.50 Caliber Rifle Maker Defends Against Anti-Gun Report

Josey1

.50 Caliber Rifle Maker Defends Against Anti-Gun ReportBy Jason PierceCNSNews.com Staff WriterNovember 12, 2001(CNSNews.com) - The Sept. 11 terrorists used box cutters to accomplish their mission, but that hasn't stopped anti-gun lobbyists from using the terrorist threat to call for tighter gun control. A prominent example is the recent report by Tom Diaz of the Violence Policy Center. He alleges that the .50 caliber rifles pose a threat to national security, not only because of their destructive power, but the ease in which the weapons can fall into the hands of terrorist or extremist groups.A spokeswoman for Barrett Firearms Manufacturing, maker of the .50 caliber rifle, accuses Diaz of being "unpatriotic," for making such "insane accusations" in the aftermath of the terrorist attacks.The .50 caliber rifles cost between $2,640 and $8,000, but can be as pricey as $10,000 when outfitted with specialized equipment like a sniper's scope. Anti-gun groups, such as the Violence Policy Center, fear these weapons will fall into the wrong hands, especially the hands of terrorists.The destructive power of the .50-caliber rifle is widely recognized. In his report, Diaz borrowed a description from John L. Plaster, author of the military and police training manual, The Ultimate Sniper. "Here's a bullet that even at 1.5 miles crashes into a target with more energy than Dirty Harry's famous .44 Magnum at point-blank," Plaster wrote.The rifles have been used in past U.S. military operations, including in 1991, when American forces in the Persian Gulf War used the rifles to disable Iraqi light vehicles, missiles and artillery. Diaz quotes Jane's International Defense Review, a military journal, as saying that "from an operational standpoint, the closest parallel weapon to a 0.50-caliber rifle is probably the 60mm mortar."As a result, Diaz believes .50-caliber rifles should be categorized differently than other guns because of their power and destructive capabilities."Given their acknowledged design purpose, sniper rifles are clearly, qualitatively different from any other class of firearms. Other firearms sold in the civilian market are at least nominally designed and sold for sporting or supposed self-defense purposes," Diaz wrote. "Sniper rifles, on the other hand, are designed and sold for the express purpose of killing people and destroying property."Diaz also accuses Barrett Firearms Manufacturing, and other gun manufacturers of understating the weapon's capabilities. "[Barrett] doesn't talk about their ability to punch through armored cars, shoot down hovering helicopters, and set aircraft and high-octane fuel tanks on fire from 1,000 yards away," Diaz writes. "Instead, [Barrett founder Ronnie G. Barrett] calls his super gun 'a toy for a big boy,' and 'a fun toy, a nice collectible.'"Diaz alleges that members of Osama bin Laden's al Qaeda terrorist network acquired more than two-dozen .50 caliber rifles. He also questions whether Barrett, "knew that the 25 guns were sold" to the group, but admits he has no evidence to implicate Barrett.According to Diaz, it's unclear "whether the guns were sold directly from the factory or through a dealer or dealers... Whether the sale to bin Laden's al Qaeda was in 1988 or 1989, however, it certainly would have represented a substantial boost to Barrett's fledgling business."Diaz writes that the Montana cult group, Church Universal and Triumphant, obtained ten of the weapons, that extremist David Koresh and his Waco, Texas-based Branch Davidian cult ended up with two, as did the Irish Republican Army.Mary Scott Smith, spokesperson for Barrett, said the company is well aware of the power of its weaponry, but denied the company has ever sold .50 caliber rifles to foreign nations not sanctioned by the U.S. State Department.According to Smith, the U.S. government bought several .50 caliber rifles fourteen years ago, then supplied the weapons to the rebel forces known as the Afghan Mujahedin, for their fight against Soviet troops occupying Afghanistan. Many of those rebel troops are now part of Afghanistan's ruling Taliban coalition, which is allegedly harboring bin Laden and members of his terrorist group. "That's all we know about it," Smith said. "It happened fourteen years ago. We are busy right now to keep our U.S. military supplied with the things they need to fight this war," Smith said.Smith said Diaz' other allegations are also without merit."We certainly did not ship any rifles to the IRA and as far as David Koresh, we only sell to licensed dealers," she said. "He evidently purchased them through his dealer and his compound had a federal firearms license, so he had them legally. We heard that those rifles were never fired."As a rule, Smith said, Barrett is only allowed to sell to the U.S. military, federally licensed gun dealers, or overseas customers who are approved by the State Department. "The reason this particular group (Violence Policy Center) chose to attack our businesses is because it is a gun control issue," Smith said. "It has nothing to do with terrorists, the war. It has to do with politics. "And, in my opinion, it's very unpatriotic for them to do this at this time, for us to have to put out so many fires and spend so much time talking about insane accusations when we should be supporting our military," she said.All original CNSNews.com material, copyright 1998-2001 Cybercast News Service. http://www.cnsnews.com/ViewNation.asp?Page=\Nation\archive\200111\NAT20011112a.html

Iconoclast

Actually, VPC, HCI (or whatever they call themselves now - scum sucking vermin seems about right) are playing the harmony for their pals in the terrorist organizations. These are the largely the same crowd complaining that its America's fault that we were attacked. BS is BS is BS, no matter how much perfume is dumped on it.