A little refresher article on early gun control: The American Revolution against British Gun Control

[Herb g]

IMO, not the best analogy. I speak every day, sometimes (as shown here) controversially. I went most of my life never firing a gun.

Better to say I don't care about 2A like I don't care about the 5th as I've never had to testify in court. Although someday might benefit from both.

Just to be clear, I never said I don't support 2A. Just offering an alternative POV.
Not all of us are worried .gov is going to take away our guns.

That last sentence, Ravenswood, is one I hope you don't have to eat someday. A wise man always has a plan for worst case scenerio.

 

[Herb g]

Personally, I don't see an issue with the target selection, especially for someone who carries daily. Attack's and threats are mostly carried out by two legged animals. Never in my nearly 60 years have I ever heard of a bullseye attacking someone.

I've shot thousands of silhouettes over the years, all the major non-Bullseye competitions use silhouette targets, just don't understand the big deal, but that's me, I'm a bit thick in the skull region.

Maybe because 9 months of my tour was with an Army AMU shooting the old NRA Match, which they call Bullseye now. I can still teach anybody to shoot one-handed. I carry too, and practice with bullseye targets. If ever the time comes, I'll imagine the head the bullseye, with the nose the X-ring. Just trying to think what the snowflakes think when they see civis on tv shooting people targets at the range. But then again, you have a point that we shouldn't give a crapp what they think.

 

[Vendor Hidden]

Besides, I'm no historian, but methinks gun-control isn't how the AR began... although certainly was a part of the cause. I'd say, if I had to limit it to one reason (impossible really), it was taxes.

Methinks you may wish to brush up on history.

 

[American123]

I hope not either. But I won't miss it terribly if it does happen.

I'll continue to write my reps against any gun control, but mostly because I don't want any restrictions in life and liberty. As long as I ain't hurtin' someone who doesn't want or deserve it, I should be able to just about anything I like.

Kinda like how amateur ham-radio operators constantly whine about cell-phone laws. I think it's distracted driving, but still send in my letters to support my fellow hams against radio being grouped in with phones.

It seems that every group of people that were ever disarmed in the history of the world, there were some that "didn't miss their lack of arms" that is until they did.

Last I checked GB is trying to ban knives because their gun ban didn't stop people from killing each other.

The term 'Fudd' seems appropriate in this case.

If you say you support the 2nd amendment but.... you don't really support that right because it obviously is on the chopping block already for you.

Not getting into firearm ownership until ones 50's really paints the picture for me. Then like any new hobby, jumping with both feet into it (buying and selling dozens of guns) before calming back down (and selling all off and owning only 1 pistol).

The US is the only country in the world where citizens have the right such as we do. Everywhere else is either a government mandate or a priviledge to be removed at any time on any whim. It would seem that the hundreds of thousands of crimes every year that are prevented in the US because of private gun ownership would cause many people to "miss" their right if those crimes were not able to be stopped because people were barred their right by some misguided populace or pathetic government official.

Finally, I know the idea may seem preposterous for some, the American public standing up to government power in armed revolt, however, if it is in fact so ridiculous why is it that the left is so intent on stripping Americans of their right. We either are so inept we don't warrant a second thought, or we are in fact such a potential force to be reckoned with that government who desires to maintain the status quo and forever guarantee their place as the ruling class know that the 2nd amendment right is the largest roadblock in doing so.

I'm glad you enjoy your hobby, but it seems clear that is all it ever was for you and you missed and are still missing the original intention behind the rights as Americans we are blessed with. Not everyone considers the loss of those rights so whimsically.

 

[veradium]

American123 AMEN to you and the statement!
2A is an inalienable right period! and no government nor person shall bear false witness to that right of the people to keep and bear arms.

 

[bbbass]

I've shot thousands of silhouettes over the years, all the major non-Bullseye competitions use silhouette targets, just don't understand the big deal,

I've shot both USPSA and IDPA for many years. Both use human torso cardboard silhouette targets... they simulate, to a certain extent, Self-Defense scenarios. One day in the local rag I read a letter-to-the-editor from a well-known liberal troublemaker all about "men in the woods, dressed in camo, shooting at human shaped targets". Oh no!!!

 

[Vendor Hidden]

A LOT happened before 5am April 10th 1775 that led to the American Revolution. It certainly wasn't just one turning point in history.
(one of many sources)

I think you are dissimulating here (I'll wait while you look that word up - I just found it myself).

Yes, a LOT happened before April 19, 1775. But we aren't talking about underlying causes and arguments that led to the American Revolution; we're talking about how it started (in your words, "how the AR began").

Gun Control is the reason, the spark that lit the "shot heard round the world". Here's a clip of the previous History page I linked to before. I'm sure you know this, but I'm including it here for context:



You can certainly maintain that the overall American Revolution was not about gun control, but there's no real argument to be made that "how the AR began" had nothing to do with gun control. It was the reason the redcoats were marching. Seizing arms and leaving the patriots defenseless was the whole point.

Thankfully the patriots recognized what you do not.

 

[nwslopoke]

IMO, not the best analogy. I speak every day, sometimes (as shown here) controversially. I went most of my life never firing a gun.

That's not the issue. You've made a choice. The issue is the removal of a right. It is not someone elses place to limit how you exercise your right. Especially within existing laws that have been tested for generations.

 

[American123]

It's a business as well as a hobby. Even now I still offer CHL classes. And I've not missed the point of the 2nd Amendment. I support it, and will continue to do so. But I didn't get into guns to exercise my 2A Rights. Nor do I think we're all going to completely lose them someday.

I'm not quite as whimsical as you make me out to be, but I'm also not a zealot. There are bigger concerns in my life than being armed.

The difference between a patriotic American and a zealot for the 2nd Amendment generally is whether a Tory is asked to label them. We could substitute the newly popular term 'fudd' in this case.

It still appears that despite what you are saying, you are not quite getting the notion that when the words "I support the second Amendment, but...." come out, you land yourself into the all to frequent territory of those who are willing to lose rights.

There are political movements as we type that are moving further toward dissarmament. It's not a matter of what you think, it's a matter of what the facts are. There are bills in WA right now pushing toward magazine limit restrictions, semi auto bans, etc. There are also countless leftist that openly call for the repeal of the 2nd Amendment and if they had such sufficient votes, would.

The concept of boiling the frog seems lost on you. Generally rights lost are never regained, generally once government gets more control, they never loosen it. The entire strategic plan of the Communist playbook is to remove rights away a generation at a time, in doing so they don't rouse the current population enough but they do secure that "inch" of ground so that future generations never know what freedom they lost. This is why my grandpa could order a rifle and it was delivered straight to his front door but I must go through 2 pages of paperwork, a phone call, and go to the FFL to allow me to take possession (at minimum).

Pardon me from not being impressed with you offering concealed carry classes for profit. #1 there is no requirement nor are they truly necessary for anyone to competently carry concealed.
#2 you have further elaborated on the point that this is a hobby and an occasional $ for you and as you described previously, your life would easily go on without it.

Everyone and anyone who takes the time, energy and cost of taking non-gun owners to the range and providing them a safe, fun and instructive experience generally promotes future gun ownership and more public that understand how all these laws introduced are ridiculous. Most of us just do it for free as a passion and not use it as some bragging point of "how we support the 2nd amendment"

Btw - I too took and passed an NRA pistol instructors class. A 10 year old kid who grew up with firearms and taught properly by family could easily do it also. I did it just for kicks though as I had little to no plan to desire to formally instruct people for money. That being said, I found individuals who were "instructors" were generally some of the most marginally qualified but pompous people because they took a class that told them they were now an instructor.

There is nothing wrong with your viewpoint, it's yours. It surely has no bearing on individual rights of others though, just like how the opinions of my fellow Americans who don't want people to own guns is irrelevant even after they attempt to legislate away my rights. (As they currently are)

 

[Diamondback]

Serious question. Why are you shooting at human silhouettes, particularly with air guns?

Because if I'm ever forced to fight for my life, it ain't gonna be a harmless little series of rings I'm gonna have to defend myself against. When the balloon goes up, You Fight Like You Train.

 

[Medic!]

Yes, and at only 52 there's still hope for him..still a work in progress...main thing is to keep an open mind and be able to change with new information. Remember Churchill : " If you're not a liberal at 20, you have no heart. If you're not a conservative at 40, you have no brain." Just a late bloomer.

I guess we are probably going to see things a bit differently?


I'm 51 and been into guns since I was four.
He's 52 and been into them for four years.

The value of a gun was immeasurable when I grew up on the farm. I suppose to those living a rural life it still is?

 

[Vendor Hidden]

I'm 51 and been into guns since I was four.
He's 52 and been into them for four years.

The value of a gun was immeasurable when I grew up on the farm. I suppose to those living a rural life it still is?

Like ravenswood, I spent my whole life without an interest in guns (either for or against) until three years ago. At 54, I took a handgun safety class, having inherited my dad's 1911 and after staring at it for three years not knowing anything about how to properly use it.

So I understand the apathetic attitude towards our right to bear arms; I get the "if the 2A is eliminated it won't affect me" position, though I now think it's a viewpoint that expresses a fundamental ignorance of history and an overabundance of trust in one's fellow man.

People's views can change. Mine certainly have, and though I take ravenswood at his word that he doesn't consider the 2A critical to his existence, I can't help wondering if he's been seduced by the moral relativism so pervasive in our culture today. It's an attitude that is essentially solipsistic in its approach to… well everything. It essentially says that "I alone matter" and the only things that are important are the things that affect me. I'm sure he'd disagree with this characterization, but it's what I infer from his arguments.

The right to bear arms is not just some right that can be bargained away and life will go on just fine. In fact, there's overwhelming objective proof that once a nation and a people are successfully disarmed, anything can happen or be done to them. Everyone in power knows this very well, whether they say so or not. Even a poor student of history can see many examples of this, not just limited to Lexington and Concord.

Those of us who think this way aren't spittle-flecked kooks raving in the woods (Stomper notwithstanding), but instead are sober-eyed students of history and human nature.

 

[DuneHopper]

It's a business as well as a hobby. Even now I still offer CHL classes. And I've not missed the point of the 2nd Amendment. I support it, and will continue to do so. But I didn't get into guns to exercise my 2A Rights. Nor do I think we're all going to completely lose them someday.

I'm not quite as whimsical as you make me out to be, but I'm also not a zealot. There are bigger concerns in my life than being armed.

I think there is a view much wider that you may not be focusing on.
I have had firearms since a kid. Zealot ? Only thing I know more about then Firearms and rights, is cars and
electronics.

If one uses a washing,machine, or a car daily, does this make them and over the top follower?
Of course not. What you call Zealot is actually culture. If one grows up with tools and uses them
as they are intended. That makes them a user of that tool. Entire cultures are created, in support of objects.
But only one culture hold this object, hand in hand with a civil right. Creating they exact opposite of zealot. You may also
know this culture by its former name. Patriot.

I know it can be confusing, especially of you are a casual user.
I know people that drive amazing Trucks and Cars, and know nothing about them.
But a Right, is not a whimsical idea or thought. It should be clearly understood what it stands for.

Hope this helps.

 

[DuneHopper]

I didn't call anyone a zealot, just offsetting his "whimsical" comment. One extreme vs another.
But if you thought being without a washing-machine was the end of society, then perhaps you are a (being tongue-in-cheek here) zealot.

I don't use a washing machine, I use a rock and the stream flowing by.
I also, hunt Elk with my bare hands and a toothpick, when I was a Kid we had to walk to school, 6 miles in quick sand

As far as washing machines, it almost was the end of society, with all those TIDE munchers.

 

[Medic!]

I don't use a washing machine, I use a rock and the stream flowing by.
I also, hunt Elk with my bare hands and a toothpick, when I was a Kid we had to walk to school, 6 miles in quick sand

As far as washing machines, it almost was the end of society, with all those TIDE munchers.

Toothpick!



Cheater.

 

[DuneHopper]

WORLD WE LIVE IN

LIBERALS - 1865-1950's opposed women voters, and those of colors. Wanted reparations for giving up their
slaves after the civil war. Helped ship off people of color to other areas of the country. Created segregation.

LIBERALS = 1960-70's oppose the war in Vietnam, by rioting in America.

LIBERALS = 1980's and 1990's, stopped allot logging, stop certain firearms ownership, opened businesses and became rich.

LIBERALS = 2000 - 2020 Watch forests burn due to no more logging, watch person on person crime rise
while disarming the innocent and law abiding. Increase healthcare and prescription cost so we all stay sick and dependent.
Riot and burn our cities, opposing other rich people that are rich like they are. o Not oppose war, when Democrats are in
office, oppose it when Republicans are. Want a more secure wall for 20 years, then oppose it when its going to be built.

Why its not popular on this website, this is a cause and effect, forcing a non-compliance. Either that
or watch more then forest burn at the hands of Liberals. Duck is a Duck, just how it is.

 

[Goosebrown]

April 19th.

 

[gunnails]

Bear targets maybe.

A guy on the Oregon coast got in a lot of trouble for killing black bear with a pellet gun.

Oregon man shoots bear in his backyard, faces animal abuse charge

 

[Herb g]

April 19th.

Wonder if you know the symbolism of the date 9/11 to Islam? It was the date in 1683 or 4 that the second Siege of Vienna started. If they had taken Vienna, the gateway to Europe, we would all be bowing to Mecca now. My ancestor was a retired Field Marshall, sent by the king of Bohemia to Vienna, to organize its defenses at age 71. So what will be the next date of " the shot heard 'round the world"?

 

[DuneHopper]

April 9th 2065