Author Topic: Q: What's the difference between a sportsman and a criminal? (Read 5804 times)

Drunky · « **Reply #30 on:** September 25, 2003, 06:39:04 PM »

If criminals threw lawyers at cops as they tried to escape, would we outlaw lawyers?

muckmaw · « **Reply #31 on:** September 25, 2003, 06:59:55 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Drunky
If criminals threw lawyers at cops as they tried to escape, would we outlaw lawyers?

A man could dream.....

john9001 · « **Reply #32 on:** September 25, 2003, 07:12:54 PM »

this thread is silly , everybody knows criminals arn't allowed to have guns.

Gunthr · « **Reply #33 on:** September 25, 2003, 07:23:00 PM »

My brother brought a CHI-COM SKS home from Vietnam, but he captured it in Cambodia. Its a nice, reliable weapon with folding pig sticker on the end and a built in cleaning kit in the wooden stock. It isn't full auto though.

miko2d · « **Reply #34 on:** September 25, 2003, 07:44:46 PM »

gofaster: A single-action Winchester would work just as well, wouldn't it? Do you really need a full-auto SKS...

That's the issue of freedom. Once it is not up to a person to decide what he really needs, the actual topic becomes academic and the government a tyrany.
If you do admit he has a right to decide, than it ceases to be a legal argument and just becomes an issue of preference or taste. At $200 it also becomes academic. One can practice with a real round at only double the price of a good 22lr round. Why the heck not own one if you have room in a safe?

One would have to be crazy to have a defensive rifle that is not at least semi-auto. True - some people can achieve equal results with a lever or pump action. If they train constantly. And have use of both hands.

miko

Erlkonig · « **Reply #35 on:** September 25, 2003, 07:56:39 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by muckmaw

I think the guys who want the full auto's and semi-auto's and nickel plated thingy don't want to impress the deer. I'm guessing their repressed military guys who still want to play army. Hell, I like paintball, dressing up in camo and looking like a schmuck, too.

The gun nuts are not expecting the black helo's to land, or Al quaida to invade. Those that do are paranoid, and scare me.

Hunting is a cop out. You don't need a bazooka to take out a Mallard. Let's be real here.

The suitable/not suitable for hunting criteria is the argument brought up by gun control advocates. And it is irrelevant to the assault weapons and machine gun issues, because even people who own such firearms (such as myself) admit they have little value, if any, as hunting weapons. The point being that there are legitmate, legal reasons for owning such weapons that don't involve hunting at all.

miko2d · « **Reply #36 on:** September 25, 2003, 08:09:28 PM »

muckmaw: The gun nuts are not expecting the black helo's to land, or Al quaida to invade. Those that do are paranoid, and scare me.

There are other much more likelier scenarios than those you cited. That is beside defence from common criminals.
Of course it is too much to expect you to actually read - and understand - the real arguments of those people whom you've already decided to be nuts.

BTW, if I were stockpiling weapons, I would be saying it's against Al-Qaeda too. Everybody seems to be doing that - starting with Bush.

miko

capt. apathy · « **Reply #37 on:** September 25, 2003, 08:25:45 PM »

Quote

I can almost guarantee, if you look up the records, most crimes are committed by illegal HANDGUNS. I would bet 90% are unregistered and therefore illegal

what law is it that would make an unregistered handgun illegal? as far as I knew you only had to register them for concealed carry. purchases of new firearms or from licensed dealers are recorded and dealers are required to keep records, but except in some areas with an unhealthy paranoia towards pistols, I was unaware that we where required to submit any lists of guns owned (not damn likely).

Ghosth · « **Reply #38 on:** September 25, 2003, 09:35:55 PM »

The whole "assault rifle" mess is a huge morass. One part smoke screen put up by the media, one part pure BS put out by the anti gun lobby. 2 Parts of missmashed lousy writting by our own politicians & goverment.

What you have is such an unholy mix no one can touch the word without getting dirty.

Fact remains I have a simple .22lr semi auto that I used to hunt squirells, & gophers with that with the addition of a cheap plastic folding stock becomes an Assault rifle. Time to rewrite that bs and make it reasonable, & sensible.

On hunting, NO one is legally allowed to hunt big game with full auto in any state I'm familar with. Been that way for decades & I've got 14 years experience as a hunter safety instructor to back that statement up.

So leave hunting out of it period.

Frankly if you get caught with an illegal full auto you'd better shoot yourself with it. Darn sure you'd never see daylight again.

So whats left is a wide assortment of semi auto rifles that some say are "dangerous".

Well DUH! But so are the bolts, the levers, & the pump actions!

They are RIFLE's for pete's sake.
They are a tool, one that happened to be designed to kill. But still just a tool.

You don't see anyone writing regulations about hammers over 2 pounds do you?

Well take away the guns & the knifes & the hammers will be next.

I used to get real hot about gun control back when I was young. I'm a bit older now, & when they come for mine its still going to be a coin flip on how it goes.

Guy asking better ask nice is all I'll say.

The whole point of this is the sheer fact that I have guns keeps our goverment honest.

They know they can only go so far before a bunch of people say enough & take matters into their own hands.

AS IT SHOULD BE!

BlkKnit · « **Reply #39 on:** September 25, 2003, 09:46:08 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by muckmaw
I personally don't see why you need an M-60 to go deerhunting. I would get it if the deer carried guns too.

And what's with the silencers? Afraid you'll scare other deer away?

Oh, good stuff here...no bashing just good clean debate. Its gotta be a AHBB first!

seriously though, no one wants an assault rifle to hunt with (well a few might, but they are the extreme minority). An SKS is just a cheap worthless POS of a rifle. I had one, I sold it.

I know people who are licensed to have silencers and they are not used for hunting either. Kinda cool to here the action slide and the lead pop the target, but not have a loud report from the muzzle. Most people do these things for one reason....to see if they can. You see, they make their own silencers from scratch, each trying to come up with a better design. And yes, that is perfectly legal, since they paid the fee and had the big federal background check (but it was funny watching them wriggle with anticipation waiting for the permit to come.....4 months later).

The point is there is no reason to ban these sort of weapons. An AR15 is not the deadly weapon the early M16's were due to the twists of the riflings. They were changed due to international pressure because of the way the tended to "bounce" once they made impact (go in the thigh, come out the shoulder).

Bans seem rediculous to me (my red neck is showing) but I have no problem with controls. Want a full auto Uzi?....get a permit. Its not that hard to do, unless you are a criminal....but then if you were, you would just steal one or get it from a black market source.

Besides, a common deer rifle is a much more deadly weapon. Accurate and reliable, able to reach out and touch someone.....if you are using a full auto you are too close.

Sandman · « **Reply #40 on:** September 25, 2003, 09:51:31 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Ghosth
The whole point of this is the sheer fact that I have guns keeps our goverment honest.

I was with ya right up to this point.

As a counterpoint, I offer Waco, Texas, April 19, 1993.

BlkKnit · « **Reply #41 on:** September 25, 2003, 09:53:20 PM »

Waco?...try again

Dune · « **Reply #42 on:** September 25, 2003, 09:59:41 PM »

AFAIK, there is not a state in the Union that allows hunting with full-autos. And I'm not aware of any that allow you do use a silencer.

However, there many who use semi-auto's for hunting. Why not use a AR-15 for hunting javelina or white tails? And Browning sells lots of its semi-auto BAR's to hunters.

BlkKnit · « **Reply #43 on:** September 25, 2003, 10:01:35 PM »

And, Ghosth is right. Government by the people?...only so long as the people can enforce it. And, as long as they can, they wont have to.

But thats not the point.

An SKS is a worthless rifle (I know some people love 'em, but I dont). why ban it? For $500 you can get a AR15 knock off that is so much better its rediculous. People who own SKS's use them as plinkers or as part of a collection. I can see a certain nostolgic attraction there. Just not for me. Now why would you want to start banning weapons? Do you carry a pocket knife? A rolled up newspaper can kill (now theres a thought, ban the press!) lol, just kiddin.

Dune · « **Reply #44 on:** September 25, 2003, 10:02:23 PM »

BTW, what's more dangerous? A semi-auto SKS shooting 7.62x39 rounds that probably couldn't hit a barn past 50 yards or a .460 Weatherby bolt-gun that's accurate out to 500 yards and would probably punch through body armor past 150?

And guess which one is a "hunting rifle"?