"A plane flies overhead to land at the nearby Linden airport. Advocates say a plane like this could be susceptible to being taken down by a .50 caliber weapon." (caption and photo courtesy nj.com)

You know all those press conferences where “victims of gun violence” and their enablers wave the bloody shirt like the checkered flag at the Indy 500? Those are enervating and, I think, a bit sad. But this, this is scary stupid. “The 60-inch sniper rifle is longer than the folding table on which it sits, a massive 35 pounds of matte black chrome propped up by removable front legs. Next to it lie three 4-inch-long, .50 caliber bullets. Together, they are capable of taking down a small aircraft. And you can buy one right now if you live in New Jersey — even if you’re on the federal terrorist watch list.” A person on the terrorist watch list can buy a small aircraft? After 9/11? Wow! As for crimes committed by shooters with a .50 cal rifle in the Garden State . . .

nj.com doesn’t list any. There haven’t been any. Not one. There was, however, a recent terrorist attack involving a pressure cooker. And a big-ass truck can do a lot of damage. Or a can of gas, some chains and padlocks. But let’s not let common sense intrude here. There’s way too much dumb to savor.

This afternoon, standing in the shadow of so-called “soft targets” in Linden — chemical tanks, processing plants and the city’s airport — politicians and advocates called upon Gov. Chris Christie to sign two gun control bills into law in the name of national security.

“‘Fifty-caliber weapons are not made to shoot people, they’re made to destroy targets,’ said Bryan Miller with the group New Jerseyans for Safety from Gun Violence. ‘New Jersey is full of such material targets.’

Left to right, Assemblyman Gordon Johnson, Assemblywoman Linda Stender, State Sen. Nicholas Scutari and Bryan Miller call on Gov. Christie to ban the sales of high-powered sniper rifles like the AR-50 on display. 7/31/13 (Caption nj.com; Tom Wright-Piersanti/The Star-Ledger)

To press that fact, [yesterday’s] event was held at a public park within shouting distance of both a small airport, which sent noisy planes and State Police helicopters flying overhead throughout, and a cluster of giant cylindrical tanks filled with chemicals. “This is a target-rich environment, and it’s open to the public,” said State Sen. Nicholas Scutari, a Linden native and sponsor of the watch list ban.

The legal-to-purchase Armalite AR-50 is accurate at distances more than one mile and fires “amazingly heavy” bullets, including explosive, incendiary and armor-piercing rounds that can easily be purchased online, Miller said.

“One man, with one of these guns and a bullet or two, can knock down a chemical tank and create chaos,” he said.

Now about that terrorist watch list. As we’ve pointed out numerous times, there are over a million people on the FBI’s terrorist watch list. Some 40 percent of those records contain inaccurate information. In 2007, there were around 20k “false positives.” How do you get on the list? That’s a secret. How do you get off the list? Also secret.

Is it possible that the Justice Department, NSA, FBI or the President himself could declare a whole category of people potential terrorists? Like . . . NRA members? Gun owners? Sure! Why not!

How about this for a scary thought: Even if Christie doesn’t ban fiddy cals, a purchaser could go on the FBI’s terrorist watch list. I mean, chemical storage tanks, right? For all we know, .50 cal buyers are on it already.

Like I said, scary stupid.

RELATED ARTICLESMORE FROM AUTHOR

110 COMMENTS

  1. For me this is kind of a weird one. Maybe it’s something that actually deserves to be part of the NFA (unlike suppressors and SBR’s). That said, I think any sort of terrorist who can afford a $6,000++++ rifle is going to be able to get around any purchasing restrictions or other law on paper. Of course, most of the crazies in the past year or two have passed background checks and weren’t on any sort of watch list in the first freakin’ place, so this sort of thing wouldn’t do jack s**t anyway.

    That said, if we think the fallout over AR-15’s was bad, I can’t even imagine what would happen if some lunatic went to town with a semi-auto .50 BMG on the right (or wrong) sort of target. Honestly, maybe the sheer expense of the rifles and the ammo is what prevents this — crazy, suicidal types don’t tend to have $10k to blow (I’d guess?).

      • Then any rifle with a scope…
        then a double barrel shotgun, because it has two barrels and “you only need one shot”
        Please don’t go there.
        Just because you maybe don’t own or want one, doesn’t mean others shouldn’t be afforded the right or ability.

    • For the money, a .50 is a terrible choice for mass carnage. One could take that same money, invest it in explosives, and get much more …..bang for the buck.

    • Don’t tell me you’re falling for the ‘can shoot down an airpane’, ‘take out a chemical tank’ lines. Wait a second…are you saying you think the NFA is a good statue?

      • More than one military anti-aircraft platform was devised using four M2 Brownings, full auto, and they were frequently NOT successful at bringing down their targets. Good luck with a single-shot bolt action.

        An awful lot of 20mm systems were used as well and it took many hundreds or even thousands of rounds, on average, to make a kill shot.

        Fifty cal through a chemical or fuel storage tank? Make a nice, clean hole and smelly leak, but highly unlikely to ignite. (See Mythbusters episodes attempting to ignite gas tanks with firearms.) And I’m pretty sure it’s already illegal to purchase incendiary or explosive bullets for these or any other weapons. More political theater for low information voters.

        • I was remembering those Mythbusters episodes, too.
          NOT happening. (But *sniff* – what about the financial loss?) That isn’t likely to be on the mind of a terrorist. They want KABOOM!

        • The only way you are going to get things to blow up by running something into them at high speed is either:

          1. If you are NBC news.

          2. If you have access to the object you are trying to blow up and plant something like tannerite on it or something.

          Only, number 2 doesn’t make any sense. Because if you were trying to maliciously blow something up and you had access to it…why would you make an elaborate scheme where you first plant the explosives, then go a long distance away and then shoot it with a HIGHLY conspicuous rifle.

          No one would do that. Even Joe Biden isn’t that stupid. They’d use a cell phone or alarm clock or something.

          So, that leaves number 1. I’m sure MSNBC news could get a chemical tank to blow up by shooting at it, but that’s probably about it. Still, they might need to shoot at something next to it. Maybe they could put some expensive car rims next to it (that way they’d have a familiar place to hide the explosives).

        • Another reason why the proposed bounty on drones in Deer Trail, Co is symbolic. Unlikely that people could shoot them down, even if they wanted to.

    • I really don’t like the NFA at all and really don’t like what it represents to me (which was an expensive tax to make sure only the “right” class of people could afford these things… remember, $200 back in 1934 was like $3,500 today). I DO want a .50 BMG because I think it would be freaking fun to shoot, and there’s plenty of ammo available now in the $2.50 to $3.50 per round range, which wasn’t the case some years ago. Basically though, I do think that the round is uniquely and highly effective against hard targets in the world of normal civilian ownership and, if anything is going to be subject to the NFA (and again, I’d rather it didn’t exist), I think this would qualify. I’d rather see this on there and suppressors and SBR’s off of there, if it’s going to exist at all. I would have more patience for the NFA process on my $8,000 rifle than my $400 suppressor. Speaking of which, I’m now 9.5 months into the wait on my Liberty Mystic stamp… could have made a freaking child in this time. WTF.

      Hope that makes sense. In the grand scheme of the gun control world, I find this to be at least understandable because it isn’t a knee-jerk reaction to crimes committed by crazy people, but is rather a preemptive strike against something based on relatively realistic actual capabilities (i.e. not cosmetic features). Maybe that’s why I’m so surprised when I see pols talking about them — there’s some degree of rationality involved, whether you want to admit it or not.

      Now, the whole terrorism watch list thing is a separate issue and sucks the big one.

    • What about .50’s do you think deserves to be an NFA item?

      I agree with you on removing SBR’s and silencers. But, I’ll take it to the next level.
      – No NFA
      – No BATFE
      – All BATFE employees now serve ICE or the Border Patrol
      – Move alcohol and tobacco to the FDA
      – All NFA records destroyed
      – Immediate National constitutional CCW
      – Elimination of militarization at all levels of law enforcement.
      – Compulsion of government and law enforcement to act in a manner consistent with the Constitution.

      Oh, I have so many more…

      Anyway, what don’t you like about fifties?

    • Yea except it is already illegal to shoot people and their property. If they are willing to break that law it is unlikely they will think twice about breaking a law over 50BMG possession. Moreover, there are easier, more effective means of destruction that are cheaper as well. Besides if you ban the 50BMG any one of the manufacturers can step up and make a .495 with similar characteristics.

      • Such as the .416 Barrett, a necked down .50BMG designed partly because of CA’s .50 ban.

        Or the 20/50. A 20mm round necked down to .50. Which is legal to buy in CA.

    • The reason why .50 is the biggest round you can get is because anything bigger is classed as a “destructive device” on the NFA. If .50 was NFAed, then it would only be a matter of time before 1. a new .49 round that was heavy and had a big powder load was created and 2. people started pushing for it to be banned because it’s so big.

      • There are so many rounds available larger than a .50 BMG…for example the .577 Nitro Express, .577 T-Rex, .600 Nitro Express, .600 Overkill, .700 Nitro Express and the .950 JDJ…and that’s just the imperial measurements.

    • Most things on the NFA shouldn’t been on there and I don’t think these should either. Besides, then they will be going after .45-70. Plus, it will be default get things like .577 T-Rex etc.

    • LOL…you think .50 Cal Ammo is expensive???? Try buying Weatherby .300 Magnum. I can get .50 Cal for about $3.50/Round…. Weatherby .300 is almost $4.

      Now…lets look at my Remington Copper Solid 12 GA. Sabots. Also .50 Cal out of my shot gun. $20 for 5! That also beats the .50 Cal BMG cost. So in reality…..50 Cal BMG is a cheap hunting round!

  2. Let me guess, the Ar-50 provided for this farce was paid for with tax dollars and provided by local law enforcement….Hmmmm? Cause I’m fairly sure those aren’t flying off the shelves of your local Wally-world.

    Asshats!

  3. Does Christie want to be win the republican nomination in 2016? If so he’ll veto the bills, if not, he’ll sign them.
    I’m torn, part of me despises any gun control, but the other part thinks that running a RINO for the 8th straight presidential election could be worse. The RINOs got spanked in four of the seven (Bush I, Dole, McCain, Romney), and the three that won did things that LBJ would have been proud of, but people blamed on limited government and capitalism, because they had Rs next to their names (Bush I, Bush II, Bush II part 2).

      • Hmm, better than many other options, but I’m going to have to disagree. We NEED Paul’s voice in the halls of power, but just too isolationist to be practical right now. VP? OK. But I’ll tell you where I would like Paul: If there has to be a Department of Homeland Security, let Rand Paul run it 🙂

        • GREAT IDEA. But then he would not be able to introduce useful legislation, so maybe not such a brainstorm after all.

    • “Does Christie want to be win the republican nomination in 2016?”

      Does a hound dog love a bone? Don’t hold your breath waiting for that fat sack to make a decision based on logic or reason. He didn’t get to where he is that way, and there’s no reason to expect him to change.

    • If he wants to run in 2016, he has to get re-elected in New Jersey first, so he needs to keep the unwashed masses here in my home state happy for now. In NJ, if he doesn’t sign the bills, they automatically become law. He won’t sign them, and that’ll be good enough to let them become law. He gets to say he didn’t sign the bills, and he hopes that’s enough to keep the right happy.

      Good lord I hate this state.

    • They got spanked because the American People believed the lies the Dem’s spewed out….

      Close Guantanimo… Free Health Care…. Bringing the troops home… Open Government (LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL just cant stop laughing at that one)….Free Cell Phones….Death to the Rich OWG’s (Old White Guys) …Jobs….40 Acres and a Mule. Etc. etc. etc.

      • I wouldn’t exactly call Reagan a rhino. While not the greatest president, he at least was capable of making Vlad Putin piss his pants.

  4. Wow.

    Any one of those aircraft buzzing around could end up in those tanks!

    Stuff is unsafe!! Ban stuff!

    • LOL!!

      You know if they really want to do a good presser on unchecked destructive potential, they should set the politicians on that damn table.

      • Absolutely. They cost more, and do more damage. A ban on politicians could highly beneficial.

  5. Forget shooting at a tanker:

    With the stupid firearms restrictions supposed to be acknkowledged in commercial vehicles, a terrorist could hijack a tanker truck and do untold carnage, way worse than any 50bmg could accomplish by itself.

    • Hijack? Take it frome someone with a CDL, it isnt hard to get one. Neither is the tanker and hazmat endorsements, provided you have a good record. In other words, why take the route that could lead to arrest before carrying out the attack. It doesnt take much or long to get a CDL.

  6. I can think of only one person who had a .50cal rifle while commiting a crime and it was Marvin Heemyer http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marvin_Heemeyer. Wiki doesnt mention it but he had the rifle with him in the “tank” and he built shooting ports in it. I dont remember if he used it or not, but if you went to the trouble to build your own tank why would you.

  7. I wonder if those politicians observed New Jersey’s strict laws about gun control when transporting the .50 caliber rifle.

    They didn’t seem to go from a authorized gun club or dealer to their home, or rental property. They made an unreasonable deviation. I believe, under the graves act, that’s 7 to 10 years in a state prison.

    • It’s a long gun. If any of them possess a Firearms ID card, it’s ok to transport just about anywhere. I’d have to really parse through the regs, but my FID card theoretically allows me to pretty much keep a shotgun or rifle in the truck all the time (unloaded, and inaccessible, of course).

      (Not that I agree with the other draconian laws in any way)

    • Better questions: Who’s .50 BMG rifle is that anyway? Surely they didn’t buy it just for this presentation; and I’m sure a FFL wouldn’t loan them one for such.

      Do any of the people in the photo have the required blessing from the NJ government to have such a rifle in a public park?

      Privately owned by somebody already? “Yes I’m all for legislation that will ban my $3500+ rifle.”

      Borrowed from the local constabulary? If so, will the local constabulary’s .50 BMG’s be banned also?
      (Yeah, I crack me up sometimes.)

    • Come to think of it, does anyone know if it’s legal to possess in the park thay’re in?

  8. I think the Firearms Industry should consider something that has worked for others:

    An SRO — A “Self Regulatory (Industry) Organization” — like what FINRA does for stockbrokers. That would allow a possible restriction of something / anything WITHOUT horrific precedent setting laws and legislative incrementalism.

    Let’s be honest — these politicians dragged out this (really nice!) .50 cal weapon — because they are sure that few Americans will be sympathetic to the idea that this firearm should be available to “anybody”.

    Even though the concerns are very hypothetical — the industry might want to get ahead of an issue like this — and set their own private conditions of sale.

    Just a thought — comments welcome.

    • Sounds like surrendering liberty ahead of being forced from it. I say let the pols play the game and suffer at the polls for it. Don’t just roll over because they threaten.

    • I agree…. they should refuse to sell any of these firearms to law enforcement and politicians.

  9. What should be more terrifying than all their talk trying to terrify sheeple is, in all actuality, the government wants these weapons all to themselves, and to impose the fear that goes along with it!

    Governement says: Give US absolute power, Then Fear US!

    The 2 A says:

    MR. Government figure, Fear you Masters! WE, THE PEOPLE!

  10. This PR event was secretly orchestrated by Armalite, Barrett and other .50 makers to create a panic buying spree for their products. OMG, I must get a second mortgage so I can rush out and buy a .50 before it’s banned. A brilliant marketing move!

  11. It’s the same old divide and conquer strategy from here to eternity. Slippery slope and all that. This is even more heinous though in that they want to ban something that hasn’t every but conceivably could be used in a crime, which has worse potential implications that their usual absurdity of wanted to ban things that at least were used in a crime.

    I’m sure their focus is on guns but as has been pointed out; for a lot less money far more dangerous things could be had. I don’t want to have to show ID and match mileage on my car every time I buy gasoline and account for discrepancies. This idiocy must be called out for what it is. Stuff is dangerous. Always has been, always will be.

  12. Two things.

    First, I’m kinda surprised that the “public park” wasn’t a free fire…excuse me…gun free zone. Col. Sanders up there should have been arrested.

    Second, I’m no physics or ballistics expert, but wouldn’t shooting a large chemical tank with that thing basically just put a largish hole in it? I mean, sure, it may leak a bit and require some cleanup, but I doubt they store large quantities of Tannerite in those things.

  13. “‘Fifty-caliber weapons are not made to shoot people, they’re made to destroy targets
    Last I heard, they were being used by our snipers in various warzones to take out enemy combatants at long range, i.e. people. As has been pointed out, a large vehicle would likely be better at ‘target’ destruction. Just some more dumb-ass politicos trolling for votes.

    • What’s so violent about destroying targets? Targets aren’t children or people or pregnant ladies or dogs. I thought destroying targets was what we were supposed to do?

    • They ARE used on occasion to take out personnel, but it is actually correct that the .50bmg is an anti-vehicle/equipment weapon. There are much, much better anti-personnel sniper systems that are just as accurate at reasonable ranges. Its been used to take out personnel, but that is not its intended use.

    • Um, that was a hoax too.

      http://www.spaceweather.com/
      “SPACE WEATHER FACT CHECK: Many readers are asking about a report in the Washington Examiner, which states that a Carrington-class solar storm narrowly missed Earth two weeks ago. There was no Carrington-class solar storm two weeks ago. On the contrary, solar activity was low throughout the month of July. The report is erroneous…”

  15. Here’s what I find hilarious… Back when bush was in office, liberals were flipping their lids over that secret watch list. They called it the beginnings of a police state (and they were actually right)

    But as soon as Obama took office, suddenly they think that list is a good standard by which to deny peoples rights?

    Just goes to show: its not about safety or security, its about getting more power for the democrat party.

    • I am actually thankful for Obama’s election in a way. During the Bush years, I thought I was a liberal/democrat. Of course I was young and didn’t fully understand what that meant. Upon Obama’s election, when his supporters suddenly went silent, or even openly supported what was easentially the continuation of Bush’s foreign policy and domestic spying efforts, I realized that I was not one of them. As his administration has progressed, and I have disagreed with just about every single thing he’s done, I’ve been able to come to terms with and recognize my politics as libertarian.

  16. I can understand why New Jersey would want to preserve its unnatural landscape. Without those huge tanks of toxic chemicals, garbage dumps the size of Delaware and a magnificent Cancer Alley unmatched by any other state, there would be no need for New Jersey. Just ask the state’s illustrious governor, Jabba the Hutt.

  17. Ok, so pretty much anything out of that rifle would be armor piercing, so I’ll give ’em a pass on that one, but I’m pretty sure that explosive and incendiary rounds cannot “easily be purchased online.”

    • 17 cents a piece on Amazon for incendiary, slightly higher for explosive, no shipping charge if you order a box.

      • I’ll take you at your word and I stand corrected. You didn’t provide a link, so can you order me a case of .50 BMG Incendiary, please?

    • You could purchase tracers, those can in theory set things on fire (need to be careful around brush). You could probably find explosive ammo as well but the amount of explosive that would fit into a .50 cal is very small.

      You could fit more explosive inside a hollowed out cell phone or something. (if they are worried about aircraft, say the evildoer drops it in someone’s suitcase). But none of that is worth worrying about.

      The thing is though, that terrorists generally don’t use guns (when committing big acts of terror, obviously if they are fighting an army or something it’s a diff story). They simply aren’t a good mass terror weapon. There could be exceptions, but overwhelmingly, they seem to prefer explosives. Something like a large .50 cal requires you to be sitting there behind the (very, very, conspicuous) rifle. And continue to sit there behind it in order to cause damage. Terrorists seem to like things (unfortunately) that can cause a ton of damage in only a few seconds. And that don’t have a risk about someone shooting them or otherwise disabling them before they can accomplish their task. If the 9/11 hijackers had tried to commit terror with guns instead of airplanes, the death toll would have been tiny or non-existent and the towers would still be standing. If Mcveigh had tried to commit terror with a .50 cal, the Oklahoma city building wouldn’t have been destroyed. There’s nothing magical bout a .50 cal, honestly. It gives you the ability to disable unarmored vehicles and gives you the ability to reach through un-hardened barriers. None of that stuff matters to a criminal or terrorist. They are simply hobby guns, and a few enthusiasts hand load hunting rounds for them as well. This is just fear mongering.

      If the authorities were serious about actual terror threats, they’d be locking down the borders hard. The ability for evildoers and REAL heavy weapons like missiles to simply walk across the southern border, is the real threat. But talking about that is politically inconvenient, evidently. “Racist”, or something. /facepalm.

  18. There is no real reason to ban 50 cal. There is no need to ban them. How many have been used in a crime anywhere in the US?

    Due to the price of the gun and ammo, and as I have seen around my area, a lack of a place to fire them. These are just expensive fun for those that can afford them.

    Leave us gun folks alone. Go after the REAL criminals with the guns. Like the gangs in Chiraq aka Chicago.

  19. BATF and DOJ have supplied many 50 Cals to Mexican Terrorists through
    Gun-Runner
    Gun-Walker
    Operation Castaway

  20. “The legal-to-purchase Armalite AR-50 is accurate at distances more than one mile and fires “amazingly heavy” bullets, including explosive, incendiary and armor-piercing rounds that can easily be purchased online, Miller said.”

    Were can you easily purchase explosive and incendiary 50 cal rounds online? Not that I’m in the market… currently. But once they start issuing those drone licenses, maybe.

    • A few things the politicians don’t tell you about .50’s: 1- they may be Anti-Materiel, but that just means they punch a rather large hole in engines and light armor. 2- a .50 bullet + something flammable(ish) does not = KABOOM. 3- a .50 is very conspicuous, both in appearance and sound (I can hear M2’s very well about 6 miles from a local base) And, as a parting shot, how come they complain that the AR-15 was designed to kill people, and then have a cow when we make a rifle to poke holes in inanimate objects at long distances?

  21. Oh I see, their logic is the same as Japan when they made the Arisaka! That flip up sight was just excellent for shooting down aircraft with a grand total of 0 (zero) shot down with them.. Gov Christie has been watching that movie S.W.A.T a little too much.. A bolt action or semi auto .50 caliber rifle has NOT been used to shoot down an aircraft in USA. Is there not more pressing issues in the toilet bowl of America known as Big Detroit aka NJ..

  22. for a civilian a 50 cal is the stupidest and most useless thing to own. that said, if you want to waist 10k then go ahead and get one. i would rather buy like 10 glocks, 10 nagants, and like 10 modern sporting rifles, but thats just me. i would love to know how many people have died by a 50 cal in America. i predict 1 by an accident.

  26. just axing- wouldn’t it be possible to use one of these said 5o cals to shoot a mooslime from say 3/4 mile away?

  27. No criminal will ever use a 50 cal rifle in a crime. Because you can’t hold it sideways when you shoot it.

  28. It occurs to me that a mass murderer with $10k to blow could probably hire an under-strength platoon of crackheads with cheap .25 autos.

  29. Um… right… sure… put down four grand on a rifle that cannot be easily hidden from sight and walk down the street and not attract unnecessary attention.

    Have these nitwits lost their collective sense of reality???

    As to this list: Well, you get on it by not nodding when one of these idiots tells you something like what’s here. And, you don’t gasp at the correct times. And, you don’t petition to government to “do something about all these people that can get…”

    Do you have four grand to put down on a .50 ?

    When the uprising starts, won’t need the four grand.

    • The most difficult part of robbing a bank with a .50 caliber Barrett is getting through the revolving door.

  30. “It’s a Barrett 50 cal, it can kill a building”

    Sounds like someone has been getting her information from archer.

  31. You do know that Danny Devito, Rosanne Barr, and a few other actors are fighting against GMO foods, don’t you? Genetically modified corn has been known to cause Cancer in Lab rats, and our FDA along with Monsanto has been making everyone eat genetically modified foods without the American People’s knowledge. Banned in 27 countries and recently in Nova Scotia. Maine voted on at least labeling what is and what isn’t GMO food. Imagine, almost 18 years without telling us that they are modifying the DNA structure of our food. Just look under “Health Hazards” on the following site and work your way down the list. Message by the..tea..party..truther..dot..com

    • It is an accepted fact that everything causes cancer in lab rats. Lab rats are bred to get cancer at the drop of a hat. Unfortunately, plain old rats seem to be resistant to just about everything. That’s why there’s so damn many rats.

    • First…what? Are you worried that they’ll breed some .50 cal corn or green beans?

      Sorry to be flip, but I don’t see the connection here.

      That said, I’m no “scientific geneticist,” but isn’t that what farmers and breeders have been doing for centuries? Whenever they start breeding animals and plants for specific characteristics, they are influencing the genetic makeup of the off-spring. (i.e. modifying the genetic code.)

      Seriously, do you think a “labra-doodle” would have shown up in the wild on its own?

      • I dunno why we’re talking about GMO’s here. But I care about health (real health) as much as I care about guns. So, let me clear it up a bit. A Labradoodle is more of a “hybrid” not genetically modified in the scientific sense. Its the same species breeding to create, well. mutts.
        GMO’s often take two very unrelated things, or things that aren’t even from the same scientific KINGDOM, and “fuse” them together. Like Corn genes and Pesticides. So the conventional farmers don’t have to take that extra time to spray horrendous chemicals on the corn anymore — its inside the gene, and we get to eat the frankenstein food.
        But Hey. Maybe we’ll get lucky and on the next camping trip with mosquitoes—sweat pesticides.

        • First of all, sorry for comment-jacking, but Kirsten, you are wrong about GMO’s on several accounts; 1- the organisms are typically modified with DNA of the same species group to help compatibility, 2- There is no way to “fuse organisms of completely different scientific kingdoms” (Unless you are in a Batman movie) as one or both of the organisms would almost inevitably reject the other and 3- GM Corn is not combined with pesticides, but is made resistant to them (Which means farmers think they can just add additional pesticides with no side effects) Not to be rude, but you either are confused by genetics (Pretty easy really) or are attempting to mislead people. (Before you ask, I am not a geneticist, I just read a few books and articles)

          • Actually, bacterial genes from Bacillus thuringiensis have been put in cotton and corn. These genes produce toxins against certain caterpillars.

        • Lol, GMO guns, noooo!

          Chase, there’s not even a motive to mislead. I’d like to know the truth as well. I’m not a geneticist either, but because GMOs and genetically engineered substances are rather new in this world (Fraught with their own short term benefits and short and long-term problems…some we don’t even understand yet or haven’t fully manifested) I’ve been watching fairly closely.
          I mentioned the kingdom line for various reasons. (and the bacteria comment above by blue is correct). But here’s an article you may find interesting. http://www.mnn.com/green-tech/research-innovations/photos/12-bizarre-examples-of-genetic-engineering/web-spinning-goats. Theres an example or two of different kingdom, like bacteria ( Kingdom Eubacteria) with plants (kingdom Plantae), some same kingdom different phylum, and some just funky ones haha.

          “Batman” villains would be proud. lol

          Fusing genes from a spider ( phlyum anthropoda) and a goat (phylum chordata) is enough example of messing with the system. Phylum is only one step below kingdom. Does this make a big difference? Or does it even matter if its the same class or species? Who knows. Scientists don’t fully yet, so we don’t yet. All we can see is some of the current damage and alteration its doing to the environment and animals in certain, fairly large, instances. For true Gene and DNA study, we will need at the very least one generation or more. And GMOS on a grand commercial scale have only been used in the latter 20th century.

          Thanks for your comments. This GMO issue is darker than even genes. Has to do with monopolies, money, power, control. Follow the money trail on most things and you’ll find the truth. Yes, there are some good hearted geneticists out there too. Not saying that. But there are very dark sides to GMOs too. Potentially altering nature permanently, ability to own the genetic code of food crop seeds [control]….etc
          But what can we do? All i’m saying is its good to stay informed and keep a watchful eye on these things. Theres a good chance you’re probably the only one to read this on this thread, (since its supposed to be about guns haha) but I still felt I wanted to take the time to share with you. I have no motive but the health of the people and planet. I hope yours is the same.

  32. “‘Fifty-caliber weapons are not made to shoot people, they’re made to destroy targets,’ said Bryan Miller with the group New Jerseyans for Safety from Gun Violence. ‘New Jersey is full of such material targets.’

    Save all the Materials!!!!!

    *face palm*

    So. If they aren’t made to shoot people….how can we still instill hatred for an object that is essentially a tool. hmmm. 50s are made to shoot…”material”. NEW JERSEY HAS A TON OF MATERIAL. (so does every stinkin’ place on the planet)…. A .50 could harm innocent material.

    I sure hope so. What else can we upstanding citizens shoot at the range?? A metal/paper target is made of “material”. I suddenly feel an overwhelming sense of false guilt, and need to rethink my life.

    Well, I’m off to the gun club. Nothin’ better than a day on the range to get the thoughts flowing! All this talk has made me hungry for a .50….

Comments are closed.