Wise One wrote:
Truckie wrote:Then, you have an open invitation to accompany me to the firing range for some fun education. Or how about a morning or afternoon of skeet or sporting clay shooting?
Thank you for your generous and friendly offer, which sounds like fun. Actually, I've already done a lots of shooting and hunting so it would probably not add much to my basic education, apart from technical details relating to the gazillions of varieties of guns and ammunition now available. My interest in these has receded over the years, and has been replaced by an intense devotion to sailing where I spend most of my time and energy.
The offer stands Wise. Probably you can teach me a few things then!
Did you intentionally begin this thread on an ANTI inflection just to spur the ensuing debate? A debate that you very well knew would follow such Anti retoric? Were you trolling Wise?
This post of yours brings to mind two things.
First, the old wisdom of being careful who one is talking with, you never know of their experiences. I neglected that wisdom while speaking with you over this thread. I "assumed" by your thoughts and words contained within that you had never touched, and with a scowl would reluctantly handle, a firearm. See what we learn about one another when we converse?
The second thing is this, and please do not take this personally as that is my furthest intent, but I will use "you" to make this point.
You epitomize what is wrong with the firearm Rights movement. The Antis are bonded and speaking with one voice, they hate guns period. Gun owners on the other hand fight amongst each other about what is right and just, what directions firearm owners take, and don't take. There is a serious lack of cohesion in the pro-gun movement.
You are obviously a gun owner or former gun owner. You have obviously derived enjoyment from firearms at some point in your life. Yet, you do not support gun owners as a whole (if in fact you are stating your positions inside this thread, and not just starting the fight).
For instance, I no longer hunt. I don't like to kill animals for amusement and/or "sport." When the deer are out destroying my property or ramming themselves into the front of my car, I'm thankful that others are killing and eating them. But anyhow, I no longer hunt and I really am torn by the way some hunters behave. I don't like the killing of living beings... but, I'm a hypocrite because I'll eat the tailhole out of a pig if it's cooked right.
My interest in firearms is sport and collecting neat guns. I no longer have an interest in "hunting configuration" firearms. Another side of my interest is professional. This all extends to the enjoyment of shooting when I can. It carries over to sport shooting at inanimate objects, engaging in defensive pistol shoots and training to provide entertainment and hone lifesaving firearm skills.
As I've said, I don't like hunting any more. But, I support hunting and hunters. I don't go out preaching that sport shooting is all right, but hunting is wrong. I support fellow lawful gun owners and users without matter of what they're doing with their firearms. I promote cohesion and single voice among gun owners... issues that are a must if the Lefties are to be silenced and defeated.
Hunters whom disagree that I should own an AR-15 or a semi-auto handgun that holds 17 rounds of ammunition or any other type of firearm should suck that belief up too. Those folks should support my RIGHT to firearm ownership without consideration of what firearms I choose to own and/or what lawful acts I engage with them.
For professional purposes, I am trained to carry and use an automatic M-16. I am trained to carry and use an automatic H&K MP-5. I am trained on a rifle with a barrel less than 16 inches and a shotgun with a barrel less than 18 inches long. On the job, I can handle, carry and deploy all sorts of "illegal" weapons. When I clock out however, being in possession of such weaponry will quickly buy me a one-way ticket to the FED HoochScow. There's ineffective gun legislation for you... laws that do NOTHING to prevent and/or deter crime.
What irks the heck out of me is the fact that if I desire to -own- those types of weapons, and I could own them, I have to invest $200 and a lot of time and documentation into the FED. I have to make my home and weaponry available to the BATFE for inspection, and at its whim I might add. I have to amass $25,000 to private purchase an M-16, a weapon which the U.S. Military and U.S. law enforcement agencies can purchase for around $800. Just in case this surprises anyone, yes, a lawful private citizen can purchase and own an automatic weapon (aka machine gun), if this citizen is wealthy enough that is. How's that for the widening gap between the poor and the privileged?
One thing the SCOTUS said that riled me was its contention and definition of "weapons in common use." Of course an M-16 is not in common use! Having one will cost a private citizen $25,200 and a LOT of hassle. I don't know about any of you, but I am too common to afford that price tag and too pro "individual" to jump through the government hoops to have one.
The moral to this bantering is this, Gunners need to unite or loss of that Right will surely come.