ‘only one’ was using it…what about a rifle of justice?”
October 9th, 2007 at 11:02 am
““Police-style rifles” suddenly revert to “assault weapons” when they are in the hands of “civilians”…”
Smart guns?
October 9th, 2007 at 11:44 am
No bias here. Just descriptive wording. This is how you lose your freedom, one word at a time.
October 9th, 2007 at 12:04 pm
[…] and Uncle point out that when a deranged police officer goes on a rampage, it’s a police-style rifle, […]
October 9th, 2007 at 12:24 pm
Well, you know, these “police-style rifles” aren’t subject to the gun laws so therefore the sue of a non-threatening term. Had a mere “civilian” done this dastardly deed with the SAME rifle, then there would’ve been an emotional political-media frenzy that the “assault weapon” caused the civilian crime and thus more calls for banning them. But the “police-style rifles” will be protected.
October 9th, 2007 at 2:26 pm
Next, they are “user-friendly rifles”. It does what the user wishes.
October 9th, 2007 at 2:52 pm
I like that McZombie. I would definitely say that my Russian AK, self-defense rifle is “user-friendly”.
But the political-media estabnlishment of officialdom would only use such a term as long as they are in the hands of the police-state apparatus, but not in the hands of us, citizens.
October 9th, 2007 at 9:01 pm
User Friendly…… does that make it “non-user unfriendly”? Seems this holds true with the anti-gun loons!