The Firing Line Forums - View Single Post

tirod · February 11, 2013, 06:43 PM

The post is meant to get US to thinking about the wild claims and inaccuracies put out by the news media.

So far, it seems to be digging up more problems here.

I have a Remington 700, and Winchester 94, and I wish people would unload them according to the instructions:

https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&q...nktCg3Ze_orAJQ

What happens in real life is the action gets jacked until it's empty, a lot of bolt actions have blind magazines. There is no dropping the floor.

https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&q...-r0zzu9LNgH0jQ

Very specific - you chamber and extract each round.

Alternate views don't make the other person wrong, if things were agreed on, we wouldn't be talking AWB again.

The detachable magazine is very much a part of the California AWB, and specifically called out in new legislation to be outlawed completely, not even a bullet button.

As for some of the rest of nitpicking, it misses the point, and I gave some clear examples. What we have actually documented is a lot of denial in how the gun works and where it rates it the scheme of evolutionary development in firearms. I don't see new rifle designs stepping back from what the AR15 pioneered, if anything, modern rifles - those adopted by armies in huge quantities - are taking the AR15 featureset as the bare minimum and adding to that.

What modern armies adopt are what future sporting arms will be - that is another fact.

I'm not trying to address the issue of the 2A being about hunting rifles, but to ignore the progression of firearms and ban modern features is really no different than the attempt to ban previous innovations because the public simply wasn't prepared to accept them. Like automobiles - you no longer have to walk in front of them waving a red flag, or keep a lantern lit next them at night on the street so a horse and buggy doesn't run into them.

Frankly, less than wholehearted acceptance of the AR15 as the modern hunting rifle is just playing into the hands of the antigunners - we know they are the enemy, but it continues to surprise me how many fifth columnists pop up to undermine our efforts.

Moot point, the proposed legislation in Congress could be interpreted as banning the Garand, too - it loads 8 rounds. The anti's won't be happy until YOUR guns are banned, too. If they win now, you are next.

"First they came for the AR 15 shooters,
and I didn't speak out because I wasn't one.

Then they came for the handgunners,
and I didn't speak out because I wasn't one.

Then they came for the shotgunners,
and I didn't speak out because I wasn't one.

Then they came for me,
and I told them I supported their goals all along.
But I was an idealist, and they didn't want to take any chances. "

If not having guns at all isn't seen as the goal, ask our brothers in Britain.

February 11, 2013, 06:43 PM	#20
tirod Junior member Join Date: January 21, 2009 Posts: 1,672	The post is meant to get US to thinking about the wild claims and inaccuracies put out by the news media. So far, it seems to be digging up more problems here. I have a Remington 700, and Winchester 94, and I wish people would unload them according to the instructions: https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&q...nktCg3Ze_orAJQ What happens in real life is the action gets jacked until it's empty, a lot of bolt actions have blind magazines. There is no dropping the floor. https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&q...-r0zzu9LNgH0jQ Very specific - you chamber and extract each round. Alternate views don't make the other person wrong, if things were agreed on, we wouldn't be talking AWB again. The detachable magazine is very much a part of the California AWB, and specifically called out in new legislation to be outlawed completely, not even a bullet button. As for some of the rest of nitpicking, it misses the point, and I gave some clear examples. What we have actually documented is a lot of denial in how the gun works and where it rates it the scheme of evolutionary development in firearms. I don't see new rifle designs stepping back from what the AR15 pioneered, if anything, modern rifles - those adopted by armies in huge quantities - are taking the AR15 featureset as the bare minimum and adding to that. What modern armies adopt are what future sporting arms will be - that is another fact. I'm not trying to address the issue of the 2A being about hunting rifles, but to ignore the progression of firearms and ban modern features is really no different than the attempt to ban previous innovations because the public simply wasn't prepared to accept them. Like automobiles - you no longer have to walk in front of them waving a red flag, or keep a lantern lit next them at night on the street so a horse and buggy doesn't run into them. Frankly, less than wholehearted acceptance of the AR15 as the modern hunting rifle is just playing into the hands of the antigunners - we know they are the enemy, but it continues to surprise me how many fifth columnists pop up to undermine our efforts. Moot point, the proposed legislation in Congress could be interpreted as banning the Garand, too - it loads 8 rounds. The anti's won't be happy until YOUR guns are banned, too. If they win now, you are next. "First they came for the AR 15 shooters, and I didn't speak out because I wasn't one. Then they came for the handgunners, and I didn't speak out because I wasn't one. Then they came for the shotgunners, and I didn't speak out because I wasn't one. Then they came for me, and I told them I supported their goals all along. But I was an idealist, and they didn't want to take any chances. " If not having guns at all isn't seen as the goal, ask our brothers in Britain.