America's Gun Violence #2

Merkin Baller

tempo_n_groove said:

Merkin Baller said:

tempo_n_groove said:

Merkin Baller said:

bootlegger10 said:

So what do people in other countries do about varmints if they can’t get a hold of an AR15 with a 100 bullet clip?   Are rodents and small animals taking over cities?

I don’t own an AR15, but somehow I’m still able to defend my home from raccoons & possums & the like. 

Can’t speak for the danger of prairie dogs tho, maybe those are extra vicious? 

Gophers and groundhogs can make for a bad day on a farm.

It's pretty sad if you think you need a gun to handle an encounter with either. 

Does it make it easier? Sure, but somehow I've survived encounters w/ both animals and not needed a gun. Go figure. 

It makes rid of these pests much easier, yes.  It's for long range, not close encounters though.  They aren't going to run up on you and bite your ankle.  They run and burrow so it's the distance that is needed.

Can't get a Jack Russell Terrier?

Listen, I'm not anti 2A, but you don't need a god damn AR15 for ground hogs, which I have to imagine is a point we agree on when all is said & done.  

tempo_n_groove

Merkin Baller said:

tempo_n_groove said:

Merkin Baller said:

tempo_n_groove said:

Merkin Baller said:

bootlegger10 said:

So what do people in other countries do about varmints if they can’t get a hold of an AR15 with a 100 bullet clip?   Are rodents and small animals taking over cities?

I don’t own an AR15, but somehow I’m still able to defend my home from raccoons & possums & the like. 

Can’t speak for the danger of prairie dogs tho, maybe those are extra vicious? 

Gophers and groundhogs can make for a bad day on a farm.

It's pretty sad if you think you need a gun to handle an encounter with either. 

Does it make it easier? Sure, but somehow I've survived encounters w/ both animals and not needed a gun. Go figure. 

It makes rid of these pests much easier, yes.  It's for long range, not close encounters though.  They aren't going to run up on you and bite your ankle.  They run and burrow so it's the distance that is needed.

Can't get a Jack Russell Terrier?

Listen, I'm not anti 2A, but you don't need a god damn AR15 for ground hogs, which I have to imagine is a point we agree on when all is said & done.  

It's the caliber that makes the difference.  I'd be happy w the mini 14 then, take the damn AR and it's copycats.  Nobody is committing crimes w one of those.

Halifax2TheMax

tempo_n_groove said:

Halifax2TheMax said:

Back when the 2A was written, only wealthy people owned firearms. For you originalists out there.

So it should still be an elitest thing?

You should pay a tax on your hobby to help offset the costs associated with said hobby. 

How “responsible” is a gun owner lacking in gainful employment that doesn’t support owning a gun? Guess we should arm the homeless?

The “elitists” were the “well regulated militia.” So the 2A is flexible as nowhere does it mention costs or having to be affordable. Love the hypocrisy. Life is full of choices.

Merkin Baller

tempo_n_groove said:

Merkin Baller said:

tempo_n_groove said:

Merkin Baller said:

tempo_n_groove said:

Merkin Baller said:

bootlegger10 said:

So what do people in other countries do about varmints if they can’t get a hold of an AR15 with a 100 bullet clip?   Are rodents and small animals taking over cities?

I don’t own an AR15, but somehow I’m still able to defend my home from raccoons & possums & the like. 

Can’t speak for the danger of prairie dogs tho, maybe those are extra vicious? 

Gophers and groundhogs can make for a bad day on a farm.

It's pretty sad if you think you need a gun to handle an encounter with either. 

Does it make it easier? Sure, but somehow I've survived encounters w/ both animals and not needed a gun. Go figure. 

It makes rid of these pests much easier, yes.  It's for long range, not close encounters though.  They aren't going to run up on you and bite your ankle.  They run and burrow so it's the distance that is needed.

Can't get a Jack Russell Terrier?

Listen, I'm not anti 2A, but you don't need a god damn AR15 for ground hogs, which I have to imagine is a point we agree on when all is said & done.  

It's the caliber that makes the difference.  I'd be happy w the mini 14 then, take the damn AR and it's copycats.  Nobody is committing crimes w one of those.

We already established you can get the job done without a gun, you can get a dog. 

But go on about caliber & mini 14s etc. 

tempo_n_groove

Merkin Baller said:

tempo_n_groove said:

Merkin Baller said:

tempo_n_groove said:

Merkin Baller said:

tempo_n_groove said:

Merkin Baller said:

bootlegger10 said:

So what do people in other countries do about varmints if they can’t get a hold of an AR15 with a 100 bullet clip?   Are rodents and small animals taking over cities?

I don’t own an AR15, but somehow I’m still able to defend my home from raccoons & possums & the like. 

Can’t speak for the danger of prairie dogs tho, maybe those are extra vicious? 

Gophers and groundhogs can make for a bad day on a farm.

It's pretty sad if you think you need a gun to handle an encounter with either. 

Does it make it easier? Sure, but somehow I've survived encounters w/ both animals and not needed a gun. Go figure. 

It makes rid of these pests much easier, yes.  It's for long range, not close encounters though.  They aren't going to run up on you and bite your ankle.  They run and burrow so it's the distance that is needed.

Can't get a Jack Russell Terrier?

Listen, I'm not anti 2A, but you don't need a god damn AR15 for ground hogs, which I have to imagine is a point we agree on when all is said & done.  

It's the caliber that makes the difference.  I'd be happy w the mini 14 then, take the damn AR and it's copycats.  Nobody is committing crimes w one of those.

We already established you can get the job done without a gun, you can get a dog. 

But go on about caliber & mini 14s etc. 

Dog doesn't always work but yes, carry on...

tempo_n_groove

Halifax2TheMax said:

tempo_n_groove said:

Halifax2TheMax said:

Back when the 2A was written, only wealthy people owned firearms. For you originalists out there.

So it should still be an elitest thing?

You should pay a tax on your hobby to help offset the costs associated with said hobby. 

How “responsible” is a gun owner lacking in gainful employment that doesn’t support owning a gun? Guess we should arm the homeless?

The “elitists” were the “well regulated militia.” So the 2A is flexible as nowhere does it mention costs or having to be affordable. Love the hypocrisy. Life is full of choices.

You're the one that said only rich had guns back in the day.

mickeyrat

tempo_n_groove said:

Merkin Baller said:

tempo_n_groove said:

Halifax2TheMax said:

Back when the 2A was written, only wealthy people owned firearms. For you originalists out there.

So it should still be an elitest thing?

It should be a “well regulated militia” thing, as literally spelled out in the second amendment. 

I'll start my own militia, make up a coat of arms, an oath, secret handshake and rules then.

are you your own state now too?

Halifax2TheMax

tempo_n_groove said:

Halifax2TheMax said:

tempo_n_groove said:

Halifax2TheMax said:

Back when the 2A was written, only wealthy people owned firearms. For you originalists out there.

So it should still be an elitest thing?

You should pay a tax on your hobby to help offset the costs associated with said hobby. 

How “responsible” is a gun owner lacking in gainful employment that doesn’t support owning a gun? Guess we should arm the homeless?

The “elitists” were the “well regulated militia.” So the 2A is flexible as nowhere does it mention costs or having to be affordable. Love the hypocrisy. Life is full of choices.

You're the one that said only rich had guns back in the day.

I said "wealthy," not "elitist." Now you're changing it to "rich." What was considered "rich" back in the day? And how did they afford their firearms?

Merkin Baller

tempo_n_groove said:

Merkin Baller said:

tempo_n_groove said:

Merkin Baller said:

tempo_n_groove said:

Merkin Baller said:

tempo_n_groove said:

Merkin Baller said:

bootlegger10 said:

So what do people in other countries do about varmints if they can’t get a hold of an AR15 with a 100 bullet clip?   Are rodents and small animals taking over cities?

I don’t own an AR15, but somehow I’m still able to defend my home from raccoons & possums & the like. 

Can’t speak for the danger of prairie dogs tho, maybe those are extra vicious? 

Gophers and groundhogs can make for a bad day on a farm.

It's pretty sad if you think you need a gun to handle an encounter with either. 

Does it make it easier? Sure, but somehow I've survived encounters w/ both animals and not needed a gun. Go figure. 

It makes rid of these pests much easier, yes.  It's for long range, not close encounters though.  They aren't going to run up on you and bite your ankle.  They run and burrow so it's the distance that is needed.

Can't get a Jack Russell Terrier?

Listen, I'm not anti 2A, but you don't need a god damn AR15 for ground hogs, which I have to imagine is a point we agree on when all is said & done.  

It's the caliber that makes the difference.  I'd be happy w the mini 14 then, take the damn AR and it's copycats.  Nobody is committing crimes w one of those.

We already established you can get the job done without a gun, you can get a dog. 

But go on about caliber & mini 14s etc. 

Dog doesn't always work but yes, carry on...

Carry on thinking guns are a necessity when they clearly aren't. 

tempo_n_groove

mickeyrat said:

tempo_n_groove said:

Merkin Baller said:

tempo_n_groove said:

Halifax2TheMax said:

Back when the 2A was written, only wealthy people owned firearms. For you originalists out there.

So it should still be an elitest thing?

It should be a “well regulated militia” thing, as literally spelled out in the second amendment. 

I'll start my own militia, make up a coat of arms, an oath, secret handshake and rules then.

are you your own state now too?

I'm not rich or elitist so owning my own state is out of that equation.

tempo_n_groove

Halifax2TheMax said:

tempo_n_groove said:

Halifax2TheMax said:

tempo_n_groove said:

Halifax2TheMax said:

Back when the 2A was written, only wealthy people owned firearms. For you originalists out there.

So it should still be an elitest thing?

You should pay a tax on your hobby to help offset the costs associated with said hobby. 

How “responsible” is a gun owner lacking in gainful employment that doesn’t support owning a gun? Guess we should arm the homeless?

The “elitists” were the “well regulated militia.” So the 2A is flexible as nowhere does it mention costs or having to be affordable. Love the hypocrisy. Life is full of choices.

You're the one that said only rich had guns back in the day.

I said "wealthy," not "elitist." Now you're changing it to "rich." What was considered "rich" back in the day? And how did they afford their firearms?

Wanting to have only the wealthy own firearms becomes a status thing where only the elite, rich can own them.

nicknyr15

Merkin Baller said:

bootlegger10 said:

So what do people in other countries do about varmints if they can’t get a hold of an AR15 with a 100 bullet clip?   Are rodents and small animals taking over cities?

I don’t own an AR15, but somehow I’m still able to defend my home from raccoons & possums & the like. 

Can’t speak for the danger of prairie dogs tho, maybe those are extra vicious? 

Really? I use landmines mostly 

HughFreakingDillon

bootlegger10 said:

So what do people in other countries do about varmints if they can’t get a hold of an AR15 with a 100 bullet clip?   Are rodents and small animals taking over cities?

my guard moose takes care of them. 

tempo_n_groove

nicknyr15 said:

Merkin Baller said:

bootlegger10 said:

So what do people in other countries do about varmints if they can’t get a hold of an AR15 with a 100 bullet clip?   Are rodents and small animals taking over cities?

I don’t own an AR15, but somehow I’m still able to defend my home from raccoons & possums & the like. 

Can’t speak for the danger of prairie dogs tho, maybe those are extra vicious? 

Really? I use landmines mostly 

I just thought of the movie Caddyshack and chuckled.

Merkin Baller

nicknyr15 said:

Merkin Baller said:

bootlegger10 said:

So what do people in other countries do about varmints if they can’t get a hold of an AR15 with a 100 bullet clip?   Are rodents and small animals taking over cities?

I don’t own an AR15, but somehow I’m still able to defend my home from raccoons & possums & the like. 

Can’t speak for the danger of prairie dogs tho, maybe those are extra vicious? 

Really? I use landmines mostly 

I do have some pretty ballsy chipmunks moving in... might have to look into this. 

tempo_n_groove

HughFreakingDillon said:

bootlegger10 said:

So what do people in other countries do about varmints if they can’t get a hold of an AR15 with a 100 bullet clip?   Are rodents and small animals taking over cities?

my guard moose takes care of them. 

This made me laugh too.

On topic, you don't need/want a 100rd clip.  You know how heavy that would be?

Smellyman

I use prayers.

sometimes thoughts.

Halifax2TheMax

tempo_n_groove said:

Halifax2TheMax said:

tempo_n_groove said:

Halifax2TheMax said:

tempo_n_groove said:

Halifax2TheMax said:

Back when the 2A was written, only wealthy people owned firearms. For you originalists out there.

So it should still be an elitest thing?

You should pay a tax on your hobby to help offset the costs associated with said hobby. 

How “responsible” is a gun owner lacking in gainful employment that doesn’t support owning a gun? Guess we should arm the homeless?

The “elitists” were the “well regulated militia.” So the 2A is flexible as nowhere does it mention costs or having to be affordable. Love the hypocrisy. Life is full of choices.

You're the one that said only rich had guns back in the day.

I said "wealthy," not "elitist." Now you're changing it to "rich." What was considered "rich" back in the day? And how did they afford their firearms?

Wanting to have only the wealthy own firearms becomes a status thing where only the elite, rich can own them.

I'm asking you what was the level of wealth required to own a firearm "back in the day" of the 2A, seeing how you think only the elitists owned them back then. Yes, in my belief, they were "wealthy." Where in the 2A does it say that firearms have to be affordable? Or that you can't tax them or the ammo? Someone on here thinks micro-stamping is out of the question because of the cost, to which I say up to $250 per gun is not to much of a price to pay to track guns used in crime when no weapon is found and potentially be able to hold straw purchasers "responsible" or "responsible" gun owners accountable when their firearms are used in crimes (half of firearms used in crimes that are recovered are stolen).

The 2A has no language regarding cost of firearms or the ammo. So, the 2A is either flexible to the times or its not. You seem to be an originalists (no bans), which brings me back to how did 'Muricans get and keep their firearms when the 2A was written and how is it that they could afford them? Mass production didn't exist yet. What level of wealth made them "elitists?"

tbergs

tempo_n_groove said:

Merkin Baller said:

bootlegger10 said:

So what do people in other countries do about varmints if they can’t get a hold of an AR15 with a 100 bullet clip?   Are rodents and small animals taking over cities?

I don’t own an AR15, but somehow I’m still able to defend my home from raccoons & possums & the like. 

Can’t speak for the danger of prairie dogs tho, maybe those are extra vicious? 

Gophers and groundhogs can make for a bad day on a farm.

My air rifle and .22 seemed to handle all of those things just fine growing up on the farm. You really get your aiming honed in because you have to get the headshot. I guess my .270 would have done the trick, but that's just stupid.

tempo_n_groove

Halifax2TheMax said:

tempo_n_groove said:

Halifax2TheMax said:

tempo_n_groove said:

Halifax2TheMax said:

tempo_n_groove said:

Halifax2TheMax said:

Back when the 2A was written, only wealthy people owned firearms. For you originalists out there.

So it should still be an elitest thing?

You should pay a tax on your hobby to help offset the costs associated with said hobby. 

How “responsible” is a gun owner lacking in gainful employment that doesn’t support owning a gun? Guess we should arm the homeless?

The “elitists” were the “well regulated militia.” So the 2A is flexible as nowhere does it mention costs or having to be affordable. Love the hypocrisy. Life is full of choices.

You're the one that said only rich had guns back in the day.

I said "wealthy," not "elitist." Now you're changing it to "rich." What was considered "rich" back in the day? And how did they afford their firearms?

Wanting to have only the wealthy own firearms becomes a status thing where only the elite, rich can own them.

I'm asking you what was the level of wealth required to own a firearm "back in the day" of the 2A, seeing how you think only the elitists owned them back then. Yes, in my belief, they were "wealthy." Where in the 2A does it say that firearms have to be affordable? Or that you can't tax them or the ammo? Someone on here thinks micro-stamping is out of the question because of the cost, to which I say up to $250 per gun is not to much of a price to pay to track guns used in crime when no weapon is found and potentially be able to hold straw purchasers "responsible" or "responsible" gun owners accountable when their firearms are used in crimes (half of firearms used in crimes that are recovered are stolen).

The 2A has no language regarding cost of firearms or the ammo. So, the 2A is either flexible to the times or its not. You seem to be an originalists (no bans), which brings me back to how did 'Muricans get and keep their firearms when the 2A was written and how is it that they could afford them? Mass production didn't exist yet. What level of wealth made them "elitists?"

 All I asked is if you wanted to make gun ownership elitist...