Ya know, this seems to be happening

[MichaelHarris]

more and more,

First reports of the incident came from a 911 call at 1:16 p.m., reporting that two officers had been shot, possibly with an assault-type rifle. The suspect fled from the scene, sparking a huge manhunt that involved officers from at least five different law enforcement agencies. http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2009/03/21/BAVB16KU75.DTL&tsp=1

Now I know all the pro-assault weapon arguments and I will say this is still a breaking story and maybe someone did misidentify the weapon. With the mass shooting two weeks ago with assault weapons, the murder of police officers in Moscow, Id a while back and now today's story. How many reports will it take for this to go from a "rare" occurrence to something more? Basically, how many will have to die before we notice a problem?

I'm not anti-gun at all, I own guns, I'm also willing to admit we are seeing more and more of these stories. The numbers aren't going to go down, crimes committed with assault weapons. You have to be vary naive to believe that they will.

[LakeSamish706]

1. My guess would be Gangs... Just like what is happening in Vancouver, BC....

Canada. There have been a rash of shootings up there these past weeks, not cops but gang members trying to take over new territory.

[EmilyAnne]

2. My husband went into a Dick's Sporting Goods last week and saw a man buying a $600 gun

that looked like a machine gun. The man mentioned to the clerk that he was going to buy some parts to convert to to an assault weapon, something that the clerk seemed to already know a great deal about.

[benEzra]

9. "Assault weapons" are the most popular civilian target rifles in the USA.

And converting a rifle to an "assault weapon" has nothing to do with rate of fire, but rather things like stock shape.



If the rifle the man was buying was only $600, then it may have been a Saiga that the buyer intended to convert from a straight stock to a more ergonomic separate-handgrip configuration. Because of some rather arcane Bill Bennett/Bush the Elder import regulations, you have to change out some other parts to avoid running afoul of 18 USC 922(r).

Machineguns are restricted to police/military only in the USA, unless you first obtain Federal authorization (BATFE Form 4), and only wealthy collectors need apply.

[EmilyAnne]

18. Hmm. Thanks for the explanation. I am so clueless about guns. My husband said it looked like a

machine gun, but I know that doesn't mean anything.

You are saying that regardless of the conversion, he can't turn it into an "assault weapon?"

Could you define an "assault weapon" for me? I always think that it had to do with rate of fire and amount of ammunition it can hold.

Thanks!

[benEzra]

20. An "assault weapon", as defined by the Brady Campaign's model legislation,

is any non-automatic, detachable-magazine civilian rifle that has any one of the following features:

--protruding handgrip;
--stock that adjusts for length or folds for storage
--muzzle with screw threads, for installing a muzzle brake (recoil reducer) or flash suppressor (flame damper);
--strong cosmetic resemblance to a military rifle, even if not functionally the same.

There are also a few shotguns and pistols that the Brady Campaign calls "assault weapons" (e.g., autoloading shotgun with a protruding handgrip, pistol with a forward mounted magazine, etc.) but the vast majority of extant firearms covered by that term are rifles.

The following rifle is a Ruger Mini-14 Ranch Rifle that I owned for several years:



I owned three stocks for it:



It is not restricted in any state in the USA with the first stock; is a banned "assault weapon" in California with the second stock; and would have been an "assault weapon" under the 1994 Federal "Feinstein ban" with the third stock.

It would also be a banned "assault weapon" in California with the first (wooden) stock, if it were fitted with a a flash suppressor/flame damper like this (the thing on the end of the barrel):



Actual automatic weapons, and weapons easily convertible to automatic fire, are tightly controlled in the U.S. by the National Firearms Act, and are available only to police, military, and wealthy collectors who can obtain Federal authorization to possess one.

http://www.cs.cmu.edu/afs/cs/usr/wbardwel/public/nfalist/nfa_faq.txt

So to answer your question, one can easily turn a non-"assault weapon" into an "assault weapon" by making cosmetic changes (such as those illustrated above), but that does NOT mean that one is turning a non-automatic rifle into an automatic weapon; the rifle's function is not changed.

I do not know what particular rifle your husband saw, but this (non-automatic) rifle is the most popular civilian target rifle in the USA:



It looks much like an M16, but isn't one, and is completely incapable of automatic fire.

What I was thinking your husband may have overheard was a conversation about altering the appearance of one of these:



to look like this:



If you look closely, it's the same rifle. How it functions is not altered at all (it's still a non-automatic civilian rifle), but fitting different furniture dramatically changes the appearance. (The buttstock in the bottom photo is in the folded position, and is visible behind the rifle.)

[Tandalayo_Scheisskopf]

3. I'm gonna wait until...

It's more than "possibly an assault weapon". At least before I develop a further opinion. I mean, it could have "possibly been the BFG from Quake" too.

I do wish that journalists, these days, would take the time to learn their craft.

[MichaelHarris]

8. When do they start doing their job?

A manhunt ensued through the streets of the East Oakland section of the city. When the police tracked down the gunman and burst into the apartment, he shot two more officers with an assault rifle, killing them both, before he was shot dead by the police.
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/03/22/us/22oakland.html?ref=us

[geckosfeet]

4. Well,, if I read that right - its says "possibly with an assault-type rifle".

In terms of the type of gun, that seems pretty inconclusive.

I am however quite alarmed that four armed police officers were shot before the shooter was subdued. Did he bushwhack the officers? Was he a trained gunman? How do four officers get themselves shot? How does someone conceal a rifle, pull it out point it, and aim and fire before an officer has time to react?

[cliffordu]

5. My uninformed opinion is that he used a handgun for the first two, escaped

and barracaded himself and then armed himself with a rifle of some sort that he used on the swat guys.

I can't believe he used an 'assault rifle' during a traffic stop...too unwieldy.

Maybe a sawed off shotgun for the whole nasty business. That would have done in the street cops and penetrated the outfits the swat guys were wearing.

[Liberal_in_LA]

6. 2 shot in traffic stop, later 2 shot when confronting suspect

[MichaelHarris]

7. it is odd

that he put down two officers on the street. If he did that with a hand gun against, (vest wearing?) police officers he was skilled. I always feel bad for officers shot in the line of duty, no matter what the weapon was.

Edit, I did read where one was shot in the head. I'm sure more facts will come in.

[benEzra]

11. I believe both motorcycle officers were shot in the head, but the facts are fluid at the moment.

The rumor on calguns is that the rifle used in at least the last two murders was an SKS, and that the murderer fired through a closet door where he was hiding, before being shot. I can't vouch for the veracity, nor do I know if the first two officers were killed with a rifle or a handgun.

[sendero]

10. And outlawing them will sure work,..

... because we know that gang members will obey the law.

[leftofthedial]

12. the only solution is MORE guns.

If only those cops had been armed, they could have blown his sorry ass aw...

umm, never mind.

[gratuitous]

13. Hell, yeah!

I have no idea whether the killer or killers used "assault" rifles or "assault-type" rifles. But whatever was used seemed more than equal to the job of taking out trained police officers, well-versed in the use of firearms.

[benEzra]

15. I believe the perpetrator "got lucky," and used surprise to his advantage, unfortunately.

Officers do not normally approach traffic stops with guns drawn, and even a .22 in the hand can beat a .40 in the holster. They were probably not aware of his felon-on-the-run status when approaching the car.

The murderer, with his record, should NOT have been early-released, IMO, but I guess the prison space was needed for nonviolent pot users instead. :eyes:

[gratuitous]

16. Quite fortunate

At least with the first two officers. Apparently the perpetrator or perpetrators were able to acquire sufficient talent and training after that to dispatch two more officers (presumably on their guard) to the next world.

We keep flooding the society with more and more guns, but it almost seems not to be working to reduce violence. Astonishing!

[benEzra]

17. The second two were ambushed through a closet door at point blank range

but a third officer shot back, killing the murderer. The rifle involved was relatively low powered and not capable of penetrating NIJ Level III or IV body armor like SWAT would typically wear, so either he shot for the head again or the officers were wearing handgun-resistant vests only.

If California didn't flood society with violent criminals to free up prison space for nonviolent drug offenders and whatnot, we wouldn't be having this conversation. But the murderer in this case was barred by both Federal and state law from so much as touching a gun or a single round of ammunition, so using him as a club to bash the lawful and nonviolent is a bit of a reach.

[benEzra]

14. 20 years ago, they would have been reported as "shot" or "shot with a rifle."

Now it's "shot with (high-powered/rapid fire/military style) assault weapon", or whatever series of scare terms the journalist chooses to use. Per capita rifle crime actually held steady in 2004 and dropped 2005-2007, but (1) fear sells, and (2) fear advances agendas.

Someone else on DU pointed out recently that the MSM is the gun-ban lobby's last loyal constituency. I think there is a great deal of truth to that, although I think it is probably more often due to unfamiliarity with the topic (and resultant gullibility) than malice.

[defendandprotect]

19. In order for the right to prevail they need violence in society -- disorder . . .

guns certainly help do that!!