RE: The US and guns

RE: The US and guns (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Casual Banter] >> Off the Grid

Message

CrappyDom -> RE: The US and guns (10/13/2006 5:53:58 PM)
That must be why the IRA had such trouble blowing shit up.

CrappyDom -> RE: The US and guns (10/13/2006 6:00:11 PM)
Anyone who thinks the 2nd was truly meant only to refer to a state militia as opposed to possession by citizens should read this link, it is a list of state constitutions... http://www.law.ucla.edu/volokh/beararms/statedat.htm 1776 North Carolina: That the people have a right to bear arms, for the defence of the State; and, as standing armies, in time of peace, are dangerous to liberty, they ought not to be kept up; and that the military should be kept under strict subordination to, and governed by, the civil power. 1776 Pennsylvania: That the people have a right to bear arms for the defence of themselves and the state; and as standing armies in the time of peace are dangerous to liberty, they ought not to be kept up; and that the military should be kept under strict subordination, to, and governed by, the civil power. 1777 Vermont: That the people have a right to bear arms for the defence of themselves and the State -- and as standing armies in time of peace are dangerous to liberty, they ought not to be kept up; and that the military should be kept under strict subordination to and governed by the civil power. 1780 Massachusetts: The people have a right to keep and to bear arms for the common defence. And as, in time of peace, armies are dangerous to liberty, they ought not to be maintained without the consent of the legislature; and the military power shall always be held in an exact subordination to the civil authority, and be governed by it.

Dtesmoac -> RE: The US and guns (10/13/2006 6:07:15 PM)
That must be why the IRA had such trouble blowing shit up. Point made - predominantly they had to resort to fertilizer based explosives. With the US financed (and often supplied) weaponry being used mainly in Ulster. Whilst they had / have some modern military scale equipment it is relatively small quantity items. Compare that with the sniper who terrorised Gas staions a few years ago in the US. A terrorist cell could equip 20 snipers with legal weapons and send them out in modified vehicles and cause total panic in the US and would need access to relatively little funding. In the UK simply being seen with a weapon in you car would arrose suspicion.

NorthernGent -> RE: The US and guns (10/14/2006 2:39:11 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: NorthernGent quote: ORIGINAL: mistoferin quote: ORIGINAL: NorthernGent It seems like different reasons for different people. If the argument is gun ownership is symbolic of your civil rights then I can understand this - every people values their freedom of choice. If the argument is for personal entertainment then, although I don't agree with the idea of hunting, I can understand why you want to hang on to your entertainment. For many, I would suggest to you that the purpose of hunting is not for it's entertainment value. It is a necessity. Not because cheap meat is inaccessible, but because it is a very necessary part of wildlife conservation. To say that you don't agree with hunting is to say that you do not agree with wildlife conservation. While there may be some out there who are doing this for kicks, most hunters take their responsibility quite seriously. Fair enough. My mistake. To qualify, you'll see I typed that I do not agree with hunting in the context of personal entertainment. If the context lacked clarity then point taken.

NorthernGent -> RE: The US and guns (10/14/2006 2:55:18 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: KenDckey Gent I dont agree with 90% of what you have to say. That is ok Disagreement is a good thing sometimes. But this time you asked to be educated. You wanted to know about the facination of Americans with Guns. What you got wayt o much of was politics (not related to the subject) indictments of the government (not related to the subject) morality of gun ownership (not related to the subject). In fact you really didn't get much in the way of an education. What you did get was retoric I find this unfrotunate and shows those in the thread in a bad light. How about we get back to educating NG? Fascination was the wrong choice of word and in all honesty betrays my political prejudice. I personally find the concept that owning a gun is symbolic of the peoples' rights an interesting one hence the question. In truth, I'm not really any further forward than the point that, as made clear on this thread, there isn't a one-size-fits-all answer i.e. different people hold different reasons and some of the reasons have nothing to do with civil liberties.

meatcleaver -> RE: The US and guns (10/14/2006 3:06:52 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: CrappyDom That must be why the IRA had such trouble blowing shit up. Well as Dtsemoac said, the IRA had to smuggle weapons, which they did from the USA or obtain money through criminality and raising money in the USA to buy arms from Libya (there's an irony). The IRA eventually came to the negotiating table because its members couldn't go for a shit without the intelligence service knowing and one of the ways it caught many terrorists was because weapons were traceable because they were not widespread through society.

NorthernGent -> RE: The US and guns (10/14/2006 3:08:31 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: caitlyn quote: ORIGINAL: NorthernGent You may a bright girl, I haven't seen many of your posts so can't say but improved discussion skills would certainly improve the all round package. I'm just bright enough to realize that discussing with you is futile, because no answer anyone is going to give to any of your 'questions' is going to be good enough for you. [;)] On you're superiority point, do I feel superior to right-wing Americans? Yes, absolutely. Do I feel superior to right-wing Dutch, British, French, etc? Yes, absolutely. Nationality has no bearing on it, I personally think all of those on the right are fools because of the personal values they hold that lead them to the right and I'll defend my point of view until the cows come home. When I'm wrong I'll hold my hands up and say so. So, settle down and join in or else I'll have no option but to put up a link of Garth Brooks for a Garth Brooks/Europop dance off for the title of most ridiculous music on the planet and I know you wouldn't want that on your conscience.

nefertari -> RE: The US and guns (10/14/2006 3:22:49 AM)
For some it's a sense of security. I don't say protection because I think it gives a sense of security to some to just have a gun around. But then you have to keep it locked up so the kids don't get into it and accidentally shoot one of their friends, so how much protection has it given you? For some it's a power trip. 'Nuff said. For some it's sport or hobby or hunting. For some, like my neighbor apparently, it's for shooting off on your porch in a residential neigborhood repeatedly over a half hour period on New Years Eve. [sm=rolleyes.gif] I don't own a gun and don't have an opinion on the matter. Saying that you have a gun for protection from terrorists or other attacks on our country in this day and age is ludicrous. Terrorists aren't going door to door. They're using planes and bombs. Your gun isn't going to do much. If memory serves, the Freedman's (it was the Freedman's, wasn't it?) at Ruby Ridge claimed they were a militia and that the courts had no jurisdiction over them. The government didn't buy it and most people just thought they were nuts. No militia that the people of this country could put together could compete with the US military or any other branch (or paramilitary branch as another poster described it) of government, so that issue is moot. I can understand not wanting our civil liberties taken away and why people get so upset when they feel that their right to bear arms is infringed upon as it is a right protected in the Constitution. However, the majority of the people of this country don't seem to have a problem with the Patriot Act and it's infringement on our civil liberties or other infringements on our liberties, such as warrantless wiretapping. People will stomp, scream and shout when it comes to gun control. There is barely a whisper with the Patriot Act. That conflict in logic baffles me. I personally would like it if everyone who owns a gun had to undergo both an IQ test (see comment about my neighbor above) and a pysch evaluation. But then you could just buy a gun illegally off the street, so it really wouldn't matter.

CrappyDom -> RE: The US and guns (10/14/2006 5:14:16 AM)
Lets not forget that an assualt rifle isn't lethal enough to legally hunt deer in most states athough they are legal for hunting squirrels. They are also not as accurate as a hunting rifle and can't shoot far enough to be worth much anyway as a sniper rifle.

CrappyDom -> RE: The US and guns (10/14/2006 5:27:53 AM)
nefertari, Ruby Ridge had nothing to do with the Freeman tax avoiders, it had to do with a man who refused to be an informent for ATF. They then put armed agents on his VERY rural property in full camo and snuck around trying to spy on him. In an encounter the man's son shot one of the agents and it went downhill from there ending when an FBI sniper shot the man's wife while she was standing in the doorway holding her infant in her arms. That same sniper was one of the people who the Texas Rangers wanted to charge with murder at Waco after finding clear evidence that he was shooting at Branch Dividions despite testifying to the contrary. As for holding your own against the US military, that isn't how guerillas work and in the US revolution, we couldn't stand up to the British at first either. Currently, the Iraqis seem to be doing quite well although simply voting the bastards out is always a better option. However, when they install electronic voting machines so they can simply decide what the vote will be, again things change.

LadyEllen -> RE: The US and guns (10/14/2006 5:44:58 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: meatcleaver quote: ORIGINAL: CrappyDom That must be why the IRA had such trouble blowing shit up. Well as Dtsemoac said, the IRA had to smuggle weapons, which they did from the USA or obtain money through criminality and raising money in the USA to buy arms from Libya (there's an irony). The IRA eventually came to the negotiating table because its members couldn't go for a shit without the intelligence service knowing and one of the ways it caught many terrorists was because weapons were traceable because they were not widespread through society. Off topic - but important I think. The IRA did not come to negotiations because they were defeated - they came to the table because of demographics. Within a short period now, Catholic/Republicans will outnumber Protestant/Loyalists because of varying birth rates. The IRA thus foresee the possibility of accomplishing their aims better through Sinn Fein (their political movement), through the ballot box. E

EnglishDomNW -> RE: The US and guns (10/14/2006 5:55:55 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: CrappyDom We can publish secret materials leaked to us, you can't. While I believe you have better papers and reporters, technically our papers are freerer to operate than yours. LOL, will you ever type something based on fact and statistical logic rather than whatever comes first into your head?

mistoferin -> RE: The US and guns (10/14/2006 6:23:15 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: CrappyDom Lets not forget that an assualt rifle isn't lethal enough to legally hunt deer in most states athough they are legal for hunting squirrels. They are also not as accurate as a hunting rifle and can't shoot far enough to be worth much anyway as a sniper rifle. quote: Getting back to subject... So IS the SKS an "assault weapon" rarely used for hunting? Fortunately, not all newspapers were buying it. From the Post-Crescent (WI): The SKS, a medium-powered carbine usually equipped with a 10-round magazine, is cheap, dependable and commonly used for deer hunting, said Bill Kordus of Menasha, a state certified hunting education instructor and former president of the Twin City Rod and Gun Club. “It’s the most common deer-hunting rifle out there. You can buy them for $100. There are millions of them,” Kordus said. Kordus said the SKS did not fall under the nation’s recently expired ban on the sale of assault weapons. And he said it’s incorrect to label the hunting version of an SKS an assault weapon. “A gun is considered a firearm and it is a tool used to hunt,” he said. “A weapon is anything used to kill or maim another human being.” Mike Young, Outagamie County DNR warden, said he owns two SKS rifles. “I place responsibility (for the Sawyer County shootings) on the hunter, not the gun,” he said. CD, Not trying to pick on you here but....maybe out where you are this is not a common weapon choice for hunting, but I would have to think that is because of the more wide open terrain. You are correct when it comes to distance. However, here in Michigan, where I hunt I would never need to take a shot that was more than 75 to 100 yards. I own an SKS (which is basically the same as an AK) and I frequently use it for hunting deer. I have had great success with it and I know that many here also use them. This weapon and it's place in hunting has been well scrutinized in recent years because it was the weapon that the "hunter" in Wisconsin shot all those other hunters with. For the record though, many hunting areas in Michigan require that you use a shotgun and rifles are not permitted at all due to the close proximity of dwellings. Shotguns are not effective at distance either but they are a very common and effective choice for hunting.

mistoferin -> RE: The US and guns (10/14/2006 6:29:43 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: NorthernGent To qualify, you'll see I typed that I do not agree with hunting in the context of personal entertainment. If the context lacked clarity then point taken. Thank you for the clarification. I must admit I am not too fond of the "sport" hunter myself. Too often on my own hunts I have come across the headless carcasses of deer that were left behind after these folks got their "trophy".

CrappyDom -> RE: The US and guns (10/14/2006 6:32:24 AM)
I was actually refering to the M16 and the .223 cartridge and most assualt weapons sold in the US are chambered in it. The AK is the only common that uses the same ammo as the SKS. Again, the main point is that common deer rifles are MORE powerful than assualt rifles, would you consider your SKS at the high or low end of power for hunting rifles considering how many are chambered in rounds like 30-06 and 7mm Rem mag. I happen to like the SKS, it is a fine shooting handy little rifle. I never manage to keep one as some buddy always wants one when I get a good deal. I would like to put one in a nice walnut stock and pimp it up a bit. You should see the stunning tigerstripped Claro walnut stock set I have on my FAL!

KenDckey -> RE: The US and guns (10/14/2006 6:43:25 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: NorthernGent What is the fascination with guns in the US? Now I know it's in the constituion but wasn't that written in 1776 when there was about 826 people living in the US and the arms referred to were flintlock muskets that required about 13 steps to fire - in other words, by the time it was fired you could have swerved the thing. These things weren't exactly .70mm hand howitzers with an infra red scope and armour-piercing bullets. If the answer is that Americans needed to arm themselves 225 years ago in a war with Britain don't worry about it, there's no way we're going to pull that shit again, we can't even run a bath anymore let alone a military campaign. Surely it would be better to have a pub on every corner rather than a gun shop? After all, if you want filling with shots, better to be vodka than bullets. Or even swap licencing laws so we can get a beer after 12 at night but you can't get a gun after 12 night - might save a few lives. So what is the attraction of owning guns? Sorryz I thought fasinations was your choice of words Look up

wild1cfl -> RE: The US and guns (10/14/2006 6:50:15 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: NorthernGent quote: ORIGINAL: Aileen68 quote: ORIGINAL: NorthernGent So what is the attraction of owning guns? Protection. I live in an area that has no police force. We rely on the state police to patrol and respond to calls. The average response time is about fifteen minutes (they patrol a large area). Fifteen minutes is a long time to wait if someone or some animal is trying to enter my house. That will be someone from CM who's been reading your "I'm horny" thread. Is it really that bad over there that someone is trying to attack you on a regular basis? Well I came across this thread rather late, but will add my 2 cents worth anyway LOL. I grew up on a cattle ranch in the middle of the deserts of Arizona. We had lots of snakes and other animals constantly getting into things like the barn or the house. I learned how to shoot a rifle when I was about 6 and a pistol soon after that. I also learned how to ride a horse by that time as well. With us weapons were a matter of survival against the vermin that we often came in contact with, if you could back away and leave them alone you did, but often when you are confronted by charging Javelina you did not have much choice other than to kill it before it ripped your leg open with it's tusk. My father was also a history buff and living in Arizona he was quite knowledgeable about the U. S. Cavalry during the Indian Wars period from the late 1860s to the 1890s. We collected the weapons that were used by the cavalry of that period plus other antique military weapons. For me I prefer my 1859 breechloading black powder Sharps carbine to many other weapons mainly because of its accuracy. I also enjoy shooting my 1903 springfield bolt action 30-06 rifle.

KenDckey -> RE: The US and guns (10/14/2006 6:54:12 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: wild1cfl quote: ORIGINAL: NorthernGent quote: ORIGINAL: Aileen68 quote: ORIGINAL: NorthernGent So what is the attraction of owning guns? Protection. I live in an area that has no police force. We rely on the state police to patrol and respond to calls. The average response time is about fifteen minutes (they patrol a large area). Fifteen minutes is a long time to wait if someone or some animal is trying to enter my house. That will be someone from CM who's been reading your "I'm horny" thread. Is it really that bad over there that someone is trying to attack you on a regular basis? Well I came across this thread rather late, but will add my 2 cents worth anyway LOL. I grew up on a cattle ranch in the middle of the deserts of Arizona. We had lots of snakes and other animals constantly getting into things like the barn or the house. I learned how to shoot a rifle when I was about 6 and a pistol soon after that. I also learned how to ride a horse by that time as well. With us weapons were a matter of survival against the vermin that we often came in contact with, if you could back away and leave them alone you did, but often when you are confronted by charging Javelina you did not have much choice other than to kill it before it ripped your leg open with it's tusk. My father was also a history buff and living in Arizona he was quite knowledgeable about the U. S. Cavalry during the Indian Wars period from the late 1860s to the 1890s. We collected the weapons that were used by the cavalry of that period plus other antique military weapons. For me I prefer my 1859 breechloading black powder Sharps carbine to many other weapons mainly because of its accuracy. I also enjoy shooting my 1903 springfield bolt action 30-06 rifle. Javalina and snakes are the reason that my pistol is loaded every other round with snake shot coming out of the tube first and closely followed by hollow points. there are only 2 ways to escape a Javalina get treed and wait for it to die or kill itl

wild1cfl -> RE: The US and guns (10/14/2006 6:56:39 AM)
yes it is Ken, as we only know too well since both of us grew up here LOL Good to see you on this morning

mistoferin -> RE: The US and guns (10/14/2006 6:57:05 AM)
Yes, I would consider it on the lower end of power. If I were going to hunt in an area where distance was an issue, I would surely choose my Remington Model 700 or my Remington Model 7, most likely the 7 because I just love it's compact size and weight and there is not much distance, power or accuracy that gets sacrificed. The area I hunt primarily is an 80 acre wooded plot that is nestled between two large corn fields. I have 9 blinds/stands that are also used for bow. They overlook small areas that we cleared and planted with whitetail clover or have permanent year round feeders. Most shots I take are actually within the 30 to 60 yard range.

Page: << < prev 5 6 [7] 8 9 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

4.882813E-02