Marinesg1012
Member
They want to ban the 223? That is crazy 
I just got my baby and I don't want her gone. besides IT IS LEGAL TO HUNT with it in my state as long as I use a 5 round mag.
banning .223 rifles??
- Thread starter Locke
- Start date
- Status
Unlucky
member
None taken.
MagKnightX
Member
- Joined
- Aug 12, 2003
- Messages
- 867
Newspeak-English Dictionary:
Legitimate Gun Owners - LehºJHIºtaºmitt GUHN OHºnurs -- n. A police officer going on a drug raid or capturing a nasty NRA member. Nobody else. Patrolmen and icky soldiers not included in definition. see JBT, Government Peace Patrol
Zundfolge
Member
MagKnightX, that's definition 1
definition 2: Democrat candidates and other rich liberals who may own a Trap shooting shotgun or two.
definition 2: Democrat candidates and other rich liberals who may own a Trap shooting shotgun or two.
Carlos Cabeza
Member
Oklahoma allows .223 for deer hunting with the proper projectile and it is quite effective if the hunter gets within a respectable range enough to make shot placement a definite 10 ring. I demonstrated this last fall
(approx. range 40yd.) and the doe in question did not move from her point of bullet impact. My rifle is a BM AR-15 DCM target 20".
(approx. range 40yd.) and the doe in question did not move from her point of bullet impact. My rifle is a BM AR-15 DCM target 20".
Locke
Member
You know, that got me thinking... it would be great if someone put together a brief yet complete explanation of all the styling/functional things banned by the AWB, and how they are complete nonsense. That way, all of us could use it to inform those who are still under the influence of the media/politicians, as well as fellow gun-owners who are unaware. What do you think about this idea, USAFNoDAk?
Ryan
7.62 FMJ...
: I could quote Forrest Gump - "Stupid is as stupid does"... but I believe it passes stupid - to ignorance and an unwillingness to learn differently. Some, though, need a prod to change sides - as USAFNoDAk (above) reports.
Beyond re-education, whether 1,000,000 or 2000, the MM effort still had all the attention of the media - and the SAS had little. The MM had nationally "recognized" voices and got their names in print, on tape, and on air. My point is - they, the antis, have the upperhand in getting coverage, ergo the ear and eyes of the (gun-issue) ignorant. When, as, and if, we pro-gunners can equal or exceed their ability to "talk" to the country, then we will make major headway.
It seems - to us anyway - that every time an innocent gets shot, particularly a child, pregnant women, or senior citizen, we lose something and the antis gain. I'm not exactly convinced that this is true with the population at large, but I would understand the immediate area/neighborhood folks would be expected to go anti after an "event". Yet, if they understood that the "event" might have been neuteralized simply by being (legally) armed and trained; that guns are but tools and not demons; that guns are dangerous only when handled; that certain ingrained rules of safety will minimize accidents; that guns not only offer protection, but also self-confidence, fun and even social benefit.
AND it is their inalienable - constitutionally protected - right to own as many guns, as many types of guns, as they may desire and can afford.
There is a question to ask here, but first - comb through the THR/TFL threads for the many times we, collectively, have been tasked, challenged, cajoled, or otherwise nagged to "do something important", like organize, fund, and operate a pro-gun effort and with a few exceptions there wasn't a true interest or drive to get it done. I'm reasonably sure we're not alone, that other boards and groups have the same problem.
Across the country it's "Let George do it" - or - The NRA will do it - or somebody. Well, the antis do it! Passing the buck to others doesn't hack it.
"We the people of the United States, in order to form a more perfect union, establish justice, insure domestic tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general welfare, and secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity..." must do it.
As an aside, just before TFL was to shut down and while THR was about to be born, Rich Lucibella kind of teased us with the idea that (THR) would be much more than TFL. I took that as it would rise - in some way - to major prominence in the Fight for Right. I then posted five questions and had but three replies - Rich was one, Preacherman and Navy joe the others. I refer you to: http://thefiringline.com/forums/showthread.php?t=146807&highlight=Ironbarr
So - the question is: When - if ever - do we begin the things that ensure our more perfect union, our justice and domestic tranquility, our defense and welfare, and liberty - those things that generate good will and (positive) media coverage to equal or exceed that (negative) of the antis?
-Andy
I know that you have no need of a reply, but...
: I could quote Forrest Gump - "Stupid is as stupid does"... but I believe it passes stupid - to ignorance and an unwillingness to learn differently. Some, though, need a prod to change sides - as USAFNoDAk (above) reports. Beyond re-education, whether 1,000,000 or 2000, the MM effort still had all the attention of the media - and the SAS had little. The MM had nationally "recognized" voices and got their names in print, on tape, and on air. My point is - they, the antis, have the upperhand in getting coverage, ergo the ear and eyes of the (gun-issue) ignorant. When, as, and if, we pro-gunners can equal or exceed their ability to "talk" to the country, then we will make major headway.
It seems - to us anyway - that every time an innocent gets shot, particularly a child, pregnant women, or senior citizen, we lose something and the antis gain. I'm not exactly convinced that this is true with the population at large, but I would understand the immediate area/neighborhood folks would be expected to go anti after an "event". Yet, if they understood that the "event" might have been neuteralized simply by being (legally) armed and trained; that guns are but tools and not demons; that guns are dangerous only when handled; that certain ingrained rules of safety will minimize accidents; that guns not only offer protection, but also self-confidence, fun and even social benefit.
AND it is their inalienable - constitutionally protected - right to own as many guns, as many types of guns, as they may desire and can afford.
There is a question to ask here, but first - comb through the THR/TFL threads for the many times we, collectively, have been tasked, challenged, cajoled, or otherwise nagged to "do something important", like organize, fund, and operate a pro-gun effort and with a few exceptions there wasn't a true interest or drive to get it done. I'm reasonably sure we're not alone, that other boards and groups have the same problem.
Across the country it's "Let George do it" - or - The NRA will do it - or somebody. Well, the antis do it! Passing the buck to others doesn't hack it.
"We the people of the United States, in order to form a more perfect union, establish justice, insure domestic tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general welfare, and secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity..." must do it.
As an aside, just before TFL was to shut down and while THR was about to be born, Rich Lucibella kind of teased us with the idea that (THR) would be much more than TFL. I took that as it would rise - in some way - to major prominence in the Fight for Right. I then posted five questions and had but three replies - Rich was one, Preacherman and Navy joe the others. I refer you to: http://thefiringline.com/forums/showthread.php?t=146807&highlight=Ironbarr
So - the question is: When - if ever - do we begin the things that ensure our more perfect union, our justice and domestic tranquility, our defense and welfare, and liberty - those things that generate good will and (positive) media coverage to equal or exceed that (negative) of the antis?
-Andy
Last edited:
Treylis
Member
I've always just shook my head at those laws. Makes utterly no sense. Does anyone know the justifications used to pass them?
You could use a .17 Rem to hunt deer here in KY. Hunting regs just specify a centerfire caliber and 10rnd mag limit. I think they used to have a 'larger than 22 caliber' limit some years ago, but it seems to have disappeared from the regulation text.
Anything smaller than a deer is perfect for a .223 and that is where it excels. If I'm not mistaken, it's also the most popular varmint round, mostly in bolt actions. Prarie dogs, groundhogs, racoon, possums, coyotes, etc., the list goes on. Besides, if we let them ban it, we better kiss the 7.62x39, .308win, .30-06, .30 carbine, .50BMG, 9mm and .45acp goodbye. If they include LEO cartridges, we won't have any firearms left.
Anything smaller than a deer is perfect for a .223 and that is where it excels. If I'm not mistaken, it's also the most popular varmint round, mostly in bolt actions. Prarie dogs, groundhogs, racoon, possums, coyotes, etc., the list goes on. Besides, if we let them ban it, we better kiss the 7.62x39, .308win, .30-06, .30 carbine, .50BMG, 9mm and .45acp goodbye. If they include LEO cartridges, we won't have any firearms left.
sm
member
Bruce H posted :
It is not about caliber, or the type/make/ model of firearm. It always boils down to getting attention, pulling heart strings, getting votes, and ultimately - Control.
If it ain't a crime, illegal, make it such - so everyone gets busted at some point in time.
"For the children"...regulate hot water heater temps and bathtubs, thats where kids get hurt.
Heck I got hurt, stepping out of the shower some 20 yrs ago, slipped turned and fell onto the corner of Formica cabinets - chipped my Scapula, and did some nerve damage. Bathroom is the most dangerous place to be - inside one's home.
My bathtub /bathroom "hurt me". The loaded Mini 14 did not...just sitting in corner of bedroom minding its own business.
I agree!!
It is not about caliber, or the type/make/ model of firearm. It always boils down to getting attention, pulling heart strings, getting votes, and ultimately - Control.
If it ain't a crime, illegal, make it such - so everyone gets busted at some point in time.
"For the children"...regulate hot water heater temps and bathtubs, thats where kids get hurt.
Heck I got hurt, stepping out of the shower some 20 yrs ago, slipped turned and fell onto the corner of Formica cabinets - chipped my Scapula, and did some nerve damage. Bathroom is the most dangerous place to be - inside one's home.
My bathtub /bathroom "hurt me". The loaded Mini 14 did not...just sitting in corner of bedroom minding its own business.
Justin Moore
Member
That's a great story
HankB
Member
The #1 reason: because they could.
Seriously, the excuse used in passing nutty laws against ownership of certain cartridges may be a fear of "bad guys" arming or resupplying themselves from government ammo dumps. A century or so back, the British Empire banned ".450 caliber" cartridge firearms from parts of their empire in Africa, as they didn't want tribesmen using bullets from Brit service rifles (using, IIRC, the .577/.450 cartridge) in their muskets. That's why Brit express rifle makers like Holland & Holland came up with things like the .465, .470, and .475 cartridges - to get around the ".450" ban.
And some places have chosen to follow the Brit example.
Hmmm . . . at one time, military cartridges actually DID offer more performance than any "common" cartridges . . . this was back around the time when the transition from black powder to smokeless was going on. Maybe the "powers that be" didn't want this wonderous "high technology" readily available to the general proletariat . . . ?
carpettbaggerr
Member
- Joined
- Nov 13, 2003
- Messages
- 1,676
Why do you think they introduced the .45 GAP?
- Status