Feinstein Releases List of Guns Demanded to be Banned.

reply to post by T4NG0


Thank you. I just think that one has to take care and keep a clear focus on the semantics. Do you believe that we are in any danger of "absolute Despotism", to quote the exact portion of this document? Think about it. Sure enough, my local government can overstep a few boundaries. State government may do a few things outrageous. Federal Govt can do all sort of unseemly crap. But it's a far, far cry from the "absolute Despotism". It's just not in the nature of the American people, regardless on their stance on gun control. I consider the "overthrow the government" thing as a straw man, for many reasons. One is that it will remain light years away from "despotism" for foreseeable future, one other is that if God forbid it gets serious about "despotism", magazine loaded shotgun like Saiga (which I happen to like, a great weapon) won't make a difference. I like firearms like many other normal men, but the argument about "overthrowing the govt" strikes me as a case of mental masturbation. I don't mean offense, but that's the view I hold.

Originally posted by buddhasystem
reply to post by T4NG0

 

Thank you. I just think that one has to take care and keep a clear focus on the semantics. Do you believe that we are in any danger of "absolute Despotism", to quote the exact portion of this document? Think about it. Sure enough, my local government can overstep a few boundaries. State government may do a few things outrageous. Federal Govt can do all sort of unseemly crap. But it's a far, far cry from the "absolute Despotism". It's just not in the nature of the American people, regardless on their stance on gun control. I consider the "overthrow the government" thing as a straw man, for many reasons. One is that it will remain light years away from "despotism" for foreseeable future, one other is that if God forbid it gets serious about "despotism", magazine loaded shotgun like Saiga (which I happen to like, a great weapon) won't make a difference. I like firearms like many other normal men, but the argument about "overthrowing the govt" strikes me as a case of mental masturbation. I don't mean offense, but that's the view I hold.

Regardless of your disturbed visions, what you perceive as a few "bubbas" with their deer rifles and "tater" shooters, against our standing military, is NOT how it would go down....

Picture Vietnam, but with taller insurgents that can actually shoot, and that actually possess knowledge of modern warfare and guerilla tactics...

reply to post by buddhasystem


I know it seems far fetched, and believe me no one wants blood shed on this one, not even me; but when our own law enforcement, military,and even some politicians are extremely worried. I wish so badly I could just enter some state of denial.

Ultimately what I want to convey is that we need to stop it now, before it gets to that point. They are attacking the constitution as if it means nothing, and writing in laws, taxes and healthcare that will cripple this nation. If you like the idea of not being the world super power keep letting these nut jobs sit in office. Both sides of the table.

reply to post by GoOfYFoOt



Thank you for saying that oh my god! At least someone gets that. The best part is we get most of the military. The same people they just trained on all that big bad tech. Sheer numbers, intelligence, and heart will suffice.

All I know is I have never heard so much talk of rebellion, even in the media as well as our military and law enforcement.

It bans the hell out of some Saiga 12s! Good thing I own a Saiga 20 as my secondary defense weapon

However, this has no legs, and will go nowhere I suspect. Should it, you can bet the midterms will be a slaughter! (pun intended)

reply to post by okiecowboy


Yeah I passed on the $25.00 per box of 20 .223 they had here. Of which there were 3 boxes. It's crazy nobody in a 60 miles radius of me has ammo for sale, and if they do it's the super expensive crap no one wants anyway. What I was told by a few local gun stores is that the dealers are refusing to ship it to NYS until everyone knows what the laws are gonna be. This won't be good if it last much longer, a lot of people will be getting really pissed soon. Me my father and many old timers cannot remember a time in our lives where .22 was no where to be found? Come to think of it all I have seen is 17, better go scoop that up soon.

I wrote my senator Bill Belson and got the following response:

"
     In 2008, the Supreme Court of the United States affirmed that the Second Amendment protects a person's right to possess a firearm, unconnected to military service, and to use that firearm for traditional lawful purposes like self-defense within the home. This is the law of the land."

Come and take them Feinstein.

Originally posted by jaynkeel
reply to post by okiecowboy

 

Yeah I passed on the $25.00 per box of 20 .223 they had here. Of which there were 3 boxes. It's crazy nobody in a 60 miles radius of me has ammo for sale, and if they do it's the super expensive crap no one wants anyway. What I was told by a few local gun stores is that the dealers are refusing to ship it to NYS until everyone knows what the laws are gonna be. This won't be good if it last much longer, a lot of people will be getting really pissed soon. Me my father and many old timers cannot remember a time in our lives where .22 was no where to be found? Come to think of it all I have seen is 17, better go scoop that up soon.

edit on 24-1-2013 by jaynkeel because: (no reason given)

Funny story, about .17HMR rounds...

My buddy and I were sighting in his Browning T-bolt chambered in the .17hmr and after we got it zeroed at 100 yds, we started a little inpromptu competition, between us...There had been a light sprinkle coming down that morning and after setting a pair of new clean targets out at 100, we proceeded to take alternating shots, from under cover until we needed to reload the 10+1 capacity of his rifle, then fired again the same way until we each had shot 22 rounds, apiece.

From the time we began taking turns, the sprinkle turned into a light rain. And, upon completion, we drove out to grab our targets and calculate who had won. My target had only 7 hits showing a 3" group. His target only had 4 hits, with a 2 1/2" group. These were standard B-27 targets that are a few feet wide by about 3 feet tall.
How could we be so accurate with those few rounds, and miss the target completely with all the rest???

The .17hmr round we were using, moves at about 2550 feet per second. But only weighs 17 grains.
I was later told by a very knowledgable friend, that the bullets were most likely striking raindrops, and most likely either disintegrating, or simply being deflected completely off of the target!

Just a cool story, that I thought some would like to read...

Now, where is my .45-70?

reply to post by T4NG0


They aren't really weapons of war since they are semi-auto. I mean, I agree that we need to hold our ground and keep them, but calling them weapons of war is incorrect and what the gun control crowd says to increase fear. You won't see any military sending troops in with semi auto rifles.

reply to post by GoOfYFoOt


Enjoyed the story, it is a fun little round though, shot my father savage for the first time a few weeks ago and it felt good. Even with the el cheapo Barska zoom scope we killed the spinner everytime.

reply to post by GoOfYFoOt

I can belive it! I had a buddy that always liked to reload things a bit on the Hot side...we were out shooting, I with
My 221 fireball and he with his 17 hornet.....to make a long story short...at the end of the day, best we could figure out...he was loaded so hot, bullets were just going poof in flight...

I just wish I had known a few months ago what was coming....I would have stockpiled. 22

reply to post by GoOfYFoOt


Best reason I have heard to not buy a .17hmr. It has great use on varmints....but so does a .22LR.

reply to post by buddhasystem


We are on track. It's hard to deny the direction. We probably should have started over when the government made banks take bailouts and then let their ceo's use that information for inside trading. Rather than trying to fix the economy they tried to give the illusion that it was fixed so the people would go further in debt.

In the last few years we've gotten warrant-less wiretapping (extended by Obama), wars without congressional approval, it's been made illegal to protest around certain politicians, Americans are being assassinated via drone strikes, Americans can now be detained indefinitely without trial, and now they are doing a gun grab.

You can be as naive as you like, but the direction we are heading is obvious. We are definitely not becoming more free.

Originally posted by GoOfYFoOt
Regardless of your disturbed visions

I thank you for being so warm, congenial and open to discussion.

Picture Vietnam, but with taller insurgents that can actually shoot, and that actually possess knowledge of modern warfare and guerilla tactics...

You seem to imply that the Vietnamese did not have knowledge of guerrilla warfare, and/or didn't know how to shoot. I find this notion bizarre. And don't tell me that fat ass members of the local target practice joint have knowledge of modern warfare. That's just stupid.

Originally posted by T4NG0
reply to post by GoOfYFoOt

 

All I know is I have never heard so much talk of rebellion, even in the media as well as our military and law enforcement.

Well...The way I see it, is that TPTB are LOOKING for a confrontation. There can be no two ways about it.

All of the preparations they have made. FEMA camps, weapons purchases, private security companies, TSA, DHS, talk of gun bans, continuing to restrict and erode our rights and freedoms, national and foreign media tirades against American citizens and our laws...

If they wanted to AVOID a conflict, why have they been preparing so much for one, without doing anything to reduce or relieve the tensions that THEY are causing?

I, too, fear that it is just a matter of time.


GF~

reply to post by GoOfYFoOt


And not to forget, the new move with women being allowed combat roles, just increased the size of the combat forces.... pretty odd timing for such a move I think

Originally posted by GogoVicMorrow
reply to post by T4NG0

 

They aren't really weapons of war since they are semi-auto. I mean, I agree that we need to hold our ground and keep them, but calling them weapons of war is incorrect and what the gun control crowd says to increase fear. You won't see any military sending troops in with semi auto rifles.

Well in my experience, I don't know anyone in the military that ever has the need to switch a rifle to full auto anyways. You can pull a trigger pretty fast for that matter, and I think most fire fights happen at a longer range. The Ar-15 using the 5.56 NATO round is effective at 5-600 meters with deadly accuracy. In fact, there was a battle I heard of where one side armed their men with semi auto FAL rifles, while the other did the opposite. Guess who won, spray and pray just does not work, I have experienced a lot of full auto weapons, for a civilian that is, and I would rather have semi auto for accuracy.

Originally posted by buddhasystem

Originally posted by GoOfYFoOt
Regardless of your disturbed visions

I thank you for being so warm, congenial and open to discussion.

Picture Vietnam, but with taller insurgents that can actually shoot, and that actually possess knowledge of modern warfare and guerilla tactics...

You seem to imply that the Vietnamese did not have knowledge of guerrilla warfare, and/or didn't know how to shoot. I find this notion bizarre. And don't tell me that fat ass members of the local target practice joint have knowledge of modern warfare. That's just stupid.

I think he is trying to state that if you thought they were bad? (Which they were!) You haven't seen anything.

reply to post by buddhasystem

I will say this, everything I have read shows that U.S. forces in viet nam were better shots than the untrained VC...
and it is estimated that U.S. troops fired 20,000-30,000 rounds per kill...

Originally posted by buddhasystem

Originally posted by GoOfYFoOt
Regardless of your disturbed visions

I thank you for being so warm, congenial and open to discussion.

Picture Vietnam, but with taller insurgents that can actually shoot, and that actually possess knowledge of modern warfare and guerilla tactics...

You seem to imply that the Vietnamese did not have knowledge of guerrilla warfare, and/or didn't know how to shoot. I find this notion bizarre. And don't tell me that fat ass members of the local target practice joint have knowledge of modern warfare. That's just stupid.

I'm having trouble determining if you are voicing sarcasm or sincerity, based on your post, but I'll assume the latter, for now.

What I was implying, is that while the Vietnamese may have had some experience in warfare, prior to our intervention, the worst of it was based on a learning curve.
Where, the body of Patriots that currently constitute our "Militia", of these United States, consists of far more with knowledge of such things, than many of the villagers that took up arms against us, and during our visits with the NVA!