posted                      

quote:

---

Originally posted by Sean:
It is senseless to limit the calibre of hunting rifles though, but deffinately a good idea to limit the magazine capacity and fire rate.

---

posted                      

quote:

---

Originally posted by shikaru808:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Sean:
It is senseless to limit the calibre of hunting rifles though, but deffinately a good idea to limit the magazine capacity and fire rate.

---

This is all good but I have to disagree on one thing. Its obvious to limit the caliber of the round because a 50. will fricken destroy a deer while smaller and more practical rounds will do the same job without the mess.

Regular civilians don't NEED 50.'s or automatic weapons or assault rifles or high-powered sniper rifles. Those are all meant for killing PEOPLE not game or for shits and giggles. If you want to try that stuff out, put on a uniform and go to Iraq.

---

posted                      

quote:

---

Originally posted by Sean:

quote:

---

Originally posted by shikaru808:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Sean:
It is senseless to limit the calibre of hunting rifles though, but deffinately a good idea to limit the magazine capacity and fire rate.

---

This is all good but I have to disagree on one thing. Its obvious to limit the caliber of the round because a 50. will fricken destroy a deer while smaller and more practical rounds will do the same job without the mess.

Regular civilians don't NEED 50.'s or automatic weapons or assault rifles or high-powered sniper rifles. Those are all meant for killing PEOPLE not game or for shits and giggles. If you want to try that stuff out, put on a uniform and go to Iraq.

---

It actually, it's not so much the calibre, as the propellant. Sure, a slug designed to be fired in an M2 .50 machine gun will completely destroy a deer, because it is an extremely powerfull round due to the power of the charge that fires it, and the design of the round. Muzzleloading hunting rifles for example, come in calibres of .50 and higher ( smaller too), but aren't as powerful due to the fact that the bullet is designed differently ( not full metal jacket steel core armour piercing as in the mg round). These bullets could be conical minne balls, or plain lead balls, fired by a black powder or smokeless powder charge. They don't completely destroy a deer. You also have your antique gun enthusiasts who hunt with repllica antique guns, from the 19th and 18th centurys, where the most common musket/rifle calibre was between .60, and .75.

So, am I suggesting that civilians be able to hunt with .50 calibre military sniper rifles? No. But, as hunting with these older style guns is popular, it makes little sense to limit gun calibre. And,anyway, if you're going to go on a shooting rampage, you're not likely to use a one shot muzzleloader.

---

True indeed. Nice facts too. But all I'm saying is that there a bunch of red-necks who really do want and believe that that the general populus deserves those military-grade weapons, guns, and ammunition. All courtesy of the Second Amendment.

And that's just stupid.

But a single shot .75? Psh, why not?

--------------------
"Its coming on. I just saw the wall move..."

posted                      

quote:

---

True indeed. Nice facts too. But all I'm saying is that there a bunch of red-necks who really do want and believe that that the general populus deserves those military-grade weapons, guns, and ammunition. All courtesy of the Second Amendment.

---

Well, then they've seen Canadian Bacon a few too many times.

[ June 30, 2008, 04:51 PM: Message edited by: Sean ]

--------------------
"Kosh, I'd like to introduce you to our Resident schmuck and his side kick Kick Me."-Ritten

"Fighting for peace is like screwing for virginity".
-George Carlin