1. Attention: We have put together a thread with tips and a tutorial video to help with using the new software. Please take a moment to check out the thread here: Trapshooters.com Tutorial & Help Video.
    Dismiss Notice

Oct. 2008 Field & Stream

Discussion in 'Uncategorized Threads' started by Brian in Oregon, Sep 21, 2008.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Brian in Oregon

    Brian in Oregon Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    25,238
    Location:
    Deplorable Bitter Clinger in Liberal La La Land
    Get the Oct. 2008 Field & Stream. Turn to page 85.<br>
    <br>
    Obama is asked about his infamous quote about people "clinging" to guns. Obama says he should have said "relied on" guns instead of clinging, because people have given up on the government fixing their economic problems.<br>
    <br>
    Then Obama is asked if he agrees with the Supreme Court's Heller decision. Obama says, "What I think it has done is provided some clarity that, in fact, the Second Amendment is an individual right and that law-abiding gun owners can't be prevented from going out and hunting, protecting their family on their own."<br>
    <br>
    Obama then says "Yes" to an "assault weapons ban", and states that the AK-47 is not a hunting arm and should be banned, permanently, from "civilian hands".<br>
    <br>
     
  2. Brian in Oregon

    Brian in Oregon Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    25,238
    Location:
    Deplorable Bitter Clinger in Liberal La La Land
    Are you really that ignorant? Or just brainwashed?<br>
    <br>
    I hunt with an AR-15. These are mainstream hunting rifles now for varmints, coyotes, and with some caliber options, big game.<br>
    <br>
    I've also deer hunted witb my FN FAL. It came in a Browning sporter box.<br>
    <br>
    So I ask you - Why do you want to ban my HUNTING rifles?
     
  3. Brian in Oregon

    Brian in Oregon Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    25,238
    Location:
    Deplorable Bitter Clinger in Liberal La La Land
    Oh, and the AR-15 is the most used rifle for DCM/CMP High Power matches. Do you think TARGET COMPTETION rifles should be banned as well, since this isn't hunting? Would it be OK to ban trap guns since trap isn't hunting?
     
  4. AveragEd

    AveragEd Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    5,475
    Location:
    Mechanicsburg, Pennsylvania
    You guys who can hunt with semis have to remember that they are illegal for hunting in many eastern states and hunters from those states may have a hard time accepting AK-47s and the like as hunting rifles. Here in Pennsylvania, autoloading handguns and rifles - rimfire or centerfire - are not legal for any form of hunting, even varmints, and autoloading shotguns are not allowed for deer. But I read about a lot more of those "military weapons" being used for hunting in other states every year.

    Ed
     
  5. Old Texas Marine

    Old Texas Marine Member

    Joined:
    Apr 6, 2008
    Messages:
    529
    Boys,

    Don't let the liberal effete get you off the subject with the topic of hunting rifles. The Second Amendment is not about hunting, target sports, etc. It is about OUR Unalienable Right to protect us from GOVERNMENT.

    The Second is the Amendment that allows the other Rights enumerated as God-Given, Unalienable Rights to be protected from the Government.

    Make the the anti-gunners stick to the subject.

    Semper fi,

    HBT
     
  6. ivanhoe

    ivanhoe Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    7,538
    Location:
    Oxford MA
    Averaged you said " Here in Pennsylvania, autoloading handguns and rifles - rimfire or centerfire - are not legal for any form of hunting, even varmints, and autoloading shotguns are not allowed for deer."

    You should be intelligent enough to know that the reason for these rules. Is to control the weapons that the public can own. I have no knowledge of the reasons given by the State of Pennsylvania for these rule to regulate the use of semi autos for hunting.

    I will go out on a limb and say it is not to improve public safety. So if this is not the reason why do many eastern states not allow them? I say it is about control not gun control people control

    Bob Lawless
     
  7. AveragEd

    AveragEd Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    5,475
    Location:
    Mechanicsburg, Pennsylvania
    Bob, I can give you two reasons for that ruling but you may not like either of them.

    The Pennsylvania Game Commission does not feel it is "sporting" to pursue game with that type of firearm. I respect that opinion and abide by it. In fact, I take only the number of shells my bolt-action rifle's box magazine will hold with me to my deer stand. I feel that if I miss one deer four times or four deer once each, I'd better quit shooting. The last thing a shooter like that needs is a rifle that can spray the woods with poorly aimed bullets. And so far in my 61 years, I have not seen a deer that can return fire so the self-defense aspect of those rifles is unneeded while hunting. Having said that, I will also state that I would probably enjoy working on one of those rifles to get it accurate enough for groundhog population control.

    The second reason is because of what the gun clubs of Pennsylvania have told the PGC about the amount of range damage inflicted not by those guns but by their users, who seem intent upon seeing how fast they can empty their guns' multi-round magazines with little regard to their ability to control their rifles under those rapid-fire conditions and, accordingly, where the muzzle winds up being pointed. To my knowledge, every club in central Pennsylvania has banned rapid-fire shooting on their ranges. Some have even banned those guns from their ranges except for organized competitions.

    We used to allow them at one of the clubs where I served as an officer and director in spite of the shot-up target backer frames and other range damage that had escalated following the increased popularity of those rifles. When a neighbor who lived near that 137-acre club attended a club meeting to show us an expended .224" FMJ bullet he found in his swimming pool, we decided the time to join those other clubs by banning rapid-fire shooting had come. Along those same lines, the holes in our indoor handgun range ceiling all but stopped appearing when we prohibited rapid-fire shooting in there, again unless part of an organized competition. Shooters lacking military or other training or competitive experience have proven that the majority of them cannot properly control firearms being discharged in that manner.

    Before someone jumps to any conclusions, that does not mean I am anti-gun. I simply stated facts, some of which are unfortunate.

    Ed
     
  8. JBrooks

    JBrooks TS Member

    Joined:
    Nov 6, 2006
    Messages:
    3,707
    Screw the concept of whether semi-auto's are for hunting. The Second Amendment is to allow us to protect are freedoms. That means shooting people who also will have guns. We are entitled to as much firepower as is available and yes, that means M60s.
     
  9. ivanhoe

    ivanhoe Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    7,538
    Location:
    Oxford MA
    Ed I don't want this to become an argument. I will however say "The Pennsylvania Game Commission does not feel it is "sporting" to pursue game with that type of firearm."very noble of them but control is control.

    You said,

    "I have not seen a deer that can return fire so the self-defense aspect of those rifles is unneeded while hunting."

    This statement is not quite clear are you saying that a single shot rifle is inadequate for self-defense? If you are that is one more argument in favor of not banning AK-47. As far as a deer returning fire is concerned using this logic all you would need is a knife. They certainly don't return fire when you are carrying a non semi-auto rifle either.

    Ed

    "When a neighbor who lived near that 137-acre club attended a club meeting to show us an expended .224" FMJ bullet he found in his swimming pool, we decided the time to join those other clubs by banning rapid-fire shooting had come."

    Of course you are positive it came from your clubs range and a rapid fire rifle. There is absolutely no chance it came from a bolt action or single shot Varmint rifle. fired in the woods or fields in the area. Not even the benefit of the doubt.

    "The second reason is because of what the gun clubs of Pennsylvania have told the PGC about the amount of range damage inflicted not by those guns but by their users, who seem intent upon seeing how fast they can empty their guns' multi-round magazines with little regard to their ability to control their rifles under those rapid-fire conditions and, accordingly, where the muzzle winds up being pointed." It might be pointed out that the type of so called hunters/sportsmen will do the same to the target frames with a single shot rifle. The only difference between the two is one is interested in seeing how fast he can empty his semi-auto and the other does not care what he aims his at or what the damage to the club his indiscretions cost his club or his sport.

    I am sorry Ed but there is nothing you or the politicians can say that can justify banning any firearm that can be used for legal purposes it is all BS.

    Bob Lawless
     
  10. AveragEd

    AveragEd Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    5,475
    Location:
    Mechanicsburg, Pennsylvania
    Bob, please understand that neither my club(s) nor myself want to see ownership of ANY form of firearm banned. But we do reserve the right to disallow certain uses of them on our ranges if their owners cannot handle them responsibly. There's nothing political about that.

    As far as where that stray bullet that went swimming originated, of course we cannot say with certainty that it left the muzzle of a semi-automatic rifle being used in a rapid-fire mode on one of our ranges. But it is illegal to hunt in Pennsylvania with a non-expanding bullet, so the varmint hunter theory, while not being eliminated, is weakened considerably. And we're fairly certain - shucks, we're SURE - that the range damage stemmed from autoloading rifles because since the rapid-fire restriction was put in place, range damage has lessened tremendously just as it did in the indoor ranges.

    As I'm sure you are aware, I was being sarcastic with my deer returning fire remark. But isn't improved self-defense one of the benefits a semi-auto offers over a single-shot or even single-action firearm? I just wanted to cover the bases.

    I don't consider this an argument, Bob; just a respectful posting of differing opinions. A lot of gun owners, myself included, are very sensitive to any kind of control we construe as even possibly being negative. In this case, however, I've seen both sides of the issue. Remember that it would be counterproductive for any gun club to ban the things our members pay dues in order to use.

    Ed
     
  11. ivanhoe

    ivanhoe Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    7,538
    Location:
    Oxford MA
    Ed

    "please understand that neither my club(s) nor myself want to see ownership of ANY form of firearm banned. But we do reserve the right to disallow certain uses of them on our ranges if their owners cannot handle them responsibly. There's nothing political about that."

    You could be correct, however I have to feel sorry for the person that competes in pistol matches. Specifically National Gallery Matches.(bullseye)Now your club may not offer this type of shooting but even if you don't. A member that shoots these matches needs a place to practice and your club every other club in central Pennsylvania have made a legal competitor unable to compete.

    "But isn't improved self-defense one of the benefits a semi-auto offers over a single-shot or even single-action firearm?" Ed as far as I and concerned it all depends on the reason you own a firearm. As far as using a gun for self defense personally I prefer something a little easier to carry than an AK-47 so your statement as far as I am concerned won't hold water.

    "A lot of gun owners, myself included, are very sensitive to any kind of control we construe as even possibly being negative. In this case, however, I've seen both sides of the issue. Remember that it would be counterproductive for any gun club to ban the things our members pay dues in order to use." Counterproductive unless it benefits the clubs. A little self serving don't you think.

    That is except when the club I belong to tells me what to do and tells the state that I am not capable of handling my firearm and the state changes the laws to agree with what the clubs say. (The second reason is because of what the gun clubs of Pennsylvania have told the PGC about the amount of range damage inflicted not by those guns but by their users, who seem intent upon seeing how fast they can empty their guns' multi-round magazines with little regard to their ability to control their rifles under those rapid-fire conditions and, accordingly, where the muzzle winds up being pointed.")

    Bob Lawless
     
  12. WesleyB

    WesleyB Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 19, 2007
    Messages:
    1,472
    oh i think we will have our guns....... its the ammo that will be gone.
     
  13. Brian in Oregon

    Brian in Oregon Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    25,238
    Location:
    Deplorable Bitter Clinger in Liberal La La Land
    2str8, I am not voting for McCain. I'm voting for Palin. She's the first Republican in a long time I actually look forward to voting for. As for McCain, yeah, she screwed us over in Oregon. Yet, unlike Obama, he knows semi-auto firearms in the hands of law abiding citizens aren't what's causing our crime problem. Blaming inanimate objects for the actions of criminals is incompetent. Even if Palin wasn't running, Obama upped the ante for the battle for Second Amendment rights when he tapped Joe Biden, who is the worst anti-gunner in congress. He's the author of the 1994 semi-auto ban, which was so bad that even Diane Fineswine had to make it less harsh. It is imperative he be stopped, even if we have to accept someone we don't want. Leave it to the Dems to nominate someone so bad that he solidifies conservatives.<br>
    <br>
    <br>
    Ed, the bottom line is this - Are you going to stand united with other gunowners regardless of your own personal hunting habits, or are you going to join the anti's in cutting up Second Amendment rights one slice at a time? You really should note that it is this Fudd attitude that has caused a lot of other gunowners to have ZERO, and I mean ZERO sympathy when the environmentalists and others shut down trap ranges or force them to use steel shot.<br>
    <br>
    Going further, it cracks me up when Fudds complain about magazine capacities of semi-autos, while they're out shooting bolt action, pump and lever action magazine rifles. I suppose this is where I should be sanctimonious and point out that most of my hunting rifles are single shots. Does this automatically make me a more ethical hunter than you? BTW, centerfire semi-autos in Oregon used for hunting cannot have more than 5 round magazines. We can have whatever capacity we want, but not for hunting. My hunting AR has five round magazines, same capacity as my bolt actions.<br>
    <br>
    As for what the Pennsylvania game commission has for regulations, what difference should that make for Second Amendment rights? Illinois was trying to ban all semi-auto, pump, and single trigger side-by-side shotguns, along with all shotguns larger than 410. So should the rest of us "respect that"? Or how about those states that mandate shotguns only? Should all the other gunowners in other states "respect that"?<br>
    <br>
    Quote: <i>"When a neighbor who lived near that 137-acre club attended a club meeting to show us an expended .224" FMJ bullet he found in his swimming pool, we decided the time to join those other clubs by banning rapid-fire shooting had come."</i><br>
    <br>
    Wow. Talk about jumping to conclusions. Even though there are .224" bolt, lever action, pump and single shot rifles, your club was clairvoyant enough to know it came from a semi-auto and banned them. Sounds like your club is full of Fudds of the worst kind. They should be ashamed of themselves for such utter incompetence, and hysterics worthy of Sarah Brady and Chuck Schumer. Sounds like "situational ethics" of trying to keep the range open threw the semi-auto guys to the wolves.<br>
    <br>
    Members of ts.com, we have met the enemy, and he is us. We are going to lose our Second Amendment rights, and it's going to happen because Fudds will not support other gunowners, and use situational ethics to justify the banning of "the other guy's" guns. And then buy into the lie that the Second Amendment is all about hunting. Then there is the total irony of using the word "ethics" while flushing the Second Amendment.
     
  14. AveragEd

    AveragEd Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    5,475
    Location:
    Mechanicsburg, Pennsylvania
    Well, how was your jump? I knew it would happen when I submitted the post!

    Here in Pennsyltucky, the gun clubs and the Pennsylvania Game Commission get along very well. The PGC depends upon gun clubs to conduct its mandatory hunter/trapper education program and relies upon feedback from clubs for data on what hunters want and need. As you know from the voting habits of gun owners - Pennsylvania is home to almost one million hunters and at least four times that many gun owners but we have an anti-gun governor - and the way people in general will not come forward and speak up, if the PGC waiting for the hunters to come to it with input, they'd be waiting a long, long time. So yes, the gun clubs tell the PGC what works on their ranges and what doesn't.

    But that's not what has influenced the PGC not to allow semi-automatic rifles and handguns for hunting. In fact, those firearms never were allowed at any time, so the use of them has not been taken away from hunters who were able to use them in the past.

    What you may not be aware of is that almost all big game in Pennsylvania is shot at less than 100 yards and probably more than half of it at less than 50 yards. That's because most of our hunting ground - the PGC owns 14 million acres of it, by the way - is hilly or mountainous and heavily wooded, so the hunter next to you might be 50 yards away and you may not know he is there because you cannot see him due to either the terrain or the vegetation. If you think disallowing semi-automatic firearms in that kind of environment is anti-gun, your thinking is seriously warped. In fact, there is one county in Pennsylvania where only shotguns are permitted for any kind of hunting because of the population density and smallness of the remaining woodlots.

    In a State Game Land as far into the middle of nowhere as it gets in Huntingdon County, Pennsylvania, I once shot a buck about 60 yards away and while field-dressing it, noticed orange on a hillside about 75 yards away in the same direction. I had unknowingly shot not AT that hunter but in his general direction and had neck-shot the deer, so the bullet passed through. I got the willies thinking about where my bullet finally stopped.

    I used to hunt on a ridge from which you could see a mountain about 1/4-mile to the north. Because the ridge faced north, the rising sun would illuminate the opposing mountainside. With no leaves to block the view, it looked like every other tree had something orange leaning against it. I hunted the ridge instead of the larger mountain because a stream at the base of the ridge kept a lot of hunters out and I didn't have to deal with that much humanity around me but that's how it can get on public hunting ground around here. When a deer would run out in the open field at the bottom of the mountain, it sounded like a war had broken out over there. And often, the deer made it across the field seemingly unscathed.

    A 153-acre gun club 15 minutes from my home where I am a life member has had to ban hunting on its property with anything but a bow because of the proximity of the homes that have been built around it.

    Is the logic of the PGC beginning to make sense to you now? This isn't the wide open spaces of the west.

    Please don't forget that no club or governing body in Pennsylvania has imposed any gun OWNERSHIP restrictions beyond what have been federally mandated. I'm very well aware that one ploy of the antis is to take away any place where guns can be fired so ownership of them becomes less attractive. But at the gun clubs, it's the old story of a few bad apples spoiling the barrel - or in this case, the range. If the club officers were to tell its one to two thousand members (typical for the better clubs hereabouts) that it must raise dues to cover range damage inflicted by 50 or so members who shoot a certain type of firearm in a certain manner, the other members would quickly put Democracy into action and vote to ban those firearms from their club's ranges altogether. Because the governing bodies of those clubs are their shooting members, they have simply banned that type of use.

    And I'm not saying that anyone who owns and shoots a semi is nuts or can't control his/her gun. I've shot off a bench right beside one of those guns more than once and have been impressed enough by what I've seen to be currently considering buying one. In fact, one time I was shooting my muzzleloader and the other shooter and I were joking about the extreme contrast in guns. It is a few of those gun owners who have screwed things up for the rest.

    Almost 100% of the clubs in Pennsylvania are member-owned, so even if the president or chairman of the board of directors wanted to, he or she could not disallow any form of firearm or shooting without the approval of a majority of the membership. So the CLUBS have not banned rapid-fire shooting, SHOOTERS have!

    My final point is that both clubs I have used as examples are very highly regarded by the NRA. The one that has banned firearm hunting on its property hosted a Friends of the NRA supporter appreciation trapshoot and banquet just this past Sunday and the other one hosts at least one Friends banquet and auction every year. Hosting such functions for the NRA costs clubs money - what does that tell you about those clubs' position on the Second Amendment?

    Ed
     
  15. 22hornet

    22hornet Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 22, 2007
    Messages:
    1,461
    Location:
    Hanford, CA
    Hey Ed...I grew up in Huntingdon County. You are right. Middle of nowhere. Gods country. Can't wait to get back! Good post, by the way.
     
  16. AveragEd

    AveragEd Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    5,475
    Location:
    Mechanicsburg, Pennsylvania
    Thanks. I was about 1/2-mile from the southeastern shore of Raystown Lake in 1989. It was my son's first time deer hunting (he wasn't old enough to hunt yet, but he went along) and I was sick as a dog. We didn't leave my friend's dad's summer cabin (an A-frame about a mile from where we would be hunting)until 8:30 and only walked a short distance into the woods. We sat down on tree stumps at 9:20 and I was gagging and coughing as a buck chased two does right past us ten minutes later. The other five guys I was hunting with went "in deep and up high where the big ones live" at 3:00 a.m. but came out dead-tired and empty-handed at dark. I still haven't lived that one down.

    Ed
     
  17. ivanhoe

    ivanhoe Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    7,538
    Location:
    Oxford MA
    2str8 you asked Brian "When did obama ever say law abiding people shouldn't own guns?"

    Well I am not Brian but he has already answered that "Get the Oct. 2008 Field & Stream. Turn to page 85."

    "Obama then says "Yes" to an "assault weapons ban", and states that the AK-47 is not a hunting arm and should be banned, permanently, from "civilian hands"

    Gee I guess that doesn't mean law abiding people? Ya Right!!!!!!!!!!!

    Bob Lawless
     
  18. bigdogtx

    bigdogtx Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 5, 2006
    Messages:
    10,650
    flincher,

    several firearms, including the ak47, have full auto capabilities. I would bet that just about any semi-auto can be "converted". If it is, then it is already illegal to own....unless you have a class 3 license.
     
  19. ivanhoe

    ivanhoe Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    7,538
    Location:
    Oxford MA
    2str8 you said "I didn't know full autos were not already banned." they aren't already banned. However an AK47 that can be purchased by the public is legally is not full auto they are semi-auto.

    Now you ask "I don't see where you can say he is against gun ownership, a broad statement, and turn it against him because he wanted to modify SOME gun ownership."

    No one here said that you asked "When did obama ever say law abiding people shouldn't own guns" No one here answered it Field and Stream answered it by quoting Obama.

    I guess you didn't figure this to your advantage did Ya.

    Bob Lawless
     
  20. Brian in Oregon

    Brian in Oregon Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    25,238
    Location:
    Deplorable Bitter Clinger in Liberal La La Land
    Ed, your reply was a lot more reasoned and better than your previous post, in which you gave all indications that PA hunters felt that it was OK to ban semi-autos because the game commission banned them.<br>
    <br>
    So 2str8, again, I'm voting for Palin, not McCain. She was not in the picture when I made my statement about McCain. It's just that simple.<br>
    <br>
    Also, Bob Lawless' reply hits the nail on the head. You've been given your answer. Obama wants to ban guns owned by law abiding citizens.<br>
    <br>
    As far as fully automatic AK47s, there are some that are legal to own and are transferable from and to ordinary citizens. Provided the provisions of the 1934 National Firearms Act are followed, and that you reside in one of the 35 states that allows ownership of machineguns.<br>
    <br>
    Flincher100, I read the article at factcheck.org. Not impressed. Throughout their piece they showed incredible ignorance to the issues involved. Just one example, they don't know where the NRA based their claim that "millions" more guns would be banned if the AWB was renewed and made permanent. Well, it's simple. The renewal language added many more firearms to the "assault weapon" ban list, including common pump shotguns. They did not do enough homework. No cigar. I'll stand behind the NRA-ILA on this. You can stand with the anti-gunners.
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.