View Single Post
  #161  
Old 02-23-2013, 9:20 AM
CBruce's Avatar
CBruce CBruce is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: San Jose, CA
Posts: 1,995
iTrader: 8 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Moonshine View Post
One positive step we can take is calling Darrell Steinberg's office and your Representative's office and encourage them to make an exemption list of "legitimate hunting rifles". Senator Steinberg is the senator in my district and his office said this is something in consideration. Suggest Feinstein's exemption list as a starting point.

None of us want to see a semi-auto ban but if you enjoy hunting (and I do very much) then you'll call or write to protect hunting rifles such as the Browning BAR long/short trac, the Benelli R-1, the Ruger 10/22, other rifles we all know are NOT "Assault Weapons"!

UPDATE: OK some folks explained why this is a bad idea. Because I do know hunters who are going down this road use this thread to post the RIGHT IDEA so I can at least explain to them why this is the wrong road.
All semi-automatic, magazine-fed rifles are functionally identical. Sticking a pistol grip or "flash hider" on a rifle does not, in any way, make it more suited for mass murder or less suited for hunting, target-shooting, or self-defense. Now that we've banned military-style assault weapons the next logical step is to ban anything that functions the same way. Can be fired as quickly, hold as many bullets, and be reloaded as quickly as the weapons of war that were a plague on our society and used to murder our children.

And we can't just stop at rifles. Clearly, semi-automatic magazine-fed handguns have been used more often in crimes and homicides than rifles. They've been used more often than rifles in mass shootings. There's no rational reason to exempt semi-auto handguns from a ban for public safety.

And let's be honest, double-action revolvers can be fired just as fast as a semi-auto and with a cheap plastic speedloader, they can be reloaded just as quickly. They might only hold 6-8 rounds, but if 10 round magazines was enough for the massacres at Columbine and Virginia Tech, it's disengenous to claim that 2-4 fewer really makes much of a difference. So, we must ban double-action revolvers as well. Single-action too, since taking the extra step to manually cock a hammer back before firing isn't really going to slow anyone done. We've all seen cowboy and action shooters fanning single-action revolvers with devestating speed.

And while we're on the topic of cowboys, lever-action and pump-action are only marginally slower than semi-automatics. Sure, it takes a bit longer to load your typical lever-action or pump action firearm, but they have speed-loaders for pump-action shotguns...so those need to be banned as well. And while it might take a bit longer for a lever-action rifle to be reloaded you can still shoot and kill a half dozen children at a school pretty easily. More if you can find a few seconds to reload.

Which leaves us with muzzle-loaders and other single-shot weapons. But before you get too excited about that let me put this out there as something to think about. What is the acceptable number of dead children slaughtered by a gun? I say it's zero. Having a weapon that can easily murder any children at a school should not exist in our modern society at all. Civilian firearm ownership is an archaic, antiquated concept written during by superstitous farmers. They didn't even have a military who could protect them.

Hunting? We don't need to hunt for food, our food industries can provide anything we want at local markets. Murdering animals for sport is simply inhumane. What we can do instead is have game farms and allow people to go to them, buy their permits, pick out the game animal like they want and they'll be quickly and humanely killed by trained and regulated professionals.

We do not need guns for self defense. That's a myth and firearm ownership only greatly increases the risk of suicides, accidental shootings, domestic disputes or arguemetns escelating into homocide. Any lives saved by a gun are offset by many more lives taken by a gun. So we're better off just not having them at all.

Only the police or military need guns. Society will be much safer and much better off when we finally rid it of all guns and other dangerous weapons. Let's be honest, the assault rifles were never really the problem. Once we got rid of those and all handguns, it became pretty clear that knives were really the tool of mass murder. More people are killed by knives every year than any other type of weapon. People don't need pointy knives unless they intend to murder someone....
Reply With Quote