In order to participate in the GunBroker Member forums, you must be logged in with your GunBroker.com account. Click the sign-in button at the top right of the forums page to get connected.
Ignorance of picking on "assault rifles"
ArmaliteA4
Member Posts: 489 ✭✭✭
I am amazed at the outright stupidity of the anti's
I mean by definition an assault rifle is designed for targets from 0-400 meters. Do these nitwits not realize that the vast plethora of "powerful,monstrous,killing machines" etc.etc. are not very accurate past 350 meters? The most effective force on the battlefield,short of WMD, is a sniper and spotter?
I mean by definition an assault rifle is designed for targets from 0-400 meters. Do these nitwits not realize that the vast plethora of "powerful,monstrous,killing machines" etc.etc. are not very accurate past 350 meters? The most effective force on the battlefield,short of WMD, is a sniper and spotter?
Comments
Quote "When guns were invented everything changed. For the first time in the history of the world a frail woman had a chance to sucessfully defend herself and home. My dream is that one of the anti-gun nuts will need a gun for defense and be unable to have one because of their own actions."
The men of America are afraid to stand up and demand their rights.
They allow themselves to cowed by Socialists that control all the legislatures..and they arn't smart enough to even ask the question "Why should I have to.."....
So you find yourself in a VERY small minority..those who dare question "Authority"...
Kind of like a parent avoiding a lot of argument about letting the kids go watch a particular offensive movie at the theatre by creating a diversion until it is too late to go to that movie. JMHO.
Quote "When guns were invented everything changed. For the first time in the history of the world a frail woman had a chance to sucessfully defend herself and home. My dream is that one of the anti-gun nuts will need a gun for defense and be unable to have one because of their own actions."
quote:Bush had the sack to go after Bin Laden and Saddam...But he has dodged the gun thing and apparently thinks illegals deserve amnesty..
Ordering young man into battle..equates into courage ?
Let me explain my idea of courage.A President looking into the TV cameras saying..." 20,000 gun laws on the books are un- Constitutional..and my presidency will work to end them.Unwarrented intrusions into Citizens daily life end today.I pledge to you that I will work EVERY DAY to restore a Constitutional America..and pursuant to this,The BATF is abolished.All Government agents will be investigated to the fullest extent possible..and ANY TRANSGRESSIONS OF THE LAW will be punished..Harshly.
We are going to have a better America by having an honest,accountable Government..and it starts RIGHT NOW."
This of course only scratches the surface of needed reforms..but no,Courage will not be found in Political Life,2004...or 05,or 06,or..
I think most people who are interested in militaria should digest that book periodically. [:D]
Quote "When guns were invented everything changed. For the first time in the history of the world a frail woman had a chance to sucessfully defend herself and home. My dream is that one of the anti-gun nuts will need a gun for defense and be unable to have one because of their own actions."
Not sniping you..really.[:D]
But being a simple man..I like things stated plainly...VERY plainly.
I have been reading your posts..and welcome aboard.
Using your posts to make a point..please don't take offense at it.[;)]
God,Guts,& GunsHave we lost all 3 ??
Too bad he was the biggest preacher and pusher for the ban in the first place saying in Congress that no man needs a magazine over 10 rounds.
I think the gun ban will be secretly added to some other Bill very soon in Congress to get sneaked by.
Death to Tyrants!!!
Lev 26:14-39
Remember how many seats were lost after AWB passage? Vae victis!
Those who would offer any interpretation that would relegate Amendment II to "relic" status of a bygone era are blatantly stating that the remainder of the Bill of Rights isn't worth a damn, either.
Luke 22:36.
quote:I see the general pulse in here,regarding the NRA, is kinda hostile. ..............I am kinda surprised that so many of "us" have such disdain for the NRA.
I so desperately wish to support the NRA..I really do.
But those that support gun control DO have my hostility..and I cannot have a friend that actively promotes control.Just not in my nature to coddle someone working to decrease my natural rights.
God,Guts,& GunsHave we lost all 3 ??
ArmaliteA4;
quote:I see the general pulse in here,regarding the NRA, is kinda hostile. ..............I am kinda surprised that so many of "us" have such disdain for the NRA.
I so desperately wish to support the NRA..I really do.
But those that support gun control DO have my hostility..and I cannot have a friend that actively promotes control.Just not in my nature to coddle someone working to decrease my natural rights.
God,Guts,& Guns<BR>Have we lost all 3 ??<BR>
HEAR<HEAR!!!!!!I Hear you and agree Highball! L.H.
you miss the main point. you are listening to what the anti-s say and not seeing what they really mean. the ban on full autos and sawed off shotguns was lobbied and inacted because it was needed to control organized crime (real gangsters during proabition). that law is the main reason our gov. got away with murder at Ruby Ridge & Waco. the anti-s are learning from history and expanding on it. they pass a law that can be used to their advantage by literal translation later. what is to say that an assault rifle is not one that might be usedin an assault? case in point; the indangered species act was meant to protect birds, critters, etc., not as a logging ban. once it was on the books any liberal judge used it as he saw fit. wah-lah the anti-s now have a tool. they are trying to expand this same system to guns.
ANY LAW THAT IS A BAN IS A BAD LAW-IT IS A LOSS OF OUR FREEDOM OF CHOICE. we have not even banned murder! sometimes it is allright if we call it CAPITAL PUNISHMENT, ABORTION, EUTHANASIA, or SELF DEFENSE. point being, educated society needs rules, not bans!
Jim
"all I really need to know I learned in kindergarten" Robert Fulghum
anyone who says "nobody needs a full auto" has never been in front of a brown bear charge
this is a pattern that has been clearly established everywhere they have baned guns, england being the best example. they just kept adding more bad gunsto the list to make people sfer. of course people not only werent safer but crime got worse, the answer was always in the interest of public safety to ban more items.
the banner here are aving a case of the jitters because we may actually end up moving in the opposite direction because of the sunset clause. if they get a permanent ban like exists in certain states, we will see a continual banning of assorted new items under the reinterpretation of unneeded military type weapons as opposed to sporting weapons. strangely(or not)the guys deciding whether a weapon is sporting or not usually have no interest concept of sport or skill with firearms. it is for this reason that the BOLT ACTION .50 cal rifles are able to be banned in areas that simply reinterpret the ban on military type weapons that were accused of being able to dump large amounts of ammo downrange quickly. a large very expensive bolt action certainly cant do that but is now facing bans using the broad description.
the problem is compounded because the same guys that want to interpret a .50 cal as being too big and only useful for military purposes are at the same time trying to ban samll calibers as being to small and only capable of use as a hideaway peice. so whats wrong with that? favored choice of criminals comes the reply from the folks that have never even fieldstripped a gun.
therein lies the truth, the guys and gals that want a permanent ban are not looking to make america safer, they cant and they know it,their objective is to put a permanent reasonable sounding ban in place with broad langauge to allow additional types and classes of weapons or cartridges to be considered as nonsporting and banned(perhaps not from current ownership but from further production)amd make the sale and transfer contingent on their approval. as well they will continue to cut down on what would be a legitimate reason to own a gun in the first place effectively eliminating a first time buyer because of the hoops he/she would have to jump through. the less people able to legitimately buy, the more the argument can be made that someone not willing to comply with all the rules must be looking to engage in criminal behaviour. also the less of a constituency that will object to further restrictions.
i lived in nyc where this has been accomplished quite well.not as well as they have done in the rest of civilized europe but we are on our way. for a while they had a permit sytem where they would ony allow a premises permit holder to take a gun to the range 2 days a month and that was it. a target permit would allow you to take your gun out to a range whenever but rstricted you from keeping it loaded in your home. you either had someone who couldnt hit the side of a barn or you had to prove you loaded your gun after the perp was a threat.fortunaetly they now have a combination only(i wont explain the politics of it)but a carry permit is only available if you are closely related to someone important and already warrant police escorts if you want.i think the un would approve.
the reason why we must fight any attempt to place a permanent ban is because we will never have a seat at the table in determining what is sensible and what is not. it will always be some politicians that has more to gain by pandering to the antis.as it is we fight an uphill battle all the time with state legislatures always getting a few anti bills on thier desk that if they pass we lose more rights that we cant get back. fortunately there has been a lot of progress in many states allowing the right to carry and it has resulted in a safer society. so we must keep up the fight and know that the gun banners are not stupid, they have a plan and if we look at englands crime stats or australias law against swords we know where they want to go.
Death to Tyrants!!!
Lev 26:14-39
Remember how many seats were lost after AWB passage? Vae victis!
Those who would offer any interpretation that would relegate Amendment II to "relic" status of a bygone era are blatantly stating that the remainder of the Bill of Rights isn't worth a damn, either.
Luke 22:36.
Death to Tyrants!!!
Lev 26:14-39
Remember how many seats were lost after AWB passage? Vae victis!
Those who would offer any interpretation that would relegate Amendment II to "relic" status of a bygone era are blatantly stating that the remainder of the Bill of Rights isn't worth a damn, either.
Luke 22:36.
Quote "Somehow government decided that the Constitutional Bill of Rights has become the Bill of "Suggested" Rights and are to be rationed to the citizens as the power elite sees fit"
sorry... just felt the urge to be a wise@ss.
By its own definition, why would someone buy a thing called an "assault" rifle?
Who cares what they are defined as in an unconstitutional law? They are rifles, that much is correct. These things were designed by civilians for civilians, not for soldiers. That came later.
Part of the reason we were inflicted with an arms ban was because of its deceptive wording. Just because we see through the lie doesn't mean everyone has the same sense.
Death to Tyrants!!!
Lev 26:14-39
Remember how many seats were lost after AWB passage? Vae victis!
Those who would offer any interpretation that would relegate Amendment II to "relic" status of a bygone era are blatantly stating that the remainder of the Bill of Rights isn't worth a damn, either.
Luke 22:36.