What's new
By:
USCHO Fan Forum

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

  • The USCHO Fan Forum has migrated to a new plaform, xenForo. Most of the function of the forum should work in familiar ways. Please note that you can switch between light and dark modes by clicking on the gear icon in the upper right of the main menu bar. We are hoping that this new platform will prove to be faster and more reliable. Please feel free to explore its features.

The 2nd Term - Round 2 - Amensty for Some, Miniature AR-15s for Others...

Status
Not open for further replies.
Re: The 2nd Term - Round 2 - Amensty for Some, Miniature AR-15s for Others...

FreshFish said:
Would there even be anything left to eat afterward? or would you just be left picking up scattered pieces of pheasant flesh from here and there.....
Click to expand...
No, there wouldn't be much left, at least nothing worth eating. You'd probably be able to find a bloody pile of bones, feathers and connective tissue.
 
Re: The 2nd Term - Round 2 - Amensty for Some, Miniature AR-15s for Others...

bigblue_dl said:
No, there wouldn't be much left, at least nothing worth eating. You'd probably be able to find a bloody pile of bones, feathers and connective tissue.
Click to expand...

Probably would look something like this

 
Re: The 2nd Term - Round 2 - Amensty for Some, Miniature AR-15s for Others...

It's an interesting dichotomy in our politics these days. At the state level, there are 30 Republican governors, and Republicans in control of many state legislatures. The House has a strong Republican majority. Yet the <strike>Demagogs</strike> Democrats comfortably won the Presidency and control the Senate.

A conservative pundit offers one explanation:

Part of the story is the fact that Americans tend to see federal and local governments differently. At the local level, people seem to have a better grasp that it’s their tax dollars at work. They are far more sensitive to tax increases and more easily outraged by spending boondoggles. They understand the importance of sustainable economic growth.

But what gets Republicans elected at the local level gets them in trouble at the federal level. One of the many reasons for this is that we’ve come to see the federal government as some sort of mystical entity empowered to right all of the wrongs in society. If there’s a problem, there “should” be a federal response, the costs or feasibility of that response be ****ed.

While Romney’s infamous riff about the “47 percent” was profoundly flawed, the simple reality is that millions of people who do, in fact, pay federal income taxes don’t care about those tax dollars the same way they care about their local tax dollars. This is true of people who get more from the federal government than they pay in, but it’s also true for millions of affluent voters as well.

Our presidents, Republican and Democrat alike, talk about their “visions” for America, as if being a president requires you to impose some quasi-religious vision on the country.

But the Democrats are simply better at talking about government in spiritual terms. Indeed, such testifying is Obama’s one indisputable gift. They talk about the federal government doing things we’d want God to do if God dabbled in public policy. They use the logic of religion, which holds that there is a unitary and seamless nature to all good things, and therefore no good thing government does should come at the expense of some other good thing government might do.

And, worst of all, they castigate anyone who opposes more spending on, say, “the children” or “the environment” as morally retrograde and “against children” and “against the environment.”

The challenge for Republicans is to convince the American people that the government isn’t magic, and that all of its money is your money, its debts your debts. I don’t think the GOP is doomed, but America might be if Americans remained unconvinced too much longer.
Click to expand...


I've thought of Progressivism as a secular religion for awhile, it was interesting for me to see someone else use that concept and express it much better than I have.
 
Last edited:
Re: The 2nd Term - Round 2 - Amensty for Some, Miniature AR-15s for Others...

5mn_Major said:
I would love to hear how hunting is easier by firing every second and dealing with continuous recoil. Snipers, SWAT, etc take single well placed shots...and do NOT fire as many rounds as possible...to take out a single target at range.



Are you done with your ramble yet?

I will repeat, because you obviously didn't read. Ban weapons...that add value to mass killings and don't to other typical usages...one weapon at a time.
Click to expand...

Your dedication to the Constitution is inspiring. I wonder, how often do you drive your car with the accelerator pushed to the floor? Because that's the nitwit notion that you've applied to hunters using "assault" weapons. Because the weapons are capable of firing many rounds in a short period of time, that means absolutely that those awful hunters will do just exactly that. And because their vehicles are most likely capable of speeds somewhat north of 100mph, that inevitably means they'll drive that fast, too. I assume (as usual) you're incapable of seeing the fatal flaw in your "thinking," but I'm guessing not everyone who posts here is a doctrinaire libstain.
 
Last edited:
FreshFish said:
It's an interesting dichotomy in our politics these days. At the state level, there are 30 Republican governors, and Republicans in control of many state legislatures. The House has a strong Republican majority. Yet the <strike>Demagogs</strike> Democrats comfortably won the Presidency and control the Senate.

A conservative pundit offers one explanation:




I've thought of Progressivism as a secular religion for awhile, it was interesting for me to see someone else use that concept and express it much better than I have.
Click to expand...

The house only has a GOP majority because of gerrymandering. Democratic candidates as a group received 8% more votes than the GOP.

Now some of that is on the Dems for not turning out in an off year election, and some is that 2010 was a wave election that happened to coincide with reapportionment.

2014 will likely see some small gop gains. But 2016 could be a bloodbath - lots of teaparty senators up for reelection in bluer states, lots of state houses also up for grabs, and its not an off year election, so the GOP won't be able to win by low turnout alone.
 
Re: The 2nd Term - Round 2 - Amensty for Some, Miniature AR-15s for Others...

Old Pio said:
And early this morning in Chicago, a woman was gunned down on an extrance ramp to Lake Shore Drive.

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/...ake-shore-drive-ramp-20130201,0,1471406.story
Click to expand...
Back in the days of the Vietnam War, the local Metromedia (now Fox) station in NYC would run the roll of the KIA's from the NYC metropolitan area. Can't remember if it was weekly or nightly, but on some nights the list was very long.

Imagine if they did that in Chicago. Would it start to shock the conscience of the city?
 
Re: The 2nd Term - Round 2 - Amensty for Some, Miniature AR-15s for Others...

joecct said:
Back in the days of the Vietnam War, the local Metromedia (now Fox) station in NYC would run the roll of the KIA's from the NYC metropolitan area. Can't remember if it was weekly or nightly, but on some nights the list was very long.

Imagine if they did that in Chicago. Would it start to shock the conscience of the city?
Click to expand...

Well, it might shock the consciences of "the revs," both of whom say they'll be marching this weekend in rembrance of Hadiya Pendleton. Like these two self-serving worthless suckers just woke up, did a face palm, when they realized gang kids were killing each other and lots of innocents, too. Is there any situation that these two bums can't make worse? I doubt it.

One got his national reputation by lying about Dr. King dying in his arms. The other got his national reputation by lying about a little girl being raped by police officers. Now he's got a program on MSNBC! Only in America.

http://www.newser.com/story/162087/jackson-vows-march-for-slain-teen.html

edit: every time I think about those two I'm reminded of Godfrey Cambridge, who defined a "black leader" as a "dude with a new suit and $100 in his pocket."

Meanwhile, the NYPost is reporting Tawana Brawley has been found, after decades on the lam, and will finally be expected to pay the judgements against for for repeatedly lying about being raped by an assistant DA.

http://www.nypost.com/p/news/nation..._source=OutbrainArticlepages&obref=obinsource
 
Last edited:
Re: The 2nd Term - Round 2 - Amensty for Some, Miniature AR-15s for Others...

Old Pio said:
Well, it might shock the consciences of "the revs," both of whom say they'll be marching this weekend in rembrance of Hadiya Pendleton. Like these two self-serving worthless suckers just woke up, did a face palm, when they realized gang kids were killing each other and lots of innocents, too. Is there any situation that these two bums can't make worse? I doubt it.

One got his national reputation by lying about Dr. King dying in his arms. The other got his national reputation by lying about a little girl being raped by police officers. Now he's got a program on MSNBC! Only in America.

http://www.newser.com/story/162087/jackson-vows-march-for-slain-teen.html

edit: every time I think about those two I'm reminded of Godfrey Cambridge, who defined a "black leader" as a "dude with a new suit and $100 in his pocket."
Click to expand...
Maybe the IRS will slap them both with a tax lein during the march?
 
Re: The 2nd Term - Round 2 - Amensty for Some, Miniature AR-15s for Others...

unofan said:
The house only [sic] has a GOP majority because of gerrymandering. Democratic candidates as a group received 8% more votes than the GOP.
Click to expand...

Have to call you out on that "only." Your statistics are skewed for a different reason: the one-district states like WY or AK have far fewer voters in that district than most Congressional districts have. You have to adjust for those imbalances and when you do it is much closer to even.

Also have to call you out on the "only" because both parties engage equally much in gerrymandering, when they have the chance. The Democrats, if I were advising them, made a long-term tactical mistake in trying to carve out "minority safe" districts, which by the way also skew the statistics. Charles Rangel gets 89% of the vote despite being censured? So you have Rangel and JJ Jr. carrying their districts by 90% to 10% and Republicans carrying their districts by 58% to 42% and then you are going to tell me "Democrats as a group received 8% more votes." It seems to me that the Republicans in this scenario have a much broader support base and better represent the population at large.

You seem to have a persistent myopia when it comes to the difference between observing and hoping. How can you ever learn anything new that way? :rolleyes:

Frankly, if I lived in a state that had a Republican governor and had both houses of the legislature also controlled by Republicans, i would probably be uncomfortable with that too. Each party offers something important to a lot of people. I'd not like it if only one of those were in total control. It's not about "which side wins," its about "how do we best achieve a viable society" isn't it??
 
Re: The 2nd Term - Round 2 - Amensty for Some, Miniature AR-15s for Others...

unofan said:
The house only has a GOP majority because of gerrymandering. Democratic candidates as a group received 8% more votes than the GOP.
Click to expand...
That doesn't have to be due to gerrymandering (unless you consider the boundaries of the states themselves to be gerrymandered!). The people-per-representative varies from 568k in Wyoming to 994k in MT, a ratio of 1:1.75, so if "red" states have smaller populations per Representative than "blue" states, then you could still end up with a GOP Congress with 8% more Dem voters even if you just divided every state into districts along lines of longitude. Gerrymandering may very well be the culprit - but it's not the "only" possibility.

edit: darn, FF types faster. Gonna have to get me a Dvorak...
 
Re: The 2nd Term - Round 2 - Amensty for Some, Miniature AR-15s for Others...

I never shot at a non-wounded running deer because I felt I was far more likely to wound the animal rather than drop it. That said any hunter worth his salt has practiced reloading often enough to be efficient with a single-shot rifle. Never mind I think single shot is preferred when hunting deer anyway since a shot from a rest is the most common deer shot taken.

I'm not calling for bans btw, just calling out your skills.
 
Last edited:
bigblue_dl said:
How can you possibly say that it adds no value to a hunter to shoot multiple times quickly? That is a completely asinine statement, and it proves that you simply don't know what you're talking about. Hey, guess what? Even great shots don't hit everything they shoot at! If a deer is running, it is not an easy shot, if you miss, it adds a helluva lot of value to be able to shoot again! 90% of the deer I see are running, good luck taking your time and taking a "well placed shot", as you put it, when the deer is running and you have about 2 seconds to get a shot off. If I had a single-shot gun, I'd have about a quarter of the deer that I have taken in my life. That is just the way it is. Hunters benefit GREATLY from being able to shoot multiple times at an animal. Do you think only one pheasant is jumped at a time? Or that deer don't travel in groups of 2-4? Seriously?
Click to expand...

bbdl has a clue. 5mnmaj does not.

I've only done hardwoods hunting. A long shot is probably 100yards because of the trees/brush. Even then, you're lucky to have a clear shot, and as mentioned by bbdl, deer usually don't cooperate and stand still for me to take my sweet time making sure I pierce vital organs or break a few joints.

I would much rather be able to fire off 2-3-4 maybe 5 shots if I'm lucky to try and make ****ed sure I kill the animal i'm shooting at, as opposed to taking 1 shot, wounding it and not be able to find it. I don't hunt to shoot and not find.

Oh, and an argument that I shouldn't shoot unless I know I will kill and find the deer? That could be the only deer I'll see that season. I'm taking whatever shot I get where I feel I have a reasonable chance to get the kill.
 
Re: The 2nd Term - Round 2 - Amensty for Some, Miniature AR-15s for Others...

Slap Shot said:
I never shot at a non-wounded running deer because I felt I was far more likely to wound the animal rather than drop it. That said any hunter worth his salt has practiced reloading often enough to be efficient with a single-shot rifle. Never mind I think single shot is preferred when hunting deer anyway since a shot from a rest is the most common deer shot taken.

I'm not calling for bans btw, just calling out your skills.
Click to expand...

Confused. Why would it be a single shot just because it's taken from a rest? A semi-auto could be shot "from a rest", could it not? Shooting stance doesn't seem to be related to the gun's action. Also, a still hunter or tracker rarely has a chance to shoot from a rest. (though I do realize that the majority of deer hunters might be baiters, which usually do just that). Anyway my question is what is the advantage of the single shot over a repeater? If you're concerned about the weight of the gun, that would seem to be even less an issue shooting from a stand than if you were tracking, when you're not going to be shooting off a rest anyway.
 
Re: The 2nd Term - Round 2 - Amensty for Some, Miniature AR-15s for Others...

Slap Shot said:
I never shot at a non-wounded running deer because I felt I was far more likely to wound the animal rather than drop it. That said any hunter worth his salt has practiced reloading often enough to be efficient with a single-shot rifle. Never mind I think single shot is preferred when hunting deer anyway since a shot from a rest is the most common deer shot taken.

I'm not calling for bans btw, just calling out your skills.
Click to expand...
You have no clue what kind of hunting we practice. We don't sit and wait, we party hunt and make drives/pushes. 2 completely different kinds of hunting. We don't get shots at standing deer, they're almost always running across an empty corn field or running through the woods. MUCH tougher shots, but also, alot more exciting than sitting and waiting.
 
Re: The 2nd Term - Round 2 - Amensty for Some, Miniature AR-15s for Others...

hockeyplayer1015 said:
Oh, and an argument that I shouldn't shoot unless I know I will kill and find the deer? That could be the only deer I'll see that season. I'm taking whatever shot I get where I feel I have a reasonable chance to get the kill.
Click to expand...

I'm surprised that...with you and all other hunters flocking to AK 47s due to their obvious superiority...just how any other rifle makers can stay in business.
 
5mn_Major said:
I'm surprised that...with you and all other hunters flocking to AK 47s due to their obvious superiority...just how any other rifle makers can stay in business.
Click to expand...

Oh, now you think you know what bbdl and I hunt with?

Browning .308 lever action or pump action rifle, depending on whether I'm doing a drive as bbdl described, or on watch, respectively (the pump action is a couple/few pounds heavier, so hauling it through the mountains for a mile or so isn't much fun). Nice try though.

I personally don't see a ton of practicality in hunting with an "assault weapon" as you crazies seem to like calling them. Could I? Sure. But I can get almost the same number of shots off with my browning as I could with an AR. Why? Each requires a pull of the trigger for a shot, I can't magically pull an AR trigger quicker, surprisingly.
 
Re: The 2nd Term - Round 2 - Amensty for Some, Miniature AR-15s for Others...

5mn_Major said:
I'm surprised that...with you and all other hunters flocking to AK 47s due to their obvious superiority...just how any other rifle makers can stay in business.
Click to expand...
Ok, Mr. Smarty Pants: propose wording for a rule that allows hunters to continue to use semi-automatic guns (as there are good reasons for them to do so, as demonstrated repeatedly in this thread) and yet would make a lick of difference when it comes to shootings in gun-free zones. 20 years on the clock...starts...NOW!
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top