Massive Rifle Needs Regulation to Keep It Out of the Hands of Terrorists

SACRAMENTO — John Burtt of Riverside sounds like a regular, level-headed guy, even if his hobby may seem strange to many: He likes to go out into the desert and target shoot with a .50-caliber sniper rifle capable of taking out a concrete bunker, armored personnel carrier or hovering helicopter.

That’s a 5-foot rifle weighing 30 pounds that sits on a tripod and fires 5.5-inch BMG bullets. BMG means Browning Machine Gun, a round much more powerful than an ordinary .50-caliber bullet.

By comparison, an average deer hunting rifle--say a .308--might measure 4 feet and weigh 9 pounds and, unlike the supergun .50, probably would not destroy a tanker truck at 2,000 yards.

A retired police marksman, Burtt enjoys shooting with his wife out by Baker or up near Coalinga in the San Joaquin Valley. They set up on 1,000-yard ranges, firing bullets that could cost $5 each if he didn’t make his own. She has broken two world records.

“It’s an extreme sport that does not appeal to everybody,” acknowledges Burtt, 57. “It’s a toy that we use and we’ve invested a lot of money in it.”

The guns start at around $2,000.

Burtt was in Sacramento on Tuesday to argue against a bill that would regulate these small cannons. Now they can be purchased freely at gun stores--same as handguns, shotguns and deer rifles--after a 10-day waiting period for a background check.

The bill, by Assemblyman Paul Koretz (D-West Hollywood), is modeled after the 1999 act that regulated assault weapons. It would “grandfather” in all currently owned .50-caliber BMGs, but require them to be registered, as assault weapons and handguns are now. That way, police can trace back the guns to their owners if they are stolen or found at a crime scene.

Beginning Jan. 1, nobody could buy a .50-caliber BMG in California without a permit. And a permit would be hard to come by.

Koretz is especially worried about these monsters falling into the hands of terrorists--and their taking aim from some distant rooftop at a propane tank, chemical plant or low-flying passenger jet.

“The further away we get from terrorist incidents, the more our eyes glaze over,” he told the Assembly Public Safety Committee.

The committee delayed a vote for a week. The bill’s ultimate fate is iffy, given that Gov. Gray Davis is cool toward new gun controls. He previously signed bills regulating assault weapons and banning Saturday night specials, among other firearms restrictions. Give all these a chance to work, he asserts.

But terrorism no longer is theoretical, notes Koretz, a longtime gun-control advocate.

“The people who own these weapons currently tend to be a pretty benign group,” he says. “I don’t think they’re potential terrorists. But I don’t want to make it easy for people to purchase them in the future.”

Besides, the lawmaker adds, there already are too many of the guns in California.

How many? Burtt thinks in the high hundreds.

Burtt clearly is in the benign group and proof that not all firearm fanciers are nuts. He’s a calm, thoughtful sport shooter who speaks out against gun control, contending it’s an ineffective harassment, a step toward confiscation and unconstitutional. Never mind that the Supreme Court never has overturned a gun-control law.

But some gun worshipers do talk like dangerous crackpots who, ironically, make their own best case for strong regulation. They speak of killing politicians.

For example, there’s this lead paragraph from an essay by freelance writer Brian Puckett on the Keep and Bear Arms Web site:

“Hundreds of thousands of Americans ... faced with ongoing state-sponsored terrorism against gun ownership, believe that they will never regain the free exercise of their right to own, carry and use firearms unless many leading anti-gun politicians and activists are killed.

“In human terms, this is perfectly understandable. In fact, it is absolutely logical.”

This man definitely should not get a .50-caliber BMG permit.

There’s incendiary junk like that all over the Internet.

“I don’t endorse it,” Burtt says. “I would not consider those people mainstream Americans.”

Motioning to the Assembly committee room, he added: “This is the forum where these things should be handled.”

One way to handle it is for likable, knowledgeable Burtt to be at any negotiating table.

Another way is for him and his wife to find a smaller gun to enjoy.

Whatever, you’d think California would regulate .50-caliber armor-busters at least as strictly as .22 pistol plinkers. At minimum, register them.

We’ve banned fingernail clippers from airplanes and are barricading the state Capitol. We should also be a little concerned about obscure superguns.