General Categories > Newsworthy
Anti-gun bigots do the gun control dance, as usual
FarmerRick:
--- Quote from: feralcatkillr on October 04, 2017, 09:32:03 AM ---Re. bump stocks:
Which is why I could care less if the ATF changed their position on them, or if they were outlawed. Good and honorable people don't do "indiscriminate" killing even in a self defense situation. Good and honorable people are accountable for every round.
I'm no expert but I consider Jeff Cooper to have been one, and he abhorred full auto fire not for some namby-pamby emotional reason but because it is "bad tactics", with just a few rather unique exceptions such as repelling piracy when you're out on the seas alone, or suppressive fire -- which only really works against non-suicidal adversaries.
That's a good argument to raise with one's liberal friends.
--- End quote ---
Re: the part in bold... ::)
The ATF only ruled if a "bumpfire" stock made a rifle into a fully automatic weapon, which it clearly DOES NOT. The rifle will still only fire one round each time the trigger is pulled.
https://www.slidefire.com/downloads/BATFE.pdf
Mntnman:
--- Quote from: feralcatkillr on October 04, 2017, 09:32:03 AM ---Re. bump stocks:
Which is why I could care less if the ATF changed their position on them, or if they were outlawed. Good and honorable people don't do "indiscriminate" killing even in a self defense situation. Good and honorable people are accountable for every round.
--- End quote ---
As a defender of the 2A, I don’t believe the ATF should have any say in what people choose to use. IMO, they are fun for some to use and they don’t need to justify that with anyone. I would never buy one but those who do seem to enjoy them. The percentage of them in existence that have been used nefariously is very low, this being the only time that I am aware of. Like you stated, full auto is almost always less effective than semiautomatic and these are even less ideal than full auto.
Mntnman:
--- Quote from: Mntnman on October 04, 2017, 12:42:30 PM ---
Like you stated, full auto is almost always less effective than semiautomatic and these are even less ideal than full auto.
--- End quote ---
If keep allowing them to set subjective limits, we are screwed because they know this or will figure it out and we lose semis. Ask Australia.
depserv:
All firearms are deadly, each in their own way, and anti-gun bigots know it. They pretend to only be after certain ones as part of a divide and conquer strategy but those who are not stupid can easily see through it.
Their first target long ago was handguns, which they targeted using the slogan Saturday Night Specials. The traitor Sarah brady called her first gun control group Handgun Control Inc. (and then later just Handgun Control, then the Brady Campaign, and so on). Handguns made more sense than any other category because the lion's share of deaths by gun are handgun deaths. It turned out though that the same thing that made them useful for crime and suicide made them even more useful for self defense (which I think is the real reason they wanted them and all other guns outlawed in the first place). So they have more or less given up on this category. For now.
Kind of anyway. They no longer specifically target handguns, but they do target modern handguns by including them in the category of so-called assault weapons. What's interesting about this is that these are more or less the opposite of what the slogan Saturday Night Special pretended to refer to. So they have attacked handguns from opposite ends of the technology spectrum.
Shotguns are well known as exceptionally effective combat weapons. They are as popular with criminals as they are with police. They are common in the military and would be much more so if they had better range, but when it comes to criminal use limited range is not usually a big deal, since it's hard to rob somebody from a hundred yards away. They haven't targeted this category yet but if they did manage to get the other ones they would most certainly go after this one. Not right away of course or their lie would become too obvious.
And then there is the deer hunting/sniper rifle. JFK and MLK were both killed by snipers, and I have no doubt corrupt political hacks and aspiring despots are well aware of the danger to them posed by the ability of a skilled patriot to kill a man at very long range. Like shotguns, these have not been targeted yet (excuse the pun), but that's only because the legitimate sporting purpose lie has served anti-gun bigots so well. As each part of the right is whittled away a new pack of lies can be built, and there will most likely be some incident that demagogues can use to get the ignorant to buy the lies used to outlaw sniper rifles (or limit range or something).
The assault weapon lie is just one among many. Remember cop-killer bullets (which had never been used to kill a cop), plastic guns, the gun show loophole, smart guns, and the slogans I referred to above: these are all slick advertising slogans, and behind every one of them is a big lie campaign so ruthless it would embarrass Josef Goebbels.
As the saying goes, we either hang together or we hang separately. So just say no to gun control. Restrictions that truly are reasonable do not come from those whose proven purpose is to destroy a right. Nothing good will come from anything with anti-gun fingerprints on it.
Les:
And right on cue. https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2017/oct/04/dianne-feinstein-bump-stocks-senate-gun-control-bill I can't believe how much wrong and misleading information I've seen in the last couple days. Research........is it really that difficult. Guess so.
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version