memphisjim
Member
- Joined
- Jul 15, 2008
- Messages
- 1,265
Anybody's range carry little girl targets?
New Ad From The Brady Campaign
- Thread starter Justin
- Start date
- Status
Added my flag as well, maybe we can get it brought down...
Nope. Youtube is private property, they don't HAVE to allow anything.
Uteridge
Member
Whew...just spent another sleepless night in my house with all of the dangerous assault clips in my gun room. I generally try not to venture out of my bedroom at night as I hear that the assault clips hunt at night and I am afraid of running into one in the dark. Of course I have enough of them in my gun room that I am constantly worried that they will form into a pack, similar to wolves, and take me down during the daytime but at least during the day I can see them coming.
I have read, and I am looking for verification from anyone with more knowledge than I, that if you run into an assault clip the best thing to do is to back away slowly and try not to look it directly in the follower. Apparently looking an assault clip directly in the follower has been known to the state of California to instigate an assault, which no one wants and I have heard is not pretty.
I have also read somewhere that if you are attacked by a dangerous assault clip it is important to note the type of assault clip that is attacking you. If it has a polymer coating your best move apparently is to play dead as the polymer coated assault clips can move very quickly since they are much lighter than the stainless steel assault clips, however they lose interest quickly and you may be able to outlast them. If you are attacked by a stainless assault clip, your best move is to run to and climb the nearest tree as these assault clips do not climb trees very well. I have to preface this advice by saying that I am not an actual survival expert in this field and this information is just what I have heard on internet forums.
Furthermore, it is important to note that the majority of assault clip assaults are reported on the West Coast, the Northeast, and Chicago. These areas have the lowest per capita population of assault clips in the country so it seems that assault clips are less dangerous if they are well socialized and if they live in large herds. Attempts to domesticate assault clips in these areas by limiting them to a 10 round capacity have thus far been unsuccessful in reducing the number or level of violence of assaults. It should be noted that these efforts seem to have increased the number of violent assaults by assault clips in these areas. It is my belief that better socialized and less restrained assault clips are significantly less violent than assault clips that are not allowed to freely roam and intermingle with other assault clips.
During my time in Iraq I noted that assaults caused by assault clips are quite brutal but do not compare to assaults perpetrated by assault linked ammo. Assaults carried out by assault linked ammo generally turn into beatdowns that are similar to gang initiations. It is my fervent belief that assault linked ammo could also be domesticated if properly socialized and raised in a loving home with good parents.
I have read, and I am looking for verification from anyone with more knowledge than I, that if you run into an assault clip the best thing to do is to back away slowly and try not to look it directly in the follower. Apparently looking an assault clip directly in the follower has been known to the state of California to instigate an assault, which no one wants and I have heard is not pretty.
I have also read somewhere that if you are attacked by a dangerous assault clip it is important to note the type of assault clip that is attacking you. If it has a polymer coating your best move apparently is to play dead as the polymer coated assault clips can move very quickly since they are much lighter than the stainless steel assault clips, however they lose interest quickly and you may be able to outlast them. If you are attacked by a stainless assault clip, your best move is to run to and climb the nearest tree as these assault clips do not climb trees very well. I have to preface this advice by saying that I am not an actual survival expert in this field and this information is just what I have heard on internet forums.
Furthermore, it is important to note that the majority of assault clip assaults are reported on the West Coast, the Northeast, and Chicago. These areas have the lowest per capita population of assault clips in the country so it seems that assault clips are less dangerous if they are well socialized and if they live in large herds. Attempts to domesticate assault clips in these areas by limiting them to a 10 round capacity have thus far been unsuccessful in reducing the number or level of violence of assaults. It should be noted that these efforts seem to have increased the number of violent assaults by assault clips in these areas. It is my belief that better socialized and less restrained assault clips are significantly less violent than assault clips that are not allowed to freely roam and intermingle with other assault clips.
During my time in Iraq I noted that assaults caused by assault clips are quite brutal but do not compare to assaults perpetrated by assault linked ammo. Assaults carried out by assault linked ammo generally turn into beatdowns that are similar to gang initiations. It is my fervent belief that assault linked ammo could also be domesticated if properly socialized and raised in a loving home with good parents.
Last edited:
ForumSurfer
Member
:chuckle:
Apparently you like to argue, or try and pick everything to a technical degree.
I admit to this on occasion as well, but now is not the occasion.
You KNOW what I mean. No point int getting all literal and technical.
Those fudgenuts are keeping us from voicing the truth on their videos. Thats the bottom line.
merlinfire
Member
- Joined
- Feb 2, 2010
- Messages
- 793
Wow, the Brady campaign is pretty broke. Or, they're illegally hiding their assets.
LawScholar
Member
I wonder how they'd feel about my two 25-round Butler Creek magazines banana-clipped to my 10-22...
This evil man is terrorizing innocent prairie dogs. Call Obama and ask him to ban .22 "CLIPS"
This evil man is terrorizing innocent prairie dogs. Call Obama and ask him to ban .22 "CLIPS"
rellascout
member
I love to argue. I also think that we as the shooting community too often do ourselves a diservice by spouting things like:
The Brady Bunch and Youtube cannot infringe upon our 1st Amend by definition. You are using a logical fallacy known as the slipperly slope while at the same time employing a red herring. Both of these render your statement illogical and a fallacy on their face. It is not a proper arguement. Arguing against the illogical with the illogical makes no sense.
Look how many posts in this thread are railing on the Brady Bunch for calling a magazine a clip. We all agree that is an uninformed and ignorant misrepresentation. If we are going to hold them up to that level of scrunity I think we should apply the same standard to ourselves as well.
IMHO it is much more forgivable to missapply the term "clip" then missapply the 1st Amendment. YMMV and I am sure it will.
ForumSurfer
Member
So is everyone else who disables comments and voting. It is a private party website, they can disable comments and voting all they like...it has nothing to do with the 1st amendment at all.
It would be no different than me posting shooting videos of my kids' range outings and disabling comments because I don't want to hear all the mindless "bad parenting" babble coming from antigunners. Both sides can disable commenting and voting, it really isn't a big deal.
Now if the government steps in and says aI can't speak out against the brady campaign, then we're talking about 1st amendment infringements.
Last edited:
trailgator
Member
ratings and comments have been disabled on this one to.
:banghead:
Last edited:
I realize that our civil liberties are a protection for us in regards to the government.
However, civilians have historically been charged with violating one's civil liberties. So, its not quite as black and white as you would think.
There is no logical fallacy or any sort of slope to be had.
I meant nothing more than they want to silence the truth. Nothing less. If you don't like my context or terminology, my apologies.
But again, YOU KNOW what I was getting at. Its all good. CONVERSATION OVER.
However, civilians have historically been charged with violating one's civil liberties. So, its not quite as black and white as you would think.
There is no logical fallacy or any sort of slope to be had.
I meant nothing more than they want to silence the truth. Nothing less. If you don't like my context or terminology, my apologies.
But again, YOU KNOW what I was getting at. Its all good. CONVERSATION OVER.
ForumSurfer
Member
No reason to apologize. I'm not trying to offend you.
But if one finds their ability to block voting and ranking offensive...then one should feel the same about anyone who blocks voting and ranking. What's good for the goose is good for the gander.
Kenneth
Member
Typical brady campaign voodoo criminology. [Projecting "evil" onto a thing, and by extension to all owners of that thing.]
I have rights because I exist, not because my government exists.
U.S. Supreme Court Justice Joseph Story wrote
I have rights because I exist, not because my government exists.
U.S. Supreme Court Justice Joseph Story wrote
mgmorden
Member
I'm completely against any measure of legislation here, but does anyone else find it funny that they're constantly flaunting "30" round "clips" as the bad things yet when the legislation gets proposed it's always magazines that hold more than 10 rounds that they're going after.
They're also always advertising these things as "high capacity" and showing magazines extending way below the grip, when STANDARD capacity magazines for handguns have been holding in excess of 10 rounds for over 70 years.
As I said I'm against ANY legislation here, but even if they WERE going to attempt legislation, I think it's reprehensible that they're advertising far exaggerated versions of what the legislation is actually targeting.
They're also always advertising these things as "high capacity" and showing magazines extending way below the grip, when STANDARD capacity magazines for handguns have been holding in excess of 10 rounds for over 70 years.
As I said I'm against ANY legislation here, but even if they WERE going to attempt legislation, I think it's reprehensible that they're advertising far exaggerated versions of what the legislation is actually targeting.
InkEd
Member
I think taking "the highroad" would be the best way
I get so tired of anti-gun "scare tactic" campaigns. However, I think angrily yelling back "B.S.!!!" doesn't make for the most intelligent counterpoint argument. I think anytime one of those ads is released, the pro-gun groups (like the NRA) should release a calm positive advertisement that dismisses the whole thing, gives some favorable stats and asks for support.
Imagine a scene like this... A guy sitting in his living room in a sweater with a fireplace and his dog beside him. And says...
"Hi, I'm _______,President of (pro-gun organization)."
"Recently, you may have seen an ad from (anti-gun group) that was meant to scare you and question the ideas of our Founding Fathers."
"Well, we at the (pro-gun group) just wanted to let you know that (some favorable gun stats) and (more favorable gun stats)."
"And we invite you to take part in (various friendly gun activities), so that you can see for yourself and enjoy the rights granted to you under the Constitution."
"So please join your friends and neighbor by enjoying (friendly gun activities). And feel free to visit our website (shown at bottom of the screen) if you would like to know more information."
"Thank You." (Screen fades to black and pro-gun groups logo appears with website underneath it.)
THE END
I get so tired of anti-gun "scare tactic" campaigns. However, I think angrily yelling back "B.S.!!!" doesn't make for the most intelligent counterpoint argument. I think anytime one of those ads is released, the pro-gun groups (like the NRA) should release a calm positive advertisement that dismisses the whole thing, gives some favorable stats and asks for support.
Imagine a scene like this... A guy sitting in his living room in a sweater with a fireplace and his dog beside him. And says...
"Hi, I'm _______,President of (pro-gun organization)."
"Recently, you may have seen an ad from (anti-gun group) that was meant to scare you and question the ideas of our Founding Fathers."
"Well, we at the (pro-gun group) just wanted to let you know that (some favorable gun stats) and (more favorable gun stats)."
"And we invite you to take part in (various friendly gun activities), so that you can see for yourself and enjoy the rights granted to you under the Constitution."
"So please join your friends and neighbor by enjoying (friendly gun activities). And feel free to visit our website (shown at bottom of the screen) if you would like to know more information."
"Thank You." (Screen fades to black and pro-gun groups logo appears with website underneath it.)
THE END
Last edited:
AZ
Member
Agree with you Ed, the best way to win this argument is going to be civility, also known as what the people at Brady are incapable of.
Deus Machina
Member
You sure? I see comments from four minutes ago.
merlinfire
Member
- Joined
- Feb 2, 2010
- Messages
- 793
Yes, high capacity mags are the weapons of the most evil in the world. Good thing only the ruling authorities can have them right? 
Single Action Six
Member
More Brady Lies..!!
What pray tell is a “Assault Clip”..!!..?
I’ve been in and around firearms and the firearm industry in one way, shape or form for over 50 years.. and I’ve never ever seen a “Assault Clip”, let alone bought, sold or owned one.
Once again, the Brady Campaign
is trying to “ban” something that doesn’t (and hasn’t), ever existed.
This only goes to show you how they bend the truth, outright lie and make things up to further their cause.
Why would anyone want to believe anything the Brady Campaign says..!!..?
Pro Gun.. and Proud of it!
Single Action Six
What pray tell is a “Assault Clip”..!!..?
I’ve been in and around firearms and the firearm industry in one way, shape or form for over 50 years.. and I’ve never ever seen a “Assault Clip”, let alone bought, sold or owned one.
Once again, the Brady Campaign
is trying to “ban” something that doesn’t (and hasn’t), ever existed.This only goes to show you how they bend the truth, outright lie and make things up to further their cause.
Why would anyone want to believe anything the Brady Campaign says..!!..?
Pro Gun.. and Proud of it!
Single Action Six
Last edited:
rellascout
member
InkED is right on point!!!!!!
When these types of missleading ads come out I think we as the shooting community need to step out of the vaccum like THR and look at it from a non gun enthusist perspective.
My parents do not own guns. They do not shoot. They would not know the difference between a clip or a mag. You could call it a doohicky and it will not matter. My inlaws are more gun savy and even shoot some but they still might not be able to tell you the difference. What will matter is that in each set of parents will see a guy with a lot of bullets shooting a gun fairly quickly without having to reload.
That is the premise and concept we as the law abiding pro-gun community needs to contend with. It is not what they call it. That is secondary but we all seem to get hung up on it. We also need to take the emotion out of it. That is what the Brady Bunch is feeding with this ad. They are trying to get an emotional response. They are trying to create fear. Meeting fear with anger is not going to get the results we want.
Those who have made up their minds to be anti-gun are not going to change their minds anymore than we are going to look at that video and feel the need to destory our mags. We need to be rational and not look to move the extremes but move the people in the middle. Like it or not this country always moves or changes from the middle.
The goal has to be to educate those who hold no position or who lean slightly one way or the other.
When these types of missleading ads come out I think we as the shooting community need to step out of the vaccum like THR and look at it from a non gun enthusist perspective.
My parents do not own guns. They do not shoot. They would not know the difference between a clip or a mag. You could call it a doohicky and it will not matter. My inlaws are more gun savy and even shoot some but they still might not be able to tell you the difference. What will matter is that in each set of parents will see a guy with a lot of bullets shooting a gun fairly quickly without having to reload.
That is the premise and concept we as the law abiding pro-gun community needs to contend with. It is not what they call it. That is secondary but we all seem to get hung up on it. We also need to take the emotion out of it. That is what the Brady Bunch is feeding with this ad. They are trying to get an emotional response. They are trying to create fear. Meeting fear with anger is not going to get the results we want.
Those who have made up their minds to be anti-gun are not going to change their minds anymore than we are going to look at that video and feel the need to destory our mags. We need to be rational and not look to move the extremes but move the people in the middle. Like it or not this country always moves or changes from the middle.
The goal has to be to educate those who hold no position or who lean slightly one way or the other.
Larry E
Member
Gee, I guess the clips for my M1 are okay because they only hold 8 rounds, well except for the five round clip. Other than that I don't have any clips, lots of magazines for various guns, but no other clips.
ATBackPackin
Member
I think that the average layman would look at that video and take it for what it is, an absurd scare tactic to achieve their own personal agenda.
However if you look at their overview and FAQ's, I think this is where they could persuade the layman to agree with their views. That is what is scary to me and of course these are such fallacies and sometimes flat out lies.
I think this is where we have to try to educate the layman or middle person. Not to try to force them to be like us ( and if they don't they are nothing more than sheep ), but have them understand us and what the ND amendment really means.
Just my thoughts.
Shawn
However if you look at their overview and FAQ's, I think this is where they could persuade the layman to agree with their views. That is what is scary to me and of course these are such fallacies and sometimes flat out lies.
I think this is where we have to try to educate the layman or middle person. Not to try to force them to be like us ( and if they don't they are nothing more than sheep ), but have them understand us and what the ND amendment really means.
Just my thoughts.
Shawn
Kendal Black
Member
- Joined
- Mar 18, 2011
- Messages
- 1,647
I think telling true stories is the best antidote to propaganda. We need to tell about incidents where good folks had to use a great many rounds to protect themselves. That, it seems to me, is the best line to take.
The Beckwith incident comes to mind. Who can think of more?
http://www.afn.org/~guns/ayoob.html
My own thought on the matter is honest people should have parity of armament, at least, with the criminals, who often manage to get whatever they want, laws or no.
The Beckwith incident comes to mind. Who can think of more?
http://www.afn.org/~guns/ayoob.html
My own thought on the matter is honest people should have parity of armament, at least, with the criminals, who often manage to get whatever they want, laws or no.
Axel Larson
Member
Uteridge you had me in stitches laughing so hard.
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
- Locked
- Locked
