It's a pity that Senator Coburn didn't bother to ask what Holder believes constitutes a "cop killer" bullet, because that term, like "assault weapon" (and "gun show loophole," for that matter) is an invention of the citizen disarmament lobby, designed to exploit the ignorance of much of the general public regarding firearms.That's today's St. Louis Gun Rights Examiner. Hope to see you there.
The soft body armor typically issued to patrol officers (as opposed to the heavy, cumbersome, rigid armor worn by S.W.A.T. units) is designed to stop handgun rounds, and will not provide adequate protection from just about any centerfire rifle round--including any that's useful for game much larger than a groundhog. Senator Ted Kennedy once famously tried to use that as an excuse to ban just about all centerfire rifle ammo. [More]
Digg me?
Check out other Gun Rights Examiners:
- Atlanta: Georgia Tech's school safety zone renders its students and employees vulnerable
- Austin: Washington man kills five kids: More death by government?
- Boston: Massachusetts Gun Law – time for real reform (Part III)
- Charlotte: Mexicali lies on 'assault weapons:' The real agenda?
- Cleveland: Why not put confiscated firearms to good use?
- DC: Virginia Governor Tim Kaine insults military members with dishonest veto message
- Denver: Binghamton NY and other sheep pens
- Los Angeles: Gun control humiliated again.
- Milwaukee: New anti-gun ”feel good” bills now in committee in WI Capital. CORRECTION
- Minneapolis: Breaking News: Was Pittsburgh gunman ineligible to possess firearms?
- National: Media rushes to judgment in Pittsburgh shooting
- Seattle: Media rushed to blame 'high-powered rifle' as anti-gunners dance in blood
- Wisconsin: Use and threat of lethal force
Stumble it!
2 comments:
Hey, Kurt, just a thought--when you put in the image of the Examiner logo, you can then click on that image in the "Compose" view and click the link button. Then you can put in the address of the article and when you publish the post, the image will be a link to your Examiner page. The only thing you lose by doing this is the ability to click on the photo and be taken to an "embiggened" version--but for a logo, that doesn't matter.
The advantage is that it gives people a great big button to click to go where you want them to go.
Sure--I can do that, if you think it will be useful (in fact, I've already done so with today's post, just to validate the concept).
I'd have thought that including a link in the title, and another in the "[More]" at the end of the quoted passage, would be enough, but if adding another link on the pic brings in some more page views, I'll give it a shot.,
Post a Comment