Do we buy weapons or firearms?

GEM said:

No antigunner is fooled by the dancing around the purpose of these things. The increase in purchasing of guns is for their use as weapons for self-defense and possible civil/unrest and tyranny. Not competition or hunting.

Click to expand...

I disagree; my last several guns purchased had NOTHING to do with civil unrest, HD/SD, zombies or anything remotely connected to some video game commando. Several were target shotguns, one was a K22 Masterpiece, another a .243 bolt action.

You disagree based on you. Not what industry reporting says. Google it.

If you read Democratic pronouncements, they usually support the 2nd Amendment for hunters and sportsmen. Sen. Amy Jean Klobuchar repeatedly said she didn't to take her Uncle Dick's rifle from his deer blind.

The point being the gun bans will take out the semi auto rifles and higher capacity pistols. Your talking about a K22 Masterpiecer is irrelevant. In fact, if I were Amy, I would let you keep the K22 but at the gun range where you check it out to shoot at a bullseye.

Sporting guns are irrelevant to the 2nd Amendment purposes. If you buy into describing your guns as sporting, you give away the guns and they can easily be locked up at the range. This happens in some countries.

I just don't get folks who think some please don't take my toys away verbiage will let the guns useful for 2nd Amendment purposes to be kept. I don't care if you have guns for sports. I don't care if you go bowling either.

The Second Amendment refers to "arms". To me that implies weapon. Just because one owns weapons doesn't mean that it has to be used as such.

GEM said:

You disagree based on you. Not what industry reporting says. Google it.

If you read Democratic pronouncements, they usually support the 2nd Amendment for hunters and sportsmen. Sen. Amy Jean Klobuchar repeatedly said she didn't to take her Uncle Dick's rifle from his deer blind.

The point being the gun bans will take out the semi auto rifles and higher capacity pistols. Your talking about a K22 Masterpiecer is irrelevant. In fact, if I were Amy, I would let you keep the K22 but at the gun range where you check it out to shoot at a bullseye.

Sporting guns are irrelevant to the 2nd Amendment purposes. If you buy into describing your guns as sporting, you give away the guns and they can easily be locked up at the range. This happens in some countries.

I just don't get folks who think some please don't take my toys away verbiage will let the guns useful for 2nd Amendment purposes to be kept. I don't care if you have guns for sports. I don't care if you go bowling either.

Click to expand...

And I don't care if you fear zombie apocalypses and rampaging leftists in your hometown. I buy firearms, not weapons; I buy them because I enjoy them, not because In live in 24/7/365 paranoia about massive home invasions - to each their own; just don't make blanket statements like your previous one.

We are talking about failed strategies to defend the Second Amendment. You seem to miss that point. My statement was that most new purchases of firearms are driven by weapons usage. You seem to miss that point.

The divergence of sporting gun culture and SD culture has been documented for several years. Recreation is irrelevant.

GEM said:

That's the point in a nutshell.

No antigunner is fooled by the dancing around the purpose of these things. The increase in purchasing of guns is for their use as weapons for self-defense and possible civil/unrest and tyranny. Not competition or hunting.

Outside our sphere, I suggest you use this term that the Chinese used for the first gunpowder weapons:

Orifice penetrating flying sand magic mist tube.

Perhaps that will convince antigunners to come to our fold.

Click to expand...

Pretty much what I was getting at back in post #48:

Old Dog said:

I taught my children that firearms are weapons. I needed them to understand the seriousness of the use and intent as well as the requirement for responsibility.

You all can fool yourselves are you want by using other terms, but it doesn't change the fact. We want to make the term "assault rifle" go away and start getting folks to say "modern sporting rifle" or whatever? Gosh, that's working out just swell.

Sorry, the genie is out of the bottle. We're not gonna win hearts and minds by simply changing up the words. Those who are against citizen ownership of guns aren't going to be fooled by switching nomenclature.

Click to expand...

Some of you can bow to the gods of political correctness all you want (heaven forbid we should offend some snowflake or soccer mom by calling a firearm what it actually is -- a weapon), but day after tomorrow, when President-elect Biden reminds America that he will go through with his promise to be taking the "weapons of war" off our streets, you go on now, insisting that words -- not principles -- matter.

This thread is so effin' weird.

We shouldn't be fightin' amongst ourselves when all guns are weapons to the anti-gunners.