@oralloy,
Quote: So? Hunting has nothing to do with the Second Amendment anyway
neither do silencers or bump stocks
Quote:
Not at all. Gunshots cause hearing damage if ears are unprotected. If hunters wear hearing protection, they are unable to hear quiet sounds while listening for game.
Your logic , just to support "silencers" for hunting is quite lame. Go back to the drawing boards and try to come up with something that doesnt draw laughter
@oralloy,
Quote: Further, nutty suburbanites move out to the countryside and then throw a tantrum about all the gunshots during hunting seasons and try to pass local ordinances banning hunting.
Thats total BS. A fact is that hunting requires a "safety zone" of at least 100 yds to nearest properties (THATS PROPERTY LINES NOT HOUSES), thats good enought to muffle gun sounds a bit.
You know that you are jut yanking at straws here.
Quote: I believe I answered when you brought it up before
what is it you said??
@farmerman,
farmerman wrote:
Quote: So? Hunting has nothing to do with the Second Amendment anyway
neither do silencers or bump stocks
... or magazines with extra large capacities
@snood,
yep, that sacred status of "anything you can stick onto the 2 Amendment is originalist thinking" needs some more realistic reviews.
@oralloy,
Quote:
Rifle bullets will still make a supersonic crack even with the best of silencers
ever hear twigs cracking in the deep woods?? Youll have silencers all around you in a windy day. You need to go outside a bit more .
Quote: nutty suburbanites move out to the countryside
I think Ill remember that slip
@revelette1,
Quote:McConnell calls on Roy Moore to 'step aside' in Ala. Senate race(the Guardian)
This isn't about principle. McConnell is worried only about electoral consequences. If what he said today was based on principle, he'd have to say the the same about Trump.
@wmwcjr,
Made me laugh with the clams, wmwcjr..
Quote:Despite denials from the campaign and the White House, it’s now clear that members of the Trump campaign corresponded or met with Russians at least 30 times throughout the campaign. Knowledge of these communications went to the highest levels of Donald Trump’s operation — both Corey Lewandowski and Paul Manafort, two of the campaign’s three managers, were aware of it.
WP
And note that it's 30
that we know about. But as Greg Sargent points out, while the media may now have knowledge of 30 meetings/correspondences, it's very likely that Mueller's team know of more.
Am I the only one overwhelmed with all the sexual harassment claims?
I figure a goodly portion are true. Assuming the numbers are high, this stuff is creepy and has been, um, overlooked, and the numbers horrific.
The-touched-my knee business confuses me, as knee touches can vary, as can some others, like touching someone's hand (I postulate.)
Can we never touch anyone again without a spoken request and affirmative answer? Are hugs going to die?
I know a lot of people don't like to be hugged, say so, and let the huggers know. That is usually that.
Well, presidents slipping sly hands on ladies backsides are dumb, or, a better word, stupid.
Maybe we'll have to develop a point system after all these centuries.
I feel like we are all on an harassment a day news diet.
A very damning sounding press conference just happened with fifth Roy Moore alleged victim.
One of America's great assholes speaks
Quote:Dinesh D'SouzaVerified account
@DineshDSouza
I was lukewarm on Roy Moore until the last-minute smear. Now we must elect him to show that the @washingtonpost sleaze attack failed
5:58 AM - 12 Nov 2017
@farmerman,
farmerman wrote:oralloy wrote:So? Hunting has nothing to do with the Second Amendment anyway.
neither do silencers or bump stocks
Militiamen clearly have the right to have full-auto weapons. Although that would be real full-auto, and not crude substitutes like bump stocks.
And unless you can produce a good reason for restrictions on silencers, they are indeed covered by the Second Amendment.
farmerman wrote:oralloy wrote:Not at all. Gunshots cause hearing damage if ears are unprotected. If hunters wear hearing protection, they are unable to hear quiet sounds while listening for game.
Your logic , just to support "silencers" for hunting is quite lame. Go back to the drawing boards and try to come up with something that doesnt draw laughter
I posted the actual reason why hunters are going to start hunting with silencers. I will not post a different reason just because you dislike the true reason.
@farmerman,
farmerman wrote:oralloy wrote:Further, nutty suburbanites move out to the countryside and then throw a tantrum about all the gunshots during hunting seasons and try to pass local ordinances banning hunting. Silenced hunting will cut down on such nonsense.
Thats total BS.
Not to people who have nutty suburbanites move into their area and then try to tell them they can't hunt anymore.
farmerman wrote:A fact is that hunting requires a "safety zone" of at least 100 yds to nearest properties (THATS PROPERTY LINES NOT HOUSES), thats good enought to muffle gun sounds a bit.
I doubt that's the case nationwide. And even where it does apply, it may not keep some anti-gun suburbanite from moving into an area and then trying to tell people they can't hunt.
farmerman wrote:You know that you are jut yanking at straws here.
No. I'm explaining the reasons why people prefer to hunt with silencers.
farmerman wrote:oralloy wrote:I believe I answered when you brought it up before.
what is it you said??
I said:
"
I am unsure what specifically you are referring to. However, I have heard that among the many many good things that would be accomplished by the SHARE Act is the reversal of some Obama-era regulations over lead ammo.
Perhaps you should call your congresspeople and urge them to pass the SHARE Act."
@snood,
snood wrote:farmerman wrote:oralloy wrote:So? Hunting has nothing to do with the Second Amendment anyway.
neither do silencers or bump stocks
... or magazines with extra large capacities
Oh? When did the military stop considering large magazines to be militarily useful? You'll have to tell us when they stopped using 30 round magazines (and belts of ammo).
@farmerman,
farmerman wrote:yep, that sacred status of "anything you can stick onto the 2 Amendment is originalist thinking" needs some more realistic reviews.
There is nothing realistic about your claims that the Second Amendment meant the opposite of what the Founding Fathers said they intended.
@ossobucotemp,
Adds... I do get that a fair part of what we are hearing is about stuff that was kept quiet, mostly for a long time, and speaking out is right and just.
@ossobucotemp,
This is an avalanche. And I've found it disorienting too. Also, disappointing as hell.
But it has to change.
