Why aren't anti-2As more afraid of long-range "precision" rifles??

Status
Not open for further replies.
Joined
Sep 27, 2011
Messages
921
Location
USA
Hey guys, this has been bothering me for a little bit so I thought I would share..

Why aren't anti-gun folk more afraid of "sniper" rifles? It seems that it would be all too easy to convince the sheople that any rifle capable of making precise hits at extended ranges should not be legal and is for "military use" only. "Because 'sniper rifles' kill people."

I would assume this would include popular bolt-action specimens as well as those scary "assault weapon" variants like the AR-10/LR-308 models. And who could forget the M82/M107 :what:

I know states like California have already banned .50BMGs and others are well on their way. But one would think that other, more precise weapons, would be on the list as well.

Maybe because long-range shots require patience, skill, and brains? Neither of which are of easy access to a criminal ;)

What do you all think?

- The Next Generation
 
Maybe because long-range shots require patience, skill, and brains? Neither of which are of easy access to a criminal ;)

says who?

Look at bernie madoff, he took people for BILLIONS, was investigated by the feds, and they couldn't even topple his criminal empire. His children ran it with him and he STILL made it.

His operations didn't fall until he told his son, and his son told on him.

I bet he's in PRISON now wishing he never told his son a darn thing!


He has plenty of patience, skills, and brains!

As do all the other criminals that don't get caught.

*swyped from the evo so excuse any typos*
 
I'm guessing it's because they congregate around whatever new story they can, and 90% of those involve handguns. I have a coworker that saw the POF rifle in "hunting/sniper" configuration (refers to the rail, but she just saw "sniper") and said "so anyone with $2500 can get a sniper rifle?" Of course, the "tactical" version (which has a longer rail) would be just as good as a sniper rifle, but you know how much antis know...
 
I think many people assume that the more expensive and tactical looking then gun, the more of the work "it does for you".

That said, "sniper rifles" are low priority, but that doesn't mean they aren't on the list. California bans "sniper scopes" and NYC bans lasers on guns.
 
Prince, there are "tactical" and "sniper" variants of POF rifles, in which everything (including the price) is the same, but the tactical has full-length rails and the sniper has quarter-rails. However, she looked at "sniper" and thought it was a "sniper rifle". I don't think she would have thought that about "tactical" (but she would have made a comment about how I don't need an assault rifle).
 
I don't think the "media" consider Precision Rifles to be as scary as "ASSAULT RIFLES WITH HIGH CAPACITY BULLET CLIPS". For my part, that makes me more than a little happy. I would rather take one, precise shot and eliminate my target as a threat than to empty a 30 round magazine and likely hit nothing. I hope they never tumble to how important precision shooting really is!
 
it's a semantics thing
"sniper"
is too easy to destroy them on
after all, how many 70's and 700's are there out there in a 'sniper caliber' (like you hunt deer with)

Way too easy for the NRA to hold up a 1903 or M1D and say 'this is a sniper rifle'
and then show the list of what the anti's want to ban and say
'this is a HUNTING rifle'

unfortunately even they are smart enough to avoid this topic right now
they use words like 'high power rifle' or whatever Kali used to ban Barrets.
 
I think since the one "legitimate" use of weapons they barely recognize is hunting, and a lot of "sniper" rifles are hunting rifles. At the moment it's just not politically expedient for them to go there. Eventually, though, they will get around to it.
 
There hasn't been a high profile spree shooting or murder with them. The anti's MO is to dance in the blood of victims while crying for more control on whatever weapon or accessory was particular to that shooting. Usually its "assault" rifles, after the Tucson shooting it was 30-rd Glock magazines, etc.

Even the DC so-called "snipers" used IIRC a M4gery Bushmaster with an Eotech. Not exactly what most people would identify as a "sniper" rifle.

Secondarily, its pretty tough to ban rifles which are nearly identical to some of the most popular hunting rifles in the country.

EDIT: Fixed gun that the DC idiots used.
 
They like to practice "divide and conquer". When you consider that such long range rifles are generally prime choices for hunting rifles, it's hard to divide the community and target them.

You'd be surprised how many gun owners have an active disdain for certain classes of guns. There are a lot of them that don't like handguns for example, or scary black "army" guns.
 
Even the DC so-called "snipers" used IIRC a M4gery Bushmaster with an Eotech. Not exactly what most people would identify as a "sniper" rifle.

Stolen from the range that I use now.

Mgmordon, I understand. I personally had a dislike for revolvers up until recently, and I despise .22 LR.
 
Not all "sniper" rifles look like hunting rifles. The Barrett and Cheytac rifles, along with some of those 'custom' builds can look pretty menacing :barf:

But I do agree, many of the "sniper" rifles are very good hunting tools, which would make them nearly impossible to ban.

One day in class, one of my classmates said, "Semi-automatics aren't for hunting, only assault weapons are semi-automatic". Good thing I was able to explain what an assault weapon really is, and that my 1957 Remington 740 is also semi-automatic. Then of course my buddy brought up the Knights SR25 along with the AR10/LR-308. Things got interesting :D

I just know that I would be much more afraid of an assailant 800+ yards out with a capable rifle, than if he was in a shopping mall spraying a an AK variant around.
 
I think it has to do with most "sniper" rifles were in hunting calibers during the Antis heyday, the mid-90's.

Im sure like the .50, the Laupua and cheytac chambered guns would have been made illegal if they had that chance. Now, if they bring up the legislation, they will just hurt their cause even farther, or maybe even bring Mr. Guera down on them.

Edit- What is funny, is they know they need 'hunters' to win votes. They must HATE that the AR type rifle is becoming the new norm for hunting rifles.
 
You are wrong to beleive that criminals are not intelligent. Some of the more noted serial killers had higher than average I.Q.'s. They are cold, calculating and possess the patience of a snake and strike only when they can get away with it. Now back to the precision rifles.

By todays standards most out of the box hunting rifles are just as accurate if not more than the precision rifles or sniper rifles used during the WW1 and WW2, korean war, and Vietnam. The media and the ignorant are mostly interested in rifles that are of high capacity categories, such as AR platforms, and AK platforms that can hold a large number of rounds before reloading. Most criminal elements are usually gang related and gangs with the most firepower rule. I believe most gang member would have one of the platforms mentioned vs a bolt action hunting rifle that holds 4 rounds in the magazine. That is why they attack the "ASSAULT RIFLE", OR "BLACKRIFLE".
 
JFK and MLK Jr. come to mind...
And the clock tower guy in Texas... But when they happened the antis were far fewer and less organized. Were similar incidents to happen today you can be sure that hunters would be the new terrorists.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top