Hmmm. Maybe the "assault rifle" will turn out to be something less than advertised. Anyway, here it is--
.............................................

One dead, one arrested after drive-by shooting in St. Paul
Star Tribune
Last update: March 02, 2006 – 9:03 AM
Printer friendly E-mail this story Crime
One dead, one arrested after drive-by shooting in St. Paul

St. Paul police have arrested one man following a drive-by shooting that left another man dead on his neighbor's doorsteps.
Police told reporters at the scene that the victim was driving his white Toyota about 2 a.m. near the intersection of Hoyt Avenue and Clarence Street when a man inside another car pulled along side the Toyota and opened fire with an assault rifle.

The man in the suspect vehicle then drove away. The victim's car, riddled with bullets, remained at the scene for hours this morning as authorities investigated.

The victim, a 23-year-old male, stopped his car in the street, crawled out and walked a short distance for help at a house near the scene. He made it to a house and pounded loudly on the door and windows before collapsing on the doorsteps, according to broadcast reports.

One witness to the incident, identified on television as Jeremy Monson, told reporters that the car containing the shooter returned to the scene and pulled up to him. A man inside the car got out asked Monson if he had seen the person driving the Toyota. After denying having seen the victim, Monson said that the man returned to the car and slowly drove down the street with its lights off. Shortly afterward, Maplewood police pursued him, Monson said.

The suspect was caught a short time later in White Bear Lake, where he was arrested without incident, St. Paul police spokesman Peter Crum said.

This is neither a random shooting nor a gang-related shooting, Crum said. The shooting incident was the final act to an on-going dispute that had begun earlier in the evening between the two men. Police are not searching for others in connection with the shooting, Crum said.

Police recovered the suspect's assault rifle from his vehicle, Crum said.

From the pictures on the news, it looked like the ones hitting the door panel did not penetrate? Did anyone else notice this, or was it I just had too much "pop" last night.......

How many "assault rifles" are really military-esque looking weapons that are really carbines chambered in pistol calibers?

Pretty clearly, an "Assault Rifle" is a machine gun like an M-16 or an AK-47.

An "Assault Weapon" is a made-up political term, like "pro-abortion" or "anti-choice," to describe a rifle of moderate power which looks scary to sarah Brady.

Also clear is that reporters generally know little to nothing about guns, and are unwilling to learn.

How do I know this? Because every time this issue comes up, we call and correct them, and it never changes.

I've left a message with Kate Parry at the Strib, as well as Fox9's morning news executive producer.

Haven't gotten a call back yet. Color me surprised.

Not to be pedantic, but isn't an assault rifle more specifically defined as a select-fire rifle chambered in an intermediate rifle cartridge?

And a machine gun a weapon which fires full-sized rifle cartridges in full automatic only?

I believe Andrew is right. The "assault weapons ban" was targetted at AR15's and AK47's. But, even then it came down to accessories more then the actual gun.

There were something like 6 things that made an "assault weapon" out of a rifle.

telescoping stock
bayonette lug
threaded barrel
pistol grip
front grip

I don't actually remember what they were, these are guesses.

What does the correct definition of a word have to do with how a anti-gun papers and anti-guns group use it to advance their agenda?

Nothing... ha

I think it's a good idea to point out that anti's (including the media) are not consistant. If one is not consistant, then it really shows that they don't know what they are talking about. So, when someone corners them on why there should be a ban of one gun and not another, then they tend to look ignorant.

Just my perception...

If they use the words as they are really defined, they won't be printing too many scare stories about "assault weapons" (since there are near zero involved in crimes) or editorials demanding "assault weapons" be banned (since post-86 guns are already untransferrable to civilians).

Based on my years at the Strib, I can tell you that not more than 2 reporters, editors, photographers, graphics people and so on out of every 100 even own a shotgun or a .22 rifle for plinking. (There are a little over 400 people in the news end of the operation.)

Right offhand, I can think of at most five people out of all those 400-plus who own guns. There is one woman reporter who told me secretly that she owns a 9 mm auto for self-defense; and a buddy of mine who's a huge gun accumulator and amateur gunsmith. Couple of others, including the hunter-writer guy, are all I can think of.

Most of those 400-plus believe that "assault weapons" are machine guns, and could be bought by any 16-year-old in any hardware store, but were banned by the Clinton administration, thankfully, meaning they were collected and melted down or something -- but restored by those awful Busharovians. They also believe that "assault weapons" are commonly used in crimes.

When the NRA met here in 1990s, a weird oversight led the management to give me the job of writing about it. I did, but they came to their senses and the story got yanked and reassigned to a woman reporter who wrote that assault weapons were commonly used in crimes.

When I asked her whether some nitwit of an editor had inserted that phony claim in her story, she said that no, she had written it, and it was commonly known to be true. When I tried to point out that it was not true, she got very upset and told me to stop talking to her.

So I did.

not surprised in the least

That is a more correct, more specific definition.

Kare11 just said "rifle" instead of using Assault {whatever}.

Wow. Even a stopped clock...

Geez, I watched KMSP (FOX9).