Creeping anti-gun bias and general paranoia...

barnbwt, a number of years ago the city of Milwaukee filed a suit against paint manufacturers dealing with lead paint that was produced 60 years ago!! Was a big deal in the news then, never did hear the outcome.
 
kmw1954 you asked why, and then said the following:

Large capacity magazines or belt feed clips is what I conceder paranoid or ego.
Click to expand...

The answers I gave have nothing to do with paranoia or ego. They are legitimate reasons for high capacity magazines. Yes, having them is our right. Yes, that means I can. Yes, I believe that having them makes me and my country safer, today.

Your notion that your neighborhood protects you from criminal violence and the need for these weapons is naive and uninformed in my opinion. I am perfectly ok with that though. If you are confident that in the case of a scenario where you need greater firepower that you can scavenge some off the street, I won't argue with that either.

I do not have any other reasons for having weapons with high capacity magazines. I don't need any other. We should be able to disagree without being insulting. I am not sure that's possible though.
 
Are you really holding up Mexico as an example for proper governmental control of guns and violence?:eek:
 
Don't think guns will be subject to the same thing tobacco has been. It was universally agreed that tobacco was harmful to those who use it. The same cannot be truthfully said about gun ownership.
 
Around 1970 the legal system changed ! No more reason and logic !
You had an empty lot which kids played on .Fine a place for kids . Then the legal system changed . Kid trips and gets hurt . He sues and wins the case !!!:mad: Others learned ,up went the no trespacing signs ,up went the fences. Screw the kids ,I can't afford the cost of fighting and losing a court case. The parents ? they'll curse you for being mean to the kids.

Neighbors ? They see a crime they shut the door and say I didn't see or hear a thing ! After all you could be sued !
No more good guys , no more real neighbors Greed destroys !:(
 
I own a bunch 30 rd mags for my AR, and 20 rd mags for my M1A. I load them at home and transport them to the range to shoot.

the reason ?

I suppose it is a matter of convenience. I load my mags with a lula at my work bench. put them in a couple ammo cans and off we go. large capacity mags give me more trigger time at the range.

I show up. bang the steel and i am on my way. no sore thumbs or hogging a bench at a busy range, while i reload.

i guess i am a get in, do my buisness, get out kinda of a guy.
 
I suppose it is a matter of convenience. I load my mags with a lula at my work bench. put them in a couple ammo cans and off we go. large capacity mags give me more trigger time at the range.
Click to expand...

Yes, I do the same thing, so I’ve never understood why some say we don’t need high capacity magazines. Range time can be expensive and I’d rather spend my time shooting than reloading.
 
K_Mac, if Mexico is what you think I'm advocating then you are sadly mistaken. Though Mexico is much closer than Australia!

But at the rate we are going we very well could become Mexico! Now that's Paranoid.
 
K_Mac, if Mexico is what you think I'm advocating then you are sadly mistaken. Though Mexico is much closer than Australia!

But at the rate we are going we very well could become Mexico! Now that's Paranoid.
Click to expand...

Stick with me and I will have you buying an AR and a dozen or two 30 round mag...:D
 
Actually I was more thinking a BOFORS 40mm AA gun but there's nowhere close by that I could fire it. Maybe Great Lakes Navel Base. :eek::D
 
30+ round magazines for semi-auto guns why? We do not live in a war zone at least not yet. I haven't seen large hordes of wild pigs running my neighborhood which might need that many rounds.
Large capacity magazines or belt feed clips is what I conceder paranoid or ego.

Yes they are legal to own and obtain and if you feel the need to have one then by all means knock your socks off. I just don't feel the "need" to have one for myself. I am not the "what you should own police" so if you want one then have one.
Click to expand...

A 30 round magazine for an AR15 or a semi auto version of the AK is not a "large capacity magazine" as you say. It's standard capacity.
 
Originally posted by barnbwt:

Considering the state of CA withheld damning study results showing that hunting projectiles had no impact on wildlife health or lead levels until after the relevant laws were passed, this concern is most certainly subterfuge of the anti-gun folks.

Fact is, metallic projectile lead isn't really the huge deal it's made out to be.
Click to expand...

You might want to do more research on projectile lead. The DNR of three states surrounding mine, along with Wisconsin have found over 25% of sick Bald Eagles are suffering from lead poisoning brought on by the ingestion of lead fragments in carcasses they have scavenged. Studies here and in North Dakota show a 50% increase in blood levels in Humans that regularly eat venison and other game they have harvested thru hunting with lead projectiles/shot. The National Park Service has also released statements informing hunters that it appears that if lead bullets are used, odds are high that you will ingest lead particles in ground venison. North Dakota warns pregnant women and children under 6 not to eat venison killed with lead projectiles because random X-raying of ground venison donated to food pantries, shows 60% contain lead fragments. There's also significant evidence that other birds eating lead shot still used for the majority of upland game hunting are suffering from lead poisoning also. These birds are other raptors preying on sick animals, vultures and crows eating carrion and game and song birds eating shot for grit. The Missouri Department of Conservation, has calculated that as many as 15 million mourning doves are killed in North America each year from lead poisoning, mostly from eating spent lead shot that looks like the weed seed they depend on for food. That’s almost as many as the estimated 20 million mourning doves legally shot and killed each year by hunters. It is a huge deal. None of these studies are being propagated by anti gun folks, but by folks involved with hunting and the natural resources. California was and is the exception. None of these agencies are promoting banning lead projectiles, but are recommending hunters rethink the use of non-toxic projectiles.

I help teach hunter safety to new hunters. We show new hunters X-Rays showing the amount of lead fragments found around wounds in deer. We recommend they avoid any meat containing blood, bone fragments or sign of damage to prevent the ingestion of lead. We also advise them to disregard meat peppered with shot and shot trails for the same reason. It's not paranoia, but being responsible.
 
lockedcj7 said:
I went on a rant in another thread due to what I perceive as anti-gun rhetoric creeping into our vocabulary.

...



I have recently noticed some anti-gun rhetoric sneaking into the culture and even into this forum.



/rant
Click to expand...


I'll address only the above.

There's a particular dialogue going back and forth in this thread that all started with the question "why?" gun owners should or would own something, and continued with arguments regarding the question and subsequent answers. I think that question, and the fact that we are discussing it on TFL is exactly what the OP was referring to. Why are we, the supposed 2A supporters, even countenancing and discussing that question and other questions and comments used by the liberals/"antis"? Why has it become a valid question among those who claim to understand and value the second amendment and its ACTUAL purpose?
 
Do that for several years (or target one generation of kids) and it will have a significant impact.
Click to expand...

I am actually encouraged on the next generation front. After what, I have perceived, as downward trend in youth shooting for many years I now see youth programs growing by leaps and bounds. From the numbers I see reported each year high school trap alone is growing fast across much of the country. In the trap world I also see many more families that have mom, dad, and kids all shooting together.

I agree the future of shooting will depend on the upcoming generations. I think it is one place we are making progress and will continue to. But it is still up to us to hold the line tell the new generations can step up to it.

Right now where I see the biggest gap in shooters is the 25 ish to 35 or 40 ish crowd.
 
It is simply media bias, and not the reality of the average person. Another word for it is propaganda. Over 35 million guns were sold in the last year and-a-half, so that in itself speaks volumes as to the thought process going on in the general population. You have to understand that the media is highly controlled, and that medium is under the control of those pushing an agenda. That agenda includes the disarming of the people of United States. It is becoming clearer as time passes; that is if you take the time to connect the dots. The fact is many have no desire at all to see the truth of what is occurring in the world around us. If they would, it would destroy the construct they have created and worked so hard to maintain. I wish I could share the information I have been privy to and have verified by many sources, but this forum is not the place. It is indeed disturbing. To say that I am concerned about the future of this country and the survival of the freedoms so dearly paid for in blood is an understatement. Most are too constrained by political correctness to ever be able to see the truth. I am indeed saddened by that fact. Many are too dependent on the system to ever desire to fathom the truth. I will end with a small example of what I know. A few years ago there was a DHS bulletin issued stating Consitutionalist, Veterans, gun owners, and Christians were the real threat to society. The main stream media did not report it. I read it on an alternative media site, and as usual, I had my reservations. I have a friend who received the daily bulletins from DHS, and asked him if it were true. He verified it. I can say our current government has not changed its position as far as any of that is concerned. If indeed you fit into one of those categories, you should be wary. Whether or not you choose to accept it, we are living Orwell's 1984. You can call me a "conspiracy theorist" if you desire to. It's no skin off my back. My only desire is to find the truth. As to the 30 round mag debate, it's just like the entire "assault rifle" thing; you won't know until it's too late, and then there's little you can do about it.
 
Why are we, the supposed 2A supporters, even countenancing and discussing that question and other questions and comments used by the liberals/"antis"? Why has it become a valid question among those who claim to understand and value the second amendment and its ACTUAL purpose?
Click to expand...

When someone asks a question regarding high capacity magazines, semiautomatic sporting rifles, concealed carry, or any other 2A related issue, I think this is exactly the right place for the discussion. These are absolutely valid questions. For those of us who have spent much time and effort coming to well reasoned conclusions regarding these things, it gives us the opportunity to explain why we feel the way we do. There are plenty of anti-gun folks who are perfectly willing to make their case. I see no reason to attack anyone asking a reasonable question, or even an unreasonable one if understanding is the goal.
 
I do wonder how generations of pioneers and frontiersmen survived when the majority of the meat they ate was harvested with lead bullets.

You know for those couple hundred years when ALL firearms bullets were lead, and more people ate game animals, and more often, than we do today...

Its a simple set up, really, pick an arbitrary, extremely low level for the "allowable" contaminant, (in this case lead) then, when higher levels are found, create a panic about the danger, and get laws passed banning the offensive substance.

There is an allowable limit for everything (or at least everything they have thought of so far..) Rodent droppings and bug parts in our food have allowable levels. Toxic metals are just one thing among many.
 
There are many different natures to the question Why. Could be to admonish or scold, Could be to clarify confusion, or it could be to obtain an unknown answer to a question.

The reason I asked the Why was to demonstrate that when asked some take that question as an attack on them or their Rights and is meant to subtract or restrict that right.

Also so show that when asked buy anyone there should be a better answer to the question than "because I can or because I have a right". That isn't building or strengthening the case. That to me is as flippant as "Whatever!" It's going to take more than that to defeat the anti-gun crowd. Just a case of the loudest crying baby gets the bottle. They do cry loudly and at any given chance.

General paranoia.

Let's see, China building air bases in the South China Sea, North Korea testing ballistic missiles, Middle East is in flames, East Africa in flames, Venezuela on the verge of collapse, climate change, dyeing oceans, depleted rain forests, terror attacks. Oh yeah, maybe 3 new Supreme Court Justus's within the next 4 years.

Nothing to be concerned about here!
 
I do wonder how generations of pioneers and frontiersmen survived when the majority of the meat they ate was harvested with lead bullets.
Click to expand...
This indirectly reminded me of the Michael Bellesiles fiasco.

For those who don't know, Bellesiles wrote a book called Arming America. His thesis was that the whole idea of the frontier being won with guns was a myth. He claimed that there were actually very few guns in civilian hands, and that even those were in poor repair.

It was published at the tail end of the Clinton administration, when antigunners were running high and arrogant on their legislative victories. The media loved the book. Gun control advocates loved the book. In fact, the most prominent blurb on the cover was a quote from Harry Reid saying it would be "the final nail in the NRA's coffin." It won the Bancroft prize, which is like the Pulitzer for historians. It was picked up for use in numerous university courses.

There were two problems. The first was the fact that none of the peers who supposedly reviewed the book actually checked Bellesiles' sources in detail.

The second was that many of those sources were inaccurate or downright fraudulent. Don't take my word for it. Emory University (where Bellesiles was employed) did their own review. They bent over backward giving him a chance to exonerate himself, and he still ended up losing his job over it. What's more, for the first time in history, the Bancroft prize was revoked.

EVERYBODY came away from it with egg on their face. The backpedaling from professors and politicians was absolutely hilarious. In fact, the ALA had a huge debate on whether or not they should continue to catalog the book, which led to a wider debate over whether or not references to it should indicate it had been debunked.

So, how did it even happen? The antis WANTED this SO BADLY they never stopped to consider that the research might be sloppy or fraudulent. Their bias was already there; they just NEEDED something "academic" to validate it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top