Jimmy Carter on Assault Weapons

Via Say Uncle. Carter doesn't think you should even want to own an assault weapon.

Mostly I wanted to have another entry in the "Jimmy Carter Sucks" category, but there are a few additional points to make: First, "assault weapon" is a scary term with no legal definition in the USA. He means "assault rifle" so let's go from there.

Assault rifles, as defined by US Federal law, are capable of select-fire, meaning they can fire one or more than one bullet with one pull of the trigger, based on the position of a selector switch. Assault weapons are very hard to get legally in the USA. They cost 5x to 20x more than 'one trigger pull for one shot' only "semi-automatic" weapons of exactly the same type. Also, they require an extensive background check, there are Federal requirements to report their location of storage and when you move you need to notify Uncle again. On top of that, there is a $200 fee (instituted, by the way, when $200 was worth what $2000 is today)

As Col. cooper repeatedly pointed out, machine guns are not good for killing people so much as they are for expending ammunition. Even a moderately well-trained operator will miss much more with an assault weapon set to automatic than one set to semi-automatic. There are very few instances where it is genuinely helpful to have a machine gun. Mostly they involve large numbers of enemy combatants at close quarters, especially in low light. Repelling boarders from your yacht at night is an ideal example. Another is taking out a whole squad of jack-booted thugs who have kicked your door in. The other type of situation where machine guns are more useful than semi-automatic guns is clearing the entire landscape, as with a door gunner coming into a "hot" landing zone raking a treeline with bullets.

Thing is, machine guns are expensive to operate. Useful ones will fire rifle bullets, which cost anywhere from $1 to $5 and up, for each shot. If you put 500 rounds into the forest, that is $2500 right there.

The only people that NEED machine guns are in combat.

The only people in combat are soldiers. Who becomes soldiers? Citizens.

Who is afraid of citizen-solders? Tyrants.

If someone wants you to NOT be able to own a $10,000 machine that costs $2500 a minute to operate, and they tell you it's for the children or because of gangs you know in advance that they are either lying or a complete ignoramus. Either way, we should not be making policy decisions based on their ideas.

If they don't realize the potential civilian applications of machine guns, even to the point of saying you shouldn't one to own one if you aren't a criminal (as with Jimmuh) they SUCK and should be quiet.

That is all.