From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Alex, you seem to want to misconstrue nearly everything I write. I'll have
one more go then give up...
For clarity's sake I will preface quotes from your posting between ~ ~ marks.
> ~Ferocious looking characters, unshaven, unwashed, wearing camouflage
> uniforms, pot bellied with knives sticking out of their boots .......
> get the picture?~
No, I don't get the picture. In nearly 30 years I have never shot with
characters like you describe. You must mix with some rum types.
>
>
> ~But you are not fighting the government, are you! You are fighting me
> and people like me! ~
I partially agree with you, I am fighting the misrule of the present
government and I am fighting for all shooting sports. If that means I am
against people who would sacrifice one person's sport to save their own, and
you seem to be one of those, yes I am fighting you too.
> TR, but if anybody asks
> what 50 cal shooting is that is terrible! Why?~
Pardon? As Harold Macmillan said of one of Khruschev's outbursts in the UN -
could I have a translation of that please.
>
> ~When did it start!? Well over 2,000 years ago in Athens.~
Oh! You mean democracy. Well, that finished in this country a few years back
when elective dictatorship took over. Maybe you haven't noticed yet.
>
> ~In terms of publicly perceived danger 50 calibre is somewhat above any
> other discipline that I can think of.~
>
> I responded: You must be joking here, 90% of the population have never
> heard of it.
>
> You responded ~But the government has heard of it.~
Sorry Alex but you quite clearly wrote ~ publicly perceived ~ you've just
moved the goal posts.
>
> Alex, it was you who said: ~your remarks are well and truly out of place~
> about me.
>
So when you answer:
> ~Why? Are they? Can you be more specific (although I would rather you
> were not).~
I find it a bit difficult to understand what you are getting at.
>
> ~But had I called him a Luddite, told him that he did not
> know what he was taking about (even though he didn't) bashed myself in
> the chest and demanded my rights, I am sure he would have walked away
> convinced that the pistol ban was the best thing since sliced bread!~
As Steve says you have stereotyped me as an unthinking boor. Your remarks
are not well taken.
>
> ~You keep your dislikes to yourself and if you do not see any point in
> fighting to save Bisley, don't!~
Plainly you have not read what I wrote: referring to TR I said:
I wouldn't miss the Bisley type of full bore rifle shooting if it ceased to
exist tomorrow.
However, I am prepared to do everything in my power to make sure it doesn't
because any type of shooting sport is worth preserving.
How you manage to get from that to ~if you do not see any point in fighting
to save Bisley, don't~ leaves me gasping. I visit Bisley 2 or 3 times a year
and love going there, however I don't consider Bisley worth saving if it
means I have to play the turncoat and sacrifice other shooters.
>
> ~I genuinely have never seen a 50 cal rifle and did not know the courses of
> fire nor anything about it, other than its military origins.~
Perhaps one of the 50 cal owners might like to comment on that but I think
the civilian 50 cal shooters predated the military. However, if you want an
example of shooting with military origins try TR. As I understand it, it
really got its boost from the 19th Century Volunteer Movement and isn't there
something about defence of the realm in the NRA's constitution? I would
hasten to add, I see nothing wrong in that but you seem to have a problem
with it. Incidentally the only 50 cal rifle I have ever seen was at Bisley.
It was for sale, not being shot.
Alex, all I am saying is that I support all shooting sports and I now
publicly undertake not to try to sacrifice another person's shooting to save
mine. All I ask is that you do the same.
Kenneth Pantling
--
Given that 7.62mm is no longer the standard military calibre, I could
make just as strong an argument for banning it as the argument for
banning .50. Who needs to be able to shoot a 7.62mm at 1,000 yards?
The arguments for banning it are exactly the same as for banning
.50BMG. The differences between banning handguns v. banning TR
and banning 50 v. banning TR are quite large, but any TR shooter
arguing for a ban on .50BMG (or rather, saying they don't care if
it is banned) is being truly naive, IMO. I think perhaps the .50
shooters could help themselves out by inviting along some TR shooters
for a look-see though.
Steve.
Cybershooters website: http://www.cybershooters.org
List admin: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
____________________________________________________________
T O P I C A -- Learn More. Surf Less.
Newsletters, Tips and Discussions on Topics You Choose.
http://www.topica.com/partner/tag01
