This story will be filed under ‘news of the weird’ instead of the front page…
A manic shooter peppered a busy Ensley retail strip with assault rifle fire Sunday evening because a local seafood market ran out of crawfish, investigators said.
Larry Wayne Kelly, 42, of Pensacola is in county jail on $575,000 bond facing a slew of felony charges.
Kelly’s lead-filled rampage erupted about 7 p.m. when Escambia County deputies received a flood of calls reporting a man speeding through Ensley, blasting an AK-47 assault rifle from the window of a pickup truck.
Kelly had several loaded guns in his truck, and it’s only luck that he didn’t injure or kill anyone.
I’ve had friends who had valid reasons to keep a gun for self-defense, and they were responsible and careful. What is the self-defense justification for owning an assault rifle? Is this ‘well regulated’?
Recurring Nightmare 
“What is the self-defense justification for owning an assault rifle?”
You can shoot more bad guys faster?
But really, though, fully-automatic weapons are already illegal here, and they have been since the 1930s. This may have been an AK-47, but it was almost certainly the kind that operates as a semi-automatic.
Considering that, it’s no different than any other semi-automatic pistol or rifle, which have very valid uses and practical applications.
I just don’t see where the definition of ‘rifle’ ends and ‘assault rifle’ begins, and frankly, I don’t think the psychopaths care.
LikeLike
First of all,fully automatic weapons are not illegal-one just has to jump through numerous hoops to own one.
Individual states have outlawed full auto firearms.RI has not.If you fill out the correct forms,pay a special tax,and pass a Federal background investigation(way beyond the standard background check for gun purchases)then you can buy one.
With the price of ammo,you’d have to be a millionaire to fire it much.
Semiautos are sometimes illegally converted to full autos.
Now,here you go again Nancy-because this psycho committed a crazy,dangerous act,you want to ban a whole class of firearms(“assault weapons”)instead of locking this guy up for 15 years or so.
Can you define”assault weapon”?I’ll bet not.
Tere is no generally accepted definition-it’s an invention of people like Chuck Schumer and Hillary Clinton.
One needn’t have a “valid”reason to own a firearm-it’s a right-as confirmed twice now by the Supreme Court.In any event,who is to determine what a “valid”reason is?Sheldon Whitehouse?David Cicilline?Maybe I should determine whether a woman should be allowed to abort her baby.See where this kind of thinking leads?
Limiting handgun magazines to ten rounds will not make the world safer.I’m an experienced shooter(47 years since I started)and fairly competent-I can empty a roomful of people using 7 round magazines-you’d be amazed how fast one can reload with practice.
I have no practical use for a pistol with a 30 round magazine,but I wouldn’t ban them.Bans a re incremental-you people get your way on this,and next year its five rounds limits,then single shot only.
It’s all part of a design by social engineering liberals to disarm the population.Dianne Feinstein elucidated this in a statement years ago.Of course,being a typical liberal hypocrite,she has a concealed carry permit,as does Schumer.
LikeLike
Don’t forget that even if you ban large magazines, they’re really just a spring, plate, and a metal box; I have friends who make their own in machine shops just for fun.
LikeLike
Ban an entire class of weapons because of one crazy.
If it were only one crazy, that would be different.
Seriously, what is the pupose behind a semi-automatic weapon designed to hold a large clip that can fire multiple rounds at high speed. Said weapons often have a shorter barrel than a hunting rifle, or older infantry rifles, so they are not ideal for long-range fire. Rather, they are designed as anti-personnel weapons primarily designed for combat “assault” when there is a high need to hit as many targets as possible in a short time, without reloading.
I believe that is a fair description of an AK-47.
What purpose does a rifle, such as I’ve described, have in a civilian society?
Was the dude part of a ‘well-regulated militia’? This is, after all, the rationale for the right to bear arms.
No right is absolute. The Freedom of Speech is not absolute. You cannot shout fire in a crowded theatre. Freedom of religion is not absolute. Polygamy is against the law, despite religions that believe it’s proper.
Why is the right to bear arms considered absolute?
And, funny. The people who object most to infringement of the 2nd Amendment, seem to be all in favor of laws that restrict the right of proper citizens to vote. Said laws supposedly counteract ‘voter fraud’ which has never, ever been demonstrated on any scale in the past 30 years.
So, in favor of laws against non-existent crimes; opposed to laws to stem real-life crimes, like shooting up a store with an AK-47.
LikeLike
I have NEVER said the right to bear arms is absolute.
Convicted felons;persons adjudged mentally to a seious degree;illegal aliens;persons engaged in an organized attempt to overthrow the governmant,etc cannot own weapons,and good for that.
The well-regulated militia argument was rejected in McDonald and Heller,two recent SCOTUS decisions.I know you are at least aware of Heller and probably both.
If you don’t like the decisions,sorry ’bout that.
i don’t like some decisions,but I know I have to live with them if we are to be a civilized society.
I actually sent people to prison for voter fraud,but they weren’t “proper citizens”as you put it-they were illegal aliens.
Voter fraud does exist and it’s been perpetrated by Democrats and Republicans.It’s an integral part of American history “klaus”-I know you read a lot-so do I.
As far as AK 47’s go,I have to say most firearms homicides are committed with very pedestrian,crappy weapons.
I actually supported legislation against “Saturday Night Specials”,but in the enduring ignorance of Congress,they banned the importation of small,low capacity high quality handguns because they didn’t do their homework.
You can kill more people by driving a car into a crowd than with any AK47 in a shorter time span.
Life has risks.I learned that at a very young age.I’m not callous about it-I just accept it in favor of living in a socially planned anthill.
BTW I don’t own an AK47-they are a pain in the ass to shoot.
I actually like lever action rifles-hardly “assault weapons”,but I do not begrudge any legally entitled person owning one.
I have always had a carry permit since I retired from law enforcement-I also have a LEOSA credential which entitles me to carry concealed in any state regardless of their laws(Obama signed an extension of rights under LEOSA recently)-it applies to retired law enforcement officers who did not retire for mental disability purposes.
Most of the time I never really bothered to carry,but now that I am seriously physically disabled as a result of a surgical procedure(they did a great job,but I was way more f**ked up than they realized)I have to because I can’t get in any fights.Of course,having carried since I was 18,I guess I’m not likely to depopulate a store or something-LOL.
You know,I just saw a terrible story on Drudge Report about an 11 year old girl who died from falling off a ferris wheel on a school trip.
Death stalks us every second-our loved ones too-everyone of us all.We can’t plan around it or avoid it.If you dwell too much on it,you’ll go crazy.
Relax and enjoy your weekend-it’s nice out.
LikeLike
Magazines and barrels are often detachable from many hunting rifles in order to make them more maintainable and transportable. Even if you banned ‘assault rifles’, people could easily get the simple parts to convert hunting weapons.
LikeLike
Aside from guns,do you really feel that Voter ID laws are violating someone’s rights?The Supreme Court doesn’t-not even laws requiring proof of citizenship to register-it’s unequivocal-one must be a citizen to vote-why not verify that?Does your franchise mean so little to you-I’d guess not.
If a non-citizen votes,it negates your vote.
LikeLike