As I was reading Time's latest article on the hunting shooting, I was dreading throughout the first few paragraphs that the SKS used would be characterized as an all-too powerful "assault weapon" that would rouse anger and dissent amongst the anti-gun populace. Instead, I was pleasantly surprised:
"He was carrying an SKS semiautomatic rifle, a legal deer-hunting weapon but an uncommon one because it isn't particularly powerful."
I'm happy to see that the editors didn't jump to the conclusion that the SKS should be made illegal due to it's military-like characteristics! Anyway, I now feel happy and relieved.
"He was carrying an SKS semiautomatic rifle, a legal deer-hunting weapon but an uncommon one because it isn't particularly powerful."
I'm happy to see that the editors didn't jump to the conclusion that the SKS should be made illegal due to it's military-like characteristics! Anyway, I now feel happy and relieved.