Has an anti ever visited the board?

[Deanimator]

YOU need automatic weapons, the heavier the better.

I'll take that as sarcasm.

If not automatic, why semi-automatic? After all, the anti-gunners are on VOLUMINOUS record about how EASY it is to convert semi-automatic firearms to full-automatic.

What are you willing to see the government do to keep me from having an AR-15 or a semi-auto Kalashnikov?

YOU have the ability to identify the motivations and characteristics of anyone who disagrees with you without hearing them out because they are con-men

Precisely.

The con-men from AHSA rely upon an uninformed and gullible audience to whom to sell their swindle. Unfortunately for them, I've been at this for more than twenty years. I know what they're going to say before they do. I've heard it all. They haven't had a new "idea" in more than ten years.

I'm not "nice" to Holocaust deniers, racists or gay bashers either. Dear me,
now they won't "like" me...

 

[benEzra]

For those still defending the "assault weapon" bait-and-switch...

All rifles COMBINED (every fricking style combined, lever, bolt, traditionally styled semiauto, EBR) accounted for 3.0% of murders in 2007, and 2.6% in 2008. Out of 14,180 total murders, all styles of rifles combined were used in 375, down from 450 in 2007. Rifles are not and have never been a crime problem in this country.

http://www.fbi.gov/ucr/cius2008/data/table_20.html

Or if you don't trust the FBI, would you listen to the gun-control lobby, back when rifle crime was higher than it is now?

"(O)ur organization, Handgun Control, Inc. does not propose further controls on rifles and shotguns. Rifles and shotguns are not the problem; they are not concealable."

--Nelson T. "Pete" Shields, head of what is now the Brady Campaign 1978-1989, Guns Don't Die--People Do, Priam Press, 1981, pp. 47-48 (emphasis added).

Or maybe the American Hunters and Shooters Association????

http://www.huntersandshooters.com/node/1479

Ray Schoenke tells Attorney General Holder: Don't renew the assault weapons ban. It didn't reduce crime. It's bad policy and even worse politics.


Washington, D.C. - Ray Schoenke, the President of the American Hunters and Shooters Association (AHSA), delivered a letter to Attorney General Eric Holder urging him to reconsider his comments about renewing the federal assault weapons ban.

Schoenke, who campaigned in key battleground states for Barack Obama last fall told Holder:

"Based on your comments today, it appears that the Obama administration may attempt to reinstate [the federal assault weapons] ban. As President of AHSA, I encourage you to negate that effort. The assault weapons ban is an issue of personal freedom, that deeply concerns America's hunting, shooting, and sporting community. And even greater than the politics, the issue is bad policy.

Most importantly, the law had no measurable effect on crime reduction. Instead, the law demonized lawful gun owners and became a lightning rod for a decade long public debate over gun crime that merely served to divert time and resources from our already over-burdened law enforcement agencies. Frankly, it has been an unnecessary distraction. Gun owners support efforts to keep our communities safe. We just want those policies directed at the root cause of crime and violence and not just symbolism, which is how the Washington Post accurately described the ban back in 1994."

After sending the letter, Schoenke stated, "The Obama administration shouldn't be distracted from handling the important economic issues currently facing our country. This type of legislation will only disillusion the millions of law-abiding gun owners who voted for Barack Obama, believing that he did indeed support their right to own firearms."

I absolutely do not understand gun owners who come in here advocating for new restrictions on the most popular civilian target rifles and defensive carbines in the United States. Taking H.R.1022 as the operative definition, more Americans own so-called "assault weapons" than hunt.

Military automatic weapons are already as tightly controlled as howitzers and bombs, and non-automatic Title 1 rifles are the LEAST misused of firearms. You don't have to like the modern "black rifles", but it would be nice if you would accept the reality of their ownership by Gen-X and younger shooters.

 

[TexasRifleman]

Military automatic weapons are already as tightly controlled as howitzers and bombs, and non-automatic Title 1 rifles are the LEAST misused of firearms. You don't have to like the modern "black rifles", but it would be nice if you would accept the reality of their ownership by Gen-X and younger shooters.

It's just the handy means for groups like AHSA to try to drive a wedge between shooters to weaken our resolve.

Gun owners who are in favor of so called "AWB's" were never pro gun or even pro hunting to begin with.

If they were really pro hunting they would realize that many hunters use that type of firearm and if it weren't for those hunters the sport might be in danger of disappearing completely.

 

[LibShooter]

YOU need automatic weapons, the heavier the better. YOU have the ability to identify the motivations and characteristics of anyone who disagrees with you without hearing them out because they are con-men, and YOU don't have to be "friendly" to anyone. You've got the weapons remember?

Need is not relevant. The Second Amendment doesn't say "the right of the people to keep and bear arms they need, shall not be infringed. All others are off limits."

To be perfectly honest, I probably don't need a single firearm. I don't hunt. I live in a pretty crime-free neighborhood. I'm very unlikely to ever run across anyone trying to harm me. I'm not going to take part in an armed insurrection. Lucky for me there's no "need" test imposed on my right to keep and bear arms.

 

[TexasRifleman]

YOU need automatic weapons, the heavier the better. YOU have the ability to identify the motivations and characteristics of anyone who disagrees with you without hearing them out because they are con-men, and YOU don't have to be "friendly" to anyone. You've got the weapons remember?

And here it is, finally. At least you are up front about it.

So what you are implying here is that anyone who wants to own a firearm of this type is someone who would likely react with violence to some kind of insult etc and therefore they shouldn't have that type of gun anyway.

and YOU don't have to be "friendly" to anyone. You've got the weapons remember?

So here we see again the attempt to demonize anyone who chooses to own a certain type of firearm.

Wedge issue, plain and simple. Dishonest, plain and simple.

 

[Deanimator]

I live in a pretty crime-free neighborhood.

So did that doctor in Connecticut... until two criminals showed up. Now he's short a wife and two daughters.

I'm very unlikely to ever run across anyone trying to harm me.

So were those six women in that Lane Bryant clothing store near where my mother lives. It turned out to be their "lucky" day and now five of the six are dead, having been shot execution style by that one guy in that "pretty crime-free neighborhood" that I've been in repeatedly. Tinley Park, Illinois never seemed all that "dangerous" to me. It was THAT day.

Not an attack on you, merely a reminder that the "safest" place on earth can get to be VERY dangerous in an instant. It just takes one person who wants to make it so.

 

[rswartsell]

LibShooter,

Go to my post where I first said I don't need Ma Duece, then read the next para, are you guys twitchy or what?

 

[rswartsell]

Texas,

Deanimator had it right to begin with, the post was sarcasm trying to point up how we can be viewed if we feel that we no longer "need" to even listen to opposing viewpoints.

You guys are the shark biting it's own tail once you get some momentum up.

 

[TexasRifleman]

You guys are the shark biting it's own tail once you get some momentum up.

Well, every word posted is taken out of context and spin put on it when the anti's come calling.

Sarcasm doesn't work well I guess, or at least it's harder for me to spot I guess.

It's a common wedge issue so when it's used as sarcasm it hits close to home I suppose. My apologies.

 

[rswartsell]

True enough Texas,

I have made this mistake before because I have a habit of using sarcasm and forgetting it doesn't work well on the 'net. Your criticism has validity there. I hope my point doesn't get entirely lost.

 

[LibShooter]

Go to my post where I first said I don't need Ma Duece, then read the next para, are you guys twitchy or what?

You must lead an interesting life if you believe everything everyone says is about you.

 

[rswartsell]

Forgive me LibShooter,

I thought because you quoted my post in yours that you were addressing my point. I didn't realize that it had no such meaning.

But hey, why waste a good opportunity for an insulting reference eh?

 

[benEzra]

It's just the handy means for groups like AHSA to try to drive a wedge between shooters to weaken our resolve.

The thing is, even the AHSA has repudiated it. Which leaves those gun owners still stumping for a ban....where? Standing with the Brady Campaign, the VPC, a few media talking heads, and Dianne Feinstein...