| Author | Message | ||
     Aesquire |
17th century. Civilian guns and "war guns" same thing. Exact. Same. Thing. 18th Century. Ditto 19th Century. Ditto 20th Century. Ditto 21st Century. Ditt-fraking-o The Winchester 70 classic bolt action rifle, ( 75 years old this year ) obviously a fine crafted hunting fire arm? Based on the Mauser War weapon. The Remington 700 classic bolt action rifle, ( 50 years old this year ) obviously a fine crafted hunting fire arm? Marine Sniper War weapon rifle M40 is based on IT. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/M40_rifle The successor to the M1903 Springfield ( also a Mauser copy) is the M1 Garand, it's 1950's upgrade the M14, ( modern semi-auto only civilian variant the Springfield M!A ) and the 1960's successor, the M-16 ( civilian version the AR-15, AR-10 and other marketing inspired names as patents ran out and other could make without paying royalties ) each and every one is used by hunters, in target competition, and for casual plinking of "tin cans" and other reactive targets. We have ALWAYS used the more or less latest military arms as our hunting and target shooting arms. In fact Most target shooting competition well into the 20th century is based around surplus or stock military rifles. This changed with the popularity of "cowboy action shooting" and "Black Powder Cartridge Rifle" long range target shooting, and other "Nostalgia" competitions that restricted the arms to a specific period. ( I myself, shoot competitively in Period arms matches, mostly Archery, using either a 14th Century Crossbow ( no sights ) an English Longbow, ( also no sights, clothyard shafts ) and when it gets back from the Bowyer, a Yubo mounted bow with 60" shafts. ( getting harder to find shafts that long ) All, BTW shot with blunted Bodkin Points, originally designed to penetrate armor. All, military weapons. War Weapons. Variations on the AR, because of it's modular and easy to work on nature, are daily used as varmint rifles, in alternative calibers, as deer, elk, etc rifles, and in the larger rounds that essentially duplicate the ballistics of the 19th century 45 Govt., Bear and Boar. You may not know the 19th century 45. govt. AKA the .45-70 is just another in a long line of ex military War weapons used to hunt, defend, and target shoot. It was the classic Buffalo Gun. I can go on naming "just slight variations of those used by Military Forces worldwide." all day long. Covering a period of over a thousand years. Weapons technology since the days of Bronze.....It's my freaking Hobby. I got an A in Anthro 201 by knapping a stone hand axe circa 15,000 BC in class, Live, and giving it to the teacher. I mounted in a block of walnut by slamming it edge first into position. Want to discuss the civilian variants of the Soviet 1944 Nagant? The various methods used to sporterize muskets taken home from the Revolutionary war? The use of Tower Locks on hunting firearms in post colonial America? Literally Millions of Remington Rolling Block rifles were built for war, for peace, and the financial crisis when certain foreign powers didn't pay for vast numbers ordered during times of war, leading to glut of surplus firearms, leading to many old time factories going out of business? Why the French invention of "smokeless powder" changed hunting forever? You have been lied to. I'm not chicken shit on this subject. the propaganda you have been cleverly fed is designed to divorce your rational mind ( you carry concealed!!??? ) from your emotional hind brain and get you to willingly give up your rights so that an elitist, rich, ••••••• with armed guards can have more power and less fear of the justice they richly deserve. They Fear YOU. They hate you. ( want the quote from Barack, talking about YOU to a crowd of other rich elitist A$$holes in SF CA? ) They think you are stupid. They think you will buy the lie. They will take and take one tiny sliver of your power and wealth until you are completely disarmed, and broke. A slave. Don't you think it's time you woke up you credulous hack? I have my disagreements with Geedee, but at least watch Holders clip above. ( the one below it makes me cringe ) When a guy who has committed serial perjury on his minions ordering the sale of weapons to drug cartels for the EXPRESS PURPOSE of screwing YOU with gun control laws based on outright lies, tells you he plans to brainwash you, I can't believe you still buy this crap. | ||
| Aesquire |
 "I would like to hear someone justify the need to posses this without limit, restriction, or license." 1. I don't have to justify shiiiit. It is my right as a free man to posess arms. Even a deadly paring knife. With pointy tip and all. 2. Apples. Good enough? Ok, Silverskin. (Message edited by aesquire on January 02, 2013) | ||
| Rick_a |
During the Clinton bans the figure was that less than two percent of gun crimes were committed with a semi-automatic rifle with a detachable magazine. Currently, there are roughly nine times more deaths attributed to the use of blunt objects or edged weapons than with rifles of any kind. The innocent should not be punished due to the acts of a lawless few. Where is the line drawn? In other countries even airguns and knives are regulated. It's a lot of effort with zero benefit. It keeps an ignorant public feeling pacified and safe. (Message edited by Rick_A on January 02, 2013) | ||
| Blake |
33 round Glock 18: select fire, fully auto capable, unavailable for civilian purchase. The magazine will fit any 9mm Glock. For home defense, please justify how more ammo is not better in a firefight against malevolent intruders to your home. The right of Americans to own and carry firearms shall not be limited. The right of Americans to own and carry firearms shall be unlimited. We have to justify why we own a certain firearm or accessory? Not according to the law of the land. | ||
| Aesquire |
OTOH.... The Sword has very little use as a hunting weapon. The Spear is usually superior for hunting in every important way, mostly because you can keep the claws, horns and fangs away better. Spears are still used for Boar hunting and on rare occasion, deer. Swords are better in close combat, human to human, than as a hunting weapon. Compound bows have rarely been used in war, because they are a civilian modification/improvement to a weapon considered obsolete by the time of it's invention on the 1960's. Of course, Bows have thousands of years of history as War Weapons. Ask a Brit. Some spec ops forces have used them on occasion, when a silent take down is needed. The Spetsnaz take pride in using hatchets. ( like the American Indian, the Viking, the Keldara, etc. ) There's a reason I have told my friends to never, ever, prank me with a "reality show" like Scare Tactics. http://www.syfy.com/scaretactics/ For example.... The traditional masked axe murderer scenario might get a negative reaction from me. Since I have actually trained to use a axe in close combat, my flash reaction is not to scream and cower, ( Oh, I'd probably scream ) but to pick up the nearest object that looked axe resistant and pound the axe guy against the wall, or floor, repeatedly until he quits scaring me. Since 40 lb metal shields are not that common, ( My trained choice ) a table would do fine. It'd really suck to be that stunt man, and worse to be me after they pry me off him. An Axe is a War Weapon. A table? An IED. Improvised Exteeeeemly panicked Demolisher. | ||
| Cityxslicker |
Up on a Global Health blog / forum board - I swear I am the only one there that 1) served in the military 2) has served with a gun 3) owns a gun 4) doesn't think Sandy Hook has a damn f'n thing to do with the latest grab outta DC. and you should see the pile on they are up to - I am everything from Rambo, a Racist, a baby killer, and of course a time bomb just waiting my own school scenario. these people are just so daft. It ain't the damn gun. Quit breeding kids if you are really all concerned about 'school violence'. No kids, no schools, no school shootings..... (of course they don't like the oversimplified logic when it is aimed back at them) And these are the EXACT people that are leading the charge in the PPACA machine. I don't trust em, not a f'n one of them. | ||
| Union_man |
If you think that a 33 round pistol clip is A OK. I must sign off. We will never agree and arguing is futile. I do know this...Things will change. The public’s tolerance of fringiest Congressmen that are unwilling to compromise has worn thin. The majority will get its way eventually. It will be sooner than think. Good luck. | ||
| Sifo |
Union_man, I'm curious, EXACTLY how many rounds of ammo does one need to defend himself from an unknown threat? | ||
| Pwnzor |
If you think that a 33 round pistol clip is A OK. I must sign off. See ya!  | ||
| Macbuell |
Union man .. you really are full of shit. You keep saying the majority as if it's written in stone. First, the President got less votes this time around than in 2008. I would hardly call that a mandate, Second, Majorities are very short lived. The Republicans had control of everything from 2005-2007 and how far did that get them. Oh yeah, the idiot was elected in 2008 and the Dems took control of the Senate and the House so it lasted exactly 2 years. And then the Dems, as they do, overstepped their bounds and were kicked out of the house in 2010. And finally, there is NO real Majority. The Dems control the Senate and the Presidency but the Republicans control the House. Every Budget bill must originate from the House which means they control the purse strings. The Dems can cry and try to push everyone around but all the Republicans have to do is refuse to pass an appropriations bill and just shut everything down. So keep talking about majorities all you want but the Dems have to negotiate with the Republicans if they want to get anything done. | ||
| Buellinachinashop |
"For home defense, please justify how more ammo is not better in a firefight against malevolent intruders to your home." Depends on how many bullet holes you want to fill in. In all reality, the average "gun fight" only lasts 2-3 rounds. I'm all for as many rounds as you desire, me? I have one 15 rounder in my 92F and a loaded 18rnd spare in my GunVault under my bed.  | ||
| Hootowl |
http://www.foxnews.com/us/2013/01/03/beloved-chica go-muffler-store-owner-citys-fifth-homicide-new-ye ar/?test=latestnews Man, they REALLY need to ban guns in Chicago. Oh wait...they already have. Huh. Why do people keep getting shot there? | ||
| Geedee |
"So keep talking about majorities all you want but the Dems have to negotiate with the Republicans if they want to get anything done." Or until Obama calls a national emergency, which he already has. "On June 25, 2012, Obama notified the Speaker of the House, John Boehner and Vice President Joe Biden as the President of the US Senate that he had just declared a National Emergency under the terms of Section 204(b) of the International Emergency Economic Powers Act by seizing assets and property owned by the Russian Federation theoretically related to Russia’s uranium enrichment program which the West feels the Soviets will use to help Syria become a nuclear power." Check out: EO 10997, EO 11000, EO 11002, EO 11003, EO 11004, EO 11005, EO 13603, EO 13617, EO 13618. "With respect to Executive Order 13603, Obama has made it easy for law enforcement to seize lawful, registered guns from US citizens who are never accused of committing a crime. They don’t arrest the person, they arrest the weapon since weapons have no constitutional rights. The new rule, published at the end of August, 2012, gives the BATF (Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco & Firearms) authority to “…seize and administratively forfeit property involved in controlled substance abuse.” And while Obama has been busy issuing EO's to control everything inside the US, he has been issuing EO's to force the US to submit to international regulations instead of the US Constitution. It's called preparedness, like acquiring lots and lots of ammo. Don't let all the golfing and holidays fool you. | ||
| Reindog |
Your language and thinking smacks of intolerance and a propensity for fascism. You would be wise to read Orwell. Your "majority" has wreaked havoc and has caused the destruction of liberty time and time again. What happens when the Beast arises and the "majority" turns on itself? --"Fringy" | ||
| Sifo |
The majority will get its way eventually. Two wolves and a sheep voting on what to have for dinner!  The constitution was written to, in many ways, protect the minority from a "mob rules" governance. You seem to have problems with that. At least for today. | ||
| Union_man |
Guys c'mon! Why are you all assuming that MY view will be the the same as most people. Sounds like you are already admitting defeat. Sad. I said The majority will get its way eventually. That is the way this country works. This will be settled sooner than later. How much later? One more mass murder? Two? I hope no more than that. The blow back from another tragedy will rule the day. The momentum may cut deeper than any of us want. I also hope that the gun hating KOOKS are not the ones drafting the "solution" without compromise, and in a vacuum. Good Luck  (Message edited by union_man on January 03, 2013) | ||
| Oldog |
I also hope that the gun hating KOOKS are not the ones drafting the "solution" without compromise, and in a vacuum. http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2013/01/02/liberal- ex-columnist-death-threats-published-in-des-moines -register/ There here ......... }The right of the PEOPLE to bear arms shall not be infringed The people who are in power will do well to remember that the Constitution that they so willingly brush away is what grants them ANY authority | ||
| Union_man |
Huh? So no changes or limitations have been made to the 2nd Amendment? Ever? Your right, couldn't happen.  Here is the way I see it... One extreme group of KOOKS will win this. If it is your side that wins. No change. If you are you sure your argument will win..."Double Down"! But... If you lose control and the other KOOKS win. It will be too late for compromise. Things will CHANGE. Possibly unchecked. There HAS to be a middle ground. I doubt it will be found. Peace. | ||
| Aesquire |
What, exactly is the middle ground between truth, and lies? Where is the compromise between tyranny and representative government? Simple. A 33 round mag is not the issue. Is a 32 round mag "better"? 17? 4? How many bullets in a box makes no difference to the anti-freedom people. It is an excuse. It always has been. When you are down to muzzle loading smooth bores the gunpowder is the evil that must be banned. Where the frack is the middle ground between the law and what the mob wants? The "majority"? The purpose of the Constitution is to protect us from the majority. That's why these people hate it so much. Using hate and the mob to gain and keep power is what evil people DO. It's sorta the definition. Whose side are you on? | ||
| Aesquire |
How much later? One more mass murder? Two? I hope no more than that. How utterly naive. Stalin had a phrase for people that ignore facts and believe propaganda. "Useful......" | ||
| Cowboy |
Please try to understand our bill of rights it is not a bill of needs. | ||
| Old_guy |
I find it disturbing that when the majority of guns were banned in Britain the murder rate increased. When they banned the majority of guns in Australia the rate for violent crimes across the board increased 20% and home invasions increased 27%. Why? Because the criminals still had their guns and knew the populace was virtually unarmed. | ||
| Kenm123t |
Union the Demoncrats are looking for a Fight. They will find one! Gun control has always ended in Genocide your backing the wrong side they have RFID chips ready for you and your kids. Love tomahawks family history is replete with stories of thier use in battle both the native american and scandinavian side. | ||
| Sifo |
Union_man, First let me thank you for calling us kooks. You've lost the argument. Has the 2nd amendment ever been changed? No it hasn't. It still stands exactly as it was written by our founders. There is a process to change it. It's not being followed, and you are not proposing that we follow it. Instead you propose we ignore our Constitution. You are calling US kooks? Seriously, how many rounds does it take to defend yourself from an unknown threat? Just type a number. 2 simple key strokes. Perhaps you feel it should only be a single key stroke? You piss and moan that no one will answer your questions, when they are being answered multiple times. You won't answer very simple questions, even when it can be done with only a couple of key strokes. Why are you all assuming that MY view will be the the same as most people. I'm making no assumptions about what you believe. I'm simply reacting to the thoughts you are writing. You seem to make it clear that you feel those who would follow the 2nd amendment as written to be kooks. It follows that you would also feel the people who wrote the 2nd amendment to be kooks. It is you who are aligning yourself with extremists who have a desire to destroy our rule of law. | ||
| Aesquire |
Now, I'm a bit confused here, and maybe you guys can help. Buellinmike did a drive-by snarking and baited with an off topic hot button. Then refused to answer, clarify, etc. So I suppose I should assume that his purpose in so doing was to be a vicious jr. high girl, delighting in malice for it's own sake? Is there any deeper meaning I should look for? I shouldn't assume that any subject he talks about is his own view. Just a means to extract a response? If so, there is no need to take him seriously, and I can respond to his straw men, propaganda trolls and moral ambiguity on any given subject, as just a childish flame? In other words the proper response is not an indignant "why are you calling for ethnic group X to suffer, you monster?" but instead should be "Ooohh! good burn Betty Sue!" ?????????? I'm now also confused by Union Man's point. What? Does? He want? Other than to repeat the deliberate mantra of the Admin? What Am I missing here other than reason? | ||
| Cityxslicker |
who are you to tell me what means I 'should' go to protect myself from what I know the idiots and minions are carrying. Udtu Ha xyu. Shall NOT be infringed is pretty damn clear. Back the F off Barry | ||
| Sifo |
I haven't taken Buellinmike seriously since he said that he views everything though the prism of race. Union_man is getting there fast. I would say a close second, but Rocco still does the occasional post. | ||
| Cowboy |
Remember when we conservites lose our freedom the liberals will be next then you will laugh out the other side of your mouth. | ||
| Rick_a |
This is no longer the case. When the Clinton bans took effect about 80% of the public was behind it. Currently the public is spit on the issue, largely as the recent bans here, in Europe, and in Australia have effectively done nothing to decrease crime. Even if crimes committed with firearms drop, violent crime goes up as a whole. (Message edited by Rick_A on January 03, 2013) | ||
| Johnnymceldoo |
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k1SZurGArxE&feature =youtube_gdata_player |
