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.
Why are you wanting a 40 cal semi auto pistol. What is wrong with you revolver?
You said a person doesn't need more than six rounds, so your revolver should be adequate.
Be honest now . I said no one needs over 6 rounds to kill a deer or hog . Deal with what I say, not what you want to twist it into. If a person can't down a deer with a loaded 30/30 other choice of bolt or lever action, the problem isn't the gun .
I am wanting a .40 cal semi for protection. From thieves, undesirables while tramping through the wilderness camping, and from the ever increasing nutters that get their hands onto guns and start shooting people randomly .
How about we drop this amusing digression about what to call the thing that holds the cartridges (note I did not say bullets) and get back to the attempts by frightened fools to disarm everyone but the criminals and the cops. I am very concerned that they fear of being shot much less then the apparent fear of having to shoot somebody while defending them selves. These people want to be above all PROTECTED regardless of what doing that does to our individual rights and ability of the rest of us to DEFEND OURSELVES.
Retaining our right to have access tot eh tools we need to defend ourselves, our families and, if necessary, complete strangers for criminal assault is the PRIMARY CONSIDERATION.
How about we drop this amusing digression about what to call the thing that holds the cartridges (note I did not say bullets) and get back to the attempts by frightened fools to disarm everyone but the criminals and the cops. I am very concerned that they fear of being shot much less then the apparent fear of having to shoot somebody while defending them selves. These people want to be above all PROTECTED regardless of what doing that does to our individual rights and ability of the rest of us to DEFEND OURSELVES.
Retaining our right to have access tot eh tools we need to defend ourselves, our families and, if necessary, complete strangers for criminal assault is the PRIMARY CONSIDERATION.
Same page here, I want the capacity to be at least as well armed as a potential criminal.
Gun control, like the actual real honest to goodness 100% no one is allowed to have guns variety, can and does work.... in countries that had it as a rule since their inception and do not have 3 guns for every 5 people in circulation. Works great in Japan for instance.
In America, it will not work. Thus, I want the ability to be on an even playing field.
Location: Formerly Pleasanton Ca, now in Marietta Ga
10,311 posts, read 8,489,553 times
Reputation: 16602
Quote:
Originally Posted by wallflash
Be honest now . I said no one needs over 6 rounds to kill a deer or hog . Deal with what I say, not what you want to twist it into. If a person can't down a deer with a loaded 30/30 other choice of bolt or lever action, the problem isn't the gun .
I am wanting a .40 cal semi for protection. From thieves, undesirables while tramping through the wilderness camping, and from the ever increasing nutters that get their hands onto guns and start shooting people randomly .
You mean you can't defend yourself from undesirables with six rounds from the revolver? Sounds like the problem isn't with the revolver.
Some people have ar-15s for home defense for the exact reason you think you need a higher capacity 40 cal pistol. So why are you the one who gets to dictate what firearm people are allowed to use for self defense?
I am dealing with what you say. Your statements seem to contradict one another since you are saying high capacity mags-or clips as you like to call them, are unnecessary yet now you want a pistol capable of being high capacity.
How about we drop this amusing digression about what to call the thing that holds the cartridges (note I did not say bullets) and get back to the attempts by frightened fools to disarm everyone but the criminals and the cops. I am very concerned that they fear of being shot much less then the apparent fear of having to shoot somebody while defending them selves. These people want to be above all PROTECTED regardless of what doing that does to our individual rights and ability of the rest of us to DEFEND OURSELVES.
Retaining our right to have access tot eh tools we need to defend ourselves, our families and, if necessary, complete strangers for criminal assault is the PRIMARY CONSIDERATION.
There's no reason, except for training, that regular citizens shouldn't have the same equipment police use. Police officers have backups but citizens often must face criminals alone.
You mean you can't defend yourself from undesirables with six rounds from the revolver? Sounds like the problem isn't with the revolver.
Some people have ar-15s for home defense for the exact reason you think you need a higher capacity 40 cal pistol. So why are you the one who gets to dictate what firearm people are allowed to use for self defense?
I am dealing with what you say. Your statements seem to contradict one another since you are saying high capacity mags-or clips as you like to call them, are unnecessary yet now you want a pistol capable of being high capacity.
Again, stick with what I say, not what you wish for me to have said . The discussion at the time was about the AR15 as a "modern sporting rifle". My reference to not needing 20 or 30 rounds was in direct reference to hunting deer or hogs .
Again, stick with what I say, not what you wish for me to have said . The discussion at the time was about the AR15 as a "modern sporting rifle". My reference to not needing 20 or 30 rounds was in direct reference to hunting deer or hogs .
Context DOES matter .
Not if one is doing helicopter hog hunting.
Or night hunting. Here's one from liberal approved Clown News Network:
I agreed earlier in the thread that the AR15 was good for hog eradication. Someone else brought up explosives to deal with hogs .
My response , again, was in reference to considering the AR15 the new "modern sporting rifle".
We agreed:
1. A clip is a clip; a magazine is a magazine. Sometimes people misuse them but we should use the proper term to reduce misunderstanding.
2. Every gun is military styled. Calling an AR-15 "military styled" is very dishonest, a liberal fake news scare technique.
3. AR-15 is a good tool for hunting hogs.
4. To each his own. Everybody should choose what is best for him or her for self-defense, whether it's a shotgun, an AR-15, a .40 pistol or a Gatling gun.
5. Automatic machine guns can be had by regular citizens without any special permit.
Not sure what you mean. So far I would say the only thing we have agreed upon is that the AR15 would be more useful than a bolt action when trying to eradicate hogs off your property . On the other hand, a friend of mine simply traps them in pens with feed and then stands on the outside and shoots them with a handgun.
You'll have to clarify a little what you mean in your question.
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.
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.
