Neil,
I'm not a hunter.
On Jan 30, 11:24 pm, archytas <[email protected]> wrote:
> I note that animals that borrow and hibernate are less likely to go
> extinct - no doubt because Craig can't get a bead on them 24/7! Our
> local Plod has clamped down on guns in Manchester, so now they are
> killing more frequently with knives.
>
> On 31 Jan, 03:41, Kierkecraig <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > Its one type of forum grenade that I'm always willing to throw. ;)
>
> > On Jan 30, 7:44 pm, Chris Jenkins <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > > Agreed. The problem that pro-gun and anti-gun folks agree on is guns in
> > > the
> > > wrong hands. It's only the solution in which they differ.
> > > This is also a forum hand grenade, and I'm pleasantly surprised at the
> > > discourse.
>
> > > On Fri, Jan 30, 2009 at 9:37 PM, archytas <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > > > We have a beer called Punt Gunner - a distasteful brew. The trick is
> > > > getting guns out of the hand of unworthies. Our local plod has been
> > > > very successful over the past year, simply by doing something about
> > > > it. Even punt guns would fail to overthrow governments, but would
> > > > have some effect in keeping my car clean as we are overflown by
> > > > geese. This leaves me in favour of rearmament for the same valid
> > > > reasons Craig supports.
>
> > > > On 30 Jan, 18:21, Kierkecraig <[email protected]> wrote:
> > > > > That sucker would shoot a pound of shot at a time?! Holy crap! That
> > > > > must have been a lot of fun. I can see how that would have a huge
> > > > > effect on the population of water fowl in no time though.
>
> > > > > I think when you start talking about limitations on firearms in the
> > > > > United States you run into conundrums. The rationale behind the
> > > > > second amendment is that the populous be armed with military type
> > > > > weapons. Reasons being, if the populous is armed with military type
> > > > > weapons, then they can be at least semi-effective in repelling
> > > > > invasions, forming militias, and not to mention, overthrowing corrupt
> > > > > governments. So if you start talking about limiting the weapons and
> > > > > their abilities, you begin to rationalize away the reasons behind the
> > > > > constitutional right.
>
> > > > > If anything, under the rationale of the second amendment, limits
> > > > > placed on handguns would make the most sense. Handguns are worthless
> > > > > in forming a militia, repelling invasions, or overthrowing corrupt
> > > > > governments. Pistols are not really military weapons, even though
> > > > > officers carry them.
>
> > > > > So the so called "assault weapons" bans, I think, are per se
> > > > > unconstitutional. The weapons included in those bans include all the
> > > > > weapons that would be used in the military. I'm okay though with the
> > > > > restriction on fully automatic weapons. Not because I think fully
> > > > > automatic weapons are significantly more dangerous than semi-automatic
> > > > > weapons, but on the contrary I think semi-automatic weapons (like my
> > > > > AR-15) are nearly just as effective as their automatic relatives (the
> > > > > M-16), and so it doesn't really bother me that they ban the automatic
> > > > > versions.
>
> > > > > nominal9 wrote:
> > > > > > I'm not much of a "Gun Guy" myself, but I have good friends who are
> > > > > > hunters. Which is to say, that I have "moderated" my views even more
> > > > > > than my own previous somewhat "liberal" , as in let 'em have the
> > > > > > guns
> > > > > > if they want 'em, stance. But still..... what do you more avid
> > > > > > supporters of gun rights think.... shouild there be any limitations
> > > > > > at
> > > > > > all, in your opinions?.... Fully automatic... how about "calibers"
> > > > > > or
> > > > > > bore size..... I remember reading about "Britsh Punt Guns" for
> > > > > > hunting..... I always wanted to have been around when one of those
> > > > > > little pea shooters went off....
> > > > > >http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Punt_gun
> > > > > >http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iUiTBC0AfVE
> > > > > > nominal9
>
> > > > > > On Jan 30, 10:29 am, Kierkecraig <[email protected]> wrote:
> > > > > > > I got an email today from one of the gun groups I subscribe to
> > > > > > > and it
> > > > > > > had embedded in it a video from Britain about gun rights. I was
> > > > > > > shocked and astonished to learn that there are people in Britain
> > > > > > > who
> > > > > > > are fighting for their gun rights. I guess Britain isn't a
> > > > completely
> > > > > > > lost cause. Here's the video.
> > > >http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yTq2NEUlhDE
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
""Minds Eye"" group.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected]
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
[email protected]
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/Minds-Eye?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
