Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => The O' Club => Topic started by: kevykev56 on July 27, 2005, 11:40:22 PM
-
This is a very dangerous statement. Using the patriot act to pass you own agenda seems very destructive. What other freedoms could be next on her agenda?....Vehicles?
---------------------------------------------------------
Statement by Senator Feinstein in Opposition
to NRA’s Gun Liability Bill
I am opposed to moving to this bill ahead of the Patriot Act and other important legislation. And if the Senate does move to this bill, I intend to offer at least one amendment, which would put dangerous and destructive .50 caliber military sniper rifles in the same category as weapons such as machine guns and sawed-off shotguns.
These extremely powerful sniper rifles are powerful enough to bring down airplanes and can fire a bullet a mile and penetrate a brick wall. They are for sale virtually anywhere, even at gun shows with no background checks. If this bill passes, these potential terrorist weapons would continue to be for sale with virtual blanket liability protection.”
http://feinstein.senate.gov/05releases/r-liability.htm (http://feinstein.senate.gov/05releases/r-liability.htm)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Who votes for these people?
-
Originally posted by kevykev56
Who votes for these people?
In this situation it would be the majority of Kalifornia. This socialist woman would be very happy if she banned every handgun from every home in America.
I don't really disagree with her about the uses of a .50 cal sniper rifle but I do disagree with any encroachment on the 2nd Amendment.
-
She knows it can penetrate armored cars, and this concerns her greatly.
-
Originally posted by kevykev56
This is a very dangerous statement.
"Dangerous."
Ooh scary.
Fact is she was *****in' about how the NRA gets its lobbyists to push through unprecedented protections at the expense of work on the Patriot Act.
Instead of worrying about her - why aren't you asking why this is happening?
I mean, freedom and all of that. Why do you hate America?
-
This practice has been used in congress for ages. Some American carton even made a song about it. Take a big bill and hide small bill….I do not recall proper name for it.
-
Yeah. This aint the same thing, but it's the same kind of...
17 billion in pork got doled out this year. Just crazy. There's these forms ya gotta fill out as to why you need the money. Then there's these consulting companies that have sprung up to help herd yer application to the right people. Then you get a boatload of money.
Give 10 or 20 grand to a senator who sits on ways and means, and get a couple million of tax payer's money for your trouble.
This NRA business is no different.
-
Originally posted by Nash
Fact is she was *****in' about how the NRA gets its lobbyists to push through unprecedented protections at the expense of work on the Patriot Act.
Fact is, she's a nanny state idiot who would happily take away any of our basic freedoms if she felt it could protect us from ourselves. Sometimes, people are just blasted for being liberals on this board. This is not one of those times. This woman is an idiot, and I'm suprised she can muster the brain power to keep her lungs functioning, much less debate anything.
Fortunately though, if she managed to outlaw these horrific .50 cal harbingers of doom, there would be no way that a terrorist would EVAR get their hands on one!
-
Well yeah, maybe SOB, but....
Fact is she was *****in' about how the NRA gets its lobbyists to push through unprecedented protections at the expense of work on the Patriot Act.
It's what we're talking about.
Now if there's a problem with this chick, go ahead and post examples.
This aint one. And there are no freebies. If ya wanna diss her, make us understand why. This here doesn't cut it.
-
For sale everywhere to the tune of $5,000 - $15,000 each, not including cost of ammo. Tell ya what though, my local gun store didn't have any and thats saying something.
-
Originally posted by Nash
"Dangerous."
Ooh scary.
Fact is she was *****in' about how the NRA gets its lobbyists to push through unprecedented protections at the expense of work on the Patriot Act.
Instead of worrying about her - why aren't you asking why this is happening?
I mean, freedom and all of that. Why do you hate America?
so basically its
"you mess with the 4th amendment and I'll screw with the 2nd"?
-
Hmm... I thought it was "why are we even talking about the 2nd right now?"
-
I've formed my opinion of her over quite a while, and from reading a lot of new stories over the years. I'm not gonna go searching for 'em though, as it's not worth my time...even to convince the fine patrons of this here BBS.
As far as the Patriot Act is concerned, I wouldn't complain if they let it die and moved on to other things. But, on that too, I'm not modivated enough at the moment to care and cite examples of what makes me feel that way. So, take it or leave it. :)
-
I get it.
And I won't hold you accountable. :)
Too much gets passed off here as reality, though. Know what I mean?
I'm sorta sick of it.
-
All that I ask is that you take my word as you would the word of God.
-
Well damn.... you even have to ask?
It's a bonafide given!
(I just slipped is all) :D
-
That's better. Now I'm off to bed. God has to get his beauty sleep, so he can be perky and alert at work tomorrow.
-
(he's a she, but don't tell her)
-
wasnt the first thing she did as mayor of san francisco was to ban hand guns in the city?
-
you tell us.
-
"I intend to offer at least one amendment, which would put dangerous and destructive .50 caliber military sniper rifles in the same category as weapons such as machine guns and sawed-off shotguns.
These extremely powerful sniper rifles are powerful enough to bring down airplanes and can fire a bullet a mile and penetrate a brick wall. They are for sale virtually anywhere, even at gun shows with no background checks. If this bill passes, these potential terrorist weapons would continue to be for sale with virtual blanket liability protection.”
Sounds pretty sensible to me! :D
-
You think terrorists would want to use a .50 cal? They'd have to train quite a bit to learn lead and bullet drop to tank a plane down.
Its the shoulder fire rockets that can home in on planes' exhaust and such that we should be more worried about. Basically aim and wait for it to beep.
-
Originally posted by Nash
Fact is she was *****in' about how the NRA gets its lobbyists to push through unprecedented protections at the expense of work on the Patriot Act.
It's what we're talking about.
WRONG
It's what YOU'RE talking about. If you want to talk about pork, start your own thread.
THIS thread is about Fienstien attempting to FORCE legislation on her own agenda by holding every bill hostage.
-
Originally posted by Gunslinger
I don't really disagree with her about the uses of a .50 cal sniper rifle but I do disagree with any encroachment on the 2nd Amendment.
Just like any other firearm, it only does what its owner does with it.
I happen to know Ronnie Barrett, owner of the the Barrett Manufactuing company, personally. His company makes the vast majority of those weapons. He can't go to the bathroom without 3 dozen government agencies knowing about it. If you think ANY of these weapons sold legally go anywhere the Feds don't know about it you're crazy. And they know EXACTLY how many are made. Barrett accounts for EVERY piece of raw materials purchased, and evey component purchased from a subcontractor.
Simply put, those weapons (rifles chambered for 50BMG) are so strictly and carefully watched, no one with evil intent is going to buy one. They'll have one built (at a machine shop), or build it themselves. Even then, they'll have to BUY the barrel, since rifling equipment is also expensive and closely watched. Go buy a 50 caliber barrel and see how many times your name pops up on the government "to be watched" lists.
And besides, the minute you give up part of a right, they'll be back to take the rest soon enough.
-
Originally posted by Nash
Hmm... I thought it was "why are we even talking about the 2nd right now?"
Uh, because the thread was about Fienstien trying to force her amendment to every bill in order to encroach on rights provided for by the Second Amendment? At least until you decided to try to hijack it and make it about pork.
-
Originally posted by Skydancer
"I intend to offer at least one amendment, which would put dangerous and destructive .50 caliber military sniper rifles in the same category as weapons such as machine guns and sawed-off shotguns.
These extremely powerful sniper rifles are powerful enough to bring down airplanes and can fire a bullet a mile and penetrate a brick wall. They are for sale virtually anywhere, even at gun shows with no background checks. If this bill passes, these potential terrorist weapons would continue to be for sale with virtual blanket liability protection.”
Sounds pretty sensible to me! :D
Yeah, she's right. You can go to any corner store or gun show and buy a rifle chambered in 50BMG from just about anyone, with no paperwork at all.:rolleyes:
I go to a gun show at least every month. I've NEVER seen anything chambered in 50BMG for sale by ANYONE but a licensed dealer. They sell for at least $2K and up and ammo is $4-$5 a loaded round. Not once have I seen a private individual dragging a rifle chambered in 50BMG around a gun show trying to sell it.
The bill she speaks of when she says: "If this bill passes, these potential terrorist weapons would continue to be for sale with virtual blanket liability protection", is a bill that makes it impossible to sue a GUN MANUFACTURER for making or selling a gun that is eventually used by a criminal in the commission of a crime.
The bill makes PERFECT SENSE. Unless you think Mercedes should be sued for making the car that the woman in Texas used to run over her husband. Unless you think Louisville Slugger should be sued for making a baseball bat some thug used to beat his victim to death.
The 50BMG chambered rifle is a really poor choice for use by terrorists. The terrorists are looking to make large scale hits killing or wounding hundreds at a time. The average 50 BMG rifle is a single shot or at best a 3-4 shot semi auto. It is 4'-5' long and weighs at least 15#-20#. Many weigh 25# or more. It is a very impractical weapon for someone intending to kill large numbers of people in a single stroke.
It COULD be used for assassination of individuals, but again, it is very impractical for that as well. When making those shots, the setup takes an expert marksman with incredible training and patience a great deal of time, and usually at least one spotter is involved. It would be pretty difficult to walk around in public with the rifle (even in a case) and also have a guy with you carrying a spotter's scope and tripod and whatever else you'd need. Then you'd have to know EXACTLY where your target would be. Just being inside a particular vehicle or structure is not "close enough". And even armor piercing 50BMG bullets are deflected by the armor in limos and armored glass. The bullet WILL deviate from its intended path when it hits protective armor of any type at anything less than a perfect 90 degree angle. When used against armored vehicles, the 50 BMG rifle is used to stop the vehicle, not kill the driver or occupants. You disable the vehicle. Try that with a vehicle transporting a head of state or other likely candidate for assassination and the area will be swarmed with military and law enforcement while your intended victim hides deep within the vehicle, which by the way will be immediately surrounded by a half dozen other vehicles, mostly at least lightly armored.
Oh, and by the way, I can purchase armor piercing bullets for my 30 caliber rifles and load my own ammo, all of which will be more powerful than the military 30 caliber machine gun round. My 300 Winchester Magnum is easily capable of shooting 4"-6" groups at 500 yards or more. I'm thinking about building a .308-.378, which is a 1K yard rifle. Just for the fun of shooting long range matches. I could just as easily load up armor piercing bullets in it and shoot them 1K yards as well.
Idiots like Fienstien worry WAY too much about firearms, when they should be worrying about real threats they could spend money dealing with. So far, there've been about a dozen or so attempts to use shoulder fired surface to air missles to bring down commercial airliners. And exactly how many terrorist acts have been attempted or committed with rifles chambered in 50BMG? Yeah, that's what I thought.:rolleyes:
-
God...erm, I mean SOB...I love this place:D
-
the fact is that finestein and her cronies are using the courts to bankrupt the gun manufacturers with frivolious lawsuits..
The bill in question is to protect honest manufactureres from costly and frivvolous lawsuits. It is the best weapon the anti gun nuts have at this time.
What will the law do? If a man takes a 44 cold anaconda and shoots his entire family....
The law will protect Colt from being sued for making a dangerous product..
If a man takes a colt anaconda tho and drops it and it onto carpet from 4 feet and it goes off and injures him... He would be able to bring a suit against Colt tho under the bill.
Think of it as... if woman spills a hot soucepan on her child... is it right to sue the stove manufacturer because he made a stove that could make liquid become harmfully hot?
sure.. the case might get thrown out but it would still cost the stove manufacturer a good deal of money to defend against.
As for 50 calibers.... first... finestien wouldn't be able to identify one if you clubbed her with it (a really good idea).... and... to date the incidents of 50 calibers being used illegally is..... well.... zero
Most hunting rifles can take down a plane... it is the armored limos that she is worried about... her armored limmo to be precise.
This is as it should be... government should fear the people not the other way around.
lazs
-
Originally posted by Nash
Well yeah, maybe SOB, but....
Fact is she was *****in' about how the NRA gets its lobbyists to push through unprecedented protections at the expense of work on the Patriot Act.
It's what we're talking about.
Now if there's a problem with this chick, go ahead and post examples.
This aint one. And there are no freebies. If ya wanna diss her, make us understand why. This here doesn't cut it.
What "unprecedented protections"? In the '90s, the congress passed a law limiting the liability of airplane manufacturers for small plane safety systems to support the industry. As a result, Cessna and other companies could get back into the business of building small light planes. That's one recent example of a very similar protection for an industry.
I am sure we can come up with more.
-
DELETED
4- Members should post in a way that is respectful of other users and HTC. Flaming or abusing users is not tolerated.
-
Originally posted by Captain Virgil Hilts
Yeah, she's right. You can go to any corner store or gun show and buy a rifle chambered in 50BMG from just about anyone, with no paperwork at all.:rolleyes:
I go to a gun show at least every month. I've NEVER seen anything chambered in 50BMG for sale by ANYONE but a licensed dealer. They sell for at least $2K and up and ammo is $4-$5 a loaded round. Not once have I seen a private individual dragging a rifle chambered in 50BMG around a gun show trying to sell it.
The bill she speaks of when she says: "If this bill passes, these potential terrorist weapons would continue to be for sale with virtual blanket liability protection", is a bill that makes it impossible to sue a GUN MANUFACTURER for making or selling a gun that is eventually used by a criminal in the commission of a crime.
The bill makes PERFECT SENSE. Unless you think Mercedes should be sued for making the car that the woman in Texas used to run over her husband. Unless you think Louisville Slugger should be sued for making a baseball bat some thug used to beat his victim to death.
The 50BMG chambered rifle is a really poor choice for use by terrorists. The terrorists are looking to make large scale hits killing or wounding hundreds at a time. The average 50 BMG rifle is a single shot or at best a 3-4 shot semi auto. It is 4'-5' long and weighs at least 15#-20#. Many weigh 25# or more. It is a very impractical weapon for someone intending to kill large numbers of people in a single stroke.
It COULD be used for assassination of individuals, but again, it is very impractical for that as well. When making those shots, the setup takes an expert marksman with incredible training and patience a great deal of time, and usually at least one spotter is involved. It would be pretty difficult to walk around in public with the rifle (even in a case) and also have a guy with you carrying a spotter's scope and tripod and whatever else you'd need. Then you'd have to know EXACTLY where your target would be. Just being inside a particular vehicle or structure is not "close enough". And even armor piercing 50BMG bullets are deflected by the armor in limos and armored glass. The bullet WILL deviate from its intended path when it hits protective armor of any type at anything less than a perfect 90 degree angle. When used against armored vehicles, the 50 BMG rifle is used to stop the vehicle, not kill the driver or occupants. You disable the vehicle. Try that with a vehicle transporting a head of state or other likely candidate for assassination and the area will be swarmed with military and law enforcement while your intended victim hides deep within the vehicle, which by the way will be immediately surrounded by a half dozen other vehicles, mostly at least lightly armored.
Oh, and by the way, I can purchase armor piercing bullets for my 30 caliber rifles and load my own ammo, all of which will be more powerful than the military 30 caliber machine gun round. My 300 Winchester Magnum is easily capable of shooting 4"-6" groups at 500 yards or more. I'm thinking about building a .308-.378, which is a 1K yard rifle. Just for the fun of shooting long range matches. I could just as easily load up armor piercing bullets in it and shoot them 1K yards as well.
Idiots like Fienstien worry WAY too much about firearms, when they should be worrying about real threats they could spend money dealing with. So far, there've been about a dozen or so attempts to use shoulder fired surface to air missles to bring down commercial airliners. And exactly how many terrorist acts have been attempted or committed with rifles chambered in 50BMG? Yeah, that's what I thought.:rolleyes:
The facts won't stop people like skyprancer. He has to throw his 2 bits in on every gun topic, even though in everyone he is just tossing out typical ignorant BS.
-
She is in office for two reasons.
One the republicans in California are idiots. They keep putting people up agaist here that can not win in CALI. Not pro life republican will get elected in this state.
Two: She is the poster child for "Cali lib".
-
Originally posted by GtoRA2
She is in office for two reasons.
One the republicans in California are idiots. They keep putting people up agaist here that can not win in CALI. Not pro life republican will get elected in this state.
Two: She is the poster child for "Cali lib".
While I agree that there has been no real vialble Republican challenger to this pile of vociferous protoplasm I think the real idiots are the ones that voted FOR her instead.
-
Originally posted by Skydancer
"I intend to offer at least one amendment, which would put dangerous and destructive .50 caliber military sniper rifles in the same category as weapons such as machine guns and sawed-off shotguns.
These extremely powerful sniper rifles are powerful enough to bring down airplanes and can fire a bullet a mile and penetrate a brick wall. They are for sale virtually anywhere, even at gun shows with no background checks. If this bill passes, these potential terrorist weapons would continue to be for sale with virtual blanket liability protection.”
Sounds pretty sensible to me! :D
Skydancer,
DiFi has never seen a firearm (except for the one's carried by her bodyguards) that she liked, and the above is a lie. I have purchased firearms in 3 different states and in all of them I had to have proof of residence, a drivers license, and go through a background check. In two I've also had to have Sheriff's permission and go through a "waiting period." No Barrett has ever been used in a criminal act, and terrorists have plenty of illegal channels through which to obtain illegally imported automatic weapons which are far more useful to them. I've fired the Barrett, it's huge, has a whale of a kick, and as Virgil mentioned, takes a lot of getting used to.
What Ms. Feinstein is doing, is exactly the same methodology she followed with the thankfully now defunct "assault weapons ban." Starting with a big ugly gun she knows she can gin-up fear over, associating it with a popular cause (i.e. anti-terrorism), playing to public ignorance in the cities, suburbs, and the media regarding guns, gun purchasing, gun crime, and terrorist methodology. The resulting bill has nothing to do with preventing terrorism, and everything to do with DiFi's desire to end legal private firearms ownership in the USA.
Imagine if you will a politician in the UK who hated motorbikes, thought they were a danger to the public and desperately wanted to ban them. Imagine him going after the biggest, meanest, most barely street-legal superbike on the market. He would tell the public how this bike could be used by criminals and terrorists to easily outpace police, how it was really a dangerous "racing bike" how anyone could buy one online without any serious checks. How they were totally unnecessary to the general public and had no "legitimate transport use" and looked threatening. Then he would press for a ban on all bikes "in that category" That's exactly the methodology employed here.
Now personally I could care less about motorbikes, I don't own one, I don't need one, why should you? They are dangerous! So the "Superbike ban" sounds sensible to me. Let's pass it. People who insist on having these two wheeled menaces can still buy a moped or a scooter, and they'll get you around.
There is no crisis with the Barrett that is being responded to, the real problem is DiFi doesn't like guns and knows it plays well to her crunchy constituency.
- SEAGOON
-
At least at one time, Fienstien owned a gun herself, as did her husband. But THEY needed a gun for their own protection. She also once waved the muzzle of a so called "assault weapon" around a room full of people, while showing everyone how "evil" it was. So not only did she own a gun and try to deny the rights of others to own one, but she is so ignorant as to point a gun she knew nothing at all about around at a room full of people. Maybe ignorant is too kind. More like arrogant and stupid.
-
Originally posted by Maverick
While I agree that there has been no real vialble Republican challenger to this pile of vociferous protoplasm I think the real idiots are the ones that voted FOR her instead.
I was trying to be nice and not call the cali libs idiots.... ;) but yeah your right Mav!
-
Originally posted by Captain Virgil Hilts
At least at one time, Fienstien owned a gun herself, as did her husband. But THEY needed a gun for their own protection. She also once waved the muzzle of a so called "assault weapon" around a room full of people, while showing everyone how "evil" it was. So not only did she own a gun and try to deny the rights of others to own one, but she is so ignorant as to point a gun she knew nothing at all about around at a room full of people. Maybe ignorant is too kind. More like arrogant and stupid.
I am fairly sure she has gotten members of her staff concealed carry permits, when she oposes them for the general public, I think she even got one of them a waiver to own a machine gun, but I can't remember were I read it so. Who knows.
if true though it just goes to show you how she feels about the common american.
-
She's not at all unlike Sarah Brady, who was caught trying to avoid the laws she fought to get applied to everyone, in order to purchase a firearm for her son. Typical of the anti gun crowd. Like the large number of anti gun celebrities who hire body guards, because THEIR body is more important than YOUR body, and YOU have no right to arm yourself for your own protection.
-
Also, Feinstein's statements are directly contradicted by the gun laws of her own state, to whit:
Transfer or sale of all firearms must be processed with a California gun dealer`s license. An application for transfer must be made with the gun dealer before any firearm may be sold or transferred. This application contains a description of the buyer or transferee and of the firearm. A copy is sent by the dealer to the California Department of Justice and the local police chief or sheriff. The dealer may be charged a fee up to $14 by the Department of Justice. If the Department of Justice determines that the buyer or transferee is not eligible to possess a firearm, they shall notify the dealer immediately. There is a 10-day waiting period before delivery of any firearm. Dealers must keep a register of all firearm transfers. A person under restraining order may not acquire any firearm.
Additionally in California, it is unlawful to possess an "assault weapon" unless it is properly registered with the state, and a recently passed bill "AB50" now includes all single shot .50 weapons in that category.
Registration involves: identification of the firearm and the name, address, date of birth, thumbprint and other information on the owner. A fee of up to $20.00 may be charged for the registration. This is in addition to all the other restrictions including the DOJ check waiting period etc.
Yeah, you can just toodle into a gun show in California, plonk down a fiver and walk out with your new Barrett no questions asked. What a boatload of... :rolleyes:
- SEAGOON
-
Seagoon,
The use of facts to spread fear is counterproductive. It is far more effective to use fear, innuendo, distortion and downright defamation. The use of these tactics by feinstein is pretty obvious but that is not the point she cares about. As long as she gets her way she is happy as she knows far better than we do how we should live our lives. We do not NEED choices. We cannot be trusted with them as we would abuse them. She knows better than we so she will remove those choices for us that she herself decided we should not have. She is not happy just making the decisions of rher own life, she wants to make them for the rest of us as well. After all she is part of the government and knows best.
-
(http://www.stentorian.com/2ndamend/feinstn.jpg)
from here (http://www.stentorian.com/2ndamend/dianne_f.html)
lol
-
Yeah, that's the incident. Fienstien sweeps the room with the muzzle of an "assault rifle".
-
The last time I saw that miserable sad-sack nutcase Feinstein was when she was elected mayor of San Francisco. Between her and the cottin pickin fruit-loops that seem to be the majority in that once awsome city it was time to move.. got as far away as I could, pitying the poor SOB's that were stuck in the fuitbowl.
i'm becoming more and more jaded with regards to the left coast.. wonder if it's my age or their insanity.
-
When Feindstein was in the SF city gov she helped arrange a gun turn in project. On the opening day of it she shows up and turns in an old blued broken .38 special. A journalist standing near her started enquiring about the pistol because her CCW permit stated she carried a Nickle chiefs special.<----something Nickle plated to this effect.
She told him to bugger off and ran to her limo and left the location before other journalists could take up the question.
Feindstein can only remember the bomb on her door step and the twinky affair where she was in her office down the hall while White shotgunned Milk and Mosconie. Because of that she wants to disarm America. It is not about protecting us citizens from evil doers with guns. It's about never being able to get over her personal inablity to deal with her own fear of the unpredictability of the unwashed masses.
She is so terrified of us that she got herself elected to office to control us and have personal body guards 24x7. If you start looking into the background of most Liberal politicians, you will find some variation on the theme. We the People exercising our personal unpredictable Freedom terrifies and angers them.
-
It's your age.
:)
I voted for her twice, and I think it is the NRA nutburgers who are spreading lies and fears about the issue. She is not advocating getting rid of these weapons, just that they be regulated like automatics. She also was one of the few Democrats that spoke out against the actions of Bill Clinton. You'd think she would be considered a MILF in here just for that reason alone.
-
And when interviewd after her first gun ban got passed in 1994 she didn't say if she could have gotten the votes she whould have banned all guns in america? Mr. and Mrs. America turn them all in.......NRA did not make that one up. You can find it as public record if you wanna search for it.
Yes age makes for selective memory.
-
Originally posted by midnight Target
It's your age.
:)
I voted for her twice, and I think it is the NRA nutburgers who are spreading lies and fears about the issue. She is not advocating getting rid of these weapons, just that they be regulated like automatics. She also was one of the few Democrats that spoke out against the actions of Bill Clinton. You'd think she would be considered a MILF in here just for that reason alone.
I wouldnt even do her with YOUR dick... you sick puppie you. :D
-
Guys I dont mind heated debat, but if we start getting dirty again Skuzzy will take this away permently. I look forward to reading all of your posts.:)
-
Originally posted by midnight Target
I voted for her twice, and I think it is the NRA nutburgers who are spreading lies and fears about the issue. She is not advocating getting rid of these weapons, just that they be regulated like automatics.
:rofl :rofl
She's not advocating getting rid of weapons, she's just advocating taking them from the general public and only allowing people SHE chooses to have them.
-
Originally posted by midnight Target
I voted for her twice, and I think it is the NRA nutburgers who are spreading lies and fears about the issue.
Yeah, you know us NRA nutburgers are just waiting for the opportune moment to team up to destroy America... Why you take MAV's ex-police and tank driving skills and wed them to my preaching and apologetics ability and we're like an all new Legion of Doom. ;)
MT, she's the one who is doing the fear mongering here - making a single shot weapon never used by a terrorist into the terrorist's weapon of choice for shooting down airliners.
She is not advocating getting rid of these weapons, just that they be regulated like automatics. [/B]
Respectfully, her bill S.505 the "Military Sniper Weapon Regulation Act" would make all .50 caliber rifles the legal equivalent of a machine gun merely because of the round they fire. This would put Barrett and the other manufacturers out of business and effectively ban the public from owning them, which is, after all, her objective.
Now if she can fear monger .50 cals into the restricted category because they can shoot through a brick, how soon before she "discovers" that many rifle rounds will defeat Kevlar body armor? For instance, most of my jacketed and solid core 180 grain .303 rounds will go through the average police vest with no trouble whatsover some rounds might even defeat the "rifle plate" inserts. In the hands of a terrorist my Enfield could be used to defeat police countermeasures! In no time .303s will be the weapon of choice, and an entire airliner could be depressurized with just one shot!
No one needs such a powerful rifle or a jet ski, for that matter.
- SEAGOON
-
It won't put Barrett out of business, he's got enough contracts with the military to last a lifetime.
What it WILL do is further encroach on the Second Amendment. Give them an inch and they'll take a mile. Or, more to the point, surrender the right to one firearm and they'll pick another that is "evil":rolleyes: or too "dangerous":rolleyes: . And then another, and another.
There is no valid reason to consider a rifle chambered in 50BMG to be the equivalent of a fully automatic weapon. The idea is ludicrous. They are no more dangerous or likely to be used by terrorists or criminals than any other high powered rifle. In fact, they are less likely to be used for any number of reasons.
Further, there is no legal basis to sue a firearms manufacturer because his weapon works as advertised. And that is EXACTLY what Fienstien wants to make possible. Some thug uses a Taurus to knock over a liquor store and kills the clerk, and she wants the clerk's family to have grounds to sue Taurus. Some drug dealer uses a Glock to kill another drug dealer and she wants the family of the dead drug dealer to be able to sue Glock.:rolleyes:
Her goal is simple. She cannot get guns themselves outlawed. She intends to make it possible to SUE manufacturers into bankruptcy. She intends to have courts like the 9th circuit to help her legislate from the bench.
-
But it's a good gun!!!!!
-
Originally posted by midnight Target
But it's a good gun!!!!!
Don't like it? Fine. Don't want one? Don't buy one. Just don't try to keep those who want one from legally obtaining one. And don't try to sue the manufacturer because it fires when the trigger is pulled.
-
Seagoon,
I cast my own 200gr slugs for my .303's. do you have any freinds who reload their own with cast rounds that have a load formula that they get thighter than 3" at 100yds? I know there are other issues at play here like throat dia. due to erosion and actual chamber and throat size vs. SAMMI specification for the Enfeild. I'm not too bad off being that my 2 Enfeilds throat dia. are .313 and .314. I'm sizing my cast rounds at .314.
By the way, most people in the U.S. who own and practice with a scope mounted M1A1(M14 for those from Reo Linda) can at 600 yards keep all 20 rounds of .308 in a 12 inch circle. If the 747 sits still long enough on the runway and you can get within 600yds, sure you can put holes in it. Fortunatly the real world is not AH, so you won't get a one ping kill......................... ...
-
Lead bullets need to be 0.001 or so larger than the bore. You need to have the bore slugged to see what diameter you need to size your bullets to. How hard is your bullet alloy? Hardness is especially important in rifles because of leading due to velocity. They need to be just short of being brittle. Look at lube as well, it's important, for the same reason as hardness. Have you tried paper patching?
-
Oops, I keep forgetting, for Progresives like Feindstein, it's mearly the idea of knowing we are out here(what if), and that our freedom means, if I wanted to hit her limosine at 600yds-1000yds with a Barret, or any comercially available Lapua .338 .250gr FMJ-BT, she has to sit around and wait out the (what if) if I would actually go to the trouble. It's the fact that some of us citizens are running around freely in this country who have the skill to do it.
At 1000yds though, most of people I know are happy to hit something as big as a limo anywhere on its body......but for her this (what if) requires banning all guns in the U.S. Just in case someone gives more that a rats dropping about this poor fear demented sad creature.
Personaly I hate shooting anything getting as big as a Lapua .388. Hurts my shoulder and the blast gives me a headach after 20 rounds.
-
Originally posted by Captain Virgil Hilts
Lead bullets need to be 0.001 or so larger than the bore. You need to have the bore slugged to see what diameter you need to size your bullets to. How hard is your bullet alloy? Hardness is especially important in rifles because of leading due to velocity. They need to be just short of being brittle. Look at lube as well, it's important, for the same reason as hardness. Have you tried paper patching?
I've slugged them and the lans<--(sorry grooves, I get these backwards) at the throat are .313 and .314 respectivly. My load right now gives me a 2" pattern at 50yds with 5 rounds. But at 100yds it spreads out. I have been reaserching it and I may just need either cream of wheat packing to fill the bore on ignition, or to change to a new powder made for CAS shooters that will fill the shell and is not position sensative.
Iv'e been using IMR4895 for these loads because I wanted to have only one powder in the house. I reload for my M1A1 and Garand, and the H4895 and IMR4895 work best with those gas systems. The 4895's aren't too bad if you relaod 170-180gr commercial jacketed rounds for the .303. Lead just increases the life span of the barrel, and the load problems are fun to tinker with and safer...lower preasures. I also get a longer usefull life from the cases loading with cast bullits.
My alloy is Hardball 2-6-92. I drop my casts into a 5gal bucket of water. My mold is a 2 cavity Lyman 200gr .314 dia #314299.
-
Thanks guys for keeping this thread civil.
Seagoon,
I wish I had been able in my first post to express what you did with your reply to skydancer. You summed up my feelings towards this woman and her agenda.
Hopefully most americans will be able to see through this and make the right decisions and keep our rights intact. The big scary gun is not a problem, it is what keeps us safe. Senators like Feinstien are what will make us unsafe.
-
I agree with Seagoon. Damn, break out the holy water and get a'preachin', Seagoon, 'cause the rapture is here! :D
As far as buying guns without background checks though, you can do that in Oregon. You don't need to register your weapons with the government (rightfully so), and I see a gun post every now and then on pdx.forsale for private party. I don't know about gun shows though.
-
50 cal is just the latest--I expect there will soon be a segment on 60 Minutes spewing bs about it...these people tried to give the impression that cops and innocent bystanders across the country were being mowed down by 'assualt' rifles (read: ANY black gun with a clip):lol ..they will trot out a film of the 50 cal blowing away a watermelon at 800 yards... (a 38 will explode a watermelon, just not at 800 yards) They tried to give the impression that MANY murders were being committed with 'assault rifles'--in fact, figure is like 7/10 of 1%....but anti-gun zealots never let facts get in their way--crackheads dont spend 1500 bucks on a gun when they can get a throwaway for 100 bucks and STILL be able to buy 1400 bucks of blow
-
lol bring down aircraft with a 50 cal sniper rifle. wow. thatd b an awsum shot! :aok
-
That's how I brought down John Denver's plane.
-
Buy ammo and vote:rolleyes:
-
Deleted - Rule 4.
-
Originally posted by Skydancer
"I intend to offer at least one amendment, which would put dangerous and destructive .50 caliber military sniper rifles in the same category as weapons such as machine guns and sawed-off shotguns.
These extremely powerful sniper rifles are powerful enough to bring down airplanes and can fire a bullet a mile and penetrate a brick wall. They are for sale virtually anywhere, even at gun shows with no background checks. If this bill passes, these potential terrorist weapons would continue to be for sale with virtual blanket liability protection.”
Sounds pretty sensible to me! :D
You actually ever heard of a single terrorist act being commited with a Barret .50 cal? Or any .50 cal for that matter? Isnt the .50 already illegal in Kalifornia?
Do you realize that most every rifle bullet, down to a .22 caliber will carry a mile?
Did you know that armor piercing rounds are made for many caliber rifles, not just a .50 caliber?
Why would anyone be worried about an armor peircing round anyway? It is less deadly than a hollow point or soft-nose expanding bullet, or even better, a blended metal bullet,
But hey, why bother to think about the subject? Why bother with the facts of reality?
Better to just blindly be lead like a little sheep, nodding and saying "baaa baaa good idea baaa baaaa"
:)
dago
-
Originally posted by bustr
Seagoon,
I cast my own 200gr slugs for my .303's. do you have any freinds who reload their own with cast rounds that have a load formula that they get thighter than 3" at 100yds?
Hi Bustr,
I've only reloaded my .303 rounds once or twice before I came to NC (now my reloading press and dies are all stored somewhere in the "Garage of Unending Clutter.") I never cast bullets though, I was using Hornady FMJ boat tails which produced very tight groups (much better than my surplus ammo). I've found that I don't go through enough ammo anymore to make reloading worth the time. :(
- SEAGOON