Whacking the VPC, Again
So last night, I was thinking about the VPC and the way they keep pushing this “1 out of 5 cops are killed by Assault Weapons!” line. The smart-aleck in me retorted, “Well, 5 out 5 cops are killed by killers!”
Then I thought, “Hey…I wonder how many of these people who killed policemen with ‘assault weapons’ already had criminal records?” So I grabbed the VPC’s “Officer Down” report and started on the list of “select incidents.” Well, I hadn’t even finished the first one on the list when I found out that somebody already had the same idea.
Assuming the information in the table is accurate, and assuming I counted correctly (that’s a big if; please check my numbers), there were 41 perps. At least 22 of these were disqualified from gun possession because of priors or mental illness.
Thank God we have that Brady Law and NICS system to keep Guns Out Of The Hands Of Criminals.
April 4th, 2004 at 10:04 pm
Why do they have MAK90(SKS), SKS (AK-47) and AK-47(SKS) listed as weapons. They are not the same.
I like how they, the anti-gun nuts, go out of their way to define Assault rifles in the courts, then label everything “Assault weapons”.
April 4th, 2004 at 10:13 pm
2 of the incidents used a Mini-14, which is specifically NOT an “ugly rifle”.
April 5th, 2004 at 8:17 am
Well, the Mini-14 fires the same ammumition as the High-Powered Assault Sniper Rifle used by Malvo and Mohammed. And the AK/SKS shoot the notorious Armor-Piercing Cop-Killer 7.62x39mm ammo.
Seriously, though, are you surprised that the VPC tries to inflate the numbers?
April 6th, 2004 at 9:36 am
Maybe it’s just me… but I can’t even find a definition of what they call an “assault weapon.” They sure aren’t using the term how I would use it, and they don’t have a clear definition of it, either. (That I could find.) Interpret that as you see fit…
April 6th, 2004 at 10:37 am
Any weaopon used in an assault?
Yours,
Wince
April 6th, 2004 at 11:19 am
Instalanch! Cool.
I’m with you Uncle. Back a long time ago I fisked the “one in five” meme showing that nineteen of the 41 “assault weapons” weren’t. I hadn’t thought to see how many of the perpetrators were prohibited persons, though.
April 6th, 2004 at 11:57 am
I just had a great idea!
Why don’t we pass a law that makes it illegal for someone who is not allowed to have a weapon to have a weapon? Then our problems will all be solved.
April 6th, 2004 at 1:02 pm
We also need to tighten the loopholes in the Murder Ban laws that allow these murders to happen in the first place!
April 6th, 2004 at 2:47 pm
Is an M1 carbine covered under the AWB? It certainly doesn’t shoot the same cop killin’ dum-dum bullet as the Mini-14
April 6th, 2004 at 4:20 pm
The M1 Carbine, as far as I know, is not specifically named in the ban. However, since it is fed by a detachable magazine (and has a bayonet lug), you could easily turn one into an “assault weapon” by replacing the GI stock, for example, with one having a pistol grip.
The VPC are getting wise. They’ve realized the idiocy of the “evil features” definition, which includes such howlers as the bayonet lug and grenade launcher. Instead, as I blogged about earlier, they’re focusing on two things: “high-capacity” detachable magazines and pistol grips. They are pushing to make these the defining criteria, along with a longer list of specific models (which I do believe includes the SKS and the M1 Carbine).
We may have dodged a bullet (so to speak) with the recent lawsuit bill, but this fight ain’t over, not by a long shot.
April 6th, 2004 at 6:14 pm
Wasn’t the M1 Carbine issued specifically to non-rifelmen (cooks, bakers, admin, artillery, etc) instead of a heavy Garand or a scarce pistol? Hardly the audience for an “assault weapon.”
April 6th, 2004 at 6:51 pm
Perhaps we should be very careful about suggesting, even in jest, silly laws that cannot and will not have any effect on outlaws. Some damn fool might decide to pass such and then blame us.
April 6th, 2004 at 7:39 pm
Gerard:
I think you are more-or-less correct, but I do believe some front-line troops also carried the carbine—e.g., paratroops.
December 1st, 2004 at 1:49 pm
[…] earm-related death and injury. Actually, the VPC conducts no real research. They tend to make it up.
| Link | | Category: Guns |
Comments» […]
November 1st, 2006 at 10:52 am
[…] Assuming the information in the table is accurate, and assuming I counted correctly (that’s a big if; please check my numbers), there were 41 perps. At least 22 of these were disqualified from gun possession because of priors or mental illness. […]