Active Users:427 Time:26/04/2025 02:47:21 PM
Well I appreciate your calling it pedantic when you aren't an expert, thanks for correcting me Isaac Send a noteboard - 22/12/2012 01:15:08 AM
Wrong is wrong, hunting is a major purpose guns are used for, thus many manufacturers label specific firearms, and modify them sometimes, to be more suitable to that goal. Jack to do with operations, what kills a deer will typically kill a man as easily.

If the underlying point is correct then yes, of course, or at the very least not act like the point is invalid based on a disagreement you have with the terminology used, especially when it's as pedantic as yours is. You can argue all you want about there being no such thing as a hunting rifle, nobody will take you seriously when a quick google image search gives you an unqualified answer as to what a hunting rifle might mean to a layperson.


If your point is that we can separate 'hunting' weapons form other types, then you literally knew less than nothing about guns, and it is disgustingly arrogant to assert otherwise. Next you can tell me why special relativity and the laws of thermodynamics are flawed, that is literally how absurd your points are to me, and I can't cushion that to be polite.

And what might kill one deer easily doesn't necessarily have to be able to kill 20 school children in a short space of time. You have admitted your background with fire arms, if you had to pick a weapon up off a rack holding an AR-15, a semi-automatic handgun of your choice or a Remington Model 700 to kill 20 children as quickly as possible at short range what would you opt for?


The choice is silly to me, and I'm sorr ybut makes you seem ignorant of the subject. My weapon of choice is the M16, as I've been heavily trained with it, thus I pick it, or its weaker variation, the AR-15.. You seem to think for the implied mission there's a meaningful difference... there is not. All would be sufficiently fatal, none require a significant timespan relative to other actions to get the next round ready. If I had to train someone form scratch specifically for that, I would pick the shotgun for a heftier slower individual and the pistol for a more dexterous person and the Ar-15 for neither though it would be my own choice and I'd consider the choice fairly minor.

Actually, as a grounded and informed individual it probably doesn't matter what you think as we have a nice bank of evidence that shows the nutters have made that decision already.


We haven't had enough spree killing to make any scientific assertions about them.
The intuitive mind is a sacred gift and the rational mind is a faithful servant. We have created a society that honors the servant and has forgotten the gift.
- Albert Einstein

King of Cairhien 20-7-2
Chancellor of the Landsraad, Archduke of Is'Mod
Reply to message
When guns are a big national issue, how do reporters & pundits not know facts about them? - 21/12/2012 05:33:14 PM 1652 Views
You don't hunt by walking into a classroom and shooting 20 deer - 21/12/2012 05:56:16 PM 1074 Views
You're actually not right on that one - 21/12/2012 07:49:53 PM 1011 Views
That wasn't the point I was making - 21/12/2012 09:49:40 PM 941 Views
You should probably clarify it then - 21/12/2012 10:47:26 PM 1100 Views
His post was perfectly clear. Yours seemed like a response to an entirely different post. - 21/12/2012 10:53:39 PM 1266 Views
Explain that remark, it is not obvious to me *NM* - 21/12/2012 11:00:10 PM 565 Views
I think - 21/12/2012 11:13:34 PM 936 Views
Thats' easy, there is simply no such thing as a 'hunting rifle' - 21/12/2012 11:17:41 PM 948 Views
I'd say the expert gunsmith - 21/12/2012 11:28:02 PM 1000 Views
I'm also an expert at math and physics, should I be more forgiving about those too? - 22/12/2012 12:38:45 AM 943 Views
Re: I'm also an expert at math and physics, should I be more forgiving about those too? - 22/12/2012 01:00:18 AM 966 Views
Well I appreciate your calling it pedantic when you aren't an expert, thanks for correcting me - 22/12/2012 01:15:08 AM 1023 Views
Re: Well I appreciate your calling it pedantic when you aren't an expert, thanks for correcting me - 22/12/2012 09:35:38 AM 1127 Views
So much for serious conversation - 22/12/2012 05:09:08 PM 950 Views
Oh I'm certainly bowing out - 22/12/2012 06:07:11 PM 958 Views
I thought I was being perfectly clear. - 21/12/2012 10:57:35 PM 960 Views
Re: I thought I was being perfectly clear. - 21/12/2012 11:25:04 PM 1016 Views
Oh I wasn't commenting on the standard of people here - 21/12/2012 11:29:36 PM 942 Views
you're largely correct, which is why we need stronger laws on ownership not guns per se - 21/12/2012 09:39:14 PM 920 Views
I can't think of a better reason than self defense - 21/12/2012 10:33:26 PM 985 Views
He is right about Australia - 21/12/2012 10:46:27 PM 947 Views
No kidding - 21/12/2012 10:59:28 PM 947 Views
If you knew all that - 21/12/2012 11:02:38 PM 991 Views
I think you are on the right track, but to the wrong destination; "lethal weapon" is redundant. - 21/12/2012 11:05:29 PM 939 Views
My read is that the 2nd Amendment not only allows, but mandates, cop-killer bullets. - 22/12/2012 12:45:04 AM 994 Views
Does the Second Amendment protect the rights of felons and the mentally incompetent to have guns? - 22/12/2012 02:35:16 AM 1167 Views
Yes the media is using terms incorrectly but the point still stands. - 22/12/2012 03:02:18 AM 876 Views
Re: Yes the media is using terms incorrectly but the point still stands. - 22/12/2012 04:12:30 AM 933 Views
umm... - 22/12/2012 12:41:31 PM 838 Views
1997 North Hollywood Shootout - 22/12/2012 04:07:39 AM 1025 Views
Laws against murder failed to prevent that, too; clearly they are ineffective and should be repealed - 22/12/2012 06:02:24 AM 1071 Views
Such laws were never intended for prevention, they define actions that will be punished. *NM* - 23/12/2012 12:57:57 PM 601 Views
So do laws against getting a gun without screening, training and certification. - 23/12/2012 02:01:32 PM 889 Views
Then CHANGE the Constitution, don't ignore it. *NM* - 26/12/2012 03:12:11 PM 518 Views
I am not suggesting either changing or ignoring the Constitution. - 26/12/2012 04:01:02 PM 1004 Views
Yes you are. - 26/12/2012 08:06:01 PM 827 Views
Learn logic, and stop needlessly trying to teach me grammar. - 26/12/2012 08:55:25 PM 975 Views
Lear to read, and I won't have to - 27/12/2012 04:28:59 PM 1016 Views
You are wrong. - 22/12/2012 12:14:40 PM 972 Views
That explains much; I read somewhere Brits are averse to it. - 22/12/2012 01:17:15 PM 913 Views
We're also averse to being wrong. - 22/12/2012 02:53:49 PM 972 Views
So you say... - 22/12/2012 03:32:16 PM 897 Views
guns r stpid *NM* - 23/12/2012 12:39:30 AM 621 Views
What bemuses me about this thing with Adam Lanza, is that his mother had 5 registered guns - 23/12/2012 07:10:26 AM 969 Views
She was asleep with him in the house. - 23/12/2012 02:24:47 PM 985 Views
LOOK, look, there is another one... - 26/12/2012 03:13:45 PM 902 Views
I find the absolutist ant/pro-gun positions equally dangerous and absurd. - 26/12/2012 04:20:37 PM 903 Views
So we should just *kinda* ignore the Constitution *this* time... But what about NEXT time... - 26/12/2012 08:08:12 PM 878 Views
No, we should enact gun regulation the Constitution explicitly empowers. - 26/12/2012 09:02:12 PM 881 Views
Which would be... NONE. *NM* - 27/12/2012 04:31:53 PM 561 Views
"A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state...." - 28/12/2012 05:14:49 PM 880 Views
*see previous grammar lesson* *NM* - 28/12/2012 10:31:43 PM 522 Views
The instant it becomes relevant, I shall. - 28/12/2012 11:45:01 PM 1081 Views
Your point being? - 27/12/2012 10:47:29 AM 869 Views
Facts are irrelevant when FUD is the order of the day. - 24/12/2012 04:34:18 PM 874 Views
It irritates me too. *NM* - 01/01/2013 01:55:05 PM 546 Views

Reply to Message