What's on your list? Why is a weapon referred to as "assault" type? mtmuley
Thoughts on the anti-hunting movement
- Thread starter RockinU
- Start date
Do you consider banning bump stocks a form of gun control?
there is no such thing as an assault weapon.uneducated people simply fear a black gun.
plain truth is , anyone who can not be trusted to carry any weapon , without killing someone, has zero business roaming free in any society.
I do not support any laws that punish the innocent to provide protection from the crazy
plain truth is , anyone who can not be trusted to carry any weapon , without killing someone, has zero business roaming free in any society.
I do not support any laws that punish the innocent to provide protection from the crazy
Last edited:
I do.
BrentD
Well-known member
that leaves a lot to interpretation. A speed limit would fit this definition by some peoples' opinions.
almost all my friends have bump stocks or some type of trigger spring attachment to help shoot faster if they wanna play at the range or on the farm. So yes banning them is a form of gun control. Keeping or limiting good guys owning anytype of gun is gun control or attachments to a gun.
what soon if we call a gun a long range rifle it will be limited or need to be controlled to keep the left happy
Straight Arrow
Well-known member
Generally speaking, the weapon which not long ago was employed almost exclusively by the military or law enforcement. AR's, AK's, and others became a trendy rage and were subsequently produced and marketed widely. Unfortunately my perspective and obviously a broader bias by gun control advocates is that those weapons are misused and displayed by militant wanna-be's and others who are less than respectable appearing citizens. Having said that, I fully realize that many responsible and safe gun owners use them for recreational target shooting and for hunting appropriately. However, it's the irresponsible gunners shooting rapidly, felling trees, otherwise just intent on blowing stuff up, disturbing others, appearing threateningly defiant, and projecting a bad image of gun owners who are at the forefront and have become the stereotype. IMO, they are more detrimental to upholding my Second Amendment rights than even the gun control advocates.
The additional critical reality for me is that there are so many, perhaps even the majority, of voting citizens who are "on the fence" regarding the gun control issues and potential new regulations, but can be pushed off the fence onto the wrong side (unreasonable gun controls) by the nimrods irresponsibly employing "assault" weapons.
For full disclosure, my son owns an AR-15 and he and my grandson shoot it and think it's pretty "cool". Much to my chagrin, the grandson "plays" with one in many video killing games, of which this old curmudgeon also disapproves. However, my point to them is, "You don't hunt with it, you don't really even shoot it that much, so it's a frivolous waste of your time, money, and gun safe space ... you don't need it! Be cool some more constructive way."
Straight Arrow, thanks for your service to our country! 30 years very big thank you!!!. I am not very happy with the NRA. I recently let my membership expire.
I disagree, but I understand where you are coming from. I don't own any of those types of rifles, and have no desire to. But I don't support restricting ownership or availability of them. mtmuley
when it comes to guns>>>> its super offensive to hear someone say " you don't need that type of gun" Im just saying Im not offended by your comment because I totally see it. I'll tell you what is next>> you don't need that truck> You don't need that size house> You don't need that meat in your freezer >> you don't need to go to church >>> you don't need to go hunting >> you don't need to hunt that animal>>> etc etc etc etc
Now here is what you need to do> Pay tax on those all you don't needs!!! Don't tread on me!
Im not familiar with it, but most likely yes by my definition
Pucky Freak
Well-known member
How about we get the thread back on track - what should us hunters be doing to protect our hunting heritage?
D
Deleted member 20812
Guest
Plant a "don't tread on me" flag on a hill and refuse to act as an ambassador to anyone different from us?
jryoung
Well-known member
Go to San Francisco, serve elk tacos, most would be surprised to see what the dialogue is. It's open, curious, and pretty easy to chip away at the false perspectives many have as to what/who hunters are.
Change isn't going to happen overnight, but an openness and willing to work will make a difference.
onpoint
Well-known member
Hmmm....
None of my friends have bump stocks nor some type of trigger spring attachment to help shoot faster......
I and all of my friends are purely hunters. I have absolutely no use for a toy like an AR. Neither do my friends. In fact, my Western Public Land hunter friends and I quite often discuss the net negative the AR culture has on the things we hold the dearest. But then again, without the things we hold dearest, our firearms would be of no use to us.
But like I said, that's me and my friends. Most of us have a butt load of firearms, a bunch of mounts around the house, and the average span of our Public Lands hunting careers is probably around 40 some years.
Just a bunch of liberal snowflakes we are - a retired truck driver, a plumber, a cop, a couple retired fish and wildlife biologists, a game warden, a day trader........
And I, a retired state fish and wildlife tech who has (likely) ended the lives of more critters than any member on this forum - yeah I'm a real hardcore liberal......................................
We and the friends we run with are an interesting illustration of the wide gulf which exists in the world of the American hunter(s).
I laugh(nervously) at people who proclaim "hunters have to stick together". They (which is a word those proclaim such things seem to like) should wake up - we are a vastly differing bunch. And that gulf is expanding.
Wonder how the whole thing will shake out................................................
Pucky Freak
Well-known member
Things we could be doing to protect our hunting heritage:
-venison diplomacy
-educating non hunters about hunting practices
-consider giving up inhumane, deeply unpopular, or overwhelmingly offensive legal hunting methods
-elect pro hunting and pro public access candidates. Republicans are overwhelmingly pro
gun but are usually also anti public access As a consequence of being pro business and pro economy.
what we are doing that works against our hunting heritage:
-thinking hunting is a right instead of a privilege. Gun ownership is a right, but we confuse the two.
-thinking we don't rely on public endorsement to be able to hunt
-Blindly supporting one political party instead of looking at the issues
-irresponsible, offensive, and insensitive flaunting of 2nd amendment rights. Hunting has long been a victim of anti gun movement, and this is not the liberal elite's fault. It's mainly our fault for acting like a bunch of foolish, arrogant a-holes.
-venison diplomacy
-educating non hunters about hunting practices
-consider giving up inhumane, deeply unpopular, or overwhelmingly offensive legal hunting methods
-elect pro hunting and pro public access candidates. Republicans are overwhelmingly pro
gun but are usually also anti public access As a consequence of being pro business and pro economy.
what we are doing that works against our hunting heritage:
-thinking hunting is a right instead of a privilege. Gun ownership is a right, but we confuse the two.
-thinking we don't rely on public endorsement to be able to hunt
-Blindly supporting one political party instead of looking at the issues
-irresponsible, offensive, and insensitive flaunting of 2nd amendment rights. Hunting has long been a victim of anti gun movement, and this is not the liberal elite's fault. It's mainly our fault for acting like a bunch of foolish, arrogant a-holes.
I do not support speed limit restrictions. I obey them but I do not support them.
seems like our friends have very similar occupations just different choice of guns but I have friends who don't own black guns also, really not sure what the purely hunter means?
makes no difference if they need I or not . since when are we a nation that limits ourselves to what we need????????? they want it and it is their right to own it. the constitution, which is the supreme law of our nation guarantees that right, wether others agree with it or not.
Similar threads
