craddock

Then talk to them about it. I suppose. I have lots of guns. That spot isn't bad at all, the winds were strong and that was the issue! It was just on the downwind side.

. Quit being childish. "Human beeings with some brain in the head instead of hot air will say/see that clear as daylight" was intented to be offensive as it was directed at me, and I am unclear how you are allowed to get away with it. I am pretty sure everyone agrees with this. Good tactic though. Just change the word to fit your arguement. That spot isn't bad at all, the winds were strong and that was the issue! It was just on the downwind side.

Let me get this straight. You insert Derek's comments into my comments and then tell that I have answered the question. What was the question though? And where are is Derek's Defintion since YOU insist that I use it? And why should I use his defintion over yours or Kallends o Websters? What is going on? All I said is that a 200 fps firearm would not be a very suitable target rifle although with a large enough load it may be lethal. But what was the question again? That spot isn't bad at all, the winds were strong and that was the issue! It was just on the downwind side.

Who said all I want to do is shoot a paper tagets? That spot isn't bad at all, the winds were strong and that was the issue! It was just on the downwind side.

For what? A firearm? Of course not. It is not even fast for an arrow although it would be fast enough to kill a deer with a good shot. I have had some air guns that were close to that low although most are higher than that. For target practice anything that low is going to be so terribly affected by wind it would only be useful if you were shooting indoors. Now if you are shooting a cannon ball lets say that fast it would be very high velocity and very lethal. So I quess with the right load it could be a sufficent to kill but it would make a lousy target firearm. That spot isn't bad at all, the winds were strong and that was the issue! It was just on the downwind side.

Well I have been hearing much speculation of this on various programs all morning. Your hardly the first but I do hope that you are wrong. That spot isn't bad at all, the winds were strong and that was the issue! It was just on the downwind side.

Yes it was the point in fact. It all started with your post claiming the opposite. "Every single gun is designed to kill (that's the purpose)" Wrong, wrong wrong. Childish and very much a mean spirited Personal Attack. That spot isn't bad at all, the winds were strong and that was the issue! It was just on the downwind side.

Yes I do follow enough to know JohnRich can get out of control on the UK threads. While I understand the underlying reasons for his posts, sometimes(mostimes) I wish he would just keep the Gun Control fight here in the states. That spot isn't bad at all, the winds were strong and that was the issue! It was just on the downwind side.

Dude I never implied you were slamming US gun laws. Never! Again my point was more in response to comments like this There is a lot of this going the other way also. The gun laws were just an example. That spot isn't bad at all, the winds were strong and that was the issue! It was just on the downwind side.

I don't follow SC enough to answer that but there are a few poster who had a history of doing that. I was not trying to be confrontational. I just that it was amusing the way John got slammed. The post has now been edited "to be nicer", but their are plenty of non US slaming our gun culture over here which they really do not understand. They act like were all walking around with guns shooting each other when we are pissed off. I did not even read the original post past the first few sentences. It may have been rubbish. But then Chris really made me laugh with this "It truly staggers me that some people in the US can be so down on a system that they know so little about" It goes both ways but how anybody can be staggered by it just one way is beyond me. Fuck! I was not condoning or condemning either post. I asked a question followed by a quick comment to help understand the question. That spot isn't bad at all, the winds were strong and that was the issue! It was just on the downwind side.

Who was questioning what guns were invented for? The point was that today not all guns are designed to kill. Sure they can but that is not what many are designed for. If you have not caught on by this point, there is little hope for you to understand this. That spot isn't bad at all, the winds were strong and that was the issue! It was just on the downwind side.

You would have to ask John that. Do not direct that at me. That spot isn't bad at all, the winds were strong and that was the issue! It was just on the downwind side.

Could you please explain this a little more clearly -- I still don't get it*** People have tried but you refuse to get it. You are going on the premise that since guns were originally designed to kill, that every gun manufactered to this day is still designed to kill. There are several companies that make high end Trap guns that cost from 10k to 30k+ which are designed from the ground up to shoot at clay targets. Some are from companies that do not even manufacter hunting firearms. In other words I am not talking about using an existing receiver and turning the firearm into a target gun. I am talking about a firearm that shares no parts of a firearm designed to be taken into the field. There are some manufacturers that take an existing design and modify it for target use. Others design from the ground up for targets. The Bow and Arrow was invented to Kill. I shot archery in Junior High. Do you think the bows I was using were designed to kill? I own several bows(as well as many firearms) that are designed to hunt with. In this day their are also highly specialized(and highly expensive) bows designed for target competition. While they could technically be taken in the field to kill an animal they are not as practical as the current hunting bows on the market. Why is that? Simple. That is not what they were designed for. Just like the bows that I shot in Junior high were not designed to kill. Or the first couple child bows that I owned. My first was a Red Bear recurve with only 10-15 lbs draw. I still have a picture of my first Robin Hood with that bow. I am pretty sure it was not designed to kill though. So so you think that all Bows are designed to kill also since that was the original reason for their invention? That spot isn't bad at all, the winds were strong and that was the issue! It was just on the downwind side.

Is it any more rubbish that the many non-US posters that comment on how dangerous it is over in the US because of all the gun crime? There are several people that make comments such as " over here I can send my kids out without a gun and not worry about them returning home safely." I have read so much mocking of the US for how dangerous of a place is is because of our gun crime stats. The fact is most of the gun crime is gang and drug crime related. For the people outside of that enviroment the US is a very safe place to live. I live in the Chicagoland area and have not locked my doors for years. If my wife wants to take a walk in the middle of the night, I am not losing sleep over it. Yet there are several posters who claim it is so much more safer over in their respected countries citing our gun crime levels or gun ownership as the reason. That spot isn't bad at all, the winds were strong and that was the issue! It was just on the downwind side.

I have absolutely no idea what you are trying to say. Sorry. John started this thread to talk about freefalling bullets and the damage they may or may not do. You told of an incident where you were shot and the damage that happened to you. You comments could have been taken in the context that you disagreed with the point of the original post because of the fact that you were shot. I just wanted to clarify. Beyond that I do not know what you response means. That spot isn't bad at all, the winds were strong and that was the issue! It was just on the downwind side.

This thread was about freefalling bullets, not about getting shot!! You were shot!! That spot isn't bad at all, the winds were strong and that was the issue! It was just on the downwind side.

Some of the more expensive guns I have ever held are not designed for killing. Well mabey some were for killing clay targets. That spot isn't bad at all, the winds were strong and that was the issue! It was just on the downwind side.

Me too once I read it again. Post has been edited. That spot isn't bad at all, the winds were strong and that was the issue! It was just on the downwind side.

Absolutely. You would be amazed how few people take really good care of the Game they harvest. Many people "think" they don't like venison because they so not know what really good venison is like. It sounds like you have some wise friends. Not sure about the soaking in milk theory. I might have to try it sometime if I have some suspect meat. That spot isn't bad at all, the winds were strong and that was the issue! It was just on the downwind side.

I love venison. I am a strong believer that the reason many people do not like Venison is not so much as how it is cooked, but it is becuase of the quality of the meat by the time it is cooked. Now that not to say that you can not help it with preparation methods but it sure helps to start with good meat. So many people ruin the great taste by poor handling, field dressing and shot placement, not getting it cooled fast enough, ect, ect, ect... Then sometimes it is just chance. I shot two very fat(2 inches fat on rump) does last year that were some of the best I have ever had and one is just outstanding. Even the round is very tender and the loin just melts in your mouth. That spot isn't bad at all, the winds were strong and that was the issue! It was just on the downwind side.

Same as last night. Venison Loin. Medium Rare. Josh That spot isn't bad at all, the winds were strong and that was the issue! It was just on the downwind side.

That is just a bit naive. Drowning deaths are one of the top causes of death for children. I believe it is the second leading cause in children up to a certain age of accidental deaths(mabey 14 years?). Ever think there may be other reasons people are hesitant to own a pool? Josh BTW I have nothing against owning a pool(or guns) with children in the house. I have a one year old who is in th pool lake and river quite a bit. Enough off topic- sorry Bill That spot isn't bad at all, the winds were strong and that was the issue! It was just on the downwind side.

We another fine example of why we call it Crook County That spot isn't bad at all, the winds were strong and that was the issue! It was just on the downwind side.

I don't normally speak for John but in this case in seems kind of obvious. Scoop claimed something to the effect that are laws in the states were very similar to those in the UK. That is simply not true That spot isn't bad at all, the winds were strong and that was the issue! It was just on the downwind side.

My question was based on the fact you claimed our laws were similar to your concerning the carry of a knife. Of course you don't need a hunting knife to open boxes, although this particualar knife is much more comfortable to carry on a daily basis that a Stanley knife(thisis a very thin folder btw). Daily comfort is one of the factors in purchasing a utilitarian knife. And in this regard my Pro Hunter is much better than your standard Stanley-type Utility knife. But back to the point. You claimed our laws are very similar to yours and that seems to have been an untruthful statement. That spot isn't bad at all, the winds were strong and that was the issue! It was just on the downwind side.