They printed a few letters of dissent against a David E. Petzel article that outlined a Gore gun-grabbing scheme. These individuals said (the letters were similar) "you have nothing to fear from registering firearms if you are law abiding", "I don't think any of my guns will ever be made illegal", and "Mr. Petzal's paranoia has no place in a magazine for sportsmen". I thought the 40+% of gunowners who voted for Gore were the folks who had one gun in the house, and didn't care to keep it one way or another, and the union die-hards naive enough to believe Gore, because he is Democrat and supposedly more pro-working man than Bush. I figure that F&S printed these letters to get more gun owners who ARE concerned off their a**es, and to let us know how many people DON'T care about keeping Great Grandpa's winchester pump bought in 1899 away from the chopsaw. Just thought I'd give a heads up to the shooters out there who don't read this magazine.
Have ya'll read the Jan 01 Field and Stream !?
- Thread starter JWR
- Start date
I hate sportsmen. I swear if they ban handguns and semis, I will personally lead the charge to ban duckie and skeety guns also. Take them all down. Jump into the swamp and bite the ducks with your teeth.
Go bowhunting all you once a year drunks on the opening day.
No bolt actions for you, great hunter.
Ooopps - ranting to much.
Go bowhunting all you once a year drunks on the opening day.
No bolt actions for you, great hunter.
Ooopps - ranting to much.
I guess I agree with the dissenters. People have been BS'd into thinking that democrats are anti-gun, anti-god, anti-american, while republicans represent everything that is great and holy. Where I live some of the most ardent hunters are union democrats while, lots of the republicans politicians I have seen tend to be young overeducated snot nosed rich people who have never had to work for a living. Even the great Charleton Heston was once a young liberal that signed a letter to the president (Ford?) decrying the dangers of guns. Some of these people will say anything to get a vote or get ahead.
Jeff Thomas
New member
Excuse me ...?
BS'ed into believing Democrats are anti-self defense / anti-gun? BS'ed? Please.
How many anti-self defense Democrats must I name? How many examples would you like of registration leading to confiscation?
We've seen Democrats support banning so-called 'assault weapons', so-called 'sniper rifles', so-called 'pocket rockets'; supporting restrictions on sale and storage of ammunition; restrictions or elimination of gun shows (i.e. private transfers of firearms.
BS'ed into believing Democrats are anti-gun? Have you just arrived in the States?
Sure, Republicans are a long ways from being perfect. But, Democrats? They long ago gave up their mantle of protecting civil rights.
Regards from AZ
BS'ed into believing Democrats are anti-self defense / anti-gun? BS'ed? Please.
How many anti-self defense Democrats must I name? How many examples would you like of registration leading to confiscation?
We've seen Democrats support banning so-called 'assault weapons', so-called 'sniper rifles', so-called 'pocket rockets'; supporting restrictions on sale and storage of ammunition; restrictions or elimination of gun shows (i.e. private transfers of firearms.
BS'ed into believing Democrats are anti-gun? Have you just arrived in the States?
Sure, Republicans are a long ways from being perfect. But, Democrats? They long ago gave up their mantle of protecting civil rights.
Regards from AZ
Art Eatman
Staff in Memoriam
Hey, Jeff
I'll spare folks my diatribe on the difference between many voters who always vote Democrat and the people who run for election to higher office (big city, state, and federal) as Democrats.
Suffice that many of the former are as pro-gun as any of us; most of the latter are Statist and pro-disarmament.
You might keep that idea in mind and re-read mjcitra's post.
Regards, Art
I'll spare folks my diatribe on the difference between many voters who always vote Democrat and the people who run for election to higher office (big city, state, and federal) as Democrats.
Suffice that many of the former are as pro-gun as any of us; most of the latter are Statist and pro-disarmament.
You might keep that idea in mind and re-read mjcitra's post.
Regards, Art
Jeff Thomas
New member
Art, I reread it.
If his distinction is between anti-self defense Democrat politicians and Democrat voters, I honestly don't see where that should make any of us feel better.
Really. Should I feel better that ardent Democrat voters (who may also be 'hunters' ... which does me little good if they're too dense to understand the RKBA) continue to support ardent, anti-self defense Democrat politicians?
Honestly ... I don't see where that should comfort me. It is simply more depressing that other gun owners are so naive and myopic. They need to wake up and smell the coffee. A few weeks on TFL might benefit and educate them, no?
Regards from AZ
If his distinction is between anti-self defense Democrat politicians and Democrat voters, I honestly don't see where that should make any of us feel better.
Really. Should I feel better that ardent Democrat voters (who may also be 'hunters' ... which does me little good if they're too dense to understand the RKBA) continue to support ardent, anti-self defense Democrat politicians?
Honestly ... I don't see where that should comfort me. It is simply more depressing that other gun owners are so naive and myopic. They need to wake up and smell the coffee. A few weeks on TFL might benefit and educate them, no?
Regards from AZ
Politically Incorrect
New member
I met one of these "sportsmen" not too long ago. He has a Ph.D. and was doing an "independent" vocational evaluation on me for a lawsuit I have from injuries I received from work. He talked about his recent hunting experience in Pennsylvania and I talked to him about a few of my firearms. He had me do dexterity exercises and I told him that he could have me disassemble and reassemble a 1911.
Then, I had an experience that could only be relived with an overdose of LSD when he asked me what a 1911 was. I said, "You do not know what a 1911 is? You have to know what a 1911 is!" I explained to him that John Browning (yes, the firearm manufacturer Browning does make rifles and shotguns for hunting) designed a semi-auto pistol and was the military sidearm for decades. It is known as the 1911. I wanted to smack him in the head with the latest gun rag (because there is at least one article on some version of the 1911.)
I'm not a violent man, but these are the gun owners that need to be shot. These are the people who just go along with whatever the government decides to do.
I was looking through the ATF website and I am convinced that the Treasury Department (the people responsible for cash are also responsible for liquor, firearms, and tobacco. Who knew?) is filled with these idiots. They love to elaborate on the term "sporting purposes."
I believe that we ought to take away guns that the ATF believes are for "sporting purposes" and allow only non-sporting or militia type weapons to be purchased.
Then, I had an experience that could only be relived with an overdose of LSD when he asked me what a 1911 was. I said, "You do not know what a 1911 is? You have to know what a 1911 is!" I explained to him that John Browning (yes, the firearm manufacturer Browning does make rifles and shotguns for hunting) designed a semi-auto pistol and was the military sidearm for decades. It is known as the 1911. I wanted to smack him in the head with the latest gun rag (because there is at least one article on some version of the 1911.)
I'm not a violent man, but these are the gun owners that need to be shot. These are the people who just go along with whatever the government decides to do.
I was looking through the ATF website and I am convinced that the Treasury Department (the people responsible for cash are also responsible for liquor, firearms, and tobacco. Who knew?) is filled with these idiots. They love to elaborate on the term "sporting purposes."
I believe that we ought to take away guns that the ATF believes are for "sporting purposes" and allow only non-sporting or militia type weapons to be purchased.
I haven't been BS'd into believing anything...I've read the bills that DemonRat politicians have introduced into Congress. I have also read the bills that some RepubliRats have introduced.
The only people who get my vote are the ones who aren't going to walk all over me after they make it to the show....
And I am really Not happy about John Ensign being a Senator, Republican that he is.
The only people who get my vote are the ones who aren't going to walk all over me after they make it to the show....
And I am really Not happy about John Ensign being a Senator, Republican that he is.
I must agree that the Democrats have earned their reputation as anti-gun and anti-self-defense bigots. In my home state of Illinois, Sen. Rod Blagojevich is the prime example. The man has personally written legislation calling for a ban on "pocket rockets" (which to him meant anything not larger than a G17, including the full-size Glock pistols.)
He has also personally written legislation to ban "sniper rifles" and .50 BMG's. Of course, in Illinois, hunters use only shotguns and .22s where long arms are concerned, so this didn't cause much of a ripple outside the NRA and ISRA membership. Not really that much within it, either.
He is probably our most vehement opponent when it comes to CCW proposals, and he fought to have the Safe Neighborhoods Act of last year include a clause that would have required firearms to be broken down in a non-functioning state just to transport them.
Of course, I could be talking about some wacko on the fringe of the party. But I'm not. Blagojevich is apparently the front-runner for the Democratic nomination for governor. I think he has his eye on the White House, though whether he has any chance of ever reaching it I don't know.
Again, if these good-hearted union deer hunters SAY they support the RKBA, but they actually VOTE against it in every election, they are lying. They do NOT support the RKBA.
And no, I have no love for the Republicans. But they and the Democrats are not exactly one and the same yet. (Except in Illinois, where the Republican governor is a pro-choice, gun-hating, tax-raising liberal.) During the fight over the Safe Neighborhoods Act, he held a press conference at a women's shelter in Springfield and held up an AR-15 with a 16" barrel and a retractable stock. "As a boy in Kankakee, I remember I'd get up in the morning and get a gun and go hunting. I never had a gun like this to hunt with, that's for sure."
Not that I'm bitter or anything.
He has also personally written legislation to ban "sniper rifles" and .50 BMG's. Of course, in Illinois, hunters use only shotguns and .22s where long arms are concerned, so this didn't cause much of a ripple outside the NRA and ISRA membership. Not really that much within it, either.
He is probably our most vehement opponent when it comes to CCW proposals, and he fought to have the Safe Neighborhoods Act of last year include a clause that would have required firearms to be broken down in a non-functioning state just to transport them.
Of course, I could be talking about some wacko on the fringe of the party. But I'm not. Blagojevich is apparently the front-runner for the Democratic nomination for governor. I think he has his eye on the White House, though whether he has any chance of ever reaching it I don't know.
Again, if these good-hearted union deer hunters SAY they support the RKBA, but they actually VOTE against it in every election, they are lying. They do NOT support the RKBA.
And no, I have no love for the Republicans. But they and the Democrats are not exactly one and the same yet. (Except in Illinois, where the Republican governor is a pro-choice, gun-hating, tax-raising liberal.) During the fight over the Safe Neighborhoods Act, he held a press conference at a women's shelter in Springfield and held up an AR-15 with a 16" barrel and a retractable stock. "As a boy in Kankakee, I remember I'd get up in the morning and get a gun and go hunting. I never had a gun like this to hunt with, that's for sure."
Not that I'm bitter or anything.
The Democrats are MOST DEFINITELY anti-gun. Most all the major anti-2nd Amendment legislation in recent memory has been put forth by the Democrats. I'm certainly not absolving the Republicans of blame. They seem a little too willing to go along with these proposals for my liking, but most of the recent measures designed to restore our inherent right to self-defense (such as CCW), has occurred under the watch of Republicans. In other words, the Republicans ain't perfect, but at least we can get SOME of them to listen......
TheBluesMan
Moderator Emeritus
I beg to differ with you, sir.
These are not the gun owners that need to be shot, these are the gun owners that need to be educated.
The rest of this response has been taken to email... Politically Incorrect
New member
Relax BluesMan,
I'm not serious about anyone being shot. Of course, they need to be educated, and hopefully, I help educate this guy about what the Second Amendment is really about.
I look at the world laughing at the idiotic notions of people who believe that they know how best to run everyone else's life. Why laugh? Because humor is the best way to deal with life. At least you can enjoy something.
I just hope that they take away all the guns before anyone has a chance to defend themselves from our totalitarian government.
I'm not serious about anyone being shot. Of course, they need to be educated, and hopefully, I help educate this guy about what the Second Amendment is really about.
I look at the world laughing at the idiotic notions of people who believe that they know how best to run everyone else's life. Why laugh? Because humor is the best way to deal with life. At least you can enjoy something.
I just hope that they take away all the guns before anyone has a chance to defend themselves from our totalitarian government.
straightShot
New member
I hate sportsmen. I swear if they ban handguns and semis
Wow, EnochGale:
Those are sure some strong statements. If I were you, I wouldn't focus on us "sportsmen". We're out there quite often shooting shotguns, rifles, and pistols. We try to mix things up, and we even put our alcoholic beverages down long enough to take aim at sounds and movement in the brush during our annual drunken deer opener.
I hope that you're out there knocking on doors, working hard to get pro-gun candidates elected, and not being one of those "non-sportsmen/hunter" gun owners who do nothing but say "Well, they won't get MY gun. Pass the dip...", and hitting a few keys on the old computer to let the rest of us know just how 'pro' you are. Nothing's worse than stereotyping a segment of the gun owning public as being ignorant, non-active, boat anchors. We're in this together for ourselves, our kids, and our grandkids.
straightShot
[Edited by straightShot on 12-19-2000 at 03:55 PM]
Wow, EnochGale:
Those are sure some strong statements. If I were you, I wouldn't focus on us "sportsmen". We're out there quite often shooting shotguns, rifles, and pistols. We try to mix things up, and we even put our alcoholic beverages down long enough to take aim at sounds and movement in the brush during our annual drunken deer opener.
I hope that you're out there knocking on doors, working hard to get pro-gun candidates elected, and not being one of those "non-sportsmen/hunter" gun owners who do nothing but say "Well, they won't get MY gun. Pass the dip...", and hitting a few keys on the old computer to let the rest of us know just how 'pro' you are. Nothing's worse than stereotyping a segment of the gun owning public as being ignorant, non-active, boat anchors. We're in this together for ourselves, our kids, and our grandkids.
straightShot
[Edited by straightShot on 12-19-2000 at 03:55 PM]
TheBluesMan
Moderator Emeritus
I'm calmer now, so I will try to respond thoughtfully. 
PI,
There is nothing in your original post that would lead me to the understanding that you were kidding about this guy needing to be shot. Sarcasm and facetiae should be avoided in this type of forum where body language and tone of voice are absent. Your words stand as they are written. Perhaps someday they will be harvested by an anti and then shoved down our throats when we are attempting to combat further infringements on our rights.
You also said that you wanted to hit the guy with a magazine. Kidding again, I'm sure, but I hope that your inner frustration didn't show through your explanation. He’ll have a really bad view of "activist" gun owners if it did.
The meaning of your last sentence is a mystery to me. I assume you are kidding again, but I guess I just don't find that scenario very funny, as it often seems all too probable.
PI,
There is nothing in your original post that would lead me to the understanding that you were kidding about this guy needing to be shot. Sarcasm and facetiae should be avoided in this type of forum where body language and tone of voice are absent. Your words stand as they are written. Perhaps someday they will be harvested by an anti and then shoved down our throats when we are attempting to combat further infringements on our rights.
You also said that you wanted to hit the guy with a magazine. Kidding again, I'm sure, but I hope that your inner frustration didn't show through your explanation. He’ll have a really bad view of "activist" gun owners if it did.
The meaning of your last sentence is a mystery to me. I assume you are kidding again, but I guess I just don't find that scenario very funny, as it often seems all too probable.
It is amazing how many hunters are only interested in keeping "hunting guns" legal. To them this means bolt action rifles, pump rifles and shotguns, single shot rifles and shotguns, and semiautomatic rifles and shotguns if they look like they should be used for hunting.
One of the guys that hunts deer with us doesn't believe that "anybody needs a damn assault rifle". I have tried to reason with him, but man he is committed to his beliefs. (That's stubborn to those in Rio Linda, CA.) I own an AR15, but he say's he's not worried about me. So I asked him who he is worried about, and he told me he's worried about gangs having these weapons. I warned him that no amount of legal BS will stop gangs and criminals from getting whatever they want. He then changed the subject and stated that he would never try hunting with an assault weapon. What a hard head. Thank god he didn't like Gore and was voting for Bush.
One of the guys that hunts deer with us doesn't believe that "anybody needs a damn assault rifle". I have tried to reason with him, but man he is committed to his beliefs. (That's stubborn to those in Rio Linda, CA.) I own an AR15, but he say's he's not worried about me. So I asked him who he is worried about, and he told me he's worried about gangs having these weapons. I warned him that no amount of legal BS will stop gangs and criminals from getting whatever they want. He then changed the subject and stated that he would never try hunting with an assault weapon. What a hard head. Thank god he didn't like Gore and was voting for Bush.
Art Eatman
Staff in Memoriam
Hey, Jeff, me again.
Semantics. I agree with you, overall, but it seemed to me that your response was tangent to what I though mjcitra intended.
Anyhow: Is it fair to say that the majority--or at least "way too many"--of all gun owners don't really understand what us activists are talking about? I am of the guesstimated opinion that there are a lot of guys out there who are typified by USAFNoDak's hunting buddy. Since these guys have been "assured" that their hunting guns will never, ever, ever be taken, they don't see RKBA as an issue. Such naivete is frustrating, to say the least.
And guys who don't see RKBA as a major political issue will vote their billfold--which, in their perception, could well mean "Democrat". Perception.
Damfino. I do know I'm a bit weary of trying to educate folks who oughta be on our side--if they could just be made to think. I'm never surprised at the answers I get from people like Tom Teepen of the Atlanta paper, but when I get the same sort of nonsense from another hunter, "It is to barf."
Sometimes the High Road just ain't real easy--but I won't leave it.
Art
Semantics. I agree with you, overall, but it seemed to me that your response was tangent to what I though mjcitra intended.
Anyhow: Is it fair to say that the majority--or at least "way too many"--of all gun owners don't really understand what us activists are talking about? I am of the guesstimated opinion that there are a lot of guys out there who are typified by USAFNoDak's hunting buddy. Since these guys have been "assured" that their hunting guns will never, ever, ever be taken, they don't see RKBA as an issue. Such naivete is frustrating, to say the least.
And guys who don't see RKBA as a major political issue will vote their billfold--which, in their perception, could well mean "Democrat". Perception.
Damfino. I do know I'm a bit weary of trying to educate folks who oughta be on our side--if they could just be made to think. I'm never surprised at the answers I get from people like Tom Teepen of the Atlanta paper, but when I get the same sort of nonsense from another hunter, "It is to barf."
Sometimes the High Road just ain't real easy--but I won't leave it.
Art
I find it amazing that hunters have bought into that tired, played propaganda concerning "assault" weapons from the Left. The true reasons behind assault weapon (I hate that term)bans have been POLITICAL(the Dems/Liberals love to find scapegoats and look like they are actually improving society. They are just social reconstructionists (the same ones that scoff at the solid Judeo-Christian stance that the founding fathers put forth) & SOCIAL (the Dem's /Liberals are the latest generation(60's rejects) of socialist movement and they are legion...in bed with those who do not honor truth, responsibility, individualism, self-preservation, and courage, but rather, want their Uncle (Sam) to level the playing field so that we are all sniveling, over-taxed, and underpowered droids).
On the other side of their face these infidel elitists would claim that assault weapons should be bannned because of the high-capacity magazines, or that they are military arms, etc. Hogwash. Look at the banned carbines. When comparing single-shot models (full auto is a different story) to the "sport" guns, it is obvious to any goof that "sport" models can be just as destructive (or more!) that their "assault" cousins. Examples : is a Mac10, or AR15 style, or AK47 (9mm, .223, 7.62 x 39) to be more feared than my autoloading Benelli 12 guage or my fast lever-action Marlins in 44mag and .45-70? Give me a break.
Wake up hunters and smell the BATF! Just as with England/Australia/Canada/etc., you are next.I've vented. Thanks for the time.
He who walks with the wise grows wise, but a companion of fools suffers harm. Proverbs 13:20
On the other side of their face these infidel elitists would claim that assault weapons should be bannned because of the high-capacity magazines, or that they are military arms, etc. Hogwash. Look at the banned carbines. When comparing single-shot models (full auto is a different story) to the "sport" guns, it is obvious to any goof that "sport" models can be just as destructive (or more!) that their "assault" cousins. Examples : is a Mac10, or AR15 style, or AK47 (9mm, .223, 7.62 x 39) to be more feared than my autoloading Benelli 12 guage or my fast lever-action Marlins in 44mag and .45-70? Give me a break.
Wake up hunters and smell the BATF! Just as with England/Australia/Canada/etc., you are next.I've vented. Thanks for the time.
He who walks with the wise grows wise, but a companion of fools suffers harm. Proverbs 13:20