bamaranger
New member
attention getter
I'm not really offended, but when the term "antipersonnel" came up, the alarm bell sounded.
Lumping and labeling calibers and types of firearms into categories ( such as antipersonnel v. hunting) plays right into the hands of those who oppose our hobbies, pastimes, beliefs and lifestyle. It seems not a far step at all to consider military v. civilian, then appropriate v. unappropriate, then prohibited v. approved.
Perhaps it is the current social and political climate that has made me a bit touchy. My earlier post was intended too call attention to what I considered dangerous terminology and mindset. If I offended anybody, here is a public apology unsolicited and fully intended. All are certainly entitled to own and hunt, or choose not to, any legal firearm they choose.
I'm not really offended, but when the term "antipersonnel" came up, the alarm bell sounded.
Lumping and labeling calibers and types of firearms into categories ( such as antipersonnel v. hunting) plays right into the hands of those who oppose our hobbies, pastimes, beliefs and lifestyle. It seems not a far step at all to consider military v. civilian, then appropriate v. unappropriate, then prohibited v. approved.
Perhaps it is the current social and political climate that has made me a bit touchy. My earlier post was intended too call attention to what I considered dangerous terminology and mindset. If I offended anybody, here is a public apology unsolicited and fully intended. All are certainly entitled to own and hunt, or choose not to, any legal firearm they choose.