You know, it's funny/sad, when someone from the anti-gun side tries to use facts. While I applaud them for trying to do so, the truth never seems to help their cause so they often resort to bending the truth, or using BS statistics, or omitting important details, or as in this case, just making shit up.
First, you need to understand that "Assault Weapon" is a made up term for a semi-automatic rifle with scary looking features. Most hunters consider the common "assault weapon" calibers to be too weak to use on game. (I'm referring to the 5.56x45 and 7.62x39 calibers of the AR-15/M16 and AK-47 respectively.)
Second, semi-autos are not jam prone and unreliable as Ed says. Yes, they are machines, and any machine can break, but with proper maintenance they are very reliable.
My AR-15 is the same as what many police departments issue. Why would they issue these weapons that are so unreliable that they can't even hold up to home defense duty? Ed, this just doesn't pass the whiff test.
The AK-47 in particular has a reputation for reliability in extreme conditions. How did Ed come to this conclusion? He's either lying or just saying whatever he thinks will help his cause.
Ed also says we should use revolvers to protect our homes because they aren't prone to jamming like the scary assault weapons. Well, as my friend Hsoi pointed out, revolvers do fail. They are also rather weak compared to a rifle.
I think it all points to the fact that Ed doesn't know what he is talking about.
So we have someone who doesn't understand the issue trying to set policy. Great.