|HubPages Device ID||This is used to identify particular browsers or devices when the access the service, and is used for security reasons.|
|Login||This is necessary to sign in to the HubPages Service.|
|HubPages Traffic Pixel||This is used to collect data on traffic to articles and other pages on our site. Unless you are signed in to a HubPages account, all personally identifiable information is anonymized.|
|Remarketing Pixels||We may use remarketing pixels from advertising networks such as Google AdWords, Bing Ads, and Facebook in order to advertise the HubPages Service to people that have visited our sites.|
|Conversion Tracking Pixels||We may use conversion tracking pixels from advertising networks such as Google AdWords, Bing Ads, and Facebook in order to identify when an advertisement has successfully resulted in the desired action, such as signing up for the HubPages Service or publishing an article on the HubPages Service.|
Tennessee’s new official state rifle is so powerful it can 'destroy commercial aircraft'
http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/tennes … li=BBnbfcL
The Barrett .50 caliber rifle is a powerful gun. Originally designed for military use, its rounds can "penetrate light armor, down helicopters, destroy commercial aircraft, and blast through rail cars," according to a report from the Violence Policy Center, a gun safety group. The Law Center to Prevent Gun Violence describes .50 caliber rifles like the Barrett as "among the most destructive weapons legally available to civilians in the United States."
Why do they need an official gun and why so powerful?
That sounds a lot like military ordinance to me. How can such a weapon be available to civilians as this goes far beyond self defense? I would like to hear from the 'gun people' as to whether they believe that they should be able to buy and possess a weapon of such tremendous destructive power.
First, it isn't such "tremendous destructive power". It doesn't take much to bring down a commercial aircraft; a single bullet into the air intake during takeoff or landing should do the trick. And the Barrett isn't going to shoot far enough up to hit one at normal cruising altitude.
As far as killing people, most hunting rifles are at nearly as deadly as the Barrett. It will have a little longer range, but is far too large to be of much use outside or target shooting or a bunker type standoff.
I will add that self defense has nothing to do with the right to own and bear arms. Whether that is the intended purpose or not is irrelevant to any question of why people have the right to have a gun.
Just like you mentioned across town earlier, it's no more dangerous than those lethal "hands and feet" that have been killing white folks, black folks, Pacific Islanders, and Chinamen for thousands of years.
Well, true - it isn't the gun or tool that kills, but the person pulling the trigger. And in close combat those trained hands will be far more lethal than a huge iron club. Of course, at a 1/4 mile distance the odds would seem to favor a gun.
Guess it's all relative and dependent on circumstance, isn't it?
The Barret * rifle , like so many "assault " rifles is but one more target adapted from military style weapons . A sling shot can bring down a helicopter , or a presentation pointer laser for that matter . It is an impressive weapon though and is really but one more bolt action rifle available to civilians.
George Washington's rifle could do all the above if properly used .
A Lamborghini isn't really that fast. Pretty much like any other car really...
I will at least give you guys credit for making such dopey statements with straight faces.
by Mike Russo5 months ago
Ask the 59 people who were killed and the 525 people who were wounded and all of those who were traumatized by this horrific event, if we need gun control. Why does any civilian need access to assault weapons? The...
by flacoinohio4 years ago
Has the threat of a weapons ban prompted you to purchase an assault rifle, magazine, and ammunition?While there is a threat of a new or reinstated Federal assault weapons ban and a new ban in effect in New York, there...
by thomasczech4 years ago
Gun Grab North America .In your opinion, are the anti gun groups going too far, or not far enough?The governments of both, United States and Canada, along with the anti gun groups are pushing for tighter restrictions of...
by Ralph Schwartz3 months ago
I've been reading and listening to the debate on gun control over the past day. I keep hearing a repeating theme from those who feel guns need to be banned - its for the safety of children. Yet, those same...
by JaxsonRaine5 years ago
This isn't meant to be a pro-gun or anti-gun thread. This is meant to be an educational thread... if anybody cares.There is a lot of misconception about guns(I blame the media and Congress), so I'll explain anything or...
by James Smith4 years ago
Considering the news that people are beginning to use 3D printing to create weapons . . .http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-ma … r-24666591 . . . and the consensus being that any attempt to restrict or even ban...
Copyright © 2018 HubPages Inc. and respective owners.
Other product and company names shown may be trademarks of their respective owners.
HubPages® is a registered Service Mark of HubPages, Inc.
HubPages and Hubbers (authors) may earn revenue on this page based on affiliate relationships and advertisements with partners including Amazon, Google, and others.