First time I didn't believe my eyes

[alan]

Is it fair to call them ‘assault weapons’?

Posted by Aaron Blake on January 17, 2013 at 10:00 am

Browsing through the Washington Post web site the other day, I came on the Blake article. Needless to say, given the editorial position of the Post, as well as the knowing and deliberate misuse of terminology by so many in media, print or broadcast "journalism", the article was surprising. Seems that, hard to believe as it may be, there are some in media, even at The Washington Post that are willing and able to tell the truth about firearms.

If you find this article interesting, I think you might, take a look at some of the stuff written by WashPost reporter Sean Sullivan. Go to the Post's web site, and in the search field at the upper right, type Aaron Blake or Sean Sullivan, you might try both, however might I suggest, for a first read, the Blake article. Once there, you might find it worth while to forward the article to your elected things, among others or at least refer their attention to it.

The rest is up to you, readers of the foregoing.

 

[alan]

As suggested by a couple of members here, I hope this attempt at creating a link works. www.aaronblake/washpost.com

 

[solvability]

Let's try a link to the article.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/the-fix/wp/2013/01/17/is-it-fair-to-call-them-assault-weapons/

 

[greenmtnguy]

Well, it isn't too horrendous, the only serious flaw in the article is that the writer seems to think that flash suppressors are "silencers", which they most definitely are not. And, a number of states have laws concerning the restriction of sound reduction devices on top of the ATF regulations, but no laws or issues regarding flash suppressors. Once again, word-processing thesaurus substitution by the writer changes the technical meaning in an (hopefully) unintended way.

 

[USAF_Vet]

Well, it isn't too horrendous, the only serious flaw in the article is that the writer seems to think that flash suppressors are "silencers", which they most definitely are not. And, a number of states have laws concerning the restriction of sound reduction devices on top of the ATF regulations, but no laws or issues regarding flash suppressors. Once again, word-processing thesaurus substitution by the writer changes the technical meaning in an (hopefully) unintended way.

You can, in fact, thread a suppressor onto a threaded barrel in lieu of, or in addition too, a flash hider or compensator. The author is not necessarily wrong here.

 

[alan]

I guess that when I read the article I missed the bit about silencers and flash hiders/supressors.