Why do hunters need semi-auto rifles?

[whiterussian1974]

These deer would argue that 1 well-aimed shot isn't always enough.

http://i748.photobucket.com/albums/xx12 ... 73e7cb.jpg
http://i748.photobucket.com/albums/xx12 ... 2d69c3.jpg
http://i748.photobucket.com/albums/xx12 ... 351088.jpg
Feel free to post arguments that YOU use against Anti-gunners.
This is the Legal and Political Discussion Forum. So w the magazine limit crazes forever looming over us, I thought that this might stimulate some productive discussion.

-Editted to delete graphic content due to member suggestion.
There are plenty of photos of animals w their jaw shot off or other deformities and amputations, but I didn't want to be too gruesome.

[aggiez28]

be gruesome... for the gruesome pics you could just put a warning and then just provide the links.

[RJT]

I need one when there are 20+ wild hogs under my feeder, and I'm trying to kill as many as I can, as fast as I can. My reason isn't an "anti" mind changer, but its a good one.


ETA: If I could find/afford a registered MG, then I'd be using that instead.

[HK45]

What does this have to do with silencers, or NFA items?
I don't need or want to see those pictures.

Maybe those pictures would be more appropriate in an anti bow hunting forum?

[whiterussian1974]

What does this have to do with silencers, or NFA items?
I don't need or want to see those pictures.
Maybe those pictures would be more appropriate in an anti bow hunting forum?

The pictures of animals w their jaws blown off by .243 etc are FAR more grousome. IF anything, gunshot wounds turn people off hunting. I'm just trying to make the point that even a perfectly aimed shot can sometimes require a quick follow-up to ensure a humane kill.

[doubloon]

point ....

... missed

[wacki]

Wow. I know hunting is necessary but this doesn't make me have a great emotional response towards hunting. Especially how hunting. Again, I know it needs to be done. National geographic strange days with Edward norton explains that very well.

I'm just saying be careful who you use this on.

[whiterussian1974]

point ....
... missed

Perhaps someone else can verbalize an excellent arguement of why hunters need semi-autos and multiple shot magazines. Libs act like ALL shooters are Snipers. One Shot, One Kill.
Real life isn't quite that simple.
Any # of conditions can lead to requiring a follow-up.
In NY they can only possess a 5 round mag. Yet many cases require more than 5 shots PER PERSON. If a group of 8 Thugs playing The Knockout Game decide to roll you for your, wallet, shoes, teeth, etc. then I want plenty of shots, plus a reload.
Game usually need only 1 shot. But US Army Snipers actually have a roughly 1.86 rd avg. Marines = 1.64.
I don't have FBI and other LE Agency figures.
Point is, a single shot or bolt action w only 1 shot doesn't always get the job done.
If you are gifted with oritory, please post a more cogient reason for why we may need and should have, multiple quick shot capability.

[Bendersquint]

What does this have to do with silencers, or NFA items?
I don't need or want to see those pictures.

Maybe those pictures would be more appropriate in an anti bow hunting forum?

Plain and simple, this topic doesn't belong on silencertalk.com

[whiterussian1974]

Wow. I know hunting is necessary but this doesn't make me have a great emotional response towards hunting. Especially how hunting. Again, I know it needs to be done. National geographic strange days with Edward norton explains that very well.

I'm just saying be careful who you use this on.

This is a weapons friendly site with people who enjoy expressing their Freedoms while we still can.
True, life is sometimes messy. A show that had elementery school kids visit a slaughter house, and then see how chicken nuggets and bologne are made, tried to convence kids to become vegatarians. English kids were disgusted and made the Pledge. American kids, who were offered nuggets and bologne sandwiches at end of tour, laughed and ran to the food tables when asked to decide between Pledge or food table.
PS: Bender don't hate. Life is too short. Your posts are often tightly wound. [To turn coils of (a cord or something similar) around something.]
You frequently shout about ATF Agents swarming on baffle-makers, until they say they are FFL&/SOT or have approved Form 4.
Relax, go for a walk, enjoy the birds in the trees. This is an IDEA site. Not a 'Break the Law by being stupid' site.
Legal and Political Discussion Forum means debating and informing about Legal and Political Topics. NY has banned mags over 5 rds. Some States don't allow suppressors for hunting. Many people want to Criminalize Self Defense. I grew up in an English Common Law State that required a home owner to retreat to their bedroom during a home invasion and not confront the Burgler. If he entered your bedroom, you were required to climb out the window and flee.
Thankfully well informed persons CAN make a difference and change crazy laws.
If you don't like a thread, skip to another and leave it to those with constructive comments.
For a Class 2/Type 7 Mfr, your attitude drives many potential clients away. Not a bad attitude, just overly judgemental.
I'm not Flaming, just offering a hint that could improve your customer relations experience.
Would also encourage more posters. More info and viewpoints are good, and shouldn't be discouraged.

[danb35]

Perhaps someone else can verbalize an excellent arguement of why hunters need semi-autos and multiple shot magazines.

Perhaps you can verbalize an excellent argument (or, heck, even an intelligible one) as to what this subject has to do with a site called silencertalk. I can't think of one, but I'm sure I could be missing something.

[rockman96]

What does this have to do with silencers, or NFA items?
I don't need or want to see those pictures.

Maybe those pictures would be more appropriate in an anti bow hunting forum?

Plain and simple, this topic doesn't belong on silencertalk.com

Yeah... sort of like your public posts informing everyone that you just replied to someone's PM.

[Tony M.]

I can't help but think that you're either a 14 year old kid or have some sort of social disorder. Those are the only two groups of people I've seen who consistently make the kinds of posts that you do and can't learn from the repeated lashings they receive that their trolling behavior isn't acceptable in polite society, or even the sometime impolite internet.

From some of your posts, it would seem that you might have some thoughts and ideas worth sharing, but most of what you post seems to counteract anything positive that you contribute.

[whiterussian1974]

I can't help but think that you're either a 14 year old kid or have some sort of social disorder. Those are the only two groups of people I've seen who consistently make the kinds of posts that you do and can't learn from the repeated lashings they receive that their trolling behavior isn't acceptable in polite society, or even the sometime impolite internet.

From some of your posts, it would seem that you might have some thoughts and ideas worth sharing, but most of what you post seems to counteract anything positive that you contribute.

The "lashings" are from posters who consistantly stifle all hobbyists and enthusiasts original contributions. Interestingly, I receive several PMs each time 1 of 3 jerks tries to "duke it out" in a thread. They write about those 3 bullying ALL newcomers and even some Industry Professionals.
We COULD retreat to only using PMs to share our ideas, (as 2 members have advised) to avoid conflict. But I've NEVER been able to stomach a Bully. At work I have to bite my tongue and walk away from opinionated jerks who get off on intimidating others.
But the Internet was FOUNDED as a research and idea sharing platform. I would rather sort through 20 unworkable ideas, than miss 1 with even a grain of insight.
There are Members' posts that I skip over if they are bloviating. But I don't crap on them, unless they are abusing someone.
As for ? as to what a Legal and Political Thread is doing on a Legal and Political Forum; that is so blatently obvious that it deserves no reply.
Yes, the Site address is SilencerTalk. Yet somehow the Site Admin added Forums for Political Thoughts, SBRs, Machineguns, Archery, Fishing, Survival, Tactics/Training, etc.
As for Polite Society: I DO agree that we should all be civil. Yet when "lashed" it;s acceptable, even understandable that a person would react viscerally.
By Trolling I assume you mean: "To draw someone or something out, to entice, to lure as if with trailing bait. [from the 1500s]"
I'm not aware that I'm doing that. If so, please PM me with example so that I can learn.
When someone trashes a member in the Public Forums, that is hardly an honest corrector. It's someone trying to feel big hiding behind a keyboard.

BTW: Does your clique really feel that we should be limitted to a single shot rifle?
That's the Effect of your arguments.

[Tony M.]

I can't help but think that you're either a 14 year old kid or have some sort of social disorder. Those are the only two groups of people I've seen who consistently make the kinds of posts that you do and can't learn from the repeated lashings they receive that their trolling behavior isn't acceptable in polite society, or even the sometime impolite internet.

From some of your posts, it would seem that you might have some thoughts and ideas worth sharing, but most of what you post seems to counteract anything positive that you contribute.

The "lashings" are from posters who consistantly stifle all hobbyists and enthusiasts original contributions. Interestingly, I receive several PMs each time 1 of 3 jerks tries to "duke it out" in a thread. They write about those 3 bullying ALL newcomers and even some Industry Professionals.
We COULD retreat to only using PMs to share our ideas, (as 2 members have advised) to avoid conflict. But I've NEVER been able to stomach a Bully. At work I have to bite my tongue and walk away from opinionated jerks who get off on intimidating others.
But the Internet was FOUNDED as a research and idea sharing platform. I would rather sort through 20 unworkable ideas, than miss 1 with even a grain of insight.
There are Members' posts that I skip over if they are bloviating. But I don't crap on them, unless they are abusing someone.
As for ? as to what a Legal and Political Thread is doing on a Legal and Political Forum; that is so blatently obvious that it deserves no reply.
Yes, the Site address is SilencerTalk. Yet somehow the Site Admin added Forums for Political Thoughts, SBRs, Machineguns, Archery, Fishing, Survival, Tactics/Training, etc.
As for Polite Society: I DO agree that we should all be civil. Yet when "lashed" it;s acceptable, even understandable that a person would react viscerally.
By Trolling I assume you mean: "To draw someone or something out, to entice, to lure as if with trailing bait. [from the 1500s]"
I'm not aware that I'm doing that. If so, please PM me with example so that I can learn.
When someone trashes a member in the Public Forums, that is hardly an honest corrector. It's someone trying to feel big hiding behind a keyboard.

BTW: Does your clique really feel that we should be limitted to a single shot rifle?
That's the Effect of your arguments.

As far as I'm concerned, your original question is misguided at best. I don't care about my 'need' for anything, I don't exercise my 'need' to own firearms of any description. I exercise my RIGHT to own them. I don't feel the need to justify that ownership to someone by attempting to prove to them that I need a large capacity magazine or a semi auto.

When the justification for owning a firearm is the 'need' to do so, we, as firearms owners, have lost. This thread is an example, just like your 'rename assault weapons' thread of trying to negotiate for something we already have, and doing so from a point of perceived weakness.

As for the rest of your comments towards me, please understand, my statement was out of disgust for the kind of question you are asking in this thread. People here have mentioned on numerous occasions the fact that your questions are as often as not misguided and of questionable origin.

In response to the question about trolling, this thread, by it's very nature is trolling. You post something that is certain to get a negative reaction, and then bask in the glow of the flames.

Some of your posts are insightful and have merit, but you regularly attack members here or make statements that are either patently false or severely misguided. The suggestion that you might have a social disorder, while not meant as an attack on you, could easily be interpreted that way, and for that, I apologize. I have a number of friends who are somewhere on the Aspergers spectrum, and like you, seem to hover back and forth between ideas that are quite insightful, and those that are utter nonsense. My statement was probably insensitive, but it was an accurate observation of the parallels between your behavior and that of the folks I know who do have social disorders.

And as for the 'clique' comment. You've clearly never read my posts here, Bender and I have disagreed regularly, even in my relatively short tenure, and I don't think the other 'guys' that you're referring to could give a F--k about me.

If you have anything constructive to add to the argument that can be made to regain certain rights that have been infringed through legislative action or executive order, I would certainly be more receptive to listening.

[whiterussian1974]

I can't help but think that you're either a 14 year old kid or have some sort of social disorder.
From some of your posts, it would seem that you might have some thoughts and ideas worth sharing, but most of what you post seems to counteract anything positive that you contribute.

The "lashings" are from posters who consistantly stifle all hobbyists and enthusiasts original contributions. Interestingly, I receive several PMs each time 1 of 3 jerks tries to "duke it out" in a thread. They write about those 3 bullying ALL newcomers and even some Industry Professionals.
We COULD retreat to only using PMs to share our ideas, (as 2 members have advised) to avoid conflict. But I've NEVER been able to stomach a Bully. At work I have to bite my tongue and walk away from opinionated jerks who get off on intimidating others.
But the Internet was FOUNDED as a research and idea sharing platform. I would rather sort through 20 unworkable ideas, than miss 1 with even a grain of insight.
BTW: Does your clique really feel that we should be limitted to a single shot rifle?
That's the Effect of your arguments.

(A)I don't care about my 'need' for anything, I don't exercise my 'need' to own firearms of any description.
(B)... just like your 'rename assault weapons' thread of trying to negotiate for something we already have, and doing so from a point of perceived weakness.
As for the rest of your comments towards me, please understand, (C)my statement was out of disgust for the kind of question you are asking in this thread.
Some of your posts are insightful and have merit, but you regularly attack members here or make statements that are (D) either patently false or severely misguided. The suggestion that you might have a social disorder, while not meant as an attack on you, could easily be interpreted that way, and for that, I apologize. I have a number of friends who are somewhere on the Aspergers spectrum, and like you, seem to hover back and forth between ideas that are quite insightful, and those that are utter nonsense. My statement was probably insensitive, but it was an accurate observation of the parallels between your behavior and that of the folks I know who do have social disorders.
And as for the 'clique' comment. You've clearly never read my posts here, Bender and I have disagreed regularly, even in my relatively short tenure, and (E) I don't think the other 'guys' that you're referring to could give a F--k about me.
If you have anything constructive to add to the argument that can be made to regain certain rights that have been infringed through legislative action or executive order, I would certainly be more receptive to listening.

I've parsed our posts to the points I wish to clarify.
I'll take them out of order to follow a coherent theme.
C: I'm not asking a ?. In Debate, Academic Articles, etc it's necessary to state an Argument, and then use that as a device for making one's point.
D: The whole point is to SHOW the Argument as False and severely misguided. In Firearms Articles many authors have used this same technique to illustrate how to counter Anti- arguments and claims to point out the faulty reasoning and unwarranted emotional response.
'How to counter 10 popular Gun Myths' was a recent example. He stated the Argument, then proceeded to tear it apart.
B: Obviously I've failed to make it clear that the Title of this Thread was only a jumping off point for discussion on why we must resist Anti-gun Legislation creeping in through back doors or even windows.
Perhaps you've heard of Frank Luntz on Fox discussion groups? He has a book 'Words that Work.' The premise is that it's not what we say, but what people hear. We must tailor our statements to Antis to defang their warped logic and garner support for our cause from any neutral or undecided bystanders.
The US Supreme Court has several times ruled to incrementally strip away our 2nd Amend Rights.
Arguments like: Keep and Bear Arms, but only certain types of Approved Arms. No "Assault Weapon features;" 1st 10 rd mag(national) then 5 rd mag(NY); the 1934 NFA itself violates "the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed." Yet misguided Legal Scholars argue that this Right only extends to Muzzleloading Blackpowder Muskets.
A: Public Opinion drives Legislation. Unlawful Statutes must be countered through the Courts. Activist Judges rule against us causing a need for a US Sup Crt Ruling. The Court often tries to reach "accomodation and compromise" rather than a strict adherence to the Founders' Intent.
(I grew up in a State w English Common Law where a homeowner was required to retreat to their bedroom during a home Invasion. If the Burglar entered the Bedroom, the Owner must escape through the window and flee the Property. If the Victim defended His Person or his Property he was tried as an 'Accessory during Commission' and co-conspirator to the Crime.
The Legal Theory being that the State had an Investment in the Criminal's Public Education, so Self Defense was a theft against the State and only the State could decide what Action to take against the Accused.)
E: And finally, that's just sad that Firearms Enthusiasts and Professionals don't care about each other. "A chain is only as strong as its Weakest Link" and "No Man Left Behind" are Virtues we should ALL live by.
PS: As for "Social Disorder," I DO have PTSD and this results in a heightened alertness and response to perceived threats.
While I'm not autistic, many of History's Greatest Minds have been "unbalanced." Mathmatician John Nash, Nikolai Tesla, and Albert Einstein have all had quirky brains that gave them unique insights that have allowed techniqual progress.

[danb35]

Whiterussian, this really should be a very simple question: How does this topic relate to a board called SILENCERtalk? How does it relate to a subforum called "NFA legal and political discussion"? I, for one, continue to not see it, and I don't think I'm the only one.

[doubloon]

point ....
... missed

Perhaps someone else can verbalize ...

Besides the topic being in the wrong forum the point you missed that other people have been trying to make is the photos are unnecessary and offensive to some who would prefer a warning about the photo content and even better a simple link to the photos instead of embedding them inline.

That's the point you missed.

[whiterussian1974]

point ....
... missed

Perhaps someone else can verbalize ...

Besides the topic being in the wrong forum the point you missed that other people have been trying to make is the photos are unnecessary and offensive to some who would prefer a warning about the photo content and even better a simple link to the photos instead of embedding them inline.

That's the point you missed.

Oh............
Ok, cool. I didn't realize that was an issue. After the crap I've seen, I was long ago largely desensitised to most things I see on 1st contact. I couldn't stand to do my job and help people in physical and emotional trauma otherwise.
When I comes to a subject matter like on this site, I imagine myself in Inservice Training with other cops or COs. When the job gets to be too much, people change professions or retire.
Since I can't see the other members, I forget that many are prior Soldiers/Marines and still love the Theory of Shooting, but don't care for the animal suffering.
I'm truly Sorry for all those who I exposed to troubling imagery. I can only learn from this and try to do better in the Future.

[Tony M.]

I've parsed our posts to the points I wish to clarify.
D: The whole point is to SHOW the Argument as False and severely misguided. In Firearms Articles many authors have used this same technique to illustrate how to counter Anti- arguments and claims to point out the faulty reasoning and unwarranted emotional response.
'How to counter 10 popular Gun Myths' was a recent example. He stated the Argument, then proceeded to tear it apart.

I'm afraid you're still missing the point of what I was saying. Breaking the argument down to the point that we're defending a right based on a sporting purpose is a real issue. It's that kind of thinking in debate that gave us things like the sporting clause in the 1968 GCA.

To help clarify, let's talk about how I deal with people who start asking why I 'need' a gun. Rather than give them some arbitrary response in an attempt to justify my need, I explain that the nature of a right is that there is no necessity to justify it's existence through need. I start discussing the 1st and 4th amendments, and ask them why they need the right to free speech or protection from unjustified search and seizure. When they balk, I explain that the founding fathers considered the right to keep and bear arms to be just as foundational a freedom as the rest of the civil rights that they value, and turn the tables on them by asking how they would dare to say that taking away my civil rights could be justified. When they make some response about how 'if it saves just one life' or some such nonsense, I remind them that more people are killed with hammers every year than assault weapons, and ask why they aren't instead attempting to ban hammers. After all, there's no constitutional right to own or use hammers. For extra points, you can also discuss the facts that gun crime has been on a steady decline in the US for 20 years, along with other violent crime.

The reality is, very few people who are adamant about being anti-gun will ever change their views. Diane Feinstein owns guns herself, but still believes that I shouldn't be able to. So instead of arguing with someone who is clearly as opinionated as I am about something we'll never agree on, I spend the time to take people who might be on the fence, shooting, and explain that their right to keep and bear arms is a civil right that they should seek to protect just as ardently as any other, even if they themselves choose not to exercise that right.

E: And finally, that's just sad that Firearms Enthusiasts and Professionals don't care about each other. "A chain is only as strong as its Weakest Link" and "No Man Left Behind" are Virtues we should ALL live by.

I think you're misunderstanding how things work on the internet. We argue and disagree, flame one another, and call each other names. But the reality is, I suspect that most of the folks here would come to your defense legally or physically if the need arose. (and you were in the right) Poor behavior is frowned upon, and unfortunately, we all have poor behavior sometimes. It just seems like about half of what you do here is deemed to be poor behavior. People tend to be more free with their thoughts and speech on the internet, and while there's nothing wrong with that, it can come off as abrasive, or even abusive at times. Unfortunately, it can also come off as uninformed, baiting or trollish. I suspect if you were to take a little more time before posting to think about how your posts would come off, you'd live a happier life here at the forum.

[doubloon]

...
I'm afraid you're still missing the point of what I was saying. Breaking the argument down to the point that we're defending a right based on a sporting purpose is a real issue. It's that kind of thinking in debate that gave us things like the sporting clause in the 1968 GCA.
...

On topic and agree.

[aggiez28]

Perhaps someone else can verbalize an excellent arguement of why hunters need semi-autos and multiple shot magazines.

Perhaps you can verbalize an excellent argument (or, heck, even an intelligible one) as to what this subject has to do with a site called silencertalk. I can't think of one, but I'm sure I could be missing something.

i think this topic is fine for this site, its just in the wrong forum on here. He probably mistook this forum "the NFA legal and political discussion" forum to be a general legal and political forum.
the topic belongs in the general legal and politica forum.
viewforum.php?f=75

that forum is dead so maybe he decided to post it in this forum since its kinda active.

[Libertarian_Geek]

If white russian's girlfriend sticks a dildo in his butt does it make this thread relevant to silencertalk?

[doubloon]

If white russian's girlfriend sticks a dildo in his butt does it make this thread relevant to silencertalk?

In a somewhat redundant kind of way I think maybe so ...

BAN CORTLAND!

[whiterussian1974]

If white russian's girlfriend sticks a dildo in his butt does it make this thread relevant to silencertalk?

Please don't give that kinky woman any ideas.
She already sends me to these Forums an hour before bed. She calls it "inoffensive old man porn."
Which is really sad because 10-20 years ago she jokingly called me a Viagra DONOR.
I'm happy to share my ideas with you pervs, but that sacrifice is going just TOO FAR.