Quote:
|
Originally Posted by buck460XVR
IMHO, a responsible owner is someone who obeys the law and shoots, hunts and stores their firearms in a safe and responsible way. When someone is next to me at the range, in the field or in the deer woods, I'm more concerned about how responsible they are with whatever firearm they have, than I am in how they feel about high capacity mags and AR type platforms.
|
It is laudable that a person who endorses restrictions on shooting not focused on hunting would handle his firearm safely. That's a facet of responsibility. However, we might agree that endorsing a constriction of the right where they think that constriction will not affect them immediately isn't responsible and lacks foresight; it's a bad behavior. A description of a bad behavior is unlikely to be complimentary.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by buck460XVR
Also, even tho they may not see a need for certain platforms/accessories, most would support them, if and when the time comes, that their choices are challenged.
|
That doesn't sound like what I understand "Fudd" to mean.
Quote:
|
A gun-owner who supports traditional hunting guns but favors gun control for other guns such as handguns or tactical rifles.
|
https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/Fudd
For what it's worth, I don't see hunters as the only subgroup of shooters who misconstrue the right to be
really only about their chosen activity.
If I proclaim that the 2d Am. protects my right to take my friends on a deer hunt with my bolt action rifle or a shotgun, but only criminals need handguns and a magazine with more than 10 rounds is evidence of poor marksmanship, it is difficult for me to foresee alienation or insult if someone describes me as a Fudd. How can accurate use be insulting?
If someone were to describe me as half blind, low speed, high drag, I imagine my response would be "Guilty".