Neighbors asked man to stop shooting his AR 15

[oujour76]

May 1, 2023 15:35:27 GMT -5 Walter said:

May 1, 2023 14:10:26 GMT -5 oujour76 said:

There go those goalposts again. From the black and white no one uses the AR-15 for hunting to it’s alluded to be inappropriate for the job. Too funny. And the question is obvious…exactly why is it an inappropriate weapon for the examples given i.e.feral hogs and coyotes?

Would one choose it over a standard hunting rifle? Yes. And the fact is a hell of a lot of hunters already do so when shooting feral pigs and coyotes. And exactly what is a "standard hunting rifle" anyway?

I could drive a 16d sinker with a 16 oz hammer, but it doesn't mean I ever hung one on my bags for that task. A ridiculous and simplistic comparison. Hunters choose the gun (and ammo) that best fits their needs. They don't use an elephant gun to shoot a pheasant.

[AlaCowboy]

May 1, 2023 13:28:41 GMT -5 Walter said:

May 1, 2023 12:13:07 GMT -5 CWGBuckeyes said:

What's really sad is not a single one of you acted like you gave a rats ass that an entire family was murdered including an 8 year old

All you give a damn about is your guns.

It has already been established here a gazillion times that there is no sufficient number of kids murdered by guns that would move most of the fervent gun community to consider curbs on any gun rights.
It simply is not a factor in the discussion.

Will you ever get tired of posting this Big Lie? The gun owners in here have stated many times that existing gun restrictions are fair. It's the hysterical anti-gun zealots like you and cwg that refuse to disarm felons and gang members that commit most of the murders of innocent children. You only want to make guns harder to be legally obtained and care nothing for disarming the criminals.

[Walter]

May 1, 2023 16:20:56 GMT -5 AlaCowboy said:

May 1, 2023 13:28:41 GMT -5 Walter said:

It has already been established here a gazillion times that there is no sufficient number of kids murdered by guns that would move most of the fervent gun community to consider curbs on any gun rights.
It simply is not a factor in the discussion.

Will you ever get tired of posting this Big Lie? The gun owners in here have stated many times that existing gun restrictions are fair. It's the hysterical anti-gun zealots like you and cwg that refuse to disarm felons and gang members that commit most of the murders of innocent children. You only want to make guns harder to be legally obtained and care nothing for disarming the criminals.

If the government ever confiscated your guns, I'd send along my thoughts and prayers to you for your loss.

[Panama pfRedd]

May 1, 2023 16:11:43 GMT -5 AlaCowboy said:

Apr 29, 2023 13:57:10 GMT -5 CWGBuckeyes said:

So he killed them including an 8 year old


Another law abiding gun owner

Thank god this American patriot had his AR 15 to defend himself from these horrible neighbors trying to take away his 2nd amendment rights. Including that 8 year old kid. How dare they


www.google.com/amp/s/abcnews.go.com/amp/US/5-dead-texas-shooting-suspect-armed-ar-15/story%3fid=98957271

Obviously a Hispanic (probably an illegal) Biden supporter. BUILD THE WALL!

Funny how that was never part of their "conversation"... It's only the gun to blame.

[AlaCowboy]

May 1, 2023 16:59:23 GMT -5 Walter said:

May 1, 2023 16:20:56 GMT -5 AlaCowboy said:

Will you ever get tired of posting this Big Lie? The gun owners in here have stated many times that existing gun restrictions are fair. It's the hysterical anti-gun zealots like you and cwg that refuse to disarm felons and gang members that commit most of the murders of innocent children. You only want to make guns harder to be legally obtained and care nothing for disarming the criminals.

If the government ever confiscated your guns, I'd send along my thoughts and prayers to you for your loss.

This illegal Mexican wetback is one of your heroes. Are you hiding him from authorities? He must have had an illegally obtained weapon. Why do you want criminals to have illegally obtained weapons? You instead don't want legal citizens to have legally obtained weapons to defend against criminals like this illegal you love so much.

[daleko]

May 1, 2023 15:35:27 GMT -5 Walter said:

May 1, 2023 14:10:26 GMT -5 oujour76 said:

There go those goalposts again. From the black and white no one uses the AR-15 for hunting to it’s alluded to be inappropriate for the job. Too funny. And the question is obvious…exactly why is it an inappropriate weapon for the examples given i.e.feral hogs and coyotes?

Would one choose it over a standard hunting rifle?

I could drive a 16d sinker with a 16 oz hammer, but it doesn't mean I ever hung one on my bags for that task.

With a .30-06 style round there are many different types bullets to use depending on type of hunting, including a .22, using a sabot. Up to a 220 gr bullet, if you want to grab a really big animal. In days gone by, of a guy being able to afford one gun, a .30-06 permitted many to hunt different types of animals, investing in one platform. And ammo was cheap. Today, not only is the target important but the type of hunting important as well. Different tools for different situations. There is no standard hunting rifle, just different types. Calibers, types of action, types of triggers, .......... Much the same as the type of hammer you use. Many hunters have dedicated tools depending on the type of target along w how they hunt. Why? because they can afford to and having that dedicated platform generally yields better results. 

If you had to function w several different types of nails, attaching different types of substrates, you'd have different kinds of hammers or make do. Or if the amount of technology was invested in 16D sinkers as is invested in bullet construction, a 16 oz hammer might work across the board. No money in that though as it's cheaper just to buy a second or third hammer. But they have made changes to make a hammer more effective.

Bullet construction and case construction has dramatically improved today, V as recently as 5-10 yrs ago. Barrel/platform construction, which improves accuracy, also. The size of the bullet to effectively do the job has become smaller. The meme that a 5.56/223, today, can't be a go to, depending on the target or the situation is misguided. Though I haven't shot it in years, I have a very heavy barrel semi-auto 5.56 that I have used for prairie dogs and coyotes out west. And I could use it for deer in Fl and Tx, where they tend to be smaller. Damn thing weighs 14 lbs. If I wanted to spend the money on current barrel technology, I could cut the weight significantly. 

20 yrs ago, a .30-06 was considered the marginal min for elk. .280/.270 is fine today w today's platform, barrel, bullet construction. However, closer in, I could head shoot them w todays 6.5 mm Creed. Very accurate. The platform would be lighter, the recoil lower, the accuracy better. And easier to carry.

Until recently long range target shooters used a .308/.300mag/wildcat, over the basic .30-06. Today it's the 6.5/6.0 Creed.  Along w some version of a .223 Wylde, up to a mid-range 500 yrd distance. Tomorrow?

But, having put to rest that a .223/5.56 mm is inappropriate for sport shooting, perhaps we can revisit the use of and by who, today.

Along w revisiting the 8th. With the greatest problem today being not mass involved in one but the volume of ones, perhaps the current system doesn't motivate those individuals to be compliant citizens. And then there is the mental health issues that seem to have society handcuffed.

[Walter]

May 1, 2023 18:54:38 GMT -5 daleko said:

May 1, 2023 15:35:27 GMT -5 Walter said:

Would one choose it over a standard hunting rifle?

I could drive a 16d sinker with a 16 oz hammer, but it doesn't mean I ever hung one on my bags for that task.

With a .30-06 style round there are many different types bullets to use depending on type of hunting, including a .22, using a sabot. Up to a 220 gr bullet, if you want to grab a really big animal. In days gone by, of a guy being able to afford one gun, a .30-06 permitted many to hunt different types of animals, investing in one platform. And ammo was cheap. Today, not only is the target important but the type of hunting important as well. Different tools for different situations. There is no standard hunting rifle, just different types. Calibers, types of action, types of triggers, .......... Much the same as the type of hammer you use. Many hunters have dedicated tools depending on the type of target along w how they hunt. Why? because they can afford to and having that dedicated platform generally yields better results. 

If you had to function w several different types of nails, attaching different types of substrates, you'd have different kinds of hammers or make do. Or if the amount of technology was invested in 16D sinkers as is invested in bullet construction, a 16 oz hammer might work across the board. No money in that though as it's cheaper just to buy a second or third hammer. But they have made changes to make a hammer more effective.

Bullet construction and case construction has dramatically improved today, V as recently as 5-10 yrs ago. Barrel/platform construction, which improves accuracy, also. The size of the bullet to effectively do the job has become smaller. The meme that a 5.56/223, today, can't be a go to, depending on the target or the situation is misguided. Though I haven't shot it in years, I have a very heavy barrel semi-auto 5.56 that I have used for prairie dogs and coyotes out west. And I could use it for deer in Fl and Tx, where they tend to be smaller. Damn thing weighs 14 lbs. If I wanted to spend the money on current barrel technology, I could cut the weight significantly. 

20 yrs ago, a .30-06 was considered the marginal min for elk. .280/.270 is fine today w today's platform, barrel, bullet construction. However, closer in, I could head shoot them w todays 6.5 mm Creed. Very accurate. The platform would be lighter, the recoil lower, the accuracy better. And easier to carry.

Until recently long range target shooters used a .308/.300mag/wildcat, over the basic .30-06. Today it's the 6.5/6.0 Creed.  Along w some version of a .223 Wylde, up to a mid-range 500 yrd distance. Tomorrow?

But, having put to rest that a .223/5.56 mm is inappropriate for sport shooting, perhaps we can revisit the use of and by who, today.

Along w revisiting the 8th. With the greatest problem today being not mass involved in one but the volume of ones, perhaps the current system doesn't motivate those individuals to be compliant citizens. And then there is the mental health issues that seem to have society handcuffed.

Interesting stuff, and frankly TMI for me.
But your treatise raises the Q about why there is such a hew and cry over a very thin sliver of available firearm periphery.

With all you enumerate, why does the gun lobby want to fight on the hill of bumpstocks, ghost guns, flash suppressors and 100 round magazines, et al?

It doesn't make much sense to me.

It seems like it would be like marijuana enthusiasts fighting for fentanyl legalization.

[oujour76]

May 1, 2023 23:38:06 GMT -5 Walter said:

May 1, 2023 18:54:38 GMT -5 daleko said:

With a .30-06 style round there are many different types bullets to use depending on type of hunting, including a .22, using a sabot. Up to a 220 gr bullet, if you want to grab a really big animal. In days gone by, of a guy being able to afford one gun, a .30-06 permitted many to hunt different types of animals, investing in one platform. And ammo was cheap. Today, not only is the target important but the type of hunting important as well. Different tools for different situations. There is no standard hunting rifle, just different types. Calibers, types of action, types of triggers, .......... Much the same as the type of hammer you use. Many hunters have dedicated tools depending on the type of target along w how they hunt. Why? because they can afford to and having that dedicated platform generally yields better results. 

If you had to function w several different types of nails, attaching different types of substrates, you'd have different kinds of hammers or make do. Or if the amount of technology was invested in 16D sinkers as is invested in bullet construction, a 16 oz hammer might work across the board. No money in that though as it's cheaper just to buy a second or third hammer. But they have made changes to make a hammer more effective.

Bullet construction and case construction has dramatically improved today, V as recently as 5-10 yrs ago. Barrel/platform construction, which improves accuracy, also. The size of the bullet to effectively do the job has become smaller. The meme that a 5.56/223, today, can't be a go to, depending on the target or the situation is misguided. Though I haven't shot it in years, I have a very heavy barrel semi-auto 5.56 that I have used for prairie dogs and coyotes out west. And I could use it for deer in Fl and Tx, where they tend to be smaller. Damn thing weighs 14 lbs. If I wanted to spend the money on current barrel technology, I could cut the weight significantly. 

20 yrs ago, a .30-06 was considered the marginal min for elk. .280/.270 is fine today w today's platform, barrel, bullet construction. However, closer in, I could head shoot them w todays 6.5 mm Creed. Very accurate. The platform would be lighter, the recoil lower, the accuracy better. And easier to carry.

Until recently long range target shooters used a .308/.300mag/wildcat, over the basic .30-06. Today it's the 6.5/6.0 Creed.  Along w some version of a .223 Wylde, up to a mid-range 500 yrd distance. Tomorrow?

But, having put to rest that a .223/5.56 mm is inappropriate for sport shooting, perhaps we can revisit the use of and by who, today.

Along w revisiting the 8th. With the greatest problem today being not mass involved in one but the volume of ones, perhaps the current system doesn't motivate those individuals to be compliant citizens. And then there is the mental health issues that seem to have society handcuffed.

Interesting stuff, and frankly TMI for me.
But your treatise raises the Q about why there is such a hew and cry over a very thin sliver of available firearm periphery.

With all you enumerate, why does the gun lobby want to fight on the hill of bumpstocks, ghost guns, flash suppressors and 100 round magazines, et al?

It doesn't make much sense to me.

It seems like it would be like marijuana enthusiasts fighting for fentanyl legalization.

Before we get off into the weeds, would appreciate an answer to my question...what is a standard hunting rifle?

[Walter]

May 2, 2023 8:33:40 GMT -5 oujour76 said:

May 1, 2023 23:38:06 GMT -5 Walter said:

Interesting stuff, and frankly TMI for me.
But your treatise raises the Q about why there is such a hew and cry over a very thin sliver of available firearm periphery.

With all you enumerate, why does the gun lobby want to fight on the hill of bumpstocks, ghost guns, flash suppressors and 100 round magazines, et al?

It doesn't make much sense to me.

It seems like it would be like marijuana enthusiasts fighting for fentanyl legalization.

Before we get off into the weeds, would appreciate an answer to my question...what is a standard hunting rifle?

I believe Daleko answered that far better than I could.
If I could have enumerated all that he posted, I might have. But I cannot.
So instead, presume that by 'standard hunting rifle' I meant 'what he said' in all its variety..
Excluded from that inventory however, is the crap that obscures reasonable discussion. Like flash suppressors. Like ghost guns. Like bumpstocks. Like ridiculous magazine sizes; in short, most of the items that gun control advocates would claim transforms a 'standard hunting rifle' into an 'assault weapon'.
Does that clear it up for you some?

[Panama pfRedd]

Daleko has a patience with leftists in explaining to them what we gun folk already know and have tried to convey our knowledge to the leftists dozens of times. For some reason they never hear what the rest of us have to say so kudos to geezer for cracking open their minds, even if it's a tiny crack.
The sad part of all this is in short order they'll circle back to where they started as if they've never heard it before. Again and again.

[Walter]

May 2, 2023 9:10:57 GMT -5 Panama pfRedd said:

Daleko has a patience with leftists in explaining to them what we gun folk already know and have tried to convey our knowledge to the leftists dozens of times. For some reason they never hear what the rest of us have to say so kudos to geezer for cracking open their minds, even if it's a tiny crack.
The sad part of all this is in short order they'll circle back to where they started as if they've never heard it before. Again and again.

Yeah. Did you see the part where I called for the government to take away your guns?

Me neither.

[oujour76]

May 2, 2023 8:50:47 GMT -5 Walter said:

May 2, 2023 8:33:40 GMT -5 oujour76 said:

Before we get off into the weeds, would appreciate an answer to my question...what is a standard hunting rifle?

I believe Daleko answered that far better than I could.
If I could have enumerated all that he posted, I might have. But I cannot.
So instead, presume that by 'standard hunting rifle' I meant 'what he said' in all its variety..
Excluded from that inventory however, is the crap that obscures reasonable discussion. Like flash suppressors. Like ghost guns. Like bumpstocks. Like ridiculous magazine sizes; in short, most of the items that gun control advocates would claim transforms a 'standard hunting rifle' into an 'assault weapon'.
Does that clear it up for you some?

I get what you're saying. Would have to give more thought to ghost guns, but for me the others on that list are peripheral and window dressing. And in advance...yes, I know the LV shooter a few years back used a bump stock.

[AlaCowboy]

May 2, 2023 8:50:47 GMT -5 Walter said:

May 2, 2023 8:33:40 GMT -5 oujour76 said:

Before we get off into the weeds, would appreciate an answer to my question...what is a standard hunting rifle?

I believe Daleko answered that far better than I could.
If I could have enumerated all that he posted, I might have. But I cannot.
So instead, presume that by 'standard hunting rifle' I meant 'what he said' in all its variety..
Excluded from that inventory however, is the crap that obscures reasonable discussion. Like flash suppressors. Like ghost guns. Like bumpstocks. Like ridiculous magazine sizes; in short, most of the items that gun control advocates would claim transforms a 'standard hunting rifle' into an 'assault weapon'.
Does that clear it up for you some?

No. You don't know what a standard hunting rifle is. You also don't know what an "assault rifle" is. If you know, please define each. If I put a "bump stock" on my 7-shot .22LR rifle, does it become an "assault rifle" in your definition?

[Walter]

May 2, 2023 11:13:56 GMT -5 oujour76 said:

May 2, 2023 8:50:47 GMT -5 Walter said:

I believe Daleko answered that far better than I could.
If I could have enumerated all that he posted, I might have. But I cannot.
So instead, presume that by 'standard hunting rifle' I meant 'what he said' in all its variety..
Excluded from that inventory however, is the crap that obscures reasonable discussion. Like flash suppressors. Like ghost guns. Like bumpstocks. Like ridiculous magazine sizes; in short, most of the items that gun control advocates would claim transforms a 'standard hunting rifle' into an 'assault weapon'.
Does that clear it up for you some?

I get what you're saying. Would have to give more thought to ghost guns, but for me the others on that list are peripheral and window dressing. And in advance...yes, I know the LV shooter a few years back used a bump stock.

My original point with all that peripheral stuff was to beg the Q: Are these things the hill you want to die on? Because right now it's the stuff that all gun owners are being tarred and feathered about. I'd guess that the number of gun owners who give a shit about bump stocks is miniscule. Yet a good number will fought to the political death to retain their availability. Something like 80% of gun owners agree that universal background checks is a good idea. Yet it never becomes law. More tar....more feathers, for ALL gun owners, in the eyes of the general public.

See where this is going?

[oujour76]

May 2, 2023 11:57:10 GMT -5 Walter said:

May 2, 2023 11:13:56 GMT -5 oujour76 said:

I get what you're saying. Would have to give more thought to ghost guns, but for me the others on that list are peripheral and window dressing. And in advance...yes, I know the LV shooter a few years back used a bump stock.

My original point with all that peripheral stuff was to beg the Q: Are these things the hill you want to die on? Because right now it's the stuff that all gun owners are being tarred and feathered about. I'd guess that the number of gun owners who give a shit about bump stocks is miniscule. Yet a good number will fought to the political death to retain their availability. Something like 80% of gun owners agree that universal background checks is a good idea. Yet it never becomes law. More tar....more feathers, for ALL gun owners, in the eyes of the general public.

See where this is going?

You also need to see where gun owners are coming from...i.e. what's next? If, tomorrow, you got universal background checks, a ban on bump stocks and a 20-round mag limit would that placate the "gun control" folks? Or would it be merely a first step? See where this is going?