Ohio/Cincinnati - Any one else catch this bit on 50 calibers?

Status
Not open for further replies.
C

Cyanide_357

Member
Joined
May 31, 2004
Messages
153
Channel 12 (WKRC) ran a bit on 50 calibers last night (11:00 pm). I wanted to know the opinions of those who saw it last night

I didn't think it was as biased as the ones ran by 60 minutes, but there could have been more clarification. As usual they got the VPC to talk.

I did get pissed when Tom Dieze (sp?) from VPC was talking about how they wanted 50 cals to be regulated under the NFA. What got me mad was the part about shooters, hunters, etc WOULD NOT mind the extra regulation. Also the normal bashing of the "gun industry"... he called them big babies.

Was the normal fearmongering of 50s being able to take out aircraft and being the "choice" of terrorists... They compaired the cartidges of a 30-06 vs a 50 bmg... and showed the "destructive force" of a 50 cal against a hunk of concrete.

Here is an article off of WKRC's website regarding 50 calibers. The video is within this link also.

http://www.wkrc.com/news/local/story.aspx?content_id=93881DA7-FD7F-4486-9952-0E8829CA2913

Cyanide
 
It's all scare tactics. I don't recall ANY terrorists being found in the possession of these wonderful rifles. I thought their preferred weapons were those that would attract little or no attention, like homemade bombs and such. Heck, if I recall, the terrorists brought down a few airliners with box cutters.
 
I'm an Ohioan w/ a .50 BMG rifle (Serbu BFG). I shoot it in my backyard. I've already drawn my line in the sand... if they ban my rifle, I will simply ignore the law and continue to shoot it. And if they come and try to take it from me, well... see my handle. ;)
 
I saw the piece on the news. Although I don't really know why they had the story on the air in the first place, I thought it was presented in a pretty fair and balanced manner. When the Violence Policy Center guy said something about "all we want is to have them classified the same as machine guns" I thought, yeah, right you lying SOB.
 
True:
They cost more than most people can afford, between $4,000 and $10,000 and the rounds cost $2-3 apiece.
.50BMG can penetrate 1/2" steel at 1 mile (1760 yards).

False:
No terrorists have ever been found to own or use .50BMG rifles, as far as is known.
The Branch Dividians used a .50BMG rifle against federal agents (one was found on the premesis however).
The .50BMG is a "palm-sized" round (err... even the entire round with brass isn't comparable to the size of a palm).
They can be used to down an airliner (I'm really tired of hearing this one repeated).
The .50BMG is the Marine Sniper's round of choice (no, the .308 is, with .300WM probably second most used).
Gun manufacturers are whiney, interested only in profit, and are unpatriotic for refusing to budge on gun laws (what do manufacturers have to do with laws? Barrett is the only manufacturer that has the stones to stand up to leftists).

Given the past reporting on .50 caliber rifles, this is as close to unbiased as you can get. I'm impressed with how close to balanced it was, but still disappointed that the lies outnumber the facts. At least they didn't imply that .50BMG performance is the same as the civilian-unfriendly Raufus rounds. Most .50BMG news articles say the rifles penetrate deeper, at longer range and set things on fire when it's just Raufus that does that.
 
JN01, I agree that it was presented in a fair light, and they did get both sides of the argument. But I felt they didn't explain or go into enough details about the 50 cals and their capabilities.

Like they said "here is the destructive force of a 50 caliber"... and they shot a chunk of concrete... well... I'm pretty sure any 30 caliber would have the same effect. Heck.. a 223 might even do it.

Don't even get me started on the VPS crap... yeah... we really want them to be regulated under the NFA... I don't even think you can get a CLEO sign off in hamilton county.

Cyanide
 
Cyanide_357 said:
JN01, I agree that it was presented in a fair light, and they did get both sides of the argument. But I felt they didn't explain or go into enough details about the 50 cals and their capabilities.

Like they said "here is the destructive force of a 50 caliber"... and they shot a chunk of concrete... well... I'm pretty sure any 30 caliber would have the same effect. Heck.. a 223 might even do it.

Don't even get me started on the VPS crap... yeah... we really want them to be regulated under the NFA... I don't even think you can get a CLEO sign off in hamilton county.

Cyanide
Click to expand...

Remember. Pro-gun people use facts and logic where as the anti-gun side use appeals to emotion and deception. For example, the .50 BMG is used to disable aircraft BUT these are aircraft parked on a runway not in flight. I remember hearing about a news story during the debates over the AWB where the anti-crowd was trying to demontrate the "destructive power" of "assault weapons" by having a police officer shoot a watermelon with an AR15. The round just went all the way through the watermelon leaving only a modest hole. Not getting the effect they wanted they had the cop then shoot the watermelon with his 9mm loaded with hydroshock which exploded the watermelon. Guess which shot on the watermelon was shown to have been from the AR (you got it the 9mm).
 
I heard it on WKRC radio this morning. It seemed like a non-story. VPC put out a press release and they read it. VPC has been putting out this same press release for years. Why the interest in reporting that VPC put out a press release now? There is no pending ban legislation in Ohio that I am aware of. Just banal filler.
 
Grr...

Well, I never watched WKRC, but I wont now for shure. I really hate when i see the .50 lumped into "terrorist weapons". It Irks me badly. Well, If anything this new trend of taking away our guns in america has proven that the 9/11 attacks have changed america, for the worst.
 
MaMa PyCb said:
If anything this new trend of taking away our guns in america has proven that the 9/11 attacks have changed america, for the worst.
Click to expand...

Actually right after 9/11 firearm sales hit an all time high. Also in New Orleans after the looting during huricane Katrine firearm sales went through the roof. Aparently many people only care about guns when they feel threatened. I just wonder how many of those sales were liberal hypocrites. You know, those Dianne Feinstein types that say they hate the fact they "have" to own one to feel safe. My personal opinion is if you are anti-gun have the integrity to live your life in fear rather than owning one.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top