@farmerman,
farmerman wrote:
Quote: The Barret 107 has a neat muzzle break and a nifty recoil system that is tres cool. It has "day optics" with a nikor 10X 20 and several reticles for distance estimation (quarter and half stadia for checking distance). The muzz velocity is reportedly 1600M/sec(Thats about 4500 ft /sec). I was able to empty a clip into a standard 250 m target in less than a minute (a good sniper could do this in under 10 seconds), and I was mostly in the "eye of the bull" with a nice pattern for a first timer. The gun has a good spring back bipod and is very comfortable firing.
Its a bit pricey for the civilian model (what with all the googaws and checkering).
That sounds pretty good, for military purposes.
I 'm not a hunter; I guess u coud hunt very big game with that.
farmerman wrote:
Quote:
You make my point by concentrating on the Federalist papers.
Everything subsequent to our constitution and the Federalist Papers
has been "Improvised" not of a stricvt constructionist viewpoint.
Consequently, an un modified view of the second amendment is
really not what we should be embracing.
The Bill of Rights was added to clarify the antecedent body of the Constitution.
farmerman wrote:
Quote:
I like guns and use them as tools for hunting and protection.
I DO NOT endorse the universal availability of all kinds of weapons.
I 'm sorry to hear that, but whoever is sufficiently motivated
will equip himself with whatever ordnance he desires, legal or not, if he is sufficiently motivated.
farmerman wrote:
Quote:Just because other kids were able to not kill themselves while
firing a MAC, doesnt , IMO, resolve the issue to openly provide
kids with opportunities to fore these things.
There are 1000s of ways for people of all ages to get accidentally killed.
Is there a
particular reason
to make it the law that its OK to get accidentally killed by many 1000s of causes,
EXCEPT ONE: kids may not get killed from automatic weapons ??
If u dwell in such fear for their well-being, shoud u have it enacted into law
that thay may not ride in cars
(surely many multiples of kids have been killed by cars than by guns)
or indeed that thay must remain indoors until age 21, to protect them from getting killed by lightning ?
farmerman wrote:
Quote:Ive always looked at auto weapons as a demonstration of lack of abilities in eye-hand coordination.
That is the engineering philosophy of shotguns also.
We have as much right to our beloved SMGs as we do to our shotguns and to our Bibles and our newspapers.
The 2nd Amendment simply
deprives government of
jurisdiction
to legislate concerning the portable armament of individual citizens.
Government has a better right to legislate as to what will be
your favorite color, than it does as to your weaponry,
because there is
nothing explicitly in the Supreme Law of the Land
depriving it of jurisdiction to force u to have its designated favorite color.
farmerman wrote:
Quote:You only need one well placed bullet at your target,
you dont need to engage in wreaking all sorts of collateral damage.
Not every American citizen is an Olympic class sharpshooter.
All sharpshooters were not created =,
but u do have the right to defend yourself and your property
with your portable weaponry of choice, be it shotgun, pistol,
revolver, or submachinegun.
If all homes in America were defended by 1 or more submachineguns or shotguns,
thay 'd thereby become deathtraps for burglars,
making severe inroads into that way of life and way of death.
The Founders woud have
LOVED THAT; its very
ROBUSTLY AMERICAN.
farmerman wrote:
Quote:In Philly, and BAltimore, they had 5 murders each on one evening last weekend.
Most violence is recidivistic.
I wish I coud have requested the Founders to provide concurrent jurisdiction
to
BANISH violent recidivists from the North American Continent.
In any case, thay can be permanently
ISOLATED from the decent citizens. Thay shoud be.
Crime 'd be reduced to next to nothing (especially if u repeal the anti-drug laws).
farmerman wrote:
Quote:Most of those hit were kids and civilians (not the cowardly gang members).
The shootings in Baltimore were accomplished by auto weapons.
Which automatic weapons?
Anyway, woud it have been significantly nicer if thay 'd thrown Molotov Coctails instead ??
Remember, people can
MAKE fully automatic weapons, if thay wanna.
Thay have even done it in
PRISON.
(Is that a testament to the
human spirit ??)
David wrote:
Quote: Its a choice between fundamentally different cultural mindsets:
one is Individualism, replete with freedom and very stingy
in granting authority to the collective or to its henchman, government.
farmerman wrote:
Quote:Once again we part ways in our individual worldviews.
That can happen.
farmerman wrote:
Quote:You see everyone as basically able to handle weapons,
With a little bit of training and some practice:
YES,
unless there is something basicly rong with him.
Most individual weapons are ez to operate.
I have found submachineguns and automatic rifles to be user friendly.
farmerman wrote:
Quote:or else you care not because you feel that, if confronted,
you can overcome them with your own skill with handguns.
Well, at least I can try; at least I have the equipment to
TRY.
The 2nd Amendment does not warrant that u will win every gunfight.
farmerman wrote:
Quote:I see a need for universal law and order as a compact between us
and our governments (state and fed and local)as enforced by their agents.
See if u can convince Reginal Denny of that compact.
I watched him being stomped in L.A. for almost an hour
on all 3 networks nationwide with no assistance forthcoming from their agents.
U can trust their agents if u wanna.
farmerman wrote:
Quote:(Right now we have a terrible track record at accomplishing this
but I dont see the answer being greater gun availability to everyone)
Those of us who disagree with u have a constitutional right
to attend to our self preservation as we see fit,
within our guaranty of
non-jurisdiction of government afforded by the Bill of Rights.
Its a matter of
personal choice.
farmerman wrote:
Quote:The four freedoms include a freedom from fear and I dont see a universally armed public
guaranteeing that . We start on the slope to chaos with your worldview.
A well armed populace was the extant state of affairs
everywhere in America
mostly thru the first third of the 20th Century.
It did not include "chaos."
Note that there have never been any gun laws in Vermont.
It remains a haven of tranquility.
Several years ago, Alaska repealed all of its gun laws.
Serenity abounds in all directions.
When I was a kid in Arizona, just about everyone had guns: no trouble.
NO "chaos".
Q.E.D.: a well armed populace can be a peacefully quiet polity.
Fears to the contrary are only imaginary.
David
