"Boater" wrote in message
...
Canuck57 wrote:
"Boater" wrote in message
...
D.Duck wrote:
"Boater" wrote in message
...
Eisboch wrote:
"Boater" wrote in message
...

The concept of individual citizens armed with small arms holding off
a huge invading army is an NRA wet dream. Americans aren't as tough
as Afghanis.

Based on what? Your left wing, elitist opinion that you present as a
"fact"?

History proves you wrong.

Eisboch
Based upon the fact that this isn't the 18th or 19th century, and that
any huge invading army is going to be equipped and organized as a huge
invading army. It's going to be up to our military to protect the
homeland.

Hell, as far as I can tell, there are only a couple of "regulars" in
this newsgroup who regularly practice with firearms.
Maybe a lot of us don't brag about it.
And maybe you are full of schitt.

Doubtful. Many have been in the armed forces, it might surprise you how
many can just pick on up, load it and shot straight. Last I checked
basic training thought everyone even the cook.

I doubt that many of those who haven't fired a firearm in years can just
pick one up, load it and shoot straight, unless the firearm is a shotgun.
I further doubt that many of those who fired a firearm years ago even own
a *serviceable* firearm.

Like I said, I don't currently own one, haven't for many years.

But would bet if you put a standard hunting rifle in front of me I would
find the safety before the perp could blink. 60 seconds tops to load and
prep.

Now if what you meant was to hit someone at 250 yards....well I would be
cooked as the eyes and skills are not that good any more. But unless the
perp is a sniper, I wouldn't have to defend myself if they were 250 yards
away. Pretty hard to miss a perp in your own home at perhaps 4 yards.

But good point, "... hey officer, sorry, I was aiming for the legs and got
right in the middle of the forehead instead." LOL. I would have no
hesitation in protecting my home and family from an intruder by any force I
could muster. If they die because of it, so sad too bad.

Boater wrote:
Canuck57 wrote:
"Boater" wrote in message
...
Eisboch wrote:
"Boater" wrote in message
...

The concept of individual citizens armed with small arms holding
off a huge invading army is an NRA wet dream. Americans aren't as
tough as Afghanis.

Based on what? Your left wing, elitist opinion that you present as
a "fact"?

History proves you wrong.

Eisboch
Based upon the fact that this isn't the 18th or 19th century, and
that any huge invading army is going to be equipped and organized as
a huge invading army. It's going to be up to our military to protect
the homeland.

Hell, as far as I can tell, there are only a couple of "regulars" in
this newsgroup who regularly practice with firearms.

I don't own one, does not mean I don't know how too. I have had some
training, and have in earlier years gone hunting.

If I ever had to pick one up to use it to protect life, property or
freedom bet I could beat most Canadians and would at least check the
barrel for being pinned so I wouldn't blow my face off.

Responsible owners should be allowed to keep their firearms. Take
Canada as proof you can pass any law you like and spend whatever you
like but the criminals still have them. It's only possible redemption
is that it does deter the irresponsible owner, but leaves the rest
without.

Taking guns from responsible people addresses nothing of the problem
it is pandered to solve. Just lets liberal control freaks control
more of your life.



I haven't seen anything from Obama in his two year campaign that
indicates to me he plans to go after my firearms. I don't accept the
prognostications of the NRA.

Nice cherry picking Krause.

BAR wrote:
Boater wrote:
Canuck57 wrote:
"Boater" wrote in message
...
Eisboch wrote:
"Boater" wrote in message
...

The concept of individual citizens armed with small arms holding
off a huge invading army is an NRA wet dream. Americans aren't as
tough as Afghanis.

Based on what? Your left wing, elitist opinion that you present as
a "fact"?

History proves you wrong.

Eisboch
Based upon the fact that this isn't the 18th or 19th century, and
that any huge invading army is going to be equipped and organized as
a huge invading army. It's going to be up to our military to protect
the homeland.

Hell, as far as I can tell, there are only a couple of "regulars" in
this newsgroup who regularly practice with firearms.

I don't own one, does not mean I don't know how too. I have had some
training, and have in earlier years gone hunting.

If I ever had to pick one up to use it to protect life, property or
freedom bet I could beat most Canadians and would at least check the
barrel for being pinned so I wouldn't blow my face off.

Responsible owners should be allowed to keep their firearms. Take
Canada as proof you can pass any law you like and spend whatever you
like but the criminals still have them. It's only possible
redemption is that it does deter the irresponsible owner, but leaves
the rest without.

Taking guns from responsible people addresses nothing of the problem
it is pandered to solve. Just lets liberal control freaks control
more of your life.



I haven't seen anything from Obama in his two year campaign that
indicates to me he plans to go after my firearms. I don't accept the
prognostications of the NRA.

Nice cherry picking Krause.


Well, I'm not driven or influenced by right-wing paranoia.

Boater wrote:
Canuck57 wrote:
"Boater" wrote in message
...
D.Duck wrote:
"Boater" wrote in message
...
Eisboch wrote:
"Boater" wrote in message
...

The concept of individual citizens armed with small arms holding
off a huge invading army is an NRA wet dream. Americans aren't as
tough as Afghanis.

Based on what? Your left wing, elitist opinion that you present
as a "fact"?

History proves you wrong.

Eisboch
Based upon the fact that this isn't the 18th or 19th century, and
that any huge invading army is going to be equipped and organized
as a huge invading army. It's going to be up to our military to
protect the homeland.

Hell, as far as I can tell, there are only a couple of "regulars"
in this newsgroup who regularly practice with firearms.
Maybe a lot of us don't brag about it.
And maybe you are full of schitt.

Doubtful. Many have been in the armed forces, it might surprise you
how many can just pick on up, load it and shot straight. Last I
checked basic training thought everyone even the cook.


I doubt that many of those who haven't fired a firearm in years can just
pick one up, load it and shoot straight, unless the firearm is a
shotgun. I further doubt that many of those who fired a firearm years
ago even own a *serviceable* firearm.

Ask anyone who went through Army or Marine boot camp if they could still
field strip the weapon they were trained to field strip and shoot 30, 40
or 50 years ago. Ask them if they could still load and fire said weapon.
And, ask them if they could still hit targets at the 200 and 300 yard
lines with said weapon.

Sight alignment, sight picture...

BAR wrote:
Boater wrote:
Canuck57 wrote:
"Boater" wrote in message
...
D.Duck wrote:
"Boater" wrote in message
...
Eisboch wrote:
"Boater" wrote in message
...

The concept of individual citizens armed with small arms holding
off a huge invading army is an NRA wet dream. Americans aren't
as tough as Afghanis.

Based on what? Your left wing, elitist opinion that you present
as a "fact"?

History proves you wrong.

Eisboch
Based upon the fact that this isn't the 18th or 19th century, and
that any huge invading army is going to be equipped and organized
as a huge invading army. It's going to be up to our military to
protect the homeland.

Hell, as far as I can tell, there are only a couple of "regulars"
in this newsgroup who regularly practice with firearms.
Maybe a lot of us don't brag about it.
And maybe you are full of schitt.

Doubtful. Many have been in the armed forces, it might surprise you
how many can just pick on up, load it and shot straight. Last I
checked basic training thought everyone even the cook.


I doubt that many of those who haven't fired a firearm in years can
just pick one up, load it and shoot straight, unless the firearm is a
shotgun. I further doubt that many of those who fired a firearm years
ago even own a *serviceable* firearm.

Ask anyone who went through Army or Marine boot camp if they could still
field strip the weapon they were trained to field strip and shoot 30, 40
or 50 years ago. Ask them if they could still load and fire said weapon.
And, ask them if they could still hit targets at the 200 and 300 yard
lines with said weapon.

Sight alignment, sight picture...


Drone on, drone. If you haven't practiced with firearms in many years,
it is unlikely you'll be able to shoot well. Shooting well is not the
same as loading and firing a weapon. Guys who haven't shot an issue
rifle since Vietnam aren't going to be able to hit small targets at
200-300 yards, if they could even do it when they were young and in
practice.

Boater wrote:
BAR wrote:
Boater wrote:
Canuck57 wrote:
"Boater" wrote in message
...
D.Duck wrote:
"Boater" wrote in message
...
Eisboch wrote:
"Boater" wrote in message
...

The concept of individual citizens armed with small arms
holding off a huge invading army is an NRA wet dream. Americans
aren't as tough as Afghanis.

Based on what? Your left wing, elitist opinion that you present
as a "fact"?

History proves you wrong.

Eisboch
Based upon the fact that this isn't the 18th or 19th century, and
that any huge invading army is going to be equipped and organized
as a huge invading army. It's going to be up to our military to
protect the homeland.

Hell, as far as I can tell, there are only a couple of "regulars"
in this newsgroup who regularly practice with firearms.
Maybe a lot of us don't brag about it.
And maybe you are full of schitt.

Doubtful. Many have been in the armed forces, it might surprise you
how many can just pick on up, load it and shot straight. Last I
checked basic training thought everyone even the cook.


I doubt that many of those who haven't fired a firearm in years can
just pick one up, load it and shoot straight, unless the firearm is a
shotgun. I further doubt that many of those who fired a firearm years
ago even own a *serviceable* firearm.

Ask anyone who went through Army or Marine boot camp if they could
still field strip the weapon they were trained to field strip and
shoot 30, 40 or 50 years ago. Ask them if they could still load and
fire said weapon. And, ask them if they could still hit targets at the
200 and 300 yard lines with said weapon.

Sight alignment, sight picture...


Drone on, drone. If you haven't practiced with firearms in many years,
it is unlikely you'll be able to shoot well. Shooting well is not the
same as loading and firing a weapon. Guys who haven't shot an issue
rifle since Vietnam aren't going to be able to hit small targets at
200-300 yards, if they could even do it when they were young and in
practice.

Sure they are. I'd put up an former USMC expert marksman against you
with at 300 yards any day of the week.

BAR wrote:
Boater wrote:
BAR wrote:
Boater wrote:
Canuck57 wrote:
"Boater" wrote in message
...
D.Duck wrote:
"Boater" wrote in message
...
Eisboch wrote:
"Boater" wrote in message
...

The concept of individual citizens armed with small arms
holding off a huge invading army is an NRA wet dream.
Americans aren't as tough as Afghanis.

Based on what? Your left wing, elitist opinion that you
present as a "fact"?

History proves you wrong.

Eisboch
Based upon the fact that this isn't the 18th or 19th century,
and that any huge invading army is going to be equipped and
organized as a huge invading army. It's going to be up to our
military to protect the homeland.

Hell, as far as I can tell, there are only a couple of
"regulars" in this newsgroup who regularly practice with firearms.
Maybe a lot of us don't brag about it.
And maybe you are full of schitt.

Doubtful. Many have been in the armed forces, it might surprise
you how many can just pick on up, load it and shot straight. Last
I checked basic training thought everyone even the cook.


I doubt that many of those who haven't fired a firearm in years can
just pick one up, load it and shoot straight, unless the firearm is
a shotgun. I further doubt that many of those who fired a firearm
years ago even own a *serviceable* firearm.

Ask anyone who went through Army or Marine boot camp if they could
still field strip the weapon they were trained to field strip and
shoot 30, 40 or 50 years ago. Ask them if they could still load and
fire said weapon. And, ask them if they could still hit targets at
the 200 and 300 yard lines with said weapon.

Sight alignment, sight picture...


Drone on, drone. If you haven't practiced with firearms in many years,
it is unlikely you'll be able to shoot well. Shooting well is not the
same as loading and firing a weapon. Guys who haven't shot an issue
rifle since Vietnam aren't going to be able to hit small targets at
200-300 yards, if they could even do it when they were young and in
practice.

Sure they are. I'd put up an former USMC expert marksman against you
with at 300 yards any day of the week.



Your previous statement "Ask anyone who went through boot camp...still
hit targets at 200 and 300 yard lines..."

"Anyone" is not an expert marksman, present or former.

Further, I don't shoot at 200 or 300 yards. I shoot pistols and can
offhand a full magazine from my 9 mm SIG into a very very small circle
at 25 yards, the "standard" pistol distance. I shoot pretty good groups
with a rifle at 100 yards, but I don't shoot any further than that.
Remember, I shoot targets, not people or animals.

Try to be a bit consistent, eh?

Boater wrote:
BAR wrote:
Boater wrote:
BAR wrote:
Boater wrote:
Canuck57 wrote:
"Boater" wrote in message
...
D.Duck wrote:
"Boater" wrote in message
...
Eisboch wrote:
"Boater" wrote in message
...

The concept of individual citizens armed with small arms
holding off a huge invading army is an NRA wet dream.
Americans aren't as tough as Afghanis.

Based on what? Your left wing, elitist opinion that you
present as a "fact"?

History proves you wrong.

Eisboch
Based upon the fact that this isn't the 18th or 19th century,
and that any huge invading army is going to be equipped and
organized as a huge invading army. It's going to be up to our
military to protect the homeland.

Hell, as far as I can tell, there are only a couple of
"regulars" in this newsgroup who regularly practice with firearms.
Maybe a lot of us don't brag about it.
And maybe you are full of schitt.

Doubtful. Many have been in the armed forces, it might surprise
you how many can just pick on up, load it and shot straight. Last
I checked basic training thought everyone even the cook.


I doubt that many of those who haven't fired a firearm in years can
just pick one up, load it and shoot straight, unless the firearm is
a shotgun. I further doubt that many of those who fired a firearm
years ago even own a *serviceable* firearm.

Ask anyone who went through Army or Marine boot camp if they could
still field strip the weapon they were trained to field strip and
shoot 30, 40 or 50 years ago. Ask them if they could still load and
fire said weapon. And, ask them if they could still hit targets at
the 200 and 300 yard lines with said weapon.

Sight alignment, sight picture...


Drone on, drone. If you haven't practiced with firearms in many
years, it is unlikely you'll be able to shoot well. Shooting well is
not the same as loading and firing a weapon. Guys who haven't shot an
issue rifle since Vietnam aren't going to be able to hit small
targets at 200-300 yards, if they could even do it when they were
young and in practice.

Sure they are. I'd put up an former USMC expert marksman against you
with at 300 yards any day of the week.



Your previous statement "Ask anyone who went through boot camp...still
hit targets at 200 and 300 yard lines..."

"Anyone" is not an expert marksman, present or former.

All I did is revise and extend my remarks. Why do you have a problem
with that?

Further, I don't shoot at 200 or 300 yards. I shoot pistols and can
offhand a full magazine from my 9 mm SIG into a very very small circle
at 25 yards, the "standard" pistol distance. I shoot pretty good groups
with a rifle at 100 yards, but I don't shoot any further than that.
Remember, I shoot targets, not people or animals.

Try to be a bit consistent, eh?

What is a "very very small circle?"

A baker target might look like a "people" from the chest up but it is
just a target.

Why are you wasting your time shooting a rifle at 100 yards? If you are
shooting a an air rifle you would be shooting a much shorter distances
and if you are shooting anything larger than a .22 you should be
shooting at least 200 yards and if you are hunting in open areas you
should be practicing for 300 yards.

BAR wrote:
Boater wrote:
BAR wrote:
Boater wrote:
BAR wrote:
Boater wrote:
Canuck57 wrote:
"Boater" wrote in message
...
D.Duck wrote:
"Boater" wrote in message
...
Eisboch wrote:
"Boater" wrote in message
...

The concept of individual citizens armed with small arms
holding off a huge invading army is an NRA wet dream.
Americans aren't as tough as Afghanis.

Based on what? Your left wing, elitist opinion that you
present as a "fact"?

History proves you wrong.

Eisboch
Based upon the fact that this isn't the 18th or 19th century,
and that any huge invading army is going to be equipped and
organized as a huge invading army. It's going to be up to our
military to protect the homeland.

Hell, as far as I can tell, there are only a couple of
"regulars" in this newsgroup who regularly practice with
firearms.
Maybe a lot of us don't brag about it.
And maybe you are full of schitt.

Doubtful. Many have been in the armed forces, it might surprise
you how many can just pick on up, load it and shot straight.
Last I checked basic training thought everyone even the cook.


I doubt that many of those who haven't fired a firearm in years
can just pick one up, load it and shoot straight, unless the
firearm is a shotgun. I further doubt that many of those who fired
a firearm years ago even own a *serviceable* firearm.

Ask anyone who went through Army or Marine boot camp if they could
still field strip the weapon they were trained to field strip and
shoot 30, 40 or 50 years ago. Ask them if they could still load and
fire said weapon. And, ask them if they could still hit targets at
the 200 and 300 yard lines with said weapon.

Sight alignment, sight picture...


Drone on, drone. If you haven't practiced with firearms in many
years, it is unlikely you'll be able to shoot well. Shooting well is
not the same as loading and firing a weapon. Guys who haven't shot
an issue rifle since Vietnam aren't going to be able to hit small
targets at 200-300 yards, if they could even do it when they were
young and in practice.

Sure they are. I'd put up an former USMC expert marksman against you
with at 300 yards any day of the week.



Your previous statement "Ask anyone who went through boot camp...still
hit targets at 200 and 300 yard lines..."

"Anyone" is not an expert marksman, present or former.

All I did is revise and extend my remarks. Why do you have a problem
with that?

Further, I don't shoot at 200 or 300 yards. I shoot pistols and can
offhand a full magazine from my 9 mm SIG into a very very small circle
at 25 yards, the "standard" pistol distance. I shoot pretty good
groups with a rifle at 100 yards, but I don't shoot any further than
that. Remember, I shoot targets, not people or animals.

Try to be a bit consistent, eh?

What is a "very very small circle?"

A baker target might look like a "people" from the chest up but it is
just a target.

Why are you wasting your time shooting a rifle at 100 yards? If you are
shooting a an air rifle you would be shooting a much shorter distances
and if you are shooting anything larger than a .22 you should be
shooting at least 200 yards and if you are hunting in open areas you
should be practicing for 300 yards.



A small circle on a well-known target:

http://i21.photobucket.com/albums/b2...us/40-0004.jpg

25 yards offhand with a .40 S&W, a pistol I don't often shoot.
Good enough to pump a magazine into a perp's chest if I were so
inclined. At 25 yards. That's 75 feet for you.

I shoot rifles at 100 yards because that is the standard range distance.

I don't hunt. A distance of 100 yards is a good test of rifle and shooter.

Remember, I shoot offhand. You know what that means, right?

"Boater" wrote in message
...
Canuck57 wrote:
"Boater" wrote in message
...
Eisboch wrote:
"Boater" wrote in message
...

The concept of individual citizens armed with small arms holding off a
huge invading army is an NRA wet dream. Americans aren't as tough as
Afghanis.

Based on what? Your left wing, elitist opinion that you present as a
"fact"?

History proves you wrong.

Eisboch
Based upon the fact that this isn't the 18th or 19th century, and that
any huge invading army is going to be equipped and organized as a huge
invading army. It's going to be up to our military to protect the
homeland.

Hell, as far as I can tell, there are only a couple of "regulars" in
this newsgroup who regularly practice with firearms.

I don't own one, does not mean I don't know how too. I have had some
training, and have in earlier years gone hunting.

If I ever had to pick one up to use it to protect life, property or
freedom bet I could beat most Canadians and would at least check the
barrel for being pinned so I wouldn't blow my face off.

Responsible owners should be allowed to keep their firearms. Take Canada
as proof you can pass any law you like and spend whatever you like but
the criminals still have them. It's only possible redemption is that it
does deter the irresponsible owner, but leaves the rest without.

Taking guns from responsible people addresses nothing of the problem it
is pandered to solve. Just lets liberal control freaks control more of
your life.

I haven't seen anything from Obama in his two year campaign that indicates
to me he plans to go after my firearms. I don't accept the
prognostications of the NRA.

Agreed, public record is better:

http://www.sportsmenforobama.org/content/view/13/26/

1 for, 6 against and one neutral. While Obama's mouth moves one way his
votes tend to go the other way.