Doc

I figured it out a long time ago that there really is only one "stopping place" for the anti-gun crowd. That line in the sand is complete and total eradication of weapons. They have made each and every advancement toward that goal through incrementalism. One baby step at a time. A death of a thousand cuts. I will say one thing for them, they are a patient bunch, and I do believe that eventually they will wear us down. I see signs of it now. I see people already saying things like, "Well gosh, nobody needs one of them things to hunt deer".... as though the 2nd amendment was written about hunting. Yes the gun defenses are being fragmented and fractured a little at a time. Modern sporting rifles are just simply the next target in a steady path toward the last target. A piece at a time folks. That's how it's done. And it doesn't matter what the goal is today, it's only the next step toward the final goal.

Do you realize that just about everybody, will have their annual maiden voyage into winter's ugliness at a time when holiday traffic and shopping is at it's heaviest. We usually get eased into this crap with a few minor snow accumulations before we get thrown into holiday traffic. I hope everyone gets acclamated to the bad road conditions in a hurry this year. Just be careful!

Now you really are getting completely ridiculous in your efforts to justify going out of your way to humiliate a young forum member. For some reason you feel justified in publicly belittling him for some spelling and grammar mistakes. I hope that makes you feel good, but don't be so transparent as to claim that it was all done for his benefit. I guess it never occurred to those that were having a free-for-all over his errors to send a PM and point out his mistakes. And of course it wouldn't have had the same humiliating impact would it? And now that someone has called you out on it, you start trying to put lipstick on it to make it all a bit more palatable. Don't bother, I'm not buying it. I'm sorry if I don't appreciate the idea of trying to drive our younger members away with those tactics. I suspect that all your efforts may very well have succeeded. Frankly I think it stinks!

Thanks for posting this. It is refreshing to hear a voice of reason for a change.

No Elmo .... you don't want to get caught up in those "if it saves just one life it's worth it...." kind of justifications. An awful lot of bad law and lost freedoms comes out of the use of that phrase. If we are going to get into harrassment style laws, let's make sure that the results are significant and the over-all benefits obvious. I've got to say that when you get into that "drive-by" action, you are dealing with very street-wise lowlifes that would not abide by any law just out of general principles .... lol. Seriously those kinds of guys are pretty much immune from gun laws. Gun laws in those cases are not preventative, but may offer some slap-on-the-wrist additional charges after the homicide.

Ok, I finally got out and tried my new Christmas present/ birthday present. Here are the quick results of the .270 Ruger American. These are the first 9 shots out of it ....100 yards. 150 gr Hornady SST Boat tail. 50.4 gr of Hodgdens H4350. I think with a little more work I can tighten them down a bit more. Not too bad considering I had snow blowing in my face and could hardly feel my fingers from the cold .... lol. I'm pretty happy with it.

If they make them illegal to possess, they don't have to come to your door to collect them. And as far as what they might do, your guess is as good as mine. Nothing is really off the table. This latest deal at Newtown has created a great opportunity for the gun confiscators. They are giddy over the possibilities and are willing and eager to take maximum advantage. Hopefully the idea of checks and balances will be at work on this issue, but in this instant atmosphere of panic and hype and emotionality, nothing would surprise me.

I'm looking down this list and trying to figure out which one of these proposed laws would have stopped (or even slowed down) this kid at Newtown. How about the kids at Columbine? If you had a mind to shoot somebody, how long would it take you to head down the street and find someone with a trunk full of illegal guns for sale? Would any of these law proposals make this guy any harder to find? .....Just some things to think about.

I appreciate you finally coming up with the list of what you consider to be necessary gun laws. I was surprised that it was relatively short and without a whole lot of new ideas that I have not heard before. Lol .... maybe I was hoping for some new thoughts that might turn out to be innovative and potentially effective. When I made the request, I had no intention of trying to refute anything on your list, I just wanted to see what we're dealing with here. It's very hard to discuss things that no one wants to define. Gun control is always mentioned like it is a defined entity, when in reality there are as many versions as there are people. Lol ... my version of gun control is being able to hit what you are aiming at. So anyway, now exactly two people have been able to articulate what they mean by "more gun control laws are needed". That is quite disappointing. Perhaps some when made to begin thinking about the details of what they were arguing for realized that they haven't a clue, and they were just going along with the feel-good crowd because it sounded good ...... lol. I don't think you will find it any surprise that there is very little here that I can agree would have any significant effect on gun crime in a positive way. I think we have a legitimate difference of opinion on these things, but at least I have some understanding of what the issues are (for 2 people anyway). Thank you for that.

I was in there yesterday, and the crowd was ridiculous. People were parked up on the grass next to Linden Ave, and there was just one parking spot left (which I took). Crazy stuff inside. Shoulder to shoulder. They are getting absolutely rich! .... lol.

I was into Beikirch's yesterday, and couldn't belief the crowd. The parking lot was absolutely full, and the store was shoulder to shoulder. I've never seen it like that.

I have been led to believe that it was illegal to have a centerfire rifle in the woods while there is a deer season in progress, in shotgun only areas. Not so????

Lol .... It would probably drive them crazy trying to figure out what you were up to.

4 pages of nonsense and hardly any of it has anything to do with Robinson's thread. Nice going guys. But we've had a good response from the grammar police. That was useful. And then we have this poor guy ATbuckhunter who keeps trying to bring it all back to being on-topic. Ha-ha-ha.... lots of luck.

It's obvious that almost all of the people who are screaming for the abolishion of the modern sporting rifles have absolutely no idea why other than that they "look" destructive. They have been sold a bill of goods by the anti-gunners who have no problem with flat out lies about these being "weapons of war" even though they fully realize that other than appearance, there are no functional similarities. The problem is that they have already made up their minds and no amount of explanation will change their views. All the antis have to do is show them a picture and all the logic goes right out the window. It's like a subliminal "flashcard", and it works. The bottom line is that we are in the minority, and a lot of those that we count on to represent the pro-gun side of the argument are cowering in the shadows afraid to speak out, or still think that the 2nd amendment was all about hunting, or they are those with the attitude of, "Hey, I've got mine, the heck with yours" approach to gun ownership ...... The idea that I will never buy one of those so you're on your own buddy. At any rate, the gun owning community is once again shown as a dis-organized, every-man-for-himself bunch of people who couldn't organize for the common good if they had to.

Sounds like they are saying that they are getting out of the business of selling ammo, because there is no such thing as assault weapon ammo.

I don't think so. There may be a stand-off here, and a barricaded shoot-out there, but for the most part people will simply hand them over. We're not really made of the same thing that we were back in colonial times. At least that 's the impression that I get. There's a lot of good talk, but when it comes down to laying our comfortable lifestyle on the line, and risking prison time or worse, realistically I doubt that we have that kind of resolve. Now, there may be a few that will stash their guns in the wall, or under the floor-boards, but they will soon realize that the guns are of little value to them if they never get a chance to openly use them. What value is a $1200 gun that is kept in the wall? Those that think the NYS populace will all of a sudden rise up and form some sort of armed insurrection, probably should think about that some more. If this sort of thing is going to be shut down, it will have to be through extreme legislative pressure, and the courts. There really is no other way. For those that still think that it is acceptable to be unaffiliated or unsupportive of pro-gun organizations (NRA for instance), now is the time to pull your head out of that dark place and look around a bit and understand what is happening around you. By the way, for those that think all this is just Cuomo's idle talk, and that it could never really happen, have another look at those Austrailian video clips that have been posted on this forum, only this time listen to the words .... lol.

Nice! you smooth talking devil ... lol. Careful, your personality is showing. I've never heard so much nonsense in my life. If you feel the need to be the forum's grammar police, knock your socks off. I don't think we need your services, but apparently it does something for your ego so do what you think you need to do. And just to keep your portrayal of my comments as having some semblance of honesty, you will note that I did not "Tell the kid grammar is unimportant in life, especially when talking, writing, and interacting with those who hold power positions over you, such as a teacher, potential employer, or current boss" .... blah ... blah .... blah. If you are going to represent my words, at least do it honestly. And like I said earlier, if your sincere desire is to help the kid, at least have the decency to do in a PM instead of trying to make some public spectacle over it. Just viewing the window into your personality that you just provided, I suspect your real motives were not really all that noble.

Well, I suspect there is a lot more important reasons for not registering long guns. There was some reason why Canada instituted the horrendously expensive sytem of long gun registration, maintained that huge blob of unmanageable data for a few years, and then decided that they had to scrap the entire foolishness. I think before you could come up with an intelligent answer to the original question of whether you favor it or not, it might be useful to study the Canadian experimentation with that very same idea, and find out why we should be able to do what they couldn't. Apparently there are more negatives to the system than the mere concerns of individual citizens.

No, the real fact of the matter is that you jumped in the middle of a discussion with a comment intended to piss me off. Nothing relative to the discussion, just a blatent unprovoked personal attack. And then you followed it up with a whole littany of other personal attacks none of which had anything to do with the topic. And I am simply pointing out that it is that kind of aggressive nonsense is the main reason why these threads wind up degenerating into pissing contests. I'm not belittleing anyone, I am simply explaining to you how that kind of unprovoked attacking is viewed and the obvious effects it has. I will say that starting a conversation with a personal attack is an interesting approach to a discussion, but not really all that effective or rational.

I want change. I want the entire state by state gun control system scrapped, and replaced by a uniform national set of laws that go through each existing law, using very stringent criteria, to evaluate which ones really have proveable value. Those that don't pass muster simply get scrapped. No more state laws. No more duplicate laws. No more redundancy. No more nonsensical laws that are in place to only serve as harrassment of legitimate gun owners. Clean it all up with a goal of getting the whole mess down to a few pages of uniform, effective laws that apply across the country. Of course I am a realist and understand that this level of interstate cooperation will never happen. But that is the change that I want.

I'm willing to bet that this thread winds up with the fewest pages of entire firearms banning discussion. There is no way to dispute the failures of gun banning when you hear them in the words of those who have experienced it. This will be the thread that the gun control fanatics of this site will wish had never been posted and I am sure they will avoid it like the plague.....lol.

Ok, it's been 4 pages since I requested that people try to give a complete list what new gun-laws they believe would provide the silver bullet to violent crime and mass killings. I thought it was a reasonable request so we could see exactly what the scope is of the new gun control measures being proposed. Apparently only one of these gun control advocates really has any idea of what they are actually proposing and that one only had a couple of ideas that most likely lack any real practicality. That includes the original author of this post that gave such an impassioned speech about how new gun laws were the only answer. My only conclusion has to be that all these people who have all of a sudden become gun control advocates are simply jumping aboard the gun control bandwagon even though they haven't got one single notion what it is that they are calling for. I'm not too sure how they can have any credibility when they don't even know what they are for. Well anyway, I tried to start a reasonable discussion, but there really doesn't seem to be any desire or ability to do that. It's pretty hard to have a discussion when nobody has defined what the discussion is really about. So, I guess these threads will simply remain a bunch of ranting about how an evil looking firearm should be banned. I guess that's what the whole thing boils down to. A modern sporting rifle has been deemed to look too much like an assault weapon and should therefore be outlawed. My gosh that really does sound absolutely ridiculous when you think about it.....lol.

Australia is providing a real-time, current, laboratory in what even partial gun confiscation can mean. I'm sure that this will be totally ignored by the anti-gun lobby here and outside of this forum as they hide from proof of what the future holds in store for us if they have their way. As I listen to the descriptions of the home invasions, escalating crime rate, and other abuses of the disarmed Austrailian people, I can only ask, "How could anyone expect that it would turn out any different". But, I'm sure the anti-gunners will have no problem running away from these facts as they push their nonsensical agendas.

Now that all deer seasons are closed (in this shotgun only area), it is legal for me to head up to my target range (in the woods behind the house) to do some target shooting with my centerfire rifle. And, as a matter of fact, that's exactly what I did yesterday when I dragged out the .270 to sight it in. I probably raised a few questions in the minds of people around the valley.