HBK
member
Do you cook the feral hogs? I think that would be cool, to kill feral hogs with an AR-10.
Rebuttal to Kerry's "I hunt but I don't need an AK-47 for it"
- Thread starter Sheslinger
- Start date
- Status
mercedesrules
Member
- Joined
- Mar 22, 2003
- Messages
- 1,010
I'm kind of a newbie to country life. I haven't cooked one yet, but I have had sausage sandwiches my friend, Russ, made from wild pig. Pretty good!
MR
Out West
Member
I killed a very nice 7 point buck this year with one round of 7.62 X 39. Should it make any difference that it was delivered by a bolt action instead of a AK? Think that the buck would notice any difference?
Out West
Out West
Carlos
Member
All the more reason to get your feet wet.
Man, I wish we had more hogs around Oregon.
That's got to be some delicious eating.liberals? gun control?
I suggest that some do not know the definition of liberal. Try consulting Mr.Webster's book instead of Rush Limbaugh.I own four firearms,I reload my ammunition,I hunt and I am liberal.I read many criticisms of Kerry he was not my choice,however he is to be preferred over our appointed leader.
________________________________________________________
ALERT.....ALERT....A village in Texas has lost its idiot
I suggest that some do not know the definition of liberal. Try consulting Mr.Webster's book instead of Rush Limbaugh.I own four firearms,I reload my ammunition,I hunt and I am liberal.I read many criticisms of Kerry he was not my choice,however he is to be preferred over our appointed leader.
________________________________________________________
ALERT.....ALERT....A village in Texas has lost its idiot
artherd
member
mercedesrules-
Many people use AR-10(Ts) or KAC SR-25s (basically the same thing, a .308 accurised AR.) to hunt for food.
Both are fantastically accurate (1/2 to 1/4MOA or less) guns with the addition of rappid follow-up shot capability. Both are also battle tested reliable.
They make fine hunting arms.
My gun of choice is a Remington 7400 in .30-06. I can't have a comfortable (pistol) grip on my 'hunding gun' because of the AWB. Kerry is an idoit.
Many people use AR-10(Ts) or KAC SR-25s (basically the same thing, a .308 accurised AR.) to hunt for food.
Both are fantastically accurate (1/2 to 1/4MOA or less) guns with the addition of rappid follow-up shot capability. Both are also battle tested reliable.
They make fine hunting arms.
My gun of choice is a Remington 7400 in .30-06. I can't have a comfortable (pistol) grip on my 'hunding gun' because of the AWB. Kerry is an idoit.
Don,
Maybe this should be taken to another thread, but ...
I'd ask you to please examine the voting record of the self-professed liberals in Washington DC and try to explain why people would be wrong in connecting modern liberals with gun control. To be sure, modern conservative politicians aren't - in general - necessarily defenders of firearms, but they're at least afraid enough of the issue to not sell us out to nearly the extent of the modern liberals who are all too happy to appeal to the "I gots my shotgun fer the huntin', and they won't take that away fr'm me, on account of them bein' hunters themselves!" crowd on the one hand while working to ban the weapons that I enjoy on the other.
How do you feel about Kerry's statement featured in this thread?
Maybe this should be taken to another thread, but ...
I know the classical definition (which would apply more to Libertarians today) and the definition that is accurate in the modern political climate. Words change in meaning.
I'd ask you to please examine the voting record of the self-professed liberals in Washington DC and try to explain why people would be wrong in connecting modern liberals with gun control. To be sure, modern conservative politicians aren't - in general - necessarily defenders of firearms, but they're at least afraid enough of the issue to not sell us out to nearly the extent of the modern liberals who are all too happy to appeal to the "I gots my shotgun fer the huntin', and they won't take that away fr'm me, on account of them bein' hunters themselves!" crowd on the one hand while working to ban the weapons that I enjoy on the other.
Frankly, I don't like the idea of either as President. Both want the gov't to have too much authority and are concerned too much with my private life. Stating that either is to be categorically preferred over the other is to ignore the fact that we're not a homogeneous community with the same goals and the same fears. Kerry will certainly appeal to some people more than Bush, but it would probably be best for those people to stay on safe ground and say that they prefer Kerry over Bush.
How do you feel about Kerry's statement featured in this thread?
Cordex,you asked my opinion on Kerry's statement concerning hunting with an AK 47...I agree with him.A fully automatic weapon is not necessary for hunting. Since I did not hear nor have I read his speech and therefore do not know the context of what he said I cannot comment any further. As to my reply being relevant to the thread thanks for the heads-up. Any further discussion or debate on liberal or conservative values would definitely be beyond the scope of this thread.
Nick1911
Member
I didn't hear the speech, so this might be unfounded, however:
Indeed it's not. But who ever said that an AK-47 was a fully-automatic weapon? Good luck finding a legal full-auto AK in the US...
Nick
Indeed it's not. But who ever said that an AK-47 was a fully-automatic weapon? Good luck finding a legal full-auto AK in the US...
Nick
I find it funny that the few times (3-4 maybe) that I've been deer hunting in my life I was using an AK, lol.
He doesn't clarify what he meant, but the built in confusion over semi-auto vs full-auto is just a bonus for gun banning jackasses like Kerry... The AWB deals strictly with semiauto weapons, seeing as how he was talking about supporting this it's safe to say he wasn't talking about machineguns... All the ignorant blissninny anti-gun crap aside the 7.62x39 round fired out of a short, handy carbine like an AK makes a good brush gun for deer and hog and such IMO...
He doesn't clarify what he meant, but the built in confusion over semi-auto vs full-auto is just a bonus for gun banning jackasses like Kerry... The AWB deals strictly with semiauto weapons, seeing as how he was talking about supporting this it's safe to say he wasn't talking about machineguns... All the ignorant blissninny anti-gun crap aside the 7.62x39 round fired out of a short, handy carbine like an AK makes a good brush gun for deer and hog and such IMO...
Well true. But then again as evidenced by the amount of people that hunt with compound bows a RIFLE isnt necessary for hunting either now it it?
If you want to tie your RKBA to HUNTING thats the reality that your going to have to deal with down the road.
I'd probably not use full-auto while hunting either, but Kerry was effectively saying "If you can't use a gun to hunt, it should be banned." How do you react to that?
1. Context - Kerry wasn't referring to full auto of any sort, he was referring to semi-auto weapons that look like AK-47s. As other members have mentioned, the AK style rifle in 7.62x39 is a suitable (though, some would consider borderline as far as power level) for hunting. A select-fire AK could be used on semi-auto for hunting.
2. "Need" - I don't need camo for hunting either, but that doesn't mean I shouldn't be allowed to buy Military Pattern Stealth Assault Clothing.
3. Most of my guns will never be used to hunt. Should they be banned?
When the AK-47is mentioned the average person thinks of a fully automatic weapon because of what they see on t.v.or read in the paper.In my never to be humble opinion that was Kerry's reference.Look he must do well in the South to win and he isn't stupid enough to advocate banning fire arms in the South.Imntbho the idea that Kerry wants your fire arms is an attempt by the radical right wing to smear or distort his meaning.It is a matter of politics and interpretion.When I hear him say that he is for banning firearms of all descript then I'll worry.As far as rifles being necessary to hunt ,for me they are.I can't hit the broad side of a barn with a bow and arrow;besides I only need to shoot once to kill my prey and that boys and girls is gun control. I don't need a machine gun.
Travis McGee
Member
I don't dance around, I go right for the heart of the matter. The 2A has NOTHING to do with hunting OR target shooting. It has to do with protecting a free republic against the rise of tyranny. It has to do with patriots being well armed enough to threaten to kill dictators and their henchmen before they can take power. Period.
That may be, but in the context of the Assault Weapons Ban his statement appears to me to be either criminal ignorance (voting for laws that you don't understand) or - more likely - deliberately attempting to confuse those average people into believing Assault Weapons == Machine Guns.
Kerry only wants me to own certain weapons. He'll let me keep my hunt'n guns, no doubt. But I don't just like hunt'n guns.
And you don't "need" a car that can go over 70 mph ... do you own one?
artherd
member
You realise, of course, it will be far too late when that day comes...
Well, technically speaking that is exactly what it means.
In fact they stoped making the actual "AK-47" in the late 1960s and replaced it with the stamped AKM rifle (and the Russians later went with AK-74 rifle). The only people who use anything even resembling an ACTUAL ak-47 are the Bulgarians who still use a milled reciever.
There are few if any true "ak-47s" anywhere at the moment.
And the fact is that YES an AK-47 is a select fire rifle. just like the m-16. We just dont have a handy name for the semiautomatic versions like they do for the m16 (ar15).
For example:
A Norinco Mak-90 is NOT an ak-47
A VEPR is not an ak-47
A Saiga is not an 1k-57
and the list goes on.
Foreign Devil
Member
- Joined
- Mar 29, 2004
- Messages
- 507
As I understand it:
AK is short hand for a lot of differnt kinds of guns based on the AK design. Some of the guns people refer to as AK's are actually more properly called RPK's, etc. It's the same way with the AR-15; actual AR-15's were originally select fire rifles, then Colt's civilian model was labelled AR-15. Now the term encompasses many types of similar guns.
Look at his voting record on S 659(also known as S1805/1806) and get back to us.
By the way your "hunting rifles" may very well become "sniper rifles" just as military look alike rifles became "assault weapons". And after all you don't need to hunt anyway.
AK is short hand for a lot of differnt kinds of guns based on the AK design. Some of the guns people refer to as AK's are actually more properly called RPK's, etc. It's the same way with the AR-15; actual AR-15's were originally select fire rifles, then Colt's civilian model was labelled AR-15. Now the term encompasses many types of similar guns.
Look at his voting record on S 659(also known as S1805/1806) and get back to us.
By the way your "hunting rifles" may very well become "sniper rifles" just as military look alike rifles became "assault weapons". And after all you don't need to hunt anyway.
mercedesrules
Member
- Joined
- Mar 22, 2003
- Messages
- 1,010
I'm a little confused. Are there people on this board that advocate or condone the banning of any firearms?
I know I don't.
MR
I know I don't.
MR
Sadly, yes. And not just the ones that support Kerry either.
The most common targets of friendly fire are full-auto, sound suppressors, short shotguns and destructive devices. Can anyone say "conditioned response"?
I've been surprised at the number of gung-ho pro-RKBA types who say "Whoa! I didn't mean that I support your right to go into the local gun store and buy a machine gun without filling out any paperwork! I mean ... yeah, you should be able to buy <insert PC firearm here>, but not a machine gun! No one needs a machine gun except police and military. If everyone could buy one, the blood would flow in the streets and every time someone got cut off in traffic, the highway would turn into a warzone!"
Carlos Cabeza
Member
sKerry in "04 JUST SAY NO !
You're hunting guns are next ! Those AP .30-.30 must be banned.
You're hunting guns are next ! Those AP .30-.30 must be banned.
wingedmonkey
Member
The RealHawkEye is right about "assualt weapons" being too weak to hunt with. www.awbansunset.com has a great flyer targeted to hunters explaining this exact point.
Last edited:
If a person tells me I don't need an AK47 clone for hunting deer...
I look them straight in the eye and inform them that if I could own ONE firearm to do most EVERYTHING, then I'd probably own an AK47 clone.
With that one firearm, I could load use it to defend my house if neccesary where it would be my hope that I not need a 30 round magazine but it certainly wouldn't hurt.
With that one firearm, I could enjoy recreational shooting activities such as target shooting and plinking.
And with that one firearm, I could effectively hunt some of the more popular types of game animals in the US with exception of some of the larger critters.
I would then explain to them that the hunting regs of most states are set up such that I wouldn't be out there blasting away with a 30 round magazine because most regulations dictate that 3round or 5round magazines are required.
Do I need a rifle capable of taking a 30 round magazine? It's not for them to say what I do or do not need. It is additional functionality that I view as being useful for some situations, situations where a hunting rifle may be less appropriate or suitable than that of the AK clone.
Actually, for the purposes of my argument I usually use the AR15 because that is what I own. With one firearm I can sit there and enjoy a DIVERSE range of sporting activities yet still have a firearm that is suitable for self defense, in some ways more suitable than a shotgun or handgun.
I've got one AR15 that I've set up for the purposes of varminting, comparing it to a bolt action rifle it has many positive attributes that I feel make it more suitable for varminting than a bolt action in the same caliber. Simply taking the upper assembly off I could change that rifle into a new configuration suitable for various competitions, casual target shooting, or as a defensive role. Or if I desire to go after bigger game I could even change it's chambering.
When faced with that kind of approach in the argument suddenly they have less to go on when faced with that much information.
But arguing these points with somebody who doesn't even have an understanding of basic differences between say a handgun and a rifle, it's a near pointless argument. Basically it's a discussion that boils down to too much info and not enough time to lay it out on the table for them.
It takes a lot of patience to try to walk a non-gun oriented person through some of these basics and it's highly likely that it will fail if either side begins to get frustrated. Best way is to get them involved and learn these things first hand through actual experience but we all know how practical that is, pretty hard to get these people to the range sometimes even if you offer multiple times.
I look them straight in the eye and inform them that if I could own ONE firearm to do most EVERYTHING, then I'd probably own an AK47 clone.
With that one firearm, I could load use it to defend my house if neccesary where it would be my hope that I not need a 30 round magazine but it certainly wouldn't hurt.
With that one firearm, I could enjoy recreational shooting activities such as target shooting and plinking.
And with that one firearm, I could effectively hunt some of the more popular types of game animals in the US with exception of some of the larger critters.
I would then explain to them that the hunting regs of most states are set up such that I wouldn't be out there blasting away with a 30 round magazine because most regulations dictate that 3round or 5round magazines are required.
Do I need a rifle capable of taking a 30 round magazine? It's not for them to say what I do or do not need. It is additional functionality that I view as being useful for some situations, situations where a hunting rifle may be less appropriate or suitable than that of the AK clone.
Actually, for the purposes of my argument I usually use the AR15 because that is what I own. With one firearm I can sit there and enjoy a DIVERSE range of sporting activities yet still have a firearm that is suitable for self defense, in some ways more suitable than a shotgun or handgun.
I've got one AR15 that I've set up for the purposes of varminting, comparing it to a bolt action rifle it has many positive attributes that I feel make it more suitable for varminting than a bolt action in the same caliber. Simply taking the upper assembly off I could change that rifle into a new configuration suitable for various competitions, casual target shooting, or as a defensive role. Or if I desire to go after bigger game I could even change it's chambering.
When faced with that kind of approach in the argument suddenly they have less to go on when faced with that much information.
But arguing these points with somebody who doesn't even have an understanding of basic differences between say a handgun and a rifle, it's a near pointless argument. Basically it's a discussion that boils down to too much info and not enough time to lay it out on the table for them.
It takes a lot of patience to try to walk a non-gun oriented person through some of these basics and it's highly likely that it will fail if either side begins to get frustrated. Best way is to get them involved and learn these things first hand through actual experience but we all know how practical that is, pretty hard to get these people to the range sometimes even if you offer multiple times.
Sheslinger
Member
About them not taking away your hunting rifles...
Am I way off base or did not Ted Kennedy just propose banning most of the hunting rounds?
Am I way off base or did not Ted Kennedy just propose banning most of the hunting rounds?
- Status