assault weapons are a certain, definable class of weapons that *can be* distinguished

Discussion in 'Hunters Rights Forum' started by The Other David, Aug 21, 2003.

  1. The Other David

    The Other David Elite Refuge Member

    Messages:
    15,554
    Joined:
    Apr 15, 2000
    Poodleshooter (love that name! Do they decoy well? What kind of call do you use? Are they decent tablefare?),

    I agree with you completely.

    David
     
  2. Poodleshooter

    Poodleshooter Refuge Member

    Messages:
    34
    Joined:
    Sep 6, 2001
    Location:
    Charlottesville,VA
    Hey David,
    Pasturepoodles! They don't decoy, but whistlepigs sure are fun to shoot with a poodleshooter (AR15)!
    I first registered with the name at an AR15/M16 specific chat board, and I use it at all shooting and hunting sites that I visit.
     
  3. Penns-Woods

    Penns-Woods Senior Refuge Member

    Messages:
    563
    Joined:
    Jan 24, 2002
    Location:
    Shippensburg, PA
    Poodleshooter:

    The Brady Bill is NOT the Assault Weapons Ban. Two separate laws passed in two different years.
     
  4. Poodleshooter

    Poodleshooter Refuge Member

    Messages:
    34
    Joined:
    Sep 6, 2001
    Location:
    Charlottesville,VA
    Sorry, you're correct. I've got my mind on Brady II which would include an AW ban. For clarity, the 1993 Brady Act concerns handguns, the 1994 Assault Weapon Ban concerns the definition of "assault weapons".
     
  5. Penns-Woods

    Penns-Woods Senior Refuge Member

    Messages:
    563
    Joined:
    Jan 24, 2002
    Location:
    Shippensburg, PA
    I see DGH is not too busy to post on other threads, but has no time to give us the answer he promised above. ;)

    Guess we can assume he is conceding there is no RATIONAL method for classifying "assault weapons" which would conclusively exclude our "hunting" guns? :D
     
  6. Tom Phillips*

    Tom Phillips* Elite Refuge Member

    Messages:
    7,622
    Joined:
    Dec 26, 2001
    Location:
    San Francisco Bay Area, California
     
  7. OneShotBandit

    OneShotBandit Elite Refuge Member

    Messages:
    8,007
    Joined:
    Feb 27, 2001
    Location:
    Indiana
    Gentlemen,
    I'm not as cool as some of you guys when it comes to the subject of any gun control. IMHO dgh gives the typical "Liberal"
    answers to questions from "Conservatives: i.e.: They answer a question w/a question AND NEVER gives an answer! I thougtht P-W gave some very specific questions & so did TOD & Tom was also very good w/his replies. Am I the only one that thinks dgh doesn't have the answer & then runs away? I once asked him to define what was different between a "sniper rifle" & a high power,
    scoped hunting rifle. He said he didn't know the difference! I am confused w/what he is really thinking. And P-W is right about some gun owners & hunters. I have a buddy who collects class 3
    guns & a life member of the NRA, but believes I am the worst person on earth for my views on hunting! I always have to take
    Maalox after reading some of these Liberal hunter's thread /
    replies. Really I would just like to choke the **** out some of these guys:l ! You guys carry on, I'm gonna go burn a 100 rds from my semi-auto "varmint" rifle;) I can still use 30 rd.'s mag.'s?

    Virgil:cool:
     
  8. Runnin' 87

    Runnin' 87 Elite Refuge Member

    Messages:
    17,219
    Joined:
    May 4, 2002
    Location:
    Ciudad Narnja de Tejas cerade Los Sabinas
    Boy howdy. Come over and check this forum and see this poor old horse is being beaten again. Poor, poor horse.

    I think it important to ask ourselves, "Why ban these certain guns?" If we are to formulate some law, there must be some greater reason than the words alone.

    The usual reason is "public safety." Have any of the prior firearms laws provided for a safer public? My answer would be a, "well yes but..." Possession of the certain firearm was made illegal, and the crook got busted, for possessing the firearm. The true evil was the crooks evil intent, not the weapon.

    A better method of approaching this issue would be limiting firearms ownership in certain classes of people, specifically, those who have shown a disposition to do evil. These laws are already in place in most cases and are very simple to prove.

    Banning the gun, in a sense, could be viewed as pro-active. In truth, banning anything has never prevented the public from obtaining the "it". In many instances the ban created a more lucrative market, which perpetuates a much greater problem that was had at first.

    Being the simple guy I am it always helps me to reduce things to the least common denominator. To me this example fits here:

    If I were to fully load and charge an M-16, a M-1 Garand, a Remington 700, a Winchester 1200, a Benelli SBE, a Glock 9mm, and a Smith and Wesson 66. If I were to lay each on the edge of a busy sidewalk, near a public school, which of the guns would be the first to start shooting the children?

    Now, in the hands of an evil doer which has the greatest capacity to cause harm?

    Lying on the sidewalk each is equally harmless. In the hands of evil each are equally destructive. The Garand is arguably the greatest battle rifle ever to have been fielded. Other than being beefed up a bit, it is no different than many of the sporters we field every year.

    In a manner of speaking, we have covered the chalkboard with numbers in an attempt to get the answer we like. No matter how we work the problem the answer is - people. It will always be the individual and his intent and capacity.

    So you say, "remove the gun and thus remove his capacity."

    No. The weapon is inconsequential in regard to intent. I will argue that I could take control of an entire school, work place, or business, and cause the death and destruction with out a weapon of any sort.

    Some of you may call B-S. Those of you "who know people" will know what I mean.

    So as most of my arguments go - back to the front - WHY???

    Why expend this effort and time on "the numbers" rather than "the answer."
     
  9. OneShotBandit

    OneShotBandit Elite Refuge Member

    Messages:
    8,007
    Joined:
    Feb 27, 2001
    Location:
    Indiana
    Here, here! Well written, well said!

    Virgil
     
  10. Penns-Woods

    Penns-Woods Senior Refuge Member

    Messages:
    563
    Joined:
    Jan 24, 2002
    Location:
    Shippensburg, PA
    Looks like DGH took his bat and ball and went home.
     

Share This Page