Zenister 0 #26 August 18, 2004 Quote[ And just how many people know how to use a bayonet without slicing themselves up? anyone who has been through basic training and pretty much anyone with enough sense to handle a spear... it's not that difficult and they are very effective when used properly.... of course i cant think of many applications outside of military uses, but that doenst mean that civilians shouldnt possess them as they are no great threat in and of themselves....____________________________________ Those who fail to learn from the past are simply Doomed. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jumper03 0 #27 August 18, 2004 Quoteanyone who has been through basic training Another side question then - When did the air force and navy start teaching bayonet? We did plenty of training during basic in the Corps with them and I thought the army did a little but didn't know the squids and birdmen pulled them out in training. Learn something every day. -------------Scars remind us that the past is real Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Zenister 0 #28 August 18, 2004 not sure about the Navy but my brother-in-law did basic bayonet drill in AF boot...he didnt spend 3 days with refreshers once a week like the Army does, but he got the basics... honestly i dont know how much rifle training the Navy gets at all...____________________________________ Those who fail to learn from the past are simply Doomed. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Kennedy 0 #29 August 18, 2004 Well, the most relevant SCUS case is still Miller. In it, the judge said it was ok to ban a certain firearm because it had no military purpose. (he was mistaken, but that's the test he laid down) By that Supreme Court test, a bayonet can be required to purchase a firearm, but it can't be banned for it. Similarly, according to the mistaken logic of Miller, they can ban a lot of firearms, but not ones that the military uses. By that token, I'm ok with losing "assault weapons" covered by the 1994 ban, as long as REAL M-16s become legal to own with no "interesting" BATFE involvement, along with REAL MP5s and other soldier-level firearms. Think the gun banners will go for that? Quotewhy in the hell would anyone need a bayonet stud on a rifle? You've got it backwards, there. The question for making a law should be: "Why in the hell should we ban that? What NEED is there to legislate it?" People shouldn't have to explain a need for everything they want to do. The government should have to explain the need before invading into the realm of civil society.witty subliminal message Guard your honor, let your reputation fall where it will, and outlast the bastards. 1* Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
peacefuljeffrey 0 #30 August 18, 2004 QuoteQuoteI'd still like you to find me ONE case of a guy fixing a bayonett and killing someone in the US other than in a war.. This is something I've always wondered about - now I have guns and I like my guns and would like to keep them - BUT - why in the hell would anyone need a bayonet stud on a rifle? And just how many people know how to use a bayonet without slicing themselves up? Why don't you first explain why, if we aren't hurting anyone with them, we should suffer prior restraint and be told that we can't have them? I mean, we ARE talking about mounting them on RIFLES. Doesn't the long-range lethality of a RIFLE sort of preempt the concern we should have about the danger of a bayonet?? I mean, you're talking about people who say that we need to make RIFLES "safer" by limiting their ability to be used as weapons within a range of, say, five feet. That's just brilliant. So before I go trying to justify why I WANT to be able to have a bayonetted rifle if I DESIRE one, I'd like you to explain what imperative there is to prevent me from having one. --Jeffrey "With tha thoughts of a militant mind... Hard line, hard line after hard line!" Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Ron 10 #31 August 19, 2004 QuoteBUT - why in the hell would anyone need a bayonet stud on a rifle? No one NEEDs a bayonet stud on a rifle...But then again no one NEEDS to skydive, or have nice watch, or drive a BMW. Some people LIKE them. Some people like having military weapons from ALL ages...I have a friend that collects old swords...He NEEDS none of them. The point is whats the harm? Have you ever seen someone fix a bayonet and go on a stabbing spree? The anti gun crowd just want to ban ANY weapon and its easy to ban the "evil" looking ones. It's easy to ban things the public may not need. It starts with Bayonet lugs and Magazines over 10 cap...It then moves to any weapon that can hold any magazine sice anyone with any knowledge knows that with any training you can switch mags in a few seconds. It then moves on from there. QuoteAnd just how many people know how to use a bayonet without slicing themselves up? Heres one."No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jumper03 0 #32 August 19, 2004 QuoteYou've got it backwards, there. The question for making a law should be: "Why in the hell should we ban that? What NEED is there to legislate it?" People shouldn't have to explain a need for everything they want to do. The government should have to explain the need before invading into the realm of civil society. Oh I completely agree. I'm still just having a hard time trying to figure out why anyone would need a bayonet stud on a personal weapon. Unless of course the good ol' boys want to slice and dice watermelon while they target practice...... "Hey Vern, I bet I can shoot that can and chop this here onion in 2 seconds flat....." Jump -------------Scars remind us that the past is real Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
chutem 0 #33 August 19, 2004 All this and we still give pocket knives to boy scouts. I'm satisfied with my S.W. .357. I don't want an assault rifle with a bayonet lug. I sure as hell don't want someone telling me I can't have one. I feel fine reloading after 6 shots, but hate it when they tell me I can only have 10. You know what they say about wanting what your not "allowed". James Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
JohnRich 4 #34 August 19, 2004 QuoteI'm still just having a hard time trying to figure out why anyone would need a bayonet stud on a personal weapon. I collect old military firearms. They come with bayonet studs. They should not be banned from purchase because of a bayonet stud. No one should be allowed to forbid me from taking my old guns out and shooting them just because they were made 50 years ago with a little metal stud under the barrel. As a collector of old military firearms, one also likes to have related accessories that go with the rifle, such as a sling, bayonet, and butt-stock cleaning kit, just to make the rifle complete and in original-issue condition. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
peacefuljeffrey 0 #35 August 20, 2004 QuoteOh I completely agree. I'm still just having a hard time trying to figure out why anyone would need a bayonet stud on a personal weapon. Unless of course the good ol' boys want to slice and dice watermelon while they target practice...... I can't understand why you're still phrasing this question in terms of "need," given that it is not based on need that we have a right to own these things. Besides, you answered your own question. The watermelon thing may be quite fun, and maybe that's all the reason someone has for wanting a bayonet attachment on his rifle. The more you question the desire for a bayonetted rifle, the more you sound like you fancy yourself the arbiter of what we should or shouldn't be allowed to have, i.e. why should we have it, if YOU don't see the "need for it? --Jeffrey "With tha thoughts of a militant mind... Hard line, hard line after hard line!" Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
