Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Oh, puleeeze! Your Barrett 82A1 is appropriate for rapist, your mugger and how many innocent bystanders 600 yards in the background? I like guns as much as the next guy, I made my living with them for 4 years of life and I've owned more than my share of them over the years but frankly, I knew my fellow gun aficionados have truly gone off the deep end when I was challenged for not possessing a weapon in my personal arsenal with an effective range of 300 meters. Dude, I'm not going to worrying about returning fire on someone at 100 meters much less 300!
Over the years, I have taken tactical shooting classes with folks who just plumb suffer from a hyper-active imagination and Rambo delusions. No, I don't need a Class 3 tactical Remington 870, no I don't need a Bushmaster M4 with an Aimpoint sighting system nor do I need to carry, two extra 15 round mags when I go to the local stop and rob.
What I do need and possess is an accurate and dependable weapon, with a reasonable magazine capacity, and enough judgement to recognize a problem and the brains to avoid it.
For all the worst case scenarios, the person who is going to most likely put your life in peril is a drunken friend or a pissed off relative.
So, having gotten that off my chest, let me say this. What we do need is stronger enforcement of many existing gun laws and we DO need to close a number of loop holds that allow nefarious individuals from being domestic gun runners. Unfortunately gun control, or the lack thereof, has become a wing-nut issue. It is high time for the grown ups to say, hey, let's find a middle ground. Allow people to purchase reasonably acceptable weapons for personal protection, while removing unreasonable weapons from our streets and the criminal element.
Finally. A sane take on the issue. That's all Obama's saying.
After 51 pages, I make the following suggestion ( as a sarcastic commentary):
**Let all of us legal gun owners keep our guns.
**Let the anti-gun libs sign off on all protection from anyone with a gun (*that means police)
**Let the criminals get sent to jail for the gun crime FIRST (NO plea bargaining) and then for other crimes
**Fence ghettoes which are rife with crime and drugs so we have less criminals -- unless the anti-gun liberals want to go save the people in them; and go without a gun.... wonder how fast many minds change on the subject?
Finally. A sane take on the issue. That's all Obama's saying.
Another reason why as a gun owner, and one has possessed a conceal weapons permit for more than 20 years, could disagree with Obama on many details but who could also support him without question, especially in light of the Supreme Courts decision in Heller which sets a number of interesting parameters for future gun regulation and precludes this silly argument about gun confiscation.
Finally. A sane take on the issue. That's all Obama's saying.
a sane take on the issue is, stop letting the crooks out of prison, stop badgering lawful citizens for wanting to protect themselves and their families anyway THEY deem fit without goverment interference.
also remember that liberals do like to put into place jim crow laws, I thought we had gotten rid of those laws, but they sure are heck still in place these days.
a sane take on the issue is, stop letting the crooks out of prison, stop badgering lawful citizens for wanting to protect themselves and their families anyway THEY deem fit without goverment interference.
also remember that liberals do like to put into place jim crow laws, I thought we had gotten rid of those laws, but they sure are heck still in place these days.
Give us some examples of "liberals" enacting Jim Crow laws.
A bit draconian, and that was a massive understatement.
How about a limit on gun purchases per month? Here in Pennsylvania there have been attempts to limit handgun purchases to one a month as a way to lessen the number of straw purchases. Apparently this is too much for the gun lobby, but I would love someone to explain to me why 12 handguns per years (exemption for true curios and antiques) is an unreasonable restriction.
Hmmm, a Glock 23, a Kimber Custom II and maybe a Uberti Schofield, maybe. So what do I get with my other 9 purchases???
Draconian? LOL I hate criminals. Dealing with violent criminals in a passive nuturing way is a joke and does not work and has never worked. They laugh at our prisons because:
1. Inmates run the prisons often doing the samebusiness that got them sent there in the first place from their cells.
2. The tax payer is stuck paying the bill as always and criminals well they live pretty good considering what they are.
With the exception of the glock I like your picks especially the Kimber.
Instead of the glock consider an HK or a SIG. How many glocks do you see used by the pro's in competition?
Number of guns purchased isn't an issue for me. Its the weak attempt at background checks that concern me. Either do valid checks maintaining a gov held portfolio on buyers or don't even have checks. A limited check or just going through the motions is worthless. How about this. First purchase is an indepth check. After that a simple verification of police record to make sure that there is no new criminal activity.
Oh, puleeeze! Your Barrett 82A1 is appropriate for rapist, your mugger and how many innocent bystanders 600 yards in the background? I like guns as much as the next guy, I made my living with them for 4 years of life and I've owned more than my share of them over the years but frankly, I knew my fellow gun aficionados have truly gone off the deep end when I was challenged for not possessing a weapon in my personal arsenal with an effective range of 300 meters. Dude, I'm not going to worrying about returning fire on someone at 100 meters much less 300!
My antique Mauser can shoot effectively well beyond 300 meters.
I'm not exactly a big fan, but I'm also not a big fan of the death penalty and I'm especially not a big fan when it comes to not capital crimes.
"Instead of the glock consider an HK or a SIG. How many glocks do you see used by the pro's in competition?"
In chronological order, H&K P7 (owned a matching set), Sigs; 229, 220 (.45) and 228 (9mm) sold them all and got a Glock 27 which I have had for more than 10 years. No up keep, no worried about marring the finish, holster and forget not to mention not having to go from a double to single action trigger pull (a big issue with me). As for competition, there is a whole competition centered around the Glocks but then, I don't want a race gun for self-defense.
Quote:
Number of guns purchased isn't an issue for me. Its the weak attempt at background checks that concern me. Either do valid checks maintaining a gov held portfolio on buyers or don't even have checks. A limited check or just going through the motions is worthless. How about this. First purchase is an indepth check. After that a simple verification of police record to make sure that there is no new criminal activity.
Ooooh, the NRA is going to hate that one. The instant check, NCIC and finger prints is fine with me. Many states with conceal weapons permits allow instant purchase with no waiting period. If you want less restrictions then apply for a cwp.
I'm not exactly a big fan, but I'm also not a big fan of the death penalty and I'm especially not a big fan when it comes to not capital crimes.
"Instead of the glock consider an HK or a SIG. How many glocks do you see used by the pro's in competition?"
In chronological order, H&K P7 (owned a matching set), Sigs; 229, 220 (.45) and 228 (9mm) sold them all and got a Glock 27 which I have had for more than 10 years. No up keep, no worried about marring the finish, holster and forget not to mention not having to go from a double to single action trigger pull (a big issue with me). As for competition, there is a whole competition centered around the Glocks but then, I don't want a race gun for self-defense.
Ooooh, the NRA is going to hate that one. The instant check, NCIC and finger prints is fine with me. Many states with conceal weapons permits allow instant purchase with no waiting period. If you want less restrictions then apply for a cwp.
Great choices in firearms. Me? Smith 645. Looks good shoots like crap.
Coldt Gold cup looks great shoots even better. I have entertained the thought of an HK but I only need or want my Gold cup. 20 years we've been together now. LOL
Rifles. Winchester mod 70 stainless synthetic 30-06 tricked out a bit and is accurate out to 500 meters. I haven't tried shooting any further than that.
Savage 22 cal. worst piece of crap I ever bought misfires constantly. Been back to the shop 3 times and no cure. Soon to be traded on something else.
Hk-91 in .308 purchased way back in the mid 1980's. Sweet to shoot and accurate. But it mostly sits unused. Bought it the same year I bought the smith 645.
Shotguns: Ithica mod 37 feather weight. Bought from Kmart in 1976 I believe. My first gun I ever bought. Still use it for small game.
Remington mod 1100. Wonderful shot gun.
Saiga 12. Its a toy and utterly fun to shoot. Worthless for anything but wasting ammo or home defence. It quite simply is to much fun to shoot and you empty your wallet every time you take it out.
Capital punishment. Criminals especially violent criminals have no compassion for their victims and absolutly deserve none from society. WE will have to agree to disagree on this one.
The Glock. LOL I was teasing you more than anything about it. I am not a glock fan if only because I am a dinosaur. They are a very reliable shooter just not my taste in pistolas.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.