Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2006/10/19
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]No Buzz give them enough slack and they will shoot themselves. :-) And Philip....The best home defense tool is brains. Of course law enforcement is not effective in providing protection. Still, to rely on an M16 seems quite stupid. We had plenty of them in Viet Nam and lost that war. We have more than enough in Iraq and we are losing that war. Talk about fear and ignorance, our government exhibits that to an nth degree. As far as target shooting goes I'd stick with something which will do better than a minute of angle. That won't be an M16 or and AK. Walt Buzz Hausner wrote: >Gun owners should be lined up against a wall and shot. > > Buzz > > >On 10/19/06 7:38 PM, "Philip Forrest" <photo.forrest@earthlink.net> wrote: > > > >>I think that owning an assault rifle for home defense is impractical, yes. >>However, if one believes in protecting oneself, family and property, law >>enforcement doesn't do that for you. There is no reason that a law abiding >>citizen cannot responsibly own and use a firearm of any type (small arms >>here, not artillery pieces & the like.) I love target shooting and though >>I >>don't know if it should be considered a "sport" it certainly requires great >>discipline and training to be able to consistently and accurately place >>shots on target. It's just a step below golf in it's level of discipline >>and ability, but much the same when it comes to the final goal. >>Fear is what drives irrational decisions. A gun will not shoot itself, we >>all know this. The only way a firearm will do what it's supposed to is if >>a >>person operating it makes it work. Fear is what needs to be overcome by >>people who don't know anything about firearms. They should be shown that a >>firearm is just a tool, the same way that a torque wrench is a tool. They >>have very specific purposes, but both are tools nonetheless. >>I have no problem with people who don't like guns, but for rational >>reasons. >>Anti-gun folks need to come up with real and equitable solutions to the >>problems they have that will WORK. There will never be a United States >>where firearm ownership is not a right, so that side of the gun argument >>needs to come up with a realistic solution to the problems they have with >>firearms. The AWB proved that gun violence did not decrease during the 10 >>years it was effective. 10 rounds in the magazine or 100 rounds, it >>doesn't >>matter. Assault weapons are used in so few crimes as to be a blip on the >>radar in comparison to the gun related crimes committed with Raven .25's or >>other cheap guns. The average assault weapon starts at about $600. Few if >>any criminals are going to be willing to put that kind of money into a >>firearm when they could get a cheap pistol for $30. >>The only way that crime with firearms is to be quelled is by large scale >>changes in society. People need to be educated about firearms, the law and >>how with a lot of cooperation, we can turn the gun related violence around. >>Many parents view themselves as responsible when teaching their children >>about sex, birth control and parenting, right? (not as many as need to be >>though) Why wouldn't someone want to teach a person how to properly and >>safely handle a firearm? We teach people how to safely drive cars every >>day. Still the vehicular fatality statistics in this country are several >>times the gun related fatality numbers. >>The last issue I don't like is the anti-gun group playing upon that very >>fear and lack of knowledge by saying things like "...it might go off. Six >>blocks away someone's family member could be holding their insides in their >>hands.." This little bit of editorial journalism is just what people like >>myself don't want to read or hear. It uses that fear of the unknowing to >>suggest that there is a gun (not artillery) that a person could buy these >>days, shoot, and eviscerate an innocent person a half mile away. Yes, >>people do get shot from stray rounds landing through their windows and >>roofs. This is an amazingly small number of people. Most wounds are >>superficial. And surely, there is not a small arm available to the public >>at this time that could do such a thing. Most small arms up to and >>including the .50 cal BMG only produce small, oblong holes at their >>tumbling >>worst. I'm not condoning any of this, of course. I don't support gun >>related violence or the wounding of innocent people at all, I'm just saying >>that a bit of exaggeration, or a lot, is not a good thing when it comes to >>this topic. >>OK, I've written far too much for sure. >> >>Philip >> >> > > > >_______________________________________________ >Leica Users Group. >See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information > > >