You could say a 50 cal machine gun is ideal That does not make it necessary Most people would find a slide action shot gun adequate for anything less than a full scale assault My opening post included a guy testing different rifles to see if they could shoot through a tree. I am going based upon his video Not sure of your point I did not demonize anything Maybe you are reacting to someone else's posts Given that you seem easily distracted I wonder if it is safe for you to have such weapons
You are the only one sexualizing guns here. Im not sure why you think that attacks and insult attempts against those not committing murder contributes to the discussion. I like that the discussion is about the people instead of the guns. That is where the problem is.
It's just penis envy, that's what it is, to impress the ladies and make them feel better, poor self-esteem, probably fat guys with no love life.
You are incorrect. No reasonable person with minimal knowledge of basic psychology would make such a connection. Unless you have a study supporting your wild claim, you have only revealed your own inadequacies.
Was just a juvenile stereotype on his part. Only way he could say that with any certainty was to go nationwide inspecting millions of penises.
Unconstitutional gun registration in California, put forth by anti-constitutional members of the State legislature, allowed the AG's office to send State Police out to unconstitutionally confiscate otherwise perfectly fine Personal Property from otherwise Perfectly Law Abiding People. California, has a small Jackboot Force willing to violate the Constitutional Protections of its own People, by knocking on doors and demanding the surrender of perfectly owned personal property in the form of a so-called "Firearm." Not a single member of Law Enforcement that I know personally, wants to head out to a law abiding firearm owner's residence for the purpose of forcing them to surrender their personal property. Not one. In fact, I know several members of law enforcement here in California, who despise having to do so and will resist as much as possible to order to do so. Not every single member of Law Enforcement is on-board with usurping Constitutional Protections from Law Abiding People, merely because the State Legislature has decided to abandon that same Constitution.
A slide action shotgun? You mean a pump action? They're one of the most ubiquitous firearms on the planet. You're telling me you people have a problem with PUMPS now? Yeah and most guns if you put enough rounds into a tree will knock it down. You can do that with 9mm ffs you just need alot of bullets.
Privately owned MiG 29 Fulcrum: Privately owned Su-27 Flanker: Privately owned L-39 Albatross: Yes, some people do level up and engage in "hobbies" that require what some my consider to be "dangerous" things. A former Military Weapons System would seem to some to be a bit over the top for a mere hobby. Yet, to someone like me the experience is something to be enjoyed to the maximum degree possible. Yet, I have no desire to use a former Military Weapons Systems to commit mass murder, mass shootings or do anything "mass" other than to have "Mass Fun" while flying - something I still enjoy to the Nth degree - even in a former Military Weapons System that may seem scary and dangerous to others. The rifle you featured in your hit piece on the Constitution above has something in common with these other "powerful and fascinating" things you seemed to have missed. They were all originally designed and built in Russia and they were all designed and built for the purpose of Defense. Now, your idea of "Defense" may not be my idea of "Defense," but I'm sure it won't take you long to figure out that with violent crime on the rise, you either need the capacity to defend yourself and your family, or you need to be willing to abdicate that responsibility to some one else - or maybe fate or faith. I chose Heckler and Koch - "When it counts" - because I am not of the opinion that somebody else is responsible for my "Defense" or that of my family. In your hit piece on the United States Constitution, I never once saw any allusion to why the founders created the 2nd Amendment in the first place. There was never any recollection in your hit piece on the fact that the founders considered you to be a member of the Militia. Your hit piece never addressed the real purpose behind having a Militia, what the Militia's purpose and intent was thought to be by the founders and why they asserted that the Militia's right as the People, was to have the option to keep and bear arms at all time. The Constitution does not specify caliber, platform or feature set of any firearm that any member of the Militia decides to keep and bear. And, without missing a beat, your hit piece on the United States Constitution failed to address the real problem in American Society at present which is Failed Parenting that produces the kind of Pathological People who go out and commit criminal acts upon otherwise peaceful law abiding people. So, if you truly want answers, if you truly care about addressing the matter of mass killings head on, then I would strongly suggest less animosity towards the United States Constitution and those who seek to abide it and focus more time, energy and effort into conducting local town hall meetings in your own neighborhood to address the matter of Piss Poor Parenting that Produces Pathological People who commit criminal acts. Your community will thank you. The entire country will thank you. The problem is bad parents on our society, not the wonderful Kalashnikov AK-45 variant, or the equally wonderful Colt inspired AR-15 variant. Neither of which am I a huge fan of by the way, as I prefer the FN SCAR 17S Heavy for mid range defensive duty, the Tavor TAR-21 for close range defensive duty, and the DT SRS-A2 Covert, as well as the DT HTI in both 416 Barret and 375 CheyTac for medium to long range defensive duties. What I can't understand is why anyone would want to disarm and make totally helpless, innocent law abiding people who just want to be left alone and not turned into a criminal's victim, or the victim of the State?
Well, a Remington 1100 is a better choice than a slide action shotgun for home defense. Semi-auto shotguns have less recoil, and there is no chance of short-stroking the pump action. Most rifles can shoot through trees. As a child, I remember my father shooting a .410 shotgun at a 2x4 at about 5 feet. He wanted to show me the amount of damage even a fairly small shotgun could do. The .410 shot through the 2x4 with about a 2" wide hole. If a .410 can do that, any shotgun or rifle can cut down a tree in enough shots. My guess is that you've never really shot a gun, so those demonstrations seem to show extremely powerful weapons, when they really don't. To address the last paragraph in your OP: Actually, the mass shooters would go through some long convoluted process. Most start their planning weeks, if not months, before they commit their mass shooting. Heck, the Las Vegas Shooter collected guns for years to get ready for his massacre. All gun laws do is harass the law-abiding.
And, as we all know, the vast majority of Grandmothers who knit with yarn, go on to become massively successful International Fashion Designers in their own right, having a worldwide following for the fashions they create as a direct result of being involved in the hobby of knitting.
But, that's the point. It is not ideal for such a purpose as Home Defense. You can't corner or cover indoors well with that kind of platform. You are not coming around a corner indoors tactfully with an M107 in your hands during a home invasion. However, a Bullpup design works very nicely in such an need for an indoors defensive posture. Cornering, covering and moving are all nicely affordable with a Bullpup. Why is it that the anti-second amendment set always tends to focus on the highest caliber platforms available when there has (to my memory) never been a mass shooting on American soil where a 50 caliber cartridge was used? I could be wrong on that stat, but I don't think so. There has never been a 416 Barrett, 375 CheyTac or 50 BMG shooting of any kind on American soil as far as I know. And, even if there has been, how many of those types of shootings have there been in juxtaposition to the number of people who will die TODAY from being rear-ended by some idiot on the freeway, or some nut case driver who never learned how to make a safe and legal lane change? Yet, are we lining up to take donations for a fund raiser that seeks to politically remove driving privileges away from those who Tailgate at 65 mph? Nope. We are not foaming at the mouth to "save lives" on that count. We only want to "save lives" when it comes to removing firearms from the hands of law abiding people. Yet, those exact life saving hypocrites will abort more than 650,000 lives this year alone while proclaiming that "guns" are the real problem in our society. And, those are the 650,000 reported Mass Killings that nobody wants to label "Mass Killing." Why? Because, we label it the "Woman's Right To Choose." Really? We have the right to selective Moral juxtaposition on the grounds that failure to take an unborn life might be an inconvenience in my own personal life? WTH is wrong this country when the outright taking of unborn life gets no play on the 6 O'clock news reel, but every single so-called "mass shooting" gets prime time coverage when hundreds of thousands of unborn lives are being destroyed each and ever year in this land? Total Hypocrisy. Nothing more and nothing less. I wish that Embryo could somehow use an AR-15 to DEFEND itself against its killer. The Embryo needs rescuing. Not the ambitions for an uncomplicated life for those who would kill that unborn child. Who defends the unborn? Who?
Sometimes i wonder if my writing is confusing, or people do not bother reading what is written? So, This is what i wrote Most people would find a slide action shot gun adequate for anything less than a full scale assault Now you tell me hoe is it that you read that as me having a problem with pump action shotguns?
