The sniper is a predictable consequence of a gun industry bent on marketing military and military-style weapons to consumers in an effort to revive sales. This mass marketing includes sniper rifles that are radically different from standard hunting rifles yet are easier to buy than handguns. Industry marketing also has fueled a sniper subculture that glorifies the “one shot, one kill” technique used over and over again by this sniper.
Most Americans are surprised to learn that firearms, one of the most lethal consumer products, are not regulated for health and safety. That means there’s no way to track manufacturers who distribute to unscrupulous dealers, no way to collect data on manufacture and use and no way to ban products that pose an unreasonable threat to public safety.
Cheryl Hystad and Susan Peschin
October 24, 2002
Sniper exposes a need for real gun regulation
Cheryl Hystad is executive director of the Maryland Consumer Rights Coalition in Baltimore, and Susan Peschin is firearms project director for the Consumer Federation of America in Washington.
Peschin lying again. Image and story from here.
[The ignorance, or willful lying, is strong with these two. You would think they should know that GC68 provides for a means to trace guns and the 4473 forms we fill out to buy new guns are used everyday for just that. That doesn’t even get into the ignorance or lying in the first paragraph with “sniper rifles” versus hunting rifles.
I know, and I strongly suspect they know, the only way they can win is through willful ignorance and/or lying. Shouldn’t we have some “common-sense” regulation that sends people to prison for attempting to violate someone else’s rights? Oh yeah! We already do.—Joe]
The sniper is a predictable consequence of a gun industry bent on marketing military and military-style weapons to consumers in an effort to revive sales.
Heh. So “snipers” are a consequence of gun manufacturers. Guess the story of William Tell is just a story, and there weren’t ANY archers anywhere in the history of mankind who could hit the broad side of a barn while standing inside? Hmmm…wonder if that’s an upgrade package I can get….”yeah, I’d like an AR-15 in 5.56, and make me a sniper while you’re at it!”
The :facepalm: is strong with these two.
It is the next two lines that really bring the facepalm.
This mass marketing includes sniper rifles that are radically different from standard hunting rifles yet are easier to buy than handguns. Industry marketing also has fueled a sniper subculture that glorifies the “one shot, one kill” technique used over and over again by this sniper.
How many hunters do you know that DON’T want to kill with their first shot?
My 19th century-style, caplock muzzle loader is a “sniper rifle”. I sit in a tree with it, waiting for a deer to walk by, and then; Zap! They never know what hit ’em.
IIRC, Carlos Hathcock, the famous military sniper, started out using a commercial hunting rifle fitted with a commercial hunting scope. So in that sense, any hunting rifle, or any rifle for that matter, is a “sniper rifle” if it’s being used for that purpose.
Now let’s say that our rifles were NOT accurate. How would that play out with the Progressive (incremental communist) media?
“These horrible weapons of death are so innaccurate, so capable of missing the intended target, they pose an imminent and grave risk to public health…”
Evil has a very limited “vocabulary” and is rather stupid. So why does it get so much traction with so many people? Emotion. So long as we’re controlled by our emotions we’re doomed to be controlled by other people.
Careful using the GCA’68 restrictions as a defense. That’s a bit like a Jewish organization saying, “We already have the star of David armband requirement, the cash-on-hand limitations, the marriage restrictions and the forced sterilization programs, and so you see we don’t need the death camps…”
I didn’t intend to use it as a defense. I intended to use it as evidence of their lying.