For those of you who fear guns.......

Sorry for the confusion, I was just talking about semi-automatic / fully-automatic weapons.

 

The M1 Garand is a thing of beauty, consider yourself lucky to have had an oppurtunity to have fired such a historic rifle, it is by far my favorite gun I have ever fired, I get a tingle up my spine after I hear that *ting*!

 

I would offer this advice. Go to a range that rents firearms. Try some of these weapons of mass destructions that the Libs are wanting to remove from lawful owners who haven't violated anyone's Rights, or used to commit a crime. Become familiar with what they are not familiar with. Try something worth returning a verified opinion. Never rely upon some one else's opinion to guide what you are unfamiliar with. If you do, then you can claim more awareness than they, even if you are still anti-gun ownership, at least you'll be better informed than they are.

 

Ahhh Okie Dokie, Do you have questions about the difference, the availability, their common use, their necessity?

 

Interesting stuff. The ultimate reason why they're calling for gun control is because people are scared and politicians need a way of responding to recent mass shootings. I agree that gun restrictions wouldn't solve our problem but its a lot easier to ban guns than adequately address such a complex issue. Obviously, we shouldn't just sit back and expect everything to sort itself out but it will take a lot of time and effort to effectively reduce the violent crime rates in America. There is no simple fix.

 

And just as a final note, people simply have to understand that when there is evil in mans heart, no amount of legislation will stop them from doing evil despite any legislation. Seeking a perfect non-violent world has proven futile. What most ani-gunners should seek is a manner in which they can affect the evil in humans not the manner in which they choose to be evil.

 

I feel so much safer now. The guy next to me who cut me off in traffic and flipped me off may have a gun. The road rage guy who gets furious anytime someone does not move within the first 1.2 seconds after the light changes, may have a gun. The gun down the block who does nightly fight training on his wife's face may have a gun. The teenagers who have been cruising and getting drunk may be carrying dad's or mom's weapon. Many school children who know dad's locker combination (if dad is even that responsible) may be going to school armed. And so on and on. Boy has this web made me feel better.

 

As an avid trap shooter I often use semi-automatic shotguns for sporting purposes. The ban on assalt weapons that the Obama administration is toying with would severely inhibit competition trap shooting, where most competitors use semi- automatic shotguns. The problem with "assault weapons" or "weapons of mass destruction" is that to a non- gun owner they seem scary. The media attaches these fear inducing titles to guns to scare people that know very little about the guns themselves. I will be the first to say that guns, especially semi-automatic weapons, are not toys and must be respected. However, there seems to be this misperception that a bunch of crazy people are running around with semi-autos when in fact a criminals weapon of choice is a hand gun. It was even disclosed that the Sandy Hook shooter left his semi-automatic weapon in his vehicle and entered the school with a Glock handgun. So why the big push for bans on semi-automatic guns? What about trap shooters like me who did nothing wrong?

 

Oh my God the stretches some people go to.
"Do you think that we should have the right to carry any kind of protection"? A sledge hammer isn't a very practical carry weapon for self defense, neither is a law rocket or a bow and arrow. A rifle isn't a practical carry weapon either which is why most carry a pistol or a wheel gun. "The right" in this case is over-ruled by practicality and common sense. Criminals are the ones who carry automatic weapons in their vehicles, criminals who ignore all gun laws.

"An enraged punch to the face doesn't have the lasting repercussions of simply pulling a trigger." And a punch to the face wouldn't have had the same repercussions for Cain as did the rock to Abel's skull. People do "overestimate their ability to control themselves" which is why laws designed to punish those who violate the laws of humanity should be properly employed, not universal decrees that punish the law abiding for what some fear they could do.

Did you know that at one time a flint lock or cap lock rifle was once an "assault weapon"? An "assault weapon' is a political term for any gun socialists or gun phobics want to demonize. Full auto weapons are already illegal for most but that doesn't stop criminals from having and using them. A semi-auto is simply a more efficient firearm in that one need not manually (*)(*)(*)(*) it before firing again. Thousands of hunters have found them to be an advantage even if in my opinion less sporting. But then a spear would be more sporting for hunting wouldn't it? The great object with hunting is not to be sporting but to bring home meat, natural meat without additives or chemicals.
Semi-auto weapons, rifles and pistols, are also used by tens of thousands of law abiding citizens in competition as I did before getting too old to be competitive. Many of those competitors include members of the clergy, doctors, nurses, lawyers, judges and police not to mention a few politicians.

And by the way a shotgun is not as practical a weapon for self defense in the home as your buddy Biden seems to indicate. It is often unwieldy, awkward in close quarters and also comes in semi-auto versions that few can manage to control. A high powered rifle bullet can go through an assailant and multiple walls striking innocent neighbors and for that reason isn't practical either.

As a side bar keep this in mind. People who own and carry guns are called citizens. Unarmed people are called subjects.

 

Would that I had a dollar for every "TING" I heard not to mention every round fired from that marvelous piece of art!

 

2ndaMANdment did a good job of addressing their necessity. I didn't realize how infrequently they're used in violent crime. This is a random question but what is the most firepower a civilian with every possible weapon licence could legally own (e.g. bombs, rpgs, tanks, fully-automatic weapons, turrets)?

 

OMG people dying and being burned by fire and drowning in water. Lets ban fire and water so we will all be safer! Look at all those cars rolling around killing people. Lets get rid of motor vehicles! But guns running around killing people and beating up their wives? Dude get hold of yourself and run to your nearest shrink for help.

 

LOL and the gun did what all by it's itty bitty self in your scenarios? A person who flips you off has a gun...so what, did they use it. The road rage guy, did he use the gun? A gun down the street does not do nightly training on a wives face, a person with evil in his or her heart with a temper did and in your scenario the gun wasn't used eh? The teenager cruising drunk is allot more likely to kill some one with his car...the gun was just in the car. So you give your kids or grandkids the combinations to things that could be misused and cause death?
Want to feel better, learn to protect yourself and your family, quit fear mongering.

 

Civilians can and do own fully automatic weapons, tanks, jets, bombers, Not sure what you mean by turrents. Civilians don't own functioning bombs, rpgs, or nuclear weapons. Now law abiding citizens with a determination could create all sorts of bombs, they don't because they respect the law. In this day and age, making anything is not impossible given a determination and a desire. Law abiding citizens don't because of respect for human life and respect for the laws. It's the one thing the anti's always try to create. The fear that owning something will automatically make some one become evil and use it. It's like me asking you, if I gave you an automatic weapon would you go to a school and use it on kids? Think about that for a bit, because if you wouldn't why would any of the millions and millions of law abiding citizens who aquire any type of weapon use it illegally?

 

This discussion has progressed a lot since my first post (which you responded to) but I'll respond anyways. I agree with nearly everything you said. I was unaware that people used semi-automatic rifles for hunting and I now see their benefits for defense. However, the only sporting method of hunting is bear wrestling.

Don't insult me.

 

Honestly, I'm not even sure what I meant. Probably, automated defense systems.

A bit of an over generalization but I see your point. There are people who commit crimes with guns, but I'm generally not afraid of people who obtain them legally. Still, you can't say that out of the billions of people on this earth, no law abiding citizen who acquires a weapon would ever use it illegally. In general your right, its just an oversimplification,.

 

Way to completely, totally ignore the point. Of course guns do not act on their own. Thanks for stating the obvious. But in the wrong hands they do more damage than knifes. And, unlike cars, they do not serve as a means of transportation. Don't you ever get tired of false analogy and straw man arguments. And given the number of red herrings, you must be fishermen. Well, carry on in your world of denial. I think you are about to find that many of your fellow citizens are about to demand limitations on you sacred toys.

 

Just for the sake of opinion I disagree with your choice of defense weapons but not with your right or choice to choose and have them. MY choice is a semi-auto pistol, .45ACP wide body. My wife prefers her SW 9mm with hydroshoks. The 223 round by the way will penetrate two Sheetrock walls set 15 feet apart and keep on going as will the .45 ACP, 38 special, 9mm and .357.
For me a rifle or shotgun is far too unwieldy and awkward in close quarters which is why I prefer pistols. I do admit the sound of a shotgun going off may send most intruders packing. My purpose here is to demonstrate that two people may differ in the choice of self defense weapons while still both serving the Gods of peace and lords of law.

 

First off, Way to fear monger, a totally useless concept, many things in the wrong hands besides guns do way more damge...you are digging a hole here eh?
Secondly If you are implying (the official state run media postion) that guns only have one purpose you are correct, they are designed to propell a projectile down a cylindrical tube at a given speed. What the intended use for that projectile is, is where your misguided perception falls from reality. The propelled projectil has many beneficial and enjoyable benefits besides the evil use you purpose. The false analogy and straw man arguments belong to you sir.
As to your last comments I say, please point out my red herrings, it would be intersting to actually hear a rational explaination for your precepts that the gun was the issue in any of your previous comments....eh?

 

I am well aware that guns have multiple purposes. I have nearly every sharpshooter award available for handguns and rifles - earned as a Eagle scout. I respect guns - the NRA and their arguments not so much. Of course guns have, in general, to be aimed and used by a human. Duh. They make killing easier, but there are certainly other means. All comparisons to automobiles are red herrings. So are comparisons to axes, knifes, and any other weapons that essentially require close proximity. I could probably successfully kill at 200 yards or more, but most people cannot. Still, their range is vastly improved. You really want to argue that? I don't think so. Guns don't need to be outlawed, but there are many stage short of outlawing which make sense and will make all of us safer. Yes, the street rage thing I brought is relevant. The out of control victim of his own testosterone has turned lose with weapons and shot the guy who cut him off. Knifes are hard to use that way though cars. Guns don't kill people? Off course they do in the hands of the wrong people.

 

Well thanks for acknowledging guns have multiple purposes and DUH Knives, cars, bats, crowbars, even hammers make killing easier than using ones hands and thanks for acknowledging there are other means, seems you are coming around to the human element eh?

Really, please explain the red herring, given you just pointed out that guns have multiple purposes

Just what proximity do most criminal acts with a firearm occur at? Please please tell me you knew the answer before you made this statement.

Well Yes I do wan t to argue the point, please provide statistics of violent gun deaths and the distances they occur at eh?

Please describe in detail what these stages short of outlawing are so we can intelligently discuss them, without the insults you seem to invoke when challenged in your beliefs

Are you describing yourself? I carry a gun and I don't do that. Are you that impulsive? Are you suggesting all americans are? You do know statistics don't support your "OPINION" eh? Your opinion is irrelevant, provide facts that Are RELEVANT AND WE'LL TALK EH.

However the cars themselves are quite the weapon eh? You missed that point all together sheesh!

BOY YOU GOT THAT RIGHT HEHE You just made my case thank you very much. "IN THE HANDS OF THE WRONG PEOPLE" I'm yelling because you can't even seem to understand your own argument........PEOPLE KILL PEOPLE not guns WOW just WOW

 

It would seem that you are inferring that the 2nd A is old and irrelevant and can be easily altered to suit the Emotionalists. Most people conveniently forget the BoR has been a constant thorn in the side of government. The Founding Fathers made sure that we, the common Citizen, have the means to protect those Rights when all else fails, from tyranny, such as Obama, Holder, Feinstein, Reid, Cuomo, and their ilk would impose.
They (federal higher ups) all want their 2nd A Rights intact, but not ours. They have used every excuse and justification to drive through legislation that would deprive the common Citizen from being able to protect themselves from a tyrannical socialistic mind set of a few in power..... and you are caught up in the deceit that this government is foisting upon you.
Try to think it through without becoming emotional. Look at it from every angle, not just the one they want you to see...be an independent thinker and not an emotional lemming. Look at the WHOLE picture: DHS buying up all the ammuntion (5 billion rounds), alphabet agencies buying full auto weaponry (IRS, HHR, HFA,...), recruiting soldiers for DHS out of Ameri-Corp (volunteer service in exchange for citizenship) and arming them with full auto AR-15...... Socialist programs like universal health care. (It hasn't got anything to do with healthcare as much as it means laying such a heavy tax burden on the middle-class, destroying business and creating an even larger unemployment numbers.) Pitting Citizens against each other to acheive the goverments own plans. View these things in a different light.
If it came down to a fight, would you rather have a musket against a full auto weapon? Would you even resist?
Remember, in every country that has followed this path, even the innocent were imprisoned or worse, and co-conspirators were put to death. (Stalin, Mussolini, Mao, Jung......)

 

I agree with your preference of choice, though not religious, I uphold the law, desire peace and safety of all those around me. I would like to touch up on the penetration a little more, check out these links, when I first starting studying self defense in home with firearms, I found out a lot of stuff that surprised me. For instance, the average encounter during a home invasion is 7 feet, however using a flashlight may spook an intruder into doing the unexpected, due to there inability to see the gun in the glare of the flashlight. A laser attachment allows the intruder to know you have a gun and let's him decide if he wishes to press further, retreat or submit and wait for police. Even at close range at five feet, coming through a doorway with a semi auto rifle is still easy to bear on target, the further the distance between the sights, the faster you can aquire the target, especially after each shot. I'm not by any means telling you that your method is wrong, anybody who chooses to protect themselves with a firearm is right, so long as they practice safe keeping and gun safety.

But back to the penetration tests.
http://www.olyarms.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=15&Itemid=26
http://www.olyarms.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=14

Of course it always depends on what type of ammo is used.

 

O

I don't see much hope that you will ever feel safe. If you are spending your time worrying about those things, then there is not much we can do for you, save lock up all of those people in case they may lose control. In fact, the man who feels you slipped into the elevator ahead of him may as well be locked up as well, because, given your delicate constitution, he may be equipped to harm you without arms. I recommend that you simply confine yourself to your home in the interest of freeing the rest of us.

 

Was that bear wrestling or bare wrestling? LOL!
BTW I wrestled a bear when I was 15 at a carnival, (rural county).