Thanatos340

There are several reasons (That have nothing to do with penis size or machoness) why an Assault rifle would be preferable for some people. For someone that does not hunt and just enjoys going to the Rifle range and firing off a few hundred rounds occasionally (It is a hobby for many people that makes about as much sense as people jumping out of airplanes. No real purpose other than they enjoy it) an Assault rifle is much better for this purpose than a Traditional Hunting rifle. First off the Assault rifle is lighter weight (Fiberglass Stock vs heavy wooden stock) easier to break down and clean afterwards and the ammo is MUCH less expensive. What valid reason do you have for wanting to take away their guns? Are not they just as entitled to enjoy their hobby as you are to enjoy yours? Once again, the constitution does not say I have a right to keep and bear arms for hunting. It says I have a right to Keep and Bear Arms. That right includes semi-automatic rifles. The stock on the gun should not matter. Trying ban weapons based on which stock the gun has is pure stupidity and serves no purpose other than to try to take guns out of the hands of law-abiding citizens. There are many reasons why the Rifle with the lightweight fiberglass stock is preferable to some people over the Traditional heavier wooden stocks.

I have jumped with you. Does that mean I get play in the lingerie Pillow fight?

All Guns are capable of killing people. There is no difference between a semi Automatic Assault Rifle and Semi Automatic Hunting Rifle other than the Stock (How it Looks). There are many advantages to using what most would consider an Assault Rifle for Hunting. The much lighter Fiberglass Stocks and rugged designs make these weapons easier to carry through the woods. The "Assault Rifles" are designed to take more abuse (Dropped in the Mud and such) and in many cases will make a better Hunting rifle. In fact I cant think of a single thing that the Military would ask for in the design of a semi-Automatic weapon that would not also be a desirable improvement for a Hunting Rifle. What is about the design of an Assault Rifle that makes it "Designed to kill People"? The Caliber? Nope. The Easy of Changing magazines? Nope. (Same mechanism for both) Something different about the way the gun shoots? Nope. Different Barrel? Nope. Different trigger? Nope. It all boils down to one has a "Scary Stock" and one doesn't. There is no difference in the function of the weapons at all.

Short answer.. Yes. Thick brush and Pine thickets are everywhere. This is where you will find the deer. Shot Guns or lesser calibers are not as effective as they tend to be deflected by brush and small limbs and leaves that are general between you and your target. Also the size of the game is relevant. In some parts of the state, The deer are relatively small and a 223 or 30/30 are just fine, In other parts of the state the deer are considerably larger and the stopping power of the 30.06 is needed. None of this is relevant though as the constitution does NOT say I have a Right to Keep and bear Arms for Hunting. It says I have a Right to Keep and bear Arms. The courts have said that right includes keeping and bearing Semi-Automatic Rifles. We are trying to say only Semi-Automatic Rifles that have traditional wooden stocks. I personally do not hunt much any more but I do enjoy going to the range once a month or so. When doing that, I prefer my Assault Rifles (Cheaper Ammo and kicks less. I could not stand to run a couple hundred rounds through my 30.06, my shoulder would be killing me after that). I strongly believe that I have a Right to do this as an American Citizen. I hate to see people trying to take that right away under some false pretense.

In my Hunting rifle (And most other that I know of) I could change the clip in under 1 second. The same time that it takes to change the clip in SKS or my AR15. It is basically the same mechanism with the exact same motions. The time to change clips is the same. The capacity of the clip would be the only difference. I am certain that higher capacity clips could be manufactured for Hunting rifles exactly like the “Assault Rifles” and probably already are being made.

Really? This is true of the "average" hunting rifle? The Average Hunting Rifle varies in different parts of the county. In the Southeast US, The Typical Hunting Rifle is a semi-automatic 30.06. Some will use 30/30`s and 223`s but they generally get laughed at for carrying their BB Guns. One Semi-Auto rifle generally fires just as quickly as another.

In general your average Hunting Rifle will generally be more powerful and capable of firing just as fast (If not faster) than most guns typically considered Assault Rifles. If Kinetic energy over time were used, It would be our Hunting rifles that would be ruled out. Physical Size?? Barrel Length? or Total Gun Length including Stock? Do you realize that a 742 Carbine is shorter in length than an M16 or AR15? (18 1/2 inch barrel vs 20 inch barrel) So the Hunting rifle is far more powerful, Fires just as fast, can change clips just as quickly, can hold just as much ammo and is physically smaller. In the end it always boils down to aesthetics. Does the gun "Look" scary. If so, It is an Assault Rifle. We have already proven by the last ban that these laws do not have a real effect on Crime. Why do it again? I actually agree that there should be some limitations on what we can purchase. I have no need for Grenade launchers, Flame Thrower or Fully Automatic Guns. Those are already illegal. But when we start (Once again) making guns illegal based on what the Stock looks like with out consideration of anything else, it is just plain stupid. The stock isn’t the part that bites.

You make some excellent points. But I am not sure about your idea of Kinetic Energy over time as a defining factor. For example take your average Deer Hunting Rifle (At least in this part of the Country) Typically a 30.06 Semi Automatic Rifle (I personally use a Remington 742 Carbine) with a 7 to 10 round clip. Many of these guns also use Clips so that you could in theory pop in another full clip in under a second or two. These pure hunting rifles are considerably more powerful and just as fast firing as AR15 or M16 (In legal Semi Automatic). You can buy larger capacity clip for these guns but there is no reason these higher capacity clips could not be made for Traditional Hunting rifles as well (And probably already are being made). Another prime example of the stupidity of the previous laws was that an SKS rifle for example (Post Ban - Made After 1992) was completely legal with as long as it had a wooden stock. IF you changed the Stock to a Fiberglass or other material stock, the gun was now an illegal Assault rifle. Talk about stupid. The law was based simply on how the gun looked. It is the exact same gun. Functionally nothing changed. I attached a few Picture examples.. 1. Remington 742 carbine - Pure Hunting Rifle but MUCH more powerful and just as fast firing as other Semi Automatic rifles. 2. SKS in Legal form. 3. SKS in Illegal Form (If manufactured after 1992) under old Law. Only difference is the Stock. This is why these supposed "Assault Weapon" Bans are just plain stupid. The definition is typically how does the gun "Look" and has nothing to do with the power and/or firing capacity.

TROUBLE!! Nuff said.

Heading out to Houston tomorrow for a few days for work. Any Houstonites going to be around Tuesday or Wednesday night to catch a couple drinks somewhere?

And just think.. About 2 more beer and the get to meet belligerent Robbie. I have never felt so bad for an innocent wait staff before.

I am going to be there!! Wooo Hoo!! (Note to self.. Watch where I step, Sounds like there will be midgets everywhere) Hey.. Tanya... Wanna be my DD? I am sure I can find a Buddy to come along. We can stop by and see Laqushia.

Reads like a good PR piece for the DZ. You cant buy advertising like that. I bet the DZO sees a small Spike in Tandem Business thanks to that article.

I am really happy that Alexis made it through. I was surprised at first that Starver made it but idol has done a lot to present him as the all around good guy this season. His Performance was pretty bad but enough people wanted him to have a another shot. This is a Popularity contest more than a Talent Contest. The Church Director has a good voice but I don’t think he will go too far. Back Stories that Idol will Harp on and/or Hide on these people: Alexis Grace - This was the third year that she auditioned. (Why didnt she make it the last two times??) and the Heart Strings rumor (Literally).. Her Father needs a Heart Transplant and doesnt have insurance. The Dream is to make enough off this to cover the Operation. (Insert Overly Emotional Teary eyed *Awwwww* here) Church Dude - Wife died 4 weeks before his Idol Audition. (Insert Overly Emotional Teary eyed *Awwwww* here) Starver - "Working Class Family Man". Supposed All around Good Guy get his big break. (Insert Overly Emotional Teary eyed *Awwwww* here) What to watch for next Week: Adam Lambert - This years Tween/Teen Heart Throb according to the unquestionable expert on these matters (My Daughter). He was the Understudy for the Male Lead in the national touring production of Wicked. When my daughter went to see this production while it was in town last year, This guy got the call up on that night and she went googlyeyed on him then so she may be a little biased.

Yes it was. Alexis Grace. Best of the Night by a Long Shot. General Concensus (according to Dial idol and other sites) says it will be Alexis Grace as Top Female Moving on. Danny Gokey (The last Guy to perform that was the Church Music Director) will be the top Guy. And sadly (Or Happily if you happen to like Psycho Train wrecks) Twatiana should slip in as next highest Vote getter to advance. (Gotta keep those rating up by having someone that everyone hates on the show)

Top Female - Alexis by a long shot. I really like this girl. Top Male should be the Guy that did Hick Town but think the Oil Rig guy will squeak in on the likeability factor. If Bangladesh can get the call centers going then Anoop has a shot too. Good voice but BORING. Twat-tiana was surprisingly good and has the full support of "Vote for the Worst" as well as the Producers Need for drama and ratings so they may slip her in as the #3. I was really disappointed with Stevie Wright. A Bad performance from her. I HATE this new Format. These people only get one shot. 12 Perform and 3 move on. That sucks.

If you ask a group of Skydiver if You owe Beer.. The Answer will almost always be "YES". Green Bottles (Or Equivalent) Please. And a CASE is 24 Beers. That is TWO 12 Packs.

I see plenty of Stupidity from Both Y-chromosome Deprived and Y-chromosome Blessed.

Lance, I remember when Shimmel was their chief online defender. I see you have now stepped up to that role. Let me guess .. You are the Shiminator Mark II?? I predicted your appearance way back in 2005.

WOW!! That was almost Redhead Level Crazy.

It is Sunny. Just ignore this thread.

There is a very simple reason for this. It all Boils down to Depth Percption. We tell women how many feet off the ground they should be they when they start thier flare... and then we also try to convince them that This is 8 inches.

No.. It is elitist to read the first sentence or two and then discredit the entire piece because you know better. Just my personal opinion. Not sure about Divots.

Yep. Buried it all the way down in the second paragraph. The same paragraph that says some places still uses Rip cord rigs for students. The article is not perfect but in general it seems accurate and written in a way that Wuffos could understand it. I did find it amusing that Wuffos tried to use the Shana Richardson story to show how you could survive falling without a parachute in the comments.

Did you read it? he seem to explain it fairly well for wuffos to understand.