Quote of the day—Star-Ledger Editorial Board

When he was in the state Assembly, Jack Ciattarelli voted against banning 50 caliber weapons, those military-grade exterminators that can sever limbs and puncture armor. These are the weapons of choice for urban warfare, and a skilled sniper can use it to take down light armored vehicles, helicopters, or even a taxiing airplane — from nearly a mile away.

Star-Ledger Editorial Board
October 25, 2021
Ciattarelli and guns: A history of misfires
[And how many 50 caliber “military-grade exterminators” are used in any type of criminal violence each year in the U.S.? Rounding to the nearest 0.1 percent, the answer is zero.

Because they have no principled argument, no legal argument, and no practical argument they lead with what they do have a huge advantage with, their lies and deception. It’s in their culture.—Joe]


8 thoughts on “Quote of the day—Star-Ledger Editorial Board

  1. Methinks their projecting their own revolutionary ideas on gun owners? As in, we have to get rid of weapons that can be used against us. Because we know our policies are destructive.
    They know full well that 50’s aren’t being used to rob liquor stores. And as stated, their worried about what they could be used for.
    And just like vampires. None of what they are appears in the mirror. To them.

  2. I almost always used a 50 caliber rifle on deer. 110 grains of black powder under a cloth-patched round ball. My self imposed range limit was 100 yards. It was thoroughly effective within that distance.

    During the Anerican Civil War, typical long gun calibers were 54 caliber and larger.

    It’s interesting that politicians believe that they, who have no knowledge or experience in such things whatsoever, need “military-grade” (which they cannot define) “exterminators” (which they cannot define) while threatening to deprive others of the same.

    So it’s always the same question with politicians and their people in media, isn’t it– Are they severely retarded or irretrievably evil, or both? Does it matter which, given that their destructive effects on society will be the same either way?

  3. It is entertaining, but they do fear the 50BMG. If things get “interesting”, that can cause havoac with the delivery of food, fuel, electricity, and water to their urban nests. They joke about nuclear weapons and F-15s but know where their vulnerability is. That 50 can do unpleasant things to trucks, locomotives, RR brake systems, pumping stations, transformers and people from far away snd with pretty good precision. It is a threat that they’d like to control or eliminate. Their effort has nothing to do with common crime which they seem to be encouraging.

    • Your 5.56 can do the same things to the supply chain of most cities just by going after truck tires. Or electric power meters. (No meter, no power, right?)
      And were not even up to the, fed’s-a-foot program.
      The left never considers life without everything they take for granted.
      Taking those things away is worse than gut-shooting them.

  4. 50 Caliber rifles like the Barrett are too expensive for the average gun owner (maybe can afford a Serbu). But if you have AP or API ammo in 30 caliber, even a .308 Winchester will suffice to disable vehicles or aircraft if you know the vulnerable points. Or 30-06. I have API for my M1 Garand. Most ex-Military know where the vulnerable points are on a target.

    • Exactly this. Caliber is not anywhere near as important as shot placement or tactical strategy. In fact, a little thermite or even napalm would do considerable damage in place of any bullet.

      TBTB don’t like .50 BMG? There are many smaller options to choose from that will do the trick, if someone really wanted to make his mark. .338 Lapua, .375 Cheytac, .416 Barrett, etc.

    • Don’t even need to be that precise. Put a .22LR round through the front of an aircraft canopy, maybe through the HUD glass. Doesn’t really break the fighter, but how many spare canopies do they have? They can’t fly with a hole in the front because the hole and the weakened structure mean the whole thing could go to pieces in flight, leaving the pilot in a convertible. Only the A-10s would stand up to that plan. Keep the planes out of the air and keep them otherwise sound for recovery later.

      Don’t take a tank head-on. Attack the logistics train that keeps it moving, and a tank is a dead weight. There’s a lesson in that, I’m sure…

  5. It isn’t what HAS happened with a particular weapon or caliber…it’s what MIGHT happen that they harp on. And using that logic we simply need to BAN FERTILIZER…..because it HAS been used to blow up buildings. But then logic,
    facts and reason are never involved in the drivel that spills from the pieholes of leftists.

Comments are closed.