If people want to buy it, more power to them. OTOH, I have an Ithaca 37 Police Special. If it was good enough for Reed and Malloy, it's good enough for me. 
Are firearm accessories like this really necessary?
- Thread starter raljr1
- Start date
- Status
Walkingwolf
Member
- Joined
- Apr 16, 2017
- Messages
- 1,624
- Reaction score
- 1,655
The second amendment follows the first amendment. Read them both. You can make comments on others choices, but accept their free speech to make their own about your comments.
CalmerThanYou
Member
- Joined
- Sep 7, 2017
- Messages
- 296
- Reaction score
- 578
You lost me a "Necessary"
- Joined
- Aug 9, 2005
- Messages
- 9,203
- Reaction score
- 11,416
I would think thousand yard shooters, at least most of them, are experienced shooters. I mentioned the "experienced shooters" in my post, but perhaps it wasn't adequately clear.
oneounceload
Member
Imagine that Benelli using Aguila minis.............
Besides, it would handle WORSE than a pig on a shovel
Besides, it would handle WORSE than a pig on a shovel
We have much proof that more laws won't help. And it's a fact that the rest of the world thinks we have too many guns and not enough restrictions.
But yet we guns owners continue to fight amongst ourselves over perceived need. If you believe in something and are willing to support it and even fight for it then you should support it 100%, 100% of the time. Not half way or just a little. Things get tough and people want to cave in and make concessions.
I'm not a rich man. But I have a friend that is. He owns several NFA guns as well as suppressors and other expensive guns such as a Barrett 50 BMG. We go up in the hills several times every summer and have a good ole time. He doesn't mind sharing his guns. He actually expects me to shoot every gun he brings. I've had the pleasure of shooting guns that most people will only see pictures of. I dare someone to tell me that I shouldn't have access to them or own them.
I've said this before folks, but if we don't stand together we will get the short end of the stick. If we continue to let our 2A rights to be slowly eroded, what's next? Socialism? Communism? If we don't fight for our rights we will soon become out numbered. We will be the minority. And we will be weak. Too weak to fight.
Look at the big picture. It's not just about the 2A. It's about freedom.
But yet we guns owners continue to fight amongst ourselves over perceived need. If you believe in something and are willing to support it and even fight for it then you should support it 100%, 100% of the time. Not half way or just a little. Things get tough and people want to cave in and make concessions.
I'm not a rich man. But I have a friend that is. He owns several NFA guns as well as suppressors and other expensive guns such as a Barrett 50 BMG. We go up in the hills several times every summer and have a good ole time. He doesn't mind sharing his guns. He actually expects me to shoot every gun he brings. I've had the pleasure of shooting guns that most people will only see pictures of. I dare someone to tell me that I shouldn't have access to them or own them.
I've said this before folks, but if we don't stand together we will get the short end of the stick. If we continue to let our 2A rights to be slowly eroded, what's next? Socialism? Communism? If we don't fight for our rights we will soon become out numbered. We will be the minority. And we will be weak. Too weak to fight.
Look at the big picture. It's not just about the 2A. It's about freedom.
Last edited:
TomkinsSP
Member
IMHO the others should go the way of the DoDo. (Same applies to accessories for firearms.) But it is the market's job, not the legislature's job to separate the chaff from the grain.
TomkinsSP
Member
Maybe we need a rule like 100 or 150 years need to pass before countries who commit mass murder get to talk about human rights. Maybe countries who were saved from those mass murderers by American pistols, rifles, tanks, aircraft, ships and provisions should just say 'thank you' on Memorial Day and hold the lectures.
Lets see who does that leave... Switzerland? I think by law every able bodied Swiss citizen is REQUIRED to be armed.
Great example and I believe supports Beamers premise of having intelligent civil debates. First you had a respectful cilivized conversation. In my experience that is the only way to ever get someone to actually listen to you and give real consideration of your points. When things are presented in a logical, intelligent manner, logical intelligent people will understand. They may still disagree, but they will at least understand are open to facts.
To the others that thought the earlier post by Beamer was about appeasment or giving in. I think you missed the point. It was about intelligence. If the opponents are so dead set on "doing something" well then let's use a little negotiations jujitsu. I would be glad to put bump stocks on the class 3 list (thus no ban, just more paperwork and tax i.e. costs) in exchange for national recognition of state issued CW permits. Straight up deal. Would you take it? I would. Great deal for tens of thousand gun owners and carriers for the reclassification of something that is in all reality a novelity item.
Last edited:
UncleEd
Member
A lot make the argument that it's an either or choice: With us 100 percent or against us 100 percent.
Sorry, but I'm against the bump stocks and the 30 or 100 round magazines. Other means in Las Vegas could have been used but
they were not. It was mass murder.
OK, does that mean I'm out?
Yes, I know the arguments of incremental surrender but I don't see it.
What I do see is that 100 percent hardline statements as made here will lead to some outright bans because those making those hardline statements will be judged by the majority as nuts.
And yes, democracy can
be the tyranny by the majority.
Sorry, but I'm against the bump stocks and the 30 or 100 round magazines. Other means in Las Vegas could have been used but
they were not. It was mass murder.
OK, does that mean I'm out?
Yes, I know the arguments of incremental surrender but I don't see it.
What I do see is that 100 percent hardline statements as made here will lead to some outright bans because those making those hardline statements will be judged by the majority as nuts.
And yes, democracy can
be the tyranny by the majority.
Arik
Member
We already had a mag ban that solved nothing. Essentially you want the AWB back because all it banned were mag capacity and accessories
Sent from my XT1650 using Tapatalk
oneounceload
Member
Since we live in a Republic, that statement does not apply
Wow..........you really don't get it, do you? You are either really naive, or very young and uninformed.
We have been incrementally surrendering since the 30s........... when do we get rid of all of the current "common sense gun laws" that have been passed? What do the anti gun folks "compromise" on or what rights do they get to give up?
All this talk of compromise only has it coming from one side -ours.
cmort666
Member
It most certainly is a zero sum game, just as it was with the Nazis.
What "compromise" do you think Ann Frank was going to come to with Adolf Eichmann and Juergen Stroop?
The anti-gun cult has ONE goal, complete disarmament of the general population. Only they and the state will be armed in the end.
They will no more be satisfied with banning thirty round magazines than Hitler was with the Sudetenland. Like the National Socialists, they are maximalists. Their only "negotiation" is over the time table.
But in any case, my answer is what it has always been:
NO, I REFUSE.
cmort666
Member
This nonsense about "compromise" with hard core anti-gun cultists is in its foolishness, of a kind with the delusional claims that the atomic bombs were "unnecessary" because the Japanese were "about to surrender".
All it takes to believe either fairy story is a complete and utter lack of knowledge (willful or otherwise) of the adversary.
BY THEIR OWN ADMISSION, any such "compromise" is a slippery slope down which they wish to rush headlong.
Hitler said what he wanted in "Mein Kampf".
Nancy Pelosi, Charles Schumer, Michael Bloomberg, Michael Moore, et al not only say what they want, they say it nearly every day, and in every media outlet. What level of obtuseness does it take to blind oneself to that?
All it takes to believe either fairy story is a complete and utter lack of knowledge (willful or otherwise) of the adversary.
BY THEIR OWN ADMISSION, any such "compromise" is a slippery slope down which they wish to rush headlong.
Hitler said what he wanted in "Mein Kampf".
Nancy Pelosi, Charles Schumer, Michael Bloomberg, Michael Moore, et al not only say what they want, they say it nearly every day, and in every media outlet. What level of obtuseness does it take to blind oneself to that?
Arik
Member
Why is everything somehow contacted to Hitler/Holocaust/Nazis/Communism/nukes/end of the world apocalyptic with you.
Sent from my XT1650 using Tapatalk
Sent from my XT1650 using Tapatalk
Last edited:
UncleEd
Member
Well, one answer is to step up and contribute to the NRA Golden Eagle fund
to the tune of hundreds of dollars a year or thousands
through the years.
I know most on this forum have done so and shall continue to do
so.
Also, cough up the dollars to the state organizations if you haven't already done so. But I know you all have.
Cmort and Oneonceload among others, let's think about doubling
our contributions.
to the tune of hundreds of dollars a year or thousands
through the years.
I know most on this forum have done so and shall continue to do
so.
Also, cough up the dollars to the state organizations if you haven't already done so. But I know you all have.
Cmort and Oneonceload among others, let's think about doubling
our contributions.
cmort666
Member
Because the time others waste watching sports on television, I devote to reading history.
I highly recommend it.
Those who fail to learn the lessons of history are doomed to watch MSNBC.
Last edited:
Arik
Member
No I get that you read a lot and that's great but still I don't get how everything relates to Nazis and Stalin. I'm sure you could connect the slow fixing of potholes to Hitler or Stalin
Sent from my XT1650 using Tapatalk
cmort666
Member
Attempting to achieve a governmental monopoly on the means of armed force has a LOT to do with Hitler or Stalin.
Can you draw the same tie to potholes?
Arik
Member
No I can't but all your arguments relate to those men or men like them.
Sent from my XT1650 using Tapatalk
Sent from my XT1650 using Tapatalk
- Status
