Subscriber Login

Forgot Your Username?
Forgot Your Password?
This might be time for assault guns ban PDF Print E-mail

Letter to the Editor:

In the summer of 1969, at the age of 18, I was going through the U.S. Infantry School at Fort Jackson, S.C.

As part of our infantry training, we received rudimentary training and firing of a variety of Vietnam-era weaponry such as the M-60 machine gun, the M-79 grenade launcher (thumper), the M-72 light anti-tank weapon and the M-16A1 assault weapon which is actually one of the prototypes of the civilian assault weapons we have today, like the Bushmaster used in the Newtown massacre of students.

The M-16 can shoot on fully automatic or semi-automatic with the flip of a small lever. It could cycle a 30-round clip in seconds (850 rounds per minute), but was usually fired in bursts of three or four rounds or semi.

The M-16 shot a smaller bullet (.223-caliber) than the M-14, the weapon it replaced. However, we were told the killing power of this cartridge was just as effective because of its high velocity (3,200 feet per second), internal fragmentation and internal ricochet. This gun was designed to be lightweight while maximizing firepower and casualties.

It was reported that all the victims of the Newtown massacre had at least three rounds in them, and the estimated timeframe of the incident was about 15 or 20 minutes.

After I moved north al­most 30 years ago, I purchased a 30-30 small lever-action carbine. I’ve harvested many deer with that gun and wounded only one. This gun is designed for hunting.

You could say I’ve been a hunting and gun enthusiast all my life. But the interesting thing is I never thought of my M-16 as in any way connected to hunting or sporting arms. As far as I was concerned, that weapon be­longed in a different place in my life — that weapon was built and designed with the latest technology to intimidate and kill people.

I believe weapons like the M-16 are weapons of war that belong on the battlefield, not a playground or under some young man’s bed to play with on the week-ends.

This fascination with this weapon of war is a reflection of our culture — one filled with fear, separation and division — with a disconnect between the people and the wars fought on their behalf. I know, I live in a Republican county, and a state that is now considered the most polarized in the country, but this isn’t a Republican or Democratic issue. It’s an American issue, a cultural issue, an issue about the right of our children to feel safe.

The NRA would have us believe this is about the Second Amendment, and their mantra is one of fear and paranoia, about storm troopers taking away our guns. If you believe that, and hate this country and it’s leadership to that extent, then there’s probably nothing that can be said, except to recommend a few good history books.

The three main things being proposed in an assault weapons ban would not affect my hunt one bit and it just might lesson the fear and angst in this culture. I know there’s no single answer to  this complicated issue and the NRA is recommending censorship,  armed guards and armed teachers, but let’s get real!

Maybe hunters and veterans like myself have a special responsibility to just say “Enough.”

I know there’s got to be a few out there who don’t follow lock-step behind the NRA. The NRA has hidden behind us too long!

Gregory Schiek Sr.



Tuesday, January 08, 2013 4:23 PM
Last Updated on Wednesday, January 16, 2013 3:35 PM


-17 #28 Frank Gabl 2013-01-22 06:57

You can’t be serious.

If anyone is an “extremist,” it’s you with all of the hyperbole and propaganda that you’ve been throwing around for days.

You’re the one who acted “extreme” right out of the gate by injecting “machine guns and hand grenades” into the debate and finished it off by saying: “Anything to justify the right to carry weapons meant for war.”

“Meant for war,” “cop-killer bullets,” “armor piercing,” “assault weapons,” “bullet that can kill police,” yet, you admit to owning weapons (“hunting rifle” and “Glock”) that you railed against. That’s the textbook definition of hypocrite for crying out loud.

Tom and I provided more than enough information to debunk your leftwing talking points. Yet, what do we get in your sanctimonious response to Steve?

“But it's crazy when those (their) views are so extreme.”

Do us all a favor and listen to yourself!
+16 #27 2013-01-21 22:03
Thanks Steve, I know this is a VERY conservative part of the country and I do agree with many of their views, but it's crazy when those views are so extreme. It reminds me of the Congress right now where no one is willing to work together for the good of the nation.
+17 #26 2013-01-21 17:46
You are totally correct Ken. Your only problem is trying to make extreme viewpoints and people make sensible changes. They won't change even if there was a clip with 1,000 bullets. They would find some stuiped reason to justify more and more bullets. If the country is taken over, all the bullets in the world will not stop the tanks and bombs that would be used against us. I think it just makes some people feel better having a bigger gun!
-16 #25 Frank Gabl 2013-01-20 16:28

The mind-boggling hypocrisy and intellectual dishonesty from the Left:

Well, I’m glad to see that we’ve moved on from the myths of the “cop killer” and “armor piercing” bullets and answered the related question posed in post 15: “What is the PURPOSE of these bullets?”

So, on to the next set of questions in post 19: “Whats the reason for clips that can fire 30-100 rounds in seconds. What do you use an ar15 for?”

First, we have to establish a few facts (as opposed to myths) as to the number of homicides committed by “all rifles” which includes the designation “semi-automatic,” of which; the demonized and much maligned AR15 is one such kind. In 2011, the number of murders committed with “all” types of “rifles” (as in hunting, etc.) was a whopping 323.

Cont. below:
-15 #24 Frank Gabl 2013-01-20 16:23

And since the closest estimates in the U.S. place rifles at 110 million and the modern sporting rifle, the AR15, at 3 million, the AR15 makes up less than a scant 3% of the “rifle” category.

This entire argument by the Left, who would ban what they label as an “assault weapon” and limit magazine size, is a ruse since these generally are the same people who condone real assault weapons and the extremists who use them to kill 12,000 children in “late term” abortions out of the 1.2 million abortions performed each year.

To quote the current occupant of the White House from just last week: “If there is a step we can take that will save even one child from what happened in Newtown, we should take that step."

Cont. below:
-16 #23 Frank Gabl 2013-01-20 16:21

So using that same logic: If there is a step we can take that will save even one child from the 12,000 that are put to death by the hands and weapons of late-term abortionists, we should take that step.

WARNING: Graphic late-term abortion using legal assault weapons.

More facts to debunk fiction:

-15 #22 2013-01-19 00:43
Ken, it's clear you are a "victim" of the anti-gun propaganda machine. "Cop killer bullets" don't exist, AR15s do not fire "hundreds of bullets in seconds", "assault weapon" is another media invented term to alter perception to the unknowledgable, hi-capacity magazines are not "the choice" of those who like to shoot up schools & movie theaters.

The exclusive school the Obama children go to has had 11 armed guards (not including SS) even before they attended. The NRA is pointing out the hypocrisy, armed guards are OK for his kids, but not for ours. Clinton suggested armed guards after Columbine.
Speaking of hypocrisy, Obama has just used children as "props" in his press conf about gun control. But that's OK, huh? What do 7-10 yr olds know about such a complex issue, other than what their parents told them to say? Shameful to use them for emotional hype to push an agenda.
-14 #21 2013-01-19 00:26
AR15s are currently used for hunting, competition, target, and home defense. They have been far and away the most popular selling firearm in the US for the past decade. Millions sold. Nothing else comes close.
AR15s are available in such time honored deer calibers as .243 & .308. The .223 version is by far the most popular rifle used by predator (coyote) hunters.
Size of magazine is irrelevant. If 30s are banned, three 10s will be used instead.
Seung-Hui Cho, the shooter at Va Tech, used only 10 & 15 round magazines. He had 2 handguns (9mm & .22lr), 17 empty magazines were found, he fired 170 shots, 10 per magazine. Dylan Klebold, a Columbine murderer, used only 10 round magazines in a Hi Point 995 carbine. He had 13 of them. The shooter in Aurora Co shot more people with a Rem 870 than his AR15.
This link will explain more than I can in the space allotted here.
Tom Montag
-1 #20 2013-01-18 16:34
Gable, Really love all your history lessons
+17 #19 2013-01-18 16:30
whats the reason for clips that can fire 30-100 rounds in seconds. What do you use an ar15 for. Why are the extreme gun owners so afraid of not being able to buy large capacity clips that are used the majority of times someone decides to take on a school or movie theatre. I really dislike the extemists on either side of this issue. I for one am a NRA member who can see both sides. Although I disagree with the nra questioning why Pres. Obama's children have armed gaurds. I mean really hasn't all presidents familys been protected since I'm sure they would be some extremists top target for kidnapping or worse!

Add comment

Comments exceeding 1,000 characters will not be accepted. Please refrain from using texting language and spell out all words. All comments are reviewed and must be approved before they are posted.

Security code