Want gun control? Fight smart.

It seems non white control could save more lives. Self segregation could greatly decrease the amount of gun violence perpetrated upon White People.
 
Really? After how many pages of arguing about Constitutionality of gun control, that's not really what you wonder about? Now it's about ME?
Federal legislation is the only way to effectively ban certain weapons. Ask Chicago if you're not sure on that. State boundaries are entirely porous. Laws on either side may differ, but we don't hear about the infractions until it's too late and a crime has been committed with the weapon.

I am just asking you a question ... That involves what you can do without it being a Constitutional matter ... I am just curious.

So ... If I understood you correctly ...
You are suggesting that you want to leverage your opinion against the opinion of people in other states ... :dunno:

If so ... How would you assume that is compliant with the desires of the Founding Fathers or the Constitution?

.
 
yes, you can hunt with an AR15, but as we get talking, no one I've talked to actually uses one for hunting.
No surprise that. On several hunting enthusiast sites one finds lists of the editors' top pics for deer hunting.
Of all the rifles mentioned, only once is an AR-15 variant cited as among the best rifles for hunting deer.

I also checked a few sites/listings focused on big game hunting. Again, the AR-15 ilk of guns didn't appear.
So while one may or may not be able to use an AR-15-like rifle for hunting, there are plenty of alternatives up and down the the price spectrum.
Correction:
I rechecked the list above. There were four semi-automatic rifles recommended among the ~100 rifles listed among the various reviewers' recommendations. The ones recommended were:
  • A BAR carbine semi (circa 1967 and, presumably, later) -- the author wasn't any more specific than that.
  • Browning BAR MK. II Safari Grade .338
  • Remington Model 74/7400/750
  • Ambush 300 Blackout -- This is the only AR-15-style rifle recommended.
Apologies for my earlier misrepresentation of the content in the articles.​
I have also read that certain AR-type rifles are best or at least good for hunting REALLY big game like rhinos and also wild boar--boar come straight at you, fast, and god help you if you miss.

But since wild boar and rhinos aren't big in the Northeast, I haven't talked to any hunters who use AR's. Our biggest animal is the moose, and they say that's about as challenging as shooting a cow in the pasture.
FWIW, the articles cited that recommended a semi-automatic rifle specifically for big game hunting suggested the Remington Model 74/7400/750 and, for elk hunting, the Browning BAR MK. II Safari Grade .338.

As goes pig hunting, several writers specify several semi-automatic weapons, though handguns are also among the recommended firearms. That suggests to me that while there are good semi-automatic rifles for that purpose, again, they aren't required.
FWIW, I have a long time acquaintance who mainly hunted boar because he could hunt them at whatever the time of year or day. I ages ago made the mistake of accepting an invitation to accompany him on one of his hog hunting forays.

He enjoyed the weekend. I enjoyed the learning experience but not the weekend; however, we did leave with a pig, which he donated to a church. That was fine with me because I was seriously wondering how the hell we were going to check a butchered hog on the flight home.

He didn't use a gun at all, and we spent much of a hot, muggy summer day walking around in a Georgia swamp looking for pig trails, looking and sniffing (literally) for hog "hang outs" ("mudding spots" he called them, the smell giving one an indication of how recently pigs had visited them -- who knew pigs have "multiple bedrooms" of a sort...he did, of course), various kinds of spoor and ruts, looking for trees that have slightly abraded bark, and periodically dropping bait and pig piss (apparently, it incenses (little pun) males and makes females curious), whereupon he informed me we would then construct a stand in a nearby tree and sit in it waiting for a pig come by.

The highlight of my weekend: (1) doing pig calls, which, unbeknownst to me at the time did not result in a pig showing up with the alacrity of a housepet and (2) leaving. LOL
That sounds to me like a thoroughly revolting weekend and I give you props for sticking it out. What did he use to kill the pig? Bow and arrow? Since these posts have about AR's used for hunting certain game, I'm curious now what your pig hunting friend used in the end?
 
Really? After how many pages of arguing about Constitutionality of gun control, that's not really what you wonder about? Now it's about ME?
Federal legislation is the only way to effectively ban certain weapons. Ask Chicago if you're not sure on that. State boundaries are entirely porous. Laws on either side may differ, but we don't hear about the infractions until it's too late and a crime has been committed with the weapon.

I am just asking you a question ... That involves what you can do without it being a Constitutional matter ... I am just curious.

So ... If I understood you correctly ...
You are suggesting that you want to leverage your opinion against the opinion of people in other states ... :dunno:

If so ... How would you assume that is compliant with the desires of the Founding Fathers or the Constitution?

.
YOU are the one who has been insisting for days that it MUST be a Constitutional matter. I don't see the problem with putting certain restrictions on gun ownership. Neither did any of the legislatures, federal, state or local, that have passed untold regulations, restrictions and controls since the Constitution was written.
 
YOU are the one who has been insisting for days that it MUST be a Constitutional matter. I don't see the problem with putting certain restrictions on gun ownership. Neither did any of the legislatures, federal, state or local, that have passed untold regulations, restrictions and controls since the Constitution was written.

No I haven't insisted it is a Constitutional matter.

I have made comment as to whether or not the Constitution addresses the matter.
I have offered Constitutional options that would be necessary to achieve your desires.

But ... I have repeatedly mentioned that States can and do have the ability to regulate firearms.

Don't attempt to misrepresent my intentions ... You are simply incorrect in that regard ... Much like most of your assumptions ... :thup:

.
 
I don't pretend to follow everything you're saying about the Constitution. I read an interesting Op Ed this weekend by a scholar who says what was most pressing in the minds of the Founding Fathers when they crafted the 2nd Amendment was to prevent a standing army. They were terrified of that and wanted every (eligible) person in the country to be armed and know how to aim so a standing army would never be necessary.

[...]
That "standing army" avoidance motivation for the Second Amendment makes perfect sense to me. Because as it is our armed forces stand as a glaring menace to our freedom -- especially since conscription has been suspended and replaced with a virtual mercenary army in the employ of government.

But more in keeping with the theme of this discussion, which is the type of firearms the Amendment allows the ordinary citizen to own, I subscribe to the theory of Original Intent which holds that the Founders' idea of a militia was a regulated force of ordinary citizens equipped with the standard military arms of that era, those being muskets and pistols. Adhering to that intent would permit the present-day citizen to keep and bear an M-16 -- our contemporary military standard.
We could also say, since the Original Intent of the Founding Fathers was to prevent a standing army, that ship has long since sailed and the 2nd Amendment no longer has any meaning at all.
 
Last edited:
YOU are the one who has been insisting for days that it MUST be a Constitutional matter. I don't see the problem with putting certain restrictions on gun ownership. Neither did any of the legislatures, federal, state or local, that have passed untold regulations, restrictions and controls since the Constitution was written.

No I haven't insisted it is a Constitutional matter.

I have made comment as to whether or not the Constitution addresses the matter.
I have offered Constitutional options that would be necessary to achieve your desires.

But ... I have repeatedly mentioned that States can and do have the ability to regulate firearms.

Don't attempt to misrepresent my intentions ... You are simply incorrect in that regard ... Much like most of your assumptions ... :thup:

.
That's not how you couched it in your last post; you are the one making assumptions.
 
That's not how you couched it in your last post; you are the one making assumptions.

I asked you question ... Which meant I desired to better understand your position.
That would only be the product of the fact I am not confident with my assumption.

Again ... Don't attempt to misrepresent what I post or why ... :thup:
You are incorrect ... Again.

.
 
That's not how you couched it in your last post; you are the one making assumptions.

I asked you question ... Which meant I desired to better understand your position.
That would only be the product of the fact I am not confident with my assumption.

Again ... Don't attempt to misrepresent what I post or why ... :thup:
You are incorrect ... Again.

.
Of course I'm incorrect. That's a given, isn't it?
If you want to ask me questions, don't load them and don't couch them as insults and I might be more inclined to answer them.

I am pretty sure I have made my positions clear in the twenty-seven pages of this thread. Again, I do not see why regulations and outright bans on certain weapons cannot be made on the federal level. With totally porous borders, state laws would not be effective. But I already said that, too.
So there is nothing else for me to answer here.
 


Gun Control History MUST SEE


If more of the ANTIFA and ANTIFA like minded dumbasses knew their history they would see how history is repeating and never support taking our 2nd amendment. You can see how it is unfolding in this documentary. Esp. when ass hat Obama was in office.
 
Of course I'm incorrect. That's a given, isn't it?
If you want to ask me questions, don't load them and don't couch them as insults and I might be more inclined to answer them.

I am pretty sure I have made my positions clear in the twenty-seven pages of this thread. Again, I do not see why regulations and outright bans on certain weapons cannot be made on the federal level. With totally porous borders, state laws would not be effective. But I already said that, too.
So there is nothing else for me to answer here.

It wasn't a loaded question ... It was a direct question ... You are incorrect again ... :thup:
I am going to ask it again ... If you cannot or will not answer it ... Then you don't need to respond with more incorrect misrepresentations.

Are you suggesting that you desire it to be a federal issue because you want your opinion to apply to other states that may not share the same opinion?

That's not a loaded question ... It simply requires a yes or no ... Your explanation for your reasoning is welcome, but not necessary.

.
 
yes, you can hunt with an AR15, but as we get talking, no one I've talked to actually uses one for hunting.
No surprise that. On several hunting enthusiast sites one finds lists of the editors' top pics for deer hunting.
Of all the rifles mentioned, only once is an AR-15 variant cited as among the best rifles for hunting deer.

I also checked a few sites/listings focused on big game hunting. Again, the AR-15 ilk of guns didn't appear.
So while one may or may not be able to use an AR-15-like rifle for hunting, there are plenty of alternatives up and down the the price spectrum.
Correction:
I rechecked the list above. There were four semi-automatic rifles recommended among the ~100 rifles listed among the various reviewers' recommendations. The ones recommended were:
  • A BAR carbine semi (circa 1967 and, presumably, later) -- the author wasn't any more specific than that.
  • Browning BAR MK. II Safari Grade .338
  • Remington Model 74/7400/750
  • Ambush 300 Blackout -- This is the only AR-15-style rifle recommended.
Apologies for my earlier misrepresentation of the content in the articles.​
I have also read that certain AR-type rifles are best or at least good for hunting REALLY big game like rhinos and also wild boar--boar come straight at you, fast, and god help you if you miss.

But since wild boar and rhinos aren't big in the Northeast, I haven't talked to any hunters who use AR's. Our biggest animal is the moose, and they say that's about as challenging as shooting a cow in the pasture.
FWIW, the articles cited that recommended a semi-automatic rifle specifically for big game hunting suggested the Remington Model 74/7400/750 and, for elk hunting, the Browning BAR MK. II Safari Grade .338.

As goes pig hunting, several writers specify several semi-automatic weapons, though handguns are also among the recommended firearms. That suggests to me that while there are good semi-automatic rifles for that purpose, again, they aren't required.
FWIW, I have a long time acquaintance who mainly hunted boar because he could hunt them at whatever the time of year or day. I ages ago made the mistake of accepting an invitation to accompany him on one of his hog hunting forays.

He enjoyed the weekend. I enjoyed the learning experience but not the weekend; however, we did leave with a pig, which he donated to a church. That was fine with me because I was seriously wondering how the hell we were going to check a butchered hog on the flight home.

He didn't use a gun at all, and we spent much of a hot, muggy summer day walking around in a Georgia swamp looking for pig trails, looking and sniffing (literally) for hog "hang outs" ("mudding spots" he called them, the smell giving one an indication of how recently pigs had visited them -- who knew pigs have "multiple bedrooms" of a sort...he did, of course), various kinds of spoor and ruts, looking for trees that have slightly abraded bark, and periodically dropping bait and pig piss (apparently, it incenses (little pun) males and makes females curious), whereupon he informed me we would then construct a stand in a nearby tree and sit in it waiting for a pig come by.

The highlight of my weekend: (1) doing pig calls, which, unbeknownst to me at the time did not result in a pig showing up with the alacrity of a housepet and (2) leaving. LOL
That sounds to me like a thoroughly revolting weekend and I give you props for sticking it out. What did he use to kill the pig? Bow and arrow? Since these posts have about AR's used for hunting certain game, I'm curious now what your pig hunting friend used in the end?
That sounds to me like a thoroughly revolting weekend
Well, my description of it, then, conveyed precisely the tone and tenor I aimed to portray. LOL

What did he use to kill the pig? Bow and arrow?
Yes.
 
Of course I'm incorrect. That's a given, isn't it?
If you want to ask me questions, don't load them and don't couch them as insults and I might be more inclined to answer them.

I am pretty sure I have made my positions clear in the twenty-seven pages of this thread. Again, I do not see why regulations and outright bans on certain weapons cannot be made on the federal level. With totally porous borders, state laws would not be effective. But I already said that, too.
So there is nothing else for me to answer here.

It wasn't a loaded question ... It was a direct question ... You are incorrect again ... :thup:
I am going to ask it again ... If you cannot or will not answer it ... Then you don't need to respond with more incorrect misrepresentations.

Are you suggesting that you desire it to be a federal issue because you want your opinion to apply to other states that may not share the same opinion?

That's not a loaded question ... It simply requires a yes or no ... Your explanation for your reasoning is welcome, but not necessary.

.
Proof by assertion - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

"Proof by assertion, sometimes informally referred to as proof by repeated assertion, is an informal fallacy in which a proposition is repeatedly restated regardless of contradiction.[1] Sometimes, this may be repeated until challenges dry up, at which point it is asserted as fact due to its not being contradicted (argumentum ad nauseam).
 
Proof by assertion - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

"Proof by assertion, sometimes informally referred to as proof by repeated assertion, is an informal fallacy in which a proposition is repeatedly restated regardless of contradiction.[1] Sometimes, this may be repeated until challenges dry up, at which point it is asserted as fact due to its not being contradicted (argumentum ad nauseam).

That doesn't answer the question ... Nor does it identify any assertion.

If it is a federal issues it applies to all states ... That's a fact ... Not a fallacy.
I am asking why you if you would like to make it a federal issues so it applies to all states regardless how the people in any particular state may actually feel about it.

You can try to avoid the question ...
You can continue to misrepresent my question ...
You can support your desire to avoid the facts with any number of miscellaneous links and misrepresentations.

You still have not answered a simple question ... Your almost obvious desire not to is becoming quite telling ... :thup:

.
 
Any White person especially female whom opposes free use and ownership of any and all firearms is clearly insane.

Without gun ownwership we would be a country of mulattos
 
Proof by assertion - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

"Proof by assertion, sometimes informally referred to as proof by repeated assertion, is an informal fallacy in which a proposition is repeatedly restated regardless of contradiction.[1] Sometimes, this may be repeated until challenges dry up, at which point it is asserted as fact due to its not being contradicted (argumentum ad nauseam).

That doesn't answer the question ... Nor does it identify any assertion.

If it is a federal issues it applies to all states ... That's a fact ... Not a fallacy.
I am asking why you if you would like to make it a federal issues so it applies to all states regardless how the people in any particular state may actually feel about it.

You can try to avoid the question ...
You can continue to misrepresent my question ...
You can support your desire to avoid the facts with any number of miscellaneous links and misrepresentations.

You still have not answered a simple question ... Your almost obvious desire not to is becoming quite telling ... :thup:

.
You're embarrassing yourself.
 
You're embarrassing yourself.

You're refusal to answer a simple question doesn't embarrass me at all ... Incorrect again ... :thup:
I mean you have pretty much indicated what your answer is ... You just won't clarify it.

What are you scared of ... Why does your answer frighten you?
Otherwise ... I can be as obnoxious as you can.

.
 

Forum List

Back
Top