Flipping stuff - firearms division

[jmoore]

When my son was 4 I bought him a Henry Mini Bolt. It was the best option for a youth 22 that didn't feel like a toy. He is now 9.5 yo and has outgrown the gun.

I posted the gun for sale on a local hunting forum for $125 and had a taker inside of an hour. I'm happy I spent the extra on the Henry as it has held it's value much better than any other kids 22 I have seen. I delivered the gun in the parking lot of an Academy yesterday where my son and I promptly walked in and purchased a Savage Mark II in 22lr for $170. Throw in a $25 soft case and we got him a brand new gun for $85 or so. I'd say that was a good deal.

Still need to get him a scope, base and rings to finish it out, but otherwise, he'll be set forever with this gun. At least in the rimfire department.

[bluesea]

You sound like a great father. :)

[jmoore]

You sound like a great father. :)

Hopefully that is true :D

[MattTuck]

I am curious, as someone who supports lawful gun ownership, but has yet to own one yet, and hopefully father at some point...


Clearly guns are not toys.

But there are many toy guns.

How do you keep it clear in a child's mind when they see others playing with guns, or maybe you let them play with toy guns?

I'm genuinely curious about this, because I would think it would be a real problem for a developing mind to grasp this, when they probably see so many examples of guns that are pretend/toy.

[jmoore]

My family is a hunting and gun owning family. My son has been around them his whole life. The real guns are kept locked away and my kids know that under no circumstances are they to touch them without an adult around, normally me. There is no mistaking the real guns for toy guns.

He only shoots with me supervising and he is given zero tolerance for poor gun handling. He has been taught proper handling and shooting from the beginning. I trust my son enough to let him go into the woods with his older cousins now, but it has taken years. There are several kids I would not apply this level of trust too, including some of his older cousins. I also do not let him joke about guns in any respect. The topic in my house is serious without being frightening.

Essentially you must instill in them the proper respect of the gun from day 1 and keep instilling it in them forever. I have not experienced any issues with discerning between a real or toy gun.

I am curious, as someone who supports lawful gun ownership, but has yet to own one yet, and hopefully father at some point...


Clearly guns are not toys.

But there are many toy guns.

How do you keep it clear in a child's mind when they see others playing with guns, or maybe you let them play with toy guns?

I'm genuinely curious about this, because I would think it would be a real problem for a developing mind to grasp this, when they probably see so many examples of guns that are pretend/toy.

[AngryScientist]

i had a great childhood, and a wonderful family. we have all enjoyed many many holidays together. i can not remember a single birthday or christmas present anyone has ever gotten me except the christmas my dad handed me my first shotgun. i'll probably never forget that one.

cool jmoore.

[crownjewelwl]

i had a great childhood, and a wonderful family. we have all enjoyed many many holidays together. i can not remember a single birthday or christmas present anyone has ever gotten me except the christmas my dad handed me my first shotgun. i'll probably never forget that one.

cool jmoore.

how old were you?

[Bruce K]

Very nice

I truly believe that one of the issues with firearms ownership today is that kids do not respect firearms. They are tools for a purpose. The glorification of thuggery and the idea that somehow a gun makes you more of a man is just so wrong headed.

You are doing it the right way if firearms are going to be part of your family's life.

BK

[parris]

+1 what jmoore stated. Just about the entiire neighborhood I grew up in were gun owners/hunters. Sloppy or unsafe gun handling wasn't tolerated by anyone. It didn't matter if we were with our fathers or their friends, the same rules applied and pity the kid who ran afoul of the rules.

[yngpunk]

My family is a hunting and gun owning family. My son has been around them his whole life. The real guns are kept locked away and my kids know that under no circumstances are they to touch them without an adult around, normally me. There is no mistaking the real guns for toy guns.

He only shoots with me supervising and he is given zero tolerance for poor gun handling. He has been taught proper handling and shooting from the beginning. I trust my son enough to let him go into the woods with his older cousins now, but it has taken years. There are several kids I would not apply this level of trust too, including some of his older cousins. I also do not let him joke about guns in any respect. The topic in my house is serious without being frightening.

Essentially you must instill in them the proper respect of the gun from day 1 and keep instilling it in them forever. I have not experienced any issues with discerning between a real or toy gun.

If only every parent took the time and effort to instill this (and other values) into their children, one wonders how much evil in the world could be avoided.

[verticaldoug]

I grew up in a small farming town in central Minnesota. Turning 11, passing the gun safety course to be able to buy your first hunting license was a right of passage for me and all my friends. Autumn was football under the Friday night lights, followed by early Saturday mornings walking the woods for grouse, and October mornings were in the duck blind (sometimes before school too). It kept us out of trouble.

[jmoore]

I was just happy about getting a good deal on flipping the gun for a new one. I didn't intend this to get into a "how do you raise your kids" tangent :)

Sent from my XT1058 using Tapatalk

[tiretrax]

Great job, Jason. I bought my son his first rifle last year. He's thrilled about it.

He has been told repeatedly about the importance of respecting the power of a firearm and that it's use requires a lot of forethought. Bruce's point about how weapons are glorified and their use seems to have little consequence is a great point. There is far too much senseless use of guns.

[Bruce K]

It was a nice move / upgrade to be sure.

But it also connects with folks at other levels

You did /are doing cool stuff with / for your kid

BK

[SlackMan]

I am curious, as someone who supports lawful gun ownership, but has yet to own one yet, and hopefully father at some point...


Clearly guns are not toys.

But there are many toy guns.

How do you keep it clear in a child's mind when they see others playing with guns, or maybe you let them play with toy guns?

I'm genuinely curious about this, because I would think it would be a real problem for a developing mind to grasp this, when they probably see so many examples of guns that are pretend/toy.

Along with what everything Jmoore said, I would add what I taught my son early and make him repeat it periodically: "Never point a gun at anything you don't want to kill."

"Blowing up" a bottle of water with something as low powered as a .22LR also makes a big impression, and illustrates the above statement in a relatively non-violent way.

Other rules include that he should never, ever, ever show a friend his gun without my being present, and that if he is at a friend's house and his friend tries to show him a gun, he should run!

[jmoore]

My son shot his first dove on opening weekend. He, and I, were very proud.

During a subsequent session of skeet, he swept me and his cousin with the barrel of his 410. Luckily the gun was unloaded and his finger was not on the trigger. I told him in no uncertain terms that if he did that again he would be finished hunting for the weekend and I might consider restating it before the season was over. That snapped him right into compliance.

[picture removed by jmoore]

[Saint Vitus]

i had a great childhood, and a wonderful family. we have all enjoyed many many holidays together. i can not remember a single birthday or christmas present anyone has ever gotten me except the christmas my dad handed me my first shotgun. i'll probably never forget that one.

cool jmoore.

Replace the word gun with bike and I'm there.

We grew up with a locked gun cabinet and I had zero interest in getting into it, we had 2 shotguns, and a rifle or two. I went hunting all of once, it was not for me. We were taught firearms respect, if we played army or such we used sticks (hockey or otherwise lol), the thought of our father's guns for play was not even in our minds.

Kudos to you jmoore!

[Louis]

Along with what everything Jmoore said, I would add what I taught my son early and make him repeat it periodically: "Never point a gun at anything you don't want to kill."

Which begs the question, why would a little kid want to kill anything at all?

[Ken Robb]

I second the idea that showing the damage that can be done by a bullet (even a .22) is a good way to help a person of any age understand that they can penetrate a surprising range of materials and hurt/kill something on the other side. There have been too many films where people take cover behind overturned tables, thin wooden walls and even tree that distort people's perception of the danger of careless shooting.

[jmoore]

Which begs the question, why would a little kid want to kill anything at all?

Little kids, whatever your definition is, want to do what their family does. If that is hunting then they want to join in. All the boys in my family want to go hunting. Its natural.

Reverance for game animals must be taught as well. It does not come naturally.

Sent from my XT1058 using Tapatalk

[donevwil]

Good for you Jason,

Some of my fondest memories with my Dad were our trips "into the woods" for firearms training and shooting lessons. Still remember in detail the first time I got to hold (and ultimately shoot) his 44 Ruger Redhawk. When he passed away a few years ago and my Mom was liquidating his stuff it took me a full day to go through his gun cabinet as all those old memories came back.

I'm not really a gun guy today, but the memories of my father teaching me gun handling/shooting are so much more memorable than those teaching me to drive, ride a bike, throw a baseball, shoot a basketball or relate to a girl.

Good for you Jason !

[Louis]

Reverance for game animals must be taught as well. It does not come naturally.

+1

And for the environment they live in.

I would extend that to non-game animals also.

Edit: By coincidence this is on the NYT Op-Ed page today (http://nyti.ms/1q1tUgp)

[jmoore]

+1

And for the environment they live in.

I would extend that to non-game animals also.


agreed. to all of this.

[Llewellyn]

Which begs the question, why would a little kid want to kill anything at all?

Indeed. Why would anyone want to kill anything. Disgusting.

[Louis]

Indeed. Why would anyone want to kill anything. Disgusting.

This is an argument that neither side will win.

However, I grew up on a chicken farm and saw my fill of killing, some of it quick, most of it long and drawn out.

I'm now a vegetarian.

[jmoore]

Indeed. Why would anyone want to kill anything. Disgusting.


oh boy. :help:


it only took 24 posts to get here.

[93legendti]

My son has had great trigger discipline since the age of 7. Even with a nerf gun, he picks it up with his finger extended and not on the trigger.

[fuzzalow]

oh boy. :help:


it only took 24 posts to get here.

With respect, when the question is ducked like this, it doesn't add to the understanding of your particular slice of Americana. Americana as it concerns the sport of huntings relevance to your regional culture, generational traditions and pastimes. (there, see I left a few breadcrumbs...). Or however the sport and activity has meaning to you. Not answered to justify or explain - you don't owe anybody an explanation as to, legally, what and why you do.

Of course you need not say any more either but from your OP, this topic does not tag you as reticent on the matter. BTW, I am not anti-gun or anti-hunting.

[bluesea]

My son shot his first dove on opening weekend. He, and I, were very proud.

During a subsequent session of skeet, he swept me and his cousin with the barrel of his 410. Luckily the gun was unloaded and his finger was not on the trigger. I told him in no uncertain terms that if he did that again he would be finished hunting for the weekend and I might consider restating it before the season was over. That snapped him right into compliance.




Awesome, I learned wing shooting (dove) at about the same age but with a Ted Williams single shot. The 410 is a strict coach.

[parallelfish]

Indeed. Why would anyone want to kill anything. Disgusting.
Because nobody has been able to figure out a way to live without eating.

[Shortsocks]

oh boy. :help:


it only took 24 posts to get here.

It's going to happen.

This is a very hot topic thing, but I'm 99% sure that even anti gun activists aren't against family values. Spending time with ones kids going out hunting rabbits, doves......Jason is a super nice guy I can see why he would want to take his son out hunting. It's just a thing one does with their kid. In the USA, South America, Italy happens all around the world.

I bought my little brother a 22 rifle on his 11 year birthday. He shot it with me, maybe 6 times, and lost interest. I gave it ourlocal Boy Scout Troop a few years ago.

Good for you jmoore.

[93legendti]

Moderator Comment: Edited to remove image per request of image owner.

[93legendti]

Because nobody has been able to figure out a way to live without eating.

Bingo.

[Gsinill]

it only took 24 posts to get here.

2 controversial topics (kids and guns / hunting) and you are surprised, really?

[lonoeightysix]

original post centered on upgrading a juvenile's rimfire rifle; nothing on pros/cons-plus/minus-right/wrong of game hunting.

just saying.

[Don49]

Indeed. Why would anyone want to kill anything. Disgusting.

Because nobody has been able to figure out a way to live without eating.

Except for us vegans.

[fuzzalow]

Because nobody has been able to figure out a way to live without eating.

And this conjures the image of a bunch of camo-clad hunters piling out of their 4X4 into the food mart at the Waa Waa while fueling up their trucks with high-test on the drive up to the hunting grounds.

Nobody hunts for daily livin' 'cos they gotta eat.

In fairness, most of the hunters I have ever known do not waste the meat from their successful trips. And many is the time they come home empty-handed. None that is hunted is endangered as a species and, like deer, the hunting serves to redress imbalances in the wild populations from the encroachment of residential development that skews the predator/prey balance.

I have no dog in this hunt! That's all for me on this one. See you at the next stop.

[parallelfish]

Except for us vegans.

Vegans don't eat? This is news to me.

[Louis]

Except for us vegans.

As best I can tell, most hunting is done for sport, so the argument also fails on that count, but yes, there's no reason you have to kill animals to survive. (but most people enjoy their steaks and burgers too much to even consider that as a potential solution)

[Louis]

Vegans don't eat? This is news to me.

You learning something new everyday! You should give it a try sometime.

[parallelfish]

And this conjures the image of a bunch of camo-clad hunters piling out of their 4X4 into the food mart at the Waa Waa while fueling up their trucks with high-test on the drive up to the hunting grounds.

Nobody hunts for daily livin' 'cos they gotta eat.

In fairness, most of the hunters I have ever known do not waste the meat from their successful trips. And many is the time they come home empty-handed. None that is hunted is endangered as a species and, like deer, the hunting serves to redress imbalances in the wild populations from the encroachment of residential development that skews the predator/prey balance.

I have no dog in this hunt! That's all for me on this one. See you at the next stop.

I made no reference to hunting. Just that one has to kill to eat, whether you do it yourself, or pay someone to do it for you.

[parallelfish]

You learning something new everyday! You should give it a try sometime.


I learned long ago living requires one to eat.

[Saint Vitus]

You learning something new everyday! You should give it a try sometime.

I tried this today, I was ready to gnaw cardboard to satisfy my hunger... :p

[fuzzalow]

I made no reference to hunting. Just that one has to kill to eat, whether you do it yourself, or pay someone to do it for you.

Oh. I was carrying on in the context of the OP and the conversation. I assumed you were doing the same. Your mental gymnastics are too fast for me, sorry.

Out.

[phcollard]

This reminds me when I was about your kid's age I killed a sparrow by accident when I was "playing" with my father's pellet gun. I was devastated and almost puked. It took me several days to get over it. That's another culture :)

[Dead Man]

Someone asked about toy guns vs. real guns...

I have 5 boys and a baby girl. They start shooting air rifles around 4, real rifles around 5, and get their own .22LR bolt action single-shot rifles at 8. Family tradition.

The wife and I decided a long time ago that we would have an absolute zero-toy-guns policy. They aren't allowed the have or play with toy guns, use sticks as guns, make finger guns.... nothing resembling the shape or function of an actual firearm allowed. Instead, they can get their little boy gun fix by having REAL guns.... but it's deadly serious business. We follow the Four Rules of Firearms Safety religiously. No foolishness or carelessness tolerated at all- not around guns, not in conversation about guns, etc. These guys will respect firearms as the deadly things they are.

[unterhausen]

no toy guns is a really good policy. Funny thing is, I don't think my kids ever had any toy guns and that's just totally by accident. I loved my toy guns when I was a kid, never had anything that would actually shoot anything though. Air Force cured me of that, damn things are scary in the hands of morons, which is far too many of the people that own guns, I'm afraid.

I'm going to get my lawnmower from the shop tomorrow. The owner shot himself in the leg and is now in a wheelchair for life.

[Dead Man]

https://a2-images.myspacecdn.com/images02/23/58588a9cb86c491983036a98e1cf4ed0/full.jpg

[oldpotatoe]

https://a2-images.myspacecdn.com/images02/23/58588a9cb86c491983036a98e1cf4ed0/full.jpg

We started with long guns, 22s to young kids and respect for firearms, then to hunting, then to this, I'm sure handguns and all of that is next...I predict a lock in 5 posts.

[tigoat]

Great dad to have! There is a lot for the money in Henry and Savage firearms. Now he will need his dad to get him a lever action Henry and a Ruger Mark something both in 22 LR to compliment his bolt action rifle.

When my son was 4 I bought him a Henry Mini Bolt. It was the best option for a youth 22 that didn't feel like a toy. He is now 9.5 yo and has outgrown the gun.

I posted the gun for sale on a local hunting forum for $125 and had a taker inside of an hour. I'm happy I spent the extra on the Henry as it has held it's value much better than any other kids 22 I have seen. I delivered the gun in the parking lot of an Academy yesterday where my son and I promptly walked in and purchased a Savage Mark II in 22lr for $170. Throw in a $25 soft case and we got him a brand new gun for $85 or so. I'd say that was a good deal.

Still need to get him a scope, base and rings to finish it out, but otherwise, he'll be set forever with this gun. At least in the rimfire department.

[yngpunk]

We started with long guns, 22s to young kids and respect for firearms, then to hunting, then to this, I'm sure handguns and all of that is next...I predict a lock in 5 posts.

Here, let me help it along...

Rapha

[Louis]

Rapha


Made in Italy by Beretta:

http://www.berettausa.com/assets/0/15/DimRegular/700x700-sub-compa-gost1.jpg

[572cv]

I keep a 22 as part of life in the country. And I got it when the kids were small, so that, as others have noted, they could see first hand what a gun can do. The exploding bottle of water is a big deal. There is no substitute for this experience. Especially well organized and supervised
I have also used it to put down rabid raccoons and a fox that were threatening. It has a scope to keep the animal's suffering to a minimum. You want to kill the animal to do that.
So, to the original poster, chapeau on your move and your motives.

[parris]

If a nice lever action 22 is desired I would try to find a nice older Marlin model 39 or if you want to go upscale and really nice the Browning BL-22 is a wonderful rifle. Having owned both I prefer the Browning.

As far as hearing protection for juniors it's very tough to go wrong with the Peltor junior size earmuff. I believe they cut out either 19 or 21 db and are low profile enough so they don't mess with a good mount. They're also inexpensive.

When my son was very young I was lucky enough to pick up a cz 452 youth model for him. He thought it was good... till he saw my model 42.

[SlackMan]

Which begs the question, why would a little kid want to kill anything at all?

Wow, I leave for a couple of hours and come back to quite an interesting set of posts. The point of my original statement is that people often point guns at other people while playing or joking around, and that such behavior is NEVER appropriate or acceptable because you would not want to kill those people. Applying the rule "never point a gun at anything you don't want to kill" would end or at least dramatically reduce all of the accidental shootings that result from such playing or joking around.

That said, if an assailant were causing or threatening death or grave bodily harm to another family member, then I think it would be appropriate for a "little kid" to try to kill the assailant, provided the kid has appropriate training to know how to use a weapon.

[lonoeightysix]

Great dad to have! There is a lot for the money in Henry and Savage firearms. Now he will need his dad to get him a lever action Henry and a Ruger Mark something both in 22 LR to compliment his bolt action rifle.


This should the REAL nut of this thread; how firearms tend to hold their value so well.

Tinkering and maintaining firearms actually holds many similarities with bicycle maintenance, restoration, and such and such.

[pbarry]

This should the REAL nut of this thread; how firearms tend to hold their value so well.

Tinkering and maintaining firearms actually holds many similarities with bicycle maintenance, restoration, and such and such.

+1

Read the whole thread. Great comments and discussion. Thanks JMoore.

[jmoore]

Someone asked why I am not defending my position as a hunter. The simple reason is that there is no point as I have rarely ever swayed anyone's opinion. Most peoples minds are made up, esp. when its called disgusting in the question. And there is no need to defend a perfectly legal activity that I have done my entire life with my family and am passing onto my kids.

Sent from my XT1058 using Tapatalk

[c-record]

https://a2-images.myspacecdn.com/images02/23/58588a9cb86c491983036a98e1cf4ed0/full.jpg


That brass in the eye isn't going to feel good.

[Louis]

Someone asked why I am not defending my position as a hunter. The simple reason is that there is no point as I have rarely ever swayed anyone's opinion. Most peoples minds are made up

+1

It would be easier to convert someone over from Campy to SRAM.

Normally I'd say that doesn't mean you can't discuss things in a reasonable manner, but on this sort of issue that's also unlikely.

[parris]

I just thought of something else as far as gunning and young or even recoil shy shooters. RST is a premium shot shell brand that makes several outstanding low.recoil as well as low pressure loads in all 4 popular gauges. Just a thought.

[Dead Man]

We started with long guns, 22s to young kids and respect for firearms, then to hunting, then to this, I'm sure handguns and all of that is next...I predict a lock in 5 posts.

Not entirely sure what you meant, but in case you missed it- I did indicate my kids start on air rifles. Then go to shooting mine/their brothers' rifles, then get their own single-shots.

They start shooting air rifles around 4, real rifles around 5, and get their own .22LR bolt action single-shot rifles at 8. Family tradition.

I let them shoot my M4s from time to time, but it's just for fun factor. They learn marksmanship before I have them out "running & gunning." None of my kids have graduated to practical/tactical rifle yet.

[Dead Man]

That brass in the eye isn't going to feel good.

I'm pretty sure he'd just fired his one and only round in the magazine, and I'd taken my eye-pro off to talk to him.

But I've certainly been guilty of forgetting to put my eyes back on. It happens. If that's the only safety rule you violate, you're doing OK.

[Dead Man]

Nothing like forgetting to put your ears back on, and taking a shot from the 10.3" barreled Mk18..... uhg

[pbarry]

Someone asked why I am not defending my position as a hunter. The simple reason is that there is no point as I have rarely ever swayed anyone's opinion. Most peoples minds are made up, esp. when its called disgusting in the question. And there is no need to defend a perfectly legal activity that I have done my entire life with my family and am passing onto my kids.

Sent from my XT1058 using Tapatalk

Well said.

it's interesting to live in Boulder County, where I was born, and have a conversation about eating meat with newer denizens. Many think "grass-fed" beef is the way to go. Definitely a better option than 'feed lot" beef, imo. Bring up hunting, and mostly their eyes go dim, or, wide..

In all three scenarios, the animals die so humans can eat, with a bolt or a shot. I'd rather eat an animal that has been in the wild for their whole life, and has a quick end, than one raised in a fenced pasture/small pen, then herded into a chute, etc...

[93legendti]

Nothing like forgetting to put your ears back on, and taking a shot from the 10.3" barreled Mk18..... uhg

Yup...a few years ago, me and my kids were watching a live fire tank exercise from about 100 yards..they got my ear protection...tank shells are loud...:crap:

[Charles M]

My first shooter was a benjamin.177...

My first powder was a lever action Winchester .22lr... I was 8. First pistol was also .22 but a little nicer walther.

My dad left no doubt what so ever about right and wrong and there was also the shooter safety course every year... Proper storage and locks.

My daughters will get lessons shortly, starting with the 10 year old.


And no. I'm not handing her off to some yuttz at a range for her to be handed an Uzi set to auto...

There's a right and wrong way. (And there's the right to choose neither).

[lonoeightysix]

Great dad to have! There is a lot for the money in Henry and Savage firearms. Now he will need his dad to get him a lever action Henry and a Ruger Mark something both in 22 LR to compliment his bolt action rifle.

Was toting around a hand-me-down Savage .22 mag/20 ga O/U last season for small game without a dog; surprised to see how much it was worth.

[pbarry]

Was toting around a hand-me-down Savage .22 mag/20 ga O/U last season for small game without a dog; surprised to see how much it was worth.

Yeah, combo guns are really interesting. One of the best true survival firearms. .22/20 is a wonderful combo. Keep it.

[F150]

You're a good Dad, jmoore.

I may be the anomaly here, as I definitely own more bangers than bicycles. Got my first shotgun, an H&R Topper 20ga., from my grandfather, shot my first 25 straight at skeet at 14 (drove myself to the old NGC range on a CB350 with a cased 1100 across my back (yes, TN issued motorcycle licenses at 14)), earned NRA Distinguished Expert on high school rifle team. Guess it was mid-'70s when the school Rod & Gun Club was disbanded (school-sponsored hunting and fishing outings-oh my). Times have changed, for sure; it's been interesting to see a resurgence in middle and high school shooting teams, clay targets primarily. You would be hard-pressed to find a more mature and respectful group of teens.

One of my "recreational activities" is to visit Academy or other gun counter and to ask to see a particular gun. If they know what they are doing, they will make sure the action is clear before handing it over. I then do the same, which is often met with "don't you trust me?". To which I usually respond "No" (or "hell no", depending on their age). I absolutely trust no one with my well-being, and routinely keep my eye on the barrels of those around me. Dove shooting is my absolute favorite, and I've offended more than a few folks with my harsh words regarding safety. Lots of times shoot small fields/close quarters. Little things like someone nearby pulling up on a bird and not hearing the safety click; I won't think twice about saying something.


+1 on eye and hearing protection...once it's gone, it ain't coming back.

[fuzzalow]

Someone asked why I am not defending my position as a hunter. The simple reason is that there is no point as I have rarely ever swayed anyone's opinion. Most peoples minds are made up, esp. when its called disgusting in the question. And there is no need to defend a perfectly legal activity that I have done my entire life with my family and am passing onto my kids.

Yes, that somebody was me. I respect your views and your answer. I am just presenting my side here now without request of a response - because we are not in conflict but I had my reasons for pursuing a response from you.

IMO taking the view that it is futile to change another person's opinion is short sighted because anytime postings are made to this forum, you are addressing the person with whom you are responding to as well as speaking to an audience at large. And that audience at large is everyone who is reading the thread. For me, I am conscious that there are other people reading and conscientious of my response to address direct replies as well as keeping everyone else in the loop. Just tryin' to make it interesting for everyone.

It is not necessary to "win" your (referring to the collective "you") debate with someone and it is not necessary to convince them to agree with your position. You put out your views and make your points and move on. So I see it as not as hand-to-hand combat as much as a dinner conversation where many might be listening and even a few chime in.

Not everyone is set in their ways as you might feel towards an adversary. Sometimes people who are just listening are open to ideas and want to hear the depth and cogency of your views. In fairness also, not everyone likes to put stuff into words so it is correct to respect everybody's views and give them space even if they don't tattle on.

Um, kinda like how I just did.:o

[rustychisel]

Yes, that somebody was me. I respect your views and your answer. I am just presenting my side here now without request of a response - because we are not in conflict but I had my reasons for pursuing a response from you.

IMO taking the view that it is futile to change another person's opinion is short sighted because anytime postings are made to this forum, you are addressing the person with whom you are responding to as well as speaking to an audience at large. ... etc


Extremely well put.

To all. Your reality is not my reality.

It is my personal view that putting guns in the hands of a 4 year old is insane, but I do not live where guns are commonplace, or accepted. Hunting is uncommon, perhaps very uncommon, and my government takes the view (heartily endorsed by most) that gun ownership is not a 'right' to be strongly exercised.

That is the position Llewellyn comes from, also. I don't suppose I'm putting words in his mouth in saying that the OP might have wanted to trumpet pride; but to other forum members it looks like poison. The OP must have known the view to be contentious to some members of this forum, remember and mark well it is an international membership.

I think I'll leave it at that.

[jlwdm]

...

It is not necessary to "win" your (referring to the collective "you") debate with someone and it is not necessary to convince them to agree with your position. You put out your views and make your points and move on. So I see it as not as hand-to-hand combat as much as a dinner conversation where many might be listening and even a few chime in.

...

I think way too many people on this forum think it is necessary to "win" in every thread. As you know, these people can't leave any contrary response alone. I find it tiresome.

Thus, I have no problem with jmoore's position.

Jeff

[Louis]

Not everyone is set in their ways as you might feel towards an adversary. Sometimes people who are just listening are open to ideas and want to hear the depth and cogency of your views.

Perhaps, but given that this is the Interwebs and not a couple of guys out on a bike ride, there are some issues (and we all know what they are: these days it's abortion, religion, same-sex marriage, politics, etc, a while back it was civil rights, the Vietnam war, etc) that are such hot-button issues that the odds of having a civil and constructive back-and-forth for any extended period of time are very low. One can always be pleasantly surprised, but previous history shows that this particular pot tends to boil over very easily.

(and even on a bike ride with one of my best riding buddies I got so pissed at him after a particularly inane political comment, all I could do was bite my tongue and change the topic)

[rustychisel]

(and even on a bike ride with one of my best riding buddies I got so pissed at him after a particularly inane political comment, all I could do was bite my tongue and change the topic)

Next time, I respectfully submit, you get out of the saddle and sprint to the top of the climb, and when he catches up you get to say "We Democrats always claim the moral high ground"... :p

[Dead Man]

Despite all the calls for a locked thread, this thread hasn't gone sour in 5 pages.

6, now. Why am I always the first post on the next page?

[Louis]

Next time, I respectfully submit, you get out of the saddle and sprint to the top of the climb, and when he catches up you get to say "We Democrats always claim the moral high ground"... :p

Especially since he was one of few guys I ride with whom I could have beaten in an uphill sprint...

[jmoore]

I'm happy to discuss my love for hunting. But you have to admit that the question "why would anyone want to kill anything? Its disgusting" is not, IMO, the way to engender a thoughtful discussion on the topic. I have been in enough discussions in this topic to know where its heading.

I am a responsible and thoughtful parent. I am proud to be my kids father and proud to pass on my passions and family heritage to my kids. I know others do not share this passion, and that's fine. I am not asking anyone else to go. But I am not doing less hunting because some might find it unpalatable any more than I'm giving up riding because some/many think I shouldn't be on the road.

Sent from my XT1058 using Tapatalk

[Tandem Rider]

I'm happy to discuss my love for hunting. But you have to admit that the question "why would anyone want to kill anything? Its disgusting" is not, IMO, the way to engender a thoughtful discussion on the topic. I have been in enough discussions in this topic to know where its heading.

I am a responsible and thoughtful parent. I am proud to be my kids father and proud to pass on my passions and family heritage to my kids. I know others do not share this passion, and that's fine. I am not asking anyone else to go. But I am not doing less hunting because some might find it unpalatable any more than I'm giving up riding because some/many think I shouldn't be on the road.

Sent from my XT1058 using Tapatalk

Well put.

I would like to believe that we are all having this discussion because most of us have somewhat moldable opinions on the subject and are discussing it. I believe that if one's opinion cannot be argued thoughtfully and logically, then it needs to be revisited.

It seems to me that is what we are doing here.

[Bruce K]

Yup, so far, pretty good

I used to shoot and hunt back in my college days. Venison or rabbit cooked on the dorm suite stove was way better than cafeteria food.

Not interested in that any more but I understand it.

These days I am all about paper targets and competition and the mental relaxation I get from the focus, breath control, etc

I find my range time providing similar mental and emotional benefits to my bike time.

Now if someone could figure out how to burn the same calories .......

And biathlon is out if the question - rifle purchase cost is beyond my budget - similar to a good carbon road bike to a spectacular one.

BK

[AngryScientist]

this thread is going well and we appreciate everyone's insightful comments.

i have some great memories of piling into my dad's old beat-up station wagon, picking up a few boxes of shells, a case of clay birds and going to a local field converted to a range and shooting through boxes of shotgun rounds. neither he or i ever got any darned good at shooting clay birds launched from our old rickety launcher, but i can remember hearing those rusty springs tension up and toss the disks out like it were hours ago. good times, just me and my dad out in the country, good times.

[oldpotatoe]

I'm happy to discuss my love for hunting. But you have to admit that the question "why would anyone want to kill anything? Its disgusting" is not, IMO, the way to engender a thoughtful discussion on the topic. I have been in enough discussions in this topic to know where its heading.

I am a responsible and thoughtful parent. I am proud to be my kids father and proud to pass on my passions and family heritage to my kids. I know others do not share this passion, and that's fine. I am not asking anyone else to go. But I am not doing less hunting because some might find it unpalatable any more than I'm giving up riding because some/many think I shouldn't be on the road.

Sent from my XT1058 using Tapatalk

Not a gun guy(altho I own 2), but I admire ANY parent that instills responsibility in a child, whether it be a rifle or any other 'tool'. Hunting isn't my thing either, don't like killing for sport or entertainment, but having a child follow a family's heritage into safe and thoughtful hunting or fishing..I have no problem with that.

VERY emotional subject..the best way to participate in this conversation is quietly, without much screaming whether it be for or against. Owning guns doesn't mean hunting, killing, wacko-ness. IMHO.

[Climb01742]

So...because a few mods find a very polarizing subject to their liking, they don't lock a thread that shows a photograph of a small defenseless bird of peace senselessly murdered in the name of a 'sport'? Fine. But then don't in the future lock others threads that may be not to your liking because there is nothing in America more political than guns. By allowing this thread to continue simply because you don't object to its divisive nature then you have given up your right the close threads in the future that some may find too political. You can't cherry pick your politics. Close them all or close none. Just don't let your personal beliefs be the deciding factor.

[fuzzalow]

I'm happy to discuss my love for hunting. But you have to admit that the question "why would anyone want to kill anything? Its disgusting" is not, IMO, the way to engender a thoughtful discussion on the topic. I have been in enough discussions in this topic to know where its heading.

Whether you choose to respond or not to respond is, either way, completely correct on your part IMO. You cannot be faulted because you are under no obligation to respond. You are not under interrogation and I agree that the aggressive manner that you were challenged is clumsy, rude and counter-productive to engender a thoughtful conversation.

However and if you take the view that there is also a wider audience reading and interested in your response, it is possible to take the high road and respond in measured tones to the question/challenge. For me, I prefer to not back down from a confrontation but to speak past the ill mannered histrionics to the wider readership in continuing a mature, considered conversation. I can make my points without resorting to schoolboy taunts and I trust you are confident of doing the same.

I am a responsible and thoughtful parent. I am proud to be my kids father and proud to pass on my passions and family heritage to my kids. I know others do not share this passion, and that's fine. I am not asking anyone else to go. But I am not doing less hunting because some might find it unpalatable any more than I'm giving up riding because some/many think I shouldn't be on the road.

What was just said here is a perfectly reasoned response to the awkward challenge up-chucked in an earlier post.

I know I said I was going to tap out of this thread but I wanted to continue our side conversation. Thanks for sharing your views rather than going radio silent. Your perspective as a hunter adds a lot to the conversation that I, and others, are interested in hearing what you have to say.

Perhaps, but given that this is the Interwebs and not a couple of guys out on a bike ride, there are some issues (and we all know what they are: these days it's abortion, religion, same-sex marriage, politics, etc, a while back it was civil rights, the Vietnam war, etc) that are such hot-button issues that the odds of having a civil and constructive back-and-forth for any extended period of time are very low. One can always be pleasantly surprised, but previous history shows that this particular pot tends to boil over very easily.

Yes, there are topics that are prohibited as defined in Paceline's user agreement. For anything else, I believe the membership here is capable of reasonable discourse.

So I don't agree to pre-empt a topic just because the typical hooliganism of the interwebs tends to chaos. It is a very lousy choice to self-censure because you think the trolls, the flame warriors or the inarticulate will inevitably burn a thread to the ground. That is self-defeating.

[Joachim]

So...because a few mods find a very polarizing subject to their liking, they don't lock a thread that shows a photograph of a small defenseless bird of peace senselessly murdered in the name of a 'sport'? Fine. But then don't in the future lock others threads that may be not to your liking because there is nothing in America more political than guns. By allowing this thread to continue simply because you don't object to its divisive nature then you have given up your right the close threads in the future that some may find too political. You can't cherry pick your politics. Close them all or close none. Just don't let your personal beliefs be the deciding factor.

While I m neither here nor there with regards to the content of this thread, I have to agree with Climb. He makes a very valid point. Either stick to the rules or change the rules, but don't bend them.

[Gsinill]

So...because a few mods find a very polarizing subject to their liking, they don't lock a thread that shows a photograph of a small defenseless bird of peace senselessly murdered in the name of a 'sport'? Fine. But then don't in the future lock others threads that may be not to your liking because there is nothing in America more political than guns. By allowing this thread to continue simply because you don't object to its divisive nature then you have given up your right the close threads in the future that some may find too political. You can't cherry pick your politics. Close them all or close none. Just don't let your personal beliefs be the deciding factor.

^^^^
THIS

This did not turn ugly since it became a conversation of likeminded folks with the rest of the audience acknowledging that it's not worth arguing, leave alone trying to change anybody's opinion, IMHO.

[F150]

So...because a few mods find a very polarizing subject to their liking, they don't lock a thread that shows a photograph of a small defenseless bird of peace senselessly murdered in the name of a 'sport'? Fine. But then don't in the future lock others threads that may be not to your liking because there is nothing in America more political than guns. By allowing this thread to continue simply because you don't object to its divisive nature then you have given up your right the close threads in the future that some may find too political. You can't cherry pick your politics. Close them all or close none. Just don't let your personal beliefs be the deciding factor.

April 18, 1775. Concord, MA. (Climb's hometown!) British advance on Colonists seeking freedom. Gunfire ensues, allowing both sides of a given topic, including this one, to express their opinion for the 239 years that followed. Generally speaking, I think we've done a pretty good job over the years expressing our opinions without getting out of hand.

"bird of peace"? Clearly a religious reference. Now you've done it!

[Llewellyn]

. For me, I prefer to not back down from a confrontation but to speak past the ill mannered histrionics to the wider readership in continuing a mature, considered conversation. I can make my points without resorting to schoolboy taunts and I trust you are confident of doing the same.

I'm assuming this comment is aimed at my earlier response which was not intended as a "schoolboy taunt", a description which I find condescending.

I made no comment on the OP's parenting style or skills, and FWIW I applaud his attempts to instill responsible gun skills in his child. It's the pastime of hunting that I find distasteful and incomprehensible.

As rustychisel mentioned upthread, it's a culture that most people in Australia simply do not understand. But I accept that I'm in a minority on this forum, and that's just how it is.

So I'm finished with this one.

[Climb01742]

I'd like to be clear about something...

While I find America's gun culture deeply troubling, I can sincerely appreciate the OP 's approach of education, training and personal responsibility. But can't everything that needs to be learned about guns be learned on a firing range shooting at targets or skeet? While we can respectfully disagree about the role of guns in our culture, up to this point the subject was perhaps within bounds here.

Where the thread crossed a line, in my view, was going to hunting and in particular showing a picture of a dove, who mate for life, being killed. Does that really have a place here? And isn't its inclusion unnecessarily provocative and insensitive to others? Not to mention the dove and it's now alone for life mate.

Silence on this subject is not agreement and as others have said it was out of civility and futility that I think other voices have not been raised. But the mods can't ignore the nature of this thread simply because it comports with their beliefs. Once that photo appeared, this thread no longer fit this forum's rules.

[jmoore]

My son cleaned and ate that bird for dinner that night.

Llewellyn, or anyone, feel free to PM me if you would like to discuss offline. I'm happy to shed some light on hunting and why I do it.

Sent from my XT1058 using Tapatalk

[OtayBW]

oh boy. :help:


it only took 24 posts to get here.

You're surprised that posting a thread about guns on a bike forum has the potential to go in a direction that you don't like? OK then....

[93legendti]

Peaceful doves?
Wild animals are just that.

"Parents Attacking Babies

By the time babies are three weeks old, they are usually eating seed on their own and have mastered the fundamentals of flight and are ready to move on. But often they continue to beg their parents for food and at night they enjoy cuddling with their father as the mother has probably already laid her next clutch and is incubating her new eggs. Eventually the parents find it difficult to endure large babies, flapping their wings in the parents' faces, when they can just as well eat on their own. This is usually when the parents start to attack the babies and it is when they need to be removed from the parent's cage before any harm is done. It should be said that we have had some babies that were smart enough not to beg for food and these babies have stayed with their parents four weeks or more often helping to incubate the new eggs. Eventually they get bored and want to go off on their own.

Aggressive Males

Two males living together may be a problem some or all of the time. I have two male zebra doves which are quite affectionate toward each other most of the time. But eventually they will start doing bow coos toward each other and usually this ends with a mutual attack requiring the doves to be separated for several hours or perhaps the rest of the day. By nightfall they will go back together and cuddle like a male and female pair for the night.

Sometimes males will attack females if they want to mate and the female is not interested. Often these attacks become serious enough that the two birds must be separated.

A male will often attack a female if he perceives that she is not doing her duty of incubating the eggs or taking care of the young. Usually a short term separation is all that is necessary to correct this situation.

See the section below for additional information about problems with male doves.

Fighting

Fighting among doves is rare but when it does occur it can easily result in serious wounds, particularly around the head and eyes. There are many reasons for doves fighting and they are listed below. But before you worry much about the cause, the birds need to be separated, perhaps by letting one out of the cage and keeping the other in for a short time or the rest of the day. However if the fighting continues after the birds are returned together then a longer separation and a second cage is required

Unpaired Doves

Placing two males together may or may not result in fighting. Males tend to be territorial only when they have mates and when incubation is underway. If fighting between two males housed together does occur probably the only solution would be to separate them permanently.

One also has to be careful during periods of free flight as sometimes males will develop a certain level of animosity toward other males and severe fighting will occur. I have three males that cannot be let out at the same time and one of these can never be let out with any other male or he will be attacked. This is our only single male at the present but it may also be a result of the fact that this male, when younger, tried to mate with every male he encountered.

Single females rarely fight and in fact I have never observed such fighting except when they managed to have eggs and were involved in incubation and then they are an absolute terror. I have seen diamond hens attack a much larger bird such as a ringneck that intruded into their space."

http://www.diamonddove.info/bird04_Living.htm

[93legendti]

this thread is going well and we appreciate everyone's insightful comments.

i have some great memories of piling into my dad's old beat-up station wagon, picking up a few boxes of shells, a case of clay birds and going to a local field converted to a range and shooting through boxes of shotgun rounds. neither he or i ever got any darned good at shooting clay birds launched from our old rickety launcher, but i can remember hearing those rusty springs tension up and toss the disks out like it were hours ago. good times, just me and my dad out in the country, good times.

I grew up on a lake, and I have great memories of fishing with my Father during summer weekends. I can still hear in my head the reel sounds when I a fish was hooked...Poor Mom had to scale and gut them and then cook them for us...:)

Good times.

[phcollard]

Peaceful doves?
Wild animals are just that.
...

Your point is "doves are not so peaceful after all so it's OK to kill them"?

:confused:

[fuzzalow]

I'm assuming this comment is aimed at my earlier response which was not intended as a "schoolboy taunt", a description which I find condescending.

I made no comment on the OP's parenting style or skills, and FWIW I applaud his attempts to instill responsible gun skills in his child. It's the pastime of hunting that I find distasteful and incomprehensible.

As rustychisel mentioned upthread, it's a culture that most people in Australia simply do not understand. But I accept that I'm in a minority on this forum, and that's just how it is.

So I'm finished with this one.

My comment about "schoolboy taunt" was a direct response to the manner and voicing of your original post & protest:

This Indeed. Why would anyone want to kill anything. Disgusting. is very different than what you just wrote above It's the pastime of hunting that I find distasteful and incomprehensible.I concede that in a topic as volatile as this one, in retrospect, a better choice of wording would have been "emotional response" instead of "schoolboy taunt". Please accept that either phrasing was directed at the mode of your written comment and not at you as a person. My apologies for the misunderstanding.

FWIW We are in approximate agreement on hunting, based on the little you have said here on the topic. I believe that hunting as sport devalues and demeans the sanctity of life as found in all living things. It gets convoluted when the catch is consumed for food, which I have no issue with, and not merely as a sport involving killing which I find barbaric.

No matter. Hunting as a cultural tradition and values are intertwined throughout American culture. It is a permanent fixture and will carry on irrespective as to the polarity of opinions. It is a legal activity. My opinions about hunting, unless as somehow part of an 99% collective majority of like minded, is immaterial.

[F150]

But can't everything that needs to be learned about guns be learned on a firing range shooting at targets or skeet? While we can respectfully disagree about the role of guns in our culture, up to this point the subject was perhaps within bounds here.



Perhaps, but it is one thing to be told/educated and another to live it. If a kid goes to school and is instructed not to bully, but sees a totally different picture at home, or on the street corner, the instruction is lost. Exposure is not enough; it takes a caring, responsible individual to make sure the importance is not lost, or selectively implemented. Some of the biggest safety transgressions I've witnessed have been at the range, perhaps because folks thought they are safe there...

Of course, I'm OCD. I even point the barrel of a disassembled firearm in a safe direction when cleaning it. When my son looks at me like I'm going overboard, I return the look. Then he gets it.

[Chris]

I'm assuming this comment is aimed at my earlier response which was not intended as a "schoolboy taunt", a description which I find condescending.

I made no comment on the OP's parenting style or skills, and FWIW I applaud his attempts to instill responsible gun skills in his child. It's the pastime of hunting that I find distasteful and incomprehensible.

As rustychisel mentioned upthread, it's a culture that most people in Australia simply do not understand. But I accept that I'm in a minority on this forum, and that's just how it is.

So I'm finished with this one.

I didn't want to weigh in on this debate, but what the hell? Everyone else has. I have a little perspective as I have landed on both sides of this issue. I grew up, and still reside in Oklahoma where hunting is very much a way of life for a lot of people. Some of my best childhood memories are from hunting trips and the time my dad spent with me teaching me about gun safety. September 1st (first day of dove season) was one of the best days of the year. I think about how it would look now, but it was not uncommon for half of the kids at my school to have their car trunks full of shotguns so that we could leave directly from school to where we would hunt that afternoon. I hunted all through college and being out in nature with my dog was a great experience as well. Somewhere along the way, I personally lost my taste for taking a life. The thrill of the hunt is still an exciting thing to me, right up until I personally have to deal with that consequence. I simply don't take life unnecessarily any more. That's down to spiders in the house, etc. Having said all that, in the United States and I assume other places as well, there is a strong need for hunting. Maybe less so, in the game bird arena around here lately due to drought conditions decimating the quail population, but certainly in regard to deer. A few years ago, the deer got so thick here that you could almost hunt them with a hammer. It's dangerous for the public and the deer population itself. As many of the natural predators and habitat have been eliminated, hunters have been needed to keep the balance in check. I'm personally happy that I don't do it anymore, but am a big believer that it needs to be done.

Having debated a topic that the OP never intended, I would like to change gears and applaud him for the quality time he is spending with his son. He is giving him a lifetime of good memories. Bravo.

[Louis]

For all the talk of "wonderful childhood times going out with my father to hunt xyz critter" I fail to understand why those memories have to be built on killing. If you want to enjoy the outdoors with your kid, take them camping and enjoy the outdoors without participating in the violent death of some of the animals that call it home. That's what kids enjoy, the time spent with a parent in a fun, exciting natural environment, not the killing of some defenseless creature in an unequal match.

[redir]

I'm not anti gun and in fact own and enjoy shooting my Enfield from time to time but I think 4 is way too young. That's my opinion. Also you cannot ignore the statistics. Owning guns is way more a risk to health then not. Period.

I've got nothing against hunting either in fact please kill more dear they are way overpopulated in Virginia.

My dad took me out into the woods to shoot animals with a camera, hike, camp, canoe and so on. He owned guns but never used them. I think that is more appropriate but that's my opinion and my life style but still 4 years old?

[fuzzalow]

^ Don't take the bait.

[phcollard]

For all the talk of "wonderful childhood times going out with my father to hunt xyz critter" I fail to understand why those memories have to be built on killing. If you want to enjoy the outdoors with your kid, take them camping and enjoy the outdoors without participating in the violent death of some of the animals that call it home. That's what kids enjoy, the time spent with a parent in a fun, exciting natural environment, not the killing of some defenseless creature in an unequal match.

Where is the like button?

[redir]

Not trying to bait just giving my opinion which I am entitled to do. I didn't start the gun thread on a bike forum after all.

[fuzzalow]

^ No, not that you were laying bait but that you were taking bait Re: 4 year old.

[redir]

^ No, not that you were laying bait but that you were taking bait Re: 4 year old.

Oh ok. I really don't know though. Is that considered normal age to start shooting? I remember shooting in Boy Scouts so I'm guessing I was probably about 12 years old but that was a while ago. I don't have kids so it's hard for me to gauge what age is appropriate for anything but I do have nephews and I can't imagine them shooting at that age.

I do like guns and I understand them as a hobby and a sport. Many of my friends are shooters. I've always enjoyed the older military rifles. I think as long as this thread doesn't drift into self defense gun nuttery then it will stay on track ;)

As to staying on track, I bought my Enfield at an old time hardware store in Virginia for $150 bucks still in it's cosmoline packaging, never been fired. I found out later that people were offering me $1000 bucks for it! It's a keeper though the thing shoots so straight it's amazing.

[jmoore]

You're surprised that posting a thread about guns on a bike forum has the potential to go in a direction that you don't like? OK then....

Not at all. I'm surprised it took 24 posts. It is usually much less than that

[jmoore]

Oh ok. I really don't know though. Is that considered normal age to start shooting?

It is really child dependent on when to start them. 4yo would not be uncommon in TX. And it's not like people are giving a 4yo a 12ga shotgun and sending them into the woods alone. There is a progression to learning to shoot. Airgun, rimfire, small centerfire, youth shotgun, etc. And all of the shooting is generally highly structured and supervised for many years until they are deemed responsible enough to go out on their own into the woods.

It's much like teaching your kids to ride a bike. You get them a kids bike and let them ride in front of the house fully supervised and then step them up from there.

[PQJ]

Where is the like button?

I've been asking for one for years, to no avail. There are a number of posts here I'd've "liked" but I'd rather not waste bits by quoting all of them.

Hope springs eternal. MODS - LIKE BUTTON, OR SIMILAR, PLEASE.

On topic. I used to shoot with my dad all the time as a kid. A few birdies, fewer eagles, many more pars, even more bogeys, and more "others" than I care to admit. Now I take my girls to the range. They love getting it airborne. We don't shoot to kill, but we do aim for the ball collector now and again.

[Climb01742]

On topic. I used to shoot with my dad all the time as a kid. A few birdies, fewer eagles, many more pars, even more bogeys, and more "others" than I care to admit. Now I take my girls to the range. They love getting it airborne. We don't shoot to kill, but we do aim for the ball collector now and again.

;)

Thanks for the laugh.

[Bruce K]

Sorry James, but threads generally get locked because the discussion is degenerating into personal attacks, offensive content, etc

This thread has pretty much avoided all of that and engendered a pretty civil discussion on the topic

It has nothing to do with what we (mods) like or dislike - it has to do with what and how things are said/discussed

This may not be 100% but us is for sure in this case

BK

[93legendti]

Your point is "doves are not so peaceful after all so it's OK to kill them"?

:confused:

Yes. If I understood James' point, it was "doves are peaceful/nice/innocent/monogamous/lovers, etc. it's bad to kill them".

Doves are wild animals.

I'd like to be clear about something...
Where the thread crossed a line, in my view, was going to hunting and in particular showing a picture of a dove, who mate for life, being killed. Does that really have a place here? And isn't its inclusion unnecessarily provocative and insensitive to others? Not to mention the dove and it's now alone for life mate....

[phcollard]

Yes. If I understood James' point, it was "doves are peaceful/nice/innocent/monogamous/lovers, etc. it's bad to kill them".

Doves are wild animals.

My neighbour is a wild animal too.

And dolphins are less peaceful than you might think.

[Joachim]

Sorry James, but threads generally get locked because the discussion is degenerating into personal attacks, offensive content, etc

This thread has pretty much avoided all of that and engendered a pretty civil discussion on the topic

It has nothing to do with what we (mods) like or dislike - it has to do with what and how things are said/discussed

This may not be 100% but us is for sure in this case

BK

Maybe I'm wrong but I would think this thread falls under this (guns are clearly a political topic):

The Paceline Forum is NOT . . .

• For discussion of partisan political topics. If a discussion devolves into partisan politics it will be shut down by the moderators and the thread may be deleted. Experience has taught us these discussions inevitably deteriorate.


However, it seems that the mods have made their decision. I just can't see how something this polarizing belongs on a bike forum (unless its a NRA bike forum), OT or not.

[Dead Man]

Maybe I'm wrong but I would think this thread falls under this (guns are clearly a political topic):

The Paceline Forum is NOT . . .

• For discussion of partisan political topics. If a discussion devolves into partisan politics it will be shut down by the moderators and the thread may be deleted. Experience has taught us these discussions inevitably deteriorate.


However, it seems that the mods have made their decision. I just can't see how something this polarizing belongs on a bike forum (unless its a NRA bike forum), OT or not.

LOL

How are guns "a political topic" if bikes aren't?

[oldpotatoe]

LOL

How are guns "a political topic" if bikes aren't?

yer kidding, right?

[witcombusa]

LOL

How are guns "a political topic" if bikes aren't?


Firearms are just mechanical assembies

Politicians are tools

[SlackMan]

Perhaps if we (where "we" is all in society) could learn to be more civil, we could have interesting discussions without them degenerating into attacks. If we could do that, then perhaps fewer topics would be viewed as polarizing. And ultimately perhaps, we could all form more nuanced and better-informed views about important issues. I particularly like the thesis at the following link:

http://www.bloombergview.com/articles/2014-09-12/don-t-be-rude-you-loser?alcmpid=view

[OtayBW]

Not at all. I'm surprised it took 24 posts. It is usually much less than that

Right. Good to know that it was your expectation to create a potentially incendiary thread.

[c-record]

I'm pretty sure he'd just fired his one and only round in the magazine, and I'd taken my eye-pro off to talk to him.

But I've certainly been guilty of forgetting to put my eyes back on. It happens. If that's the only safety rule you violate, you're doing OK.

Great to see the time taken to help them learn right. Responsibility is lost on many it seems.

[jmoore]

Right. Good to know that it was your expectation to create a potentially incendiary thread.

If we all stayed away from potentially incendiary topics, we could never discuss two-thirds of the stuff we talk about on here.

[avalonracing]

Firearms are just mechanical assembies


And for many... a phallus.

[Dead Man]

And for many... a phallus.

So are expensive bikes.... what's the relevancy?

[firerescuefin]

J shoots with his son. He bought a nice rifle. They hunt together. I'm sorry, not a lot political there. He didn't talk about going to swap meet so they could buy an AR and a 30 mag clip.

If you are incapable of instituting self control or want to take the conversation a different direction....that's a you problem.

Lets preach tolerance until someone does something that we disagree with then lets get pissed off.

FWIW, there are many threads that I don't comment on. I used to fall into the traps...not as much anymore. They're not my threads and honestly, my opinions on the subject or a nuance of the subject (which could derail it) most likely aren't wanted nor would they be constructive.

[OtayBW]

If we all stayed away from potentially incendiary topics, we could never discuss two-thirds of the stuff we talk about on here.
Actually - I would take the opposite approach and say that what makes this forum more civilized than most of its type is the common love of all things bicycle as primary theme around here, and that we are indeed largely respectful of not throwing potentially incendiary topics out there. The signal:noise is way better here than 1:2, I think.

There are obviously exceptions, however....

[choke]

J shoots with his son. He bought a nice rifle. They hunt together. I'm sorry, not a lot political there. He didn't talk about going to swap meet so they could buy an AR and a 30 mag clip.

If you are incapable of instituting self control or want to take the conversation a different direction....that's a you problem.

Lets preach tolerance until someone does something that we disagree with then lets get pissed off.

FWIW, there are many threads that I don't comment on. I used to fall into the traps...not as much anymore. They're not my threads and honestly, my opinion on the subject or a nuance of the subject (which could derail it) most likely aren't wanted nor would they be constructive.Very well said. Chapeau!

[fiamme red]

Don't forget to wear a helmet! ;)

http://www.cyclelicio.us/2012/russia-bike-biathlon/

http://www.cyclelicio.us/wp-content/uploads/2012/06/biathlon-girls-500x333.jpg

[ptourkin]

Because nobody has been able to figure out a way to live without eating.

But many of us have figured out a way to eat without killing.

[Dead Man]

But many of us have figured out a way to eat without killing.

That's not remotely possible. Even if you think you live a perfectly vegan no-kill, no-animal lifestyle, billions of rodents and insects are mercilessly slaughtered every year at harvest.

It's a nice thought, I guess... but pointless, and wrong.

[gdw]

Warning - Thread drift

"But many of us have figured out a way to eat without killing."

Lots of plants are maimed and killed to provide us with a balanced diet. Do you avoid carrots, beets, onions, etc whose harvesting cause the death of the plant... a living organism?

[Dead Man]

Life requires death. Trying to minimize your impact is noble, but hold your nose a little lower as you do it please.

[Shortsocks]

Damn it. This thread has gotten stupid. I agree with Firerescuefin.

Can we please move on to why Tyler Farrar is a tool. Or why I shopped for an hour at Office Depot for the best permanent marker to cover up the scratches on my Rapha shoes that I had never worn outside of the house....or how we are going to break into eBAUMANN's house to get all that bad ass gear he has stashed in his closet? :banana:

Or maybe on a method to crack into oldpotatoe's head to figure out how to put his knowledge of campy on paper so we can finally cash in on his campy super brain?

[jmoore]

This thread is almost as good as my friend and his custom bike saga.

[ptourkin]

I was just pointing out the logical inconsistency of that statement.

I personally maintain a plant-based diet and try to minimize my personal impact - pointing out that bugs and rodents die in agriculture doesn't actually address the suffering and high environmental impact of our meat and dairy habit and I'll concede that I kill plants. You win on that one.

As for noses held high and sanctimony, I hear that all the time, yet the rapidity of the defensive non-sequiturs from the omnivores always beats me to any punch.

Bring up protein next - then come ride with me at the 508.

Sorry for the thread drift. I'm done.

[oldpotatoe]

Damn it. This thread has gotten stupid. I agree with Firerescuefin.

Can we please move on to why Tyler Farrar is a tool. Or why I shopped for an hour at Office Depot for the best permanent marker to cover up the scratches on my Rapha shoes that I had never worn outside of the house....or how we are going to break into eBAUMANN's house to get all that bad ass gear he has stashed in his closet? :banana:

Or maybe on a method to crack into oldpotatoe's head to figure out how to put his knowledge of campy on paper so we can finally cash in on his campy super brain?

You wouldn't need me anymore, I'd get lonely.

[93legendti]

And for many... a phallus.

Freud said just the opposite...in Dreams in Folklore (1958)...

[jimoots]

Being from Australia, this thread reminds me that while we have a lot of similarities... US and AU cultural norms are very different

[fiamme red]

Freud said just the opposite...in Dreams in Folklore (1958)...I thought that Freud died long before 1958?

Sorry for the thread hijack. :)

[Shortsocks]

Warning - Thread drift

"But many of us have figured out a way to eat without killing."

Lots of plants are maimed and killed to provide us with a balanced diet. Do you avoid carrots, beets, onions, etc whose harvesting cause the death of the plant... a living organism?

I know for a FACT over the past 15 years of serious road riding I have killed 3 squirrels, one Rabbit, a Pomeranian and Two Birds ( I think they are doves or something like that because they Never move when cars or Bikes get in front of them).

I dont know if I killed those animals, or they were committing suicide...Well the Pomeranian For sure was an accident because I hit it first and it took down 2 other bikes behind me. We did visit the Lady and the Pomeranian at the vet that night in Park Cites with flowers to give her our apologies. Folks please Put leashes on your dogs. :mad:

Because of the lives of those animals be taken, they have taken 3 ribs, 1 arm tons of road rash, Two front wheels and Two left shifters. Oh, And tons of saddle rash....

Poor guys. But nothing is worse than Being on a technical downhill and having an animal jump in front of you. Really Blows. :mad:

[phcollard]

Oh well NVM...

[jmoore]

FYI, I reread the entire thread again and have edited the post with the picture of my son and the dove in it. Honestly, a picture like that is totally innocuous to me. It got dozens of likes on FB.

But as a hunter I have an obligation to portray our activities in the best light possible and pictures of dead animals can easily offend. Normally this applies to big game animals, like deer, etc., but quit obviously it extends to doves as well. So I have removed the photo from my post.

It is still there quoted in a subsequent post. I will ask the mods to remove that one as well.

[Climb01742]

FYI, I reread the entire thread again and have edited the post with the picture of my son and the dove in it. Honestly, a picture like that is totally innocuous to me. It got dozens of likes on FB.

But as a hunter I have an obligation to portray our activities in the best light possible and pictures of dead animals can easily offend. Normally this applies to big game animals, like deer, etc., but quit obviously it extends to doves as well. So I have removed the photo from my post.

It is still there quoted in a subsequent post. I will ask the mods to remove that one as well.

Thank you, jmoore, for both removing the photo and for the openness to reconsidering it. respectfully seeing a subject from different perspectives is the beginning of understanding our differences. Deserves a :banana:

[Bruce K]

The quoter can delete the quote/photo as well

Glad to see this handled in an adult way as well

Carry on

BK

[jmoore]

Thank you, jmoore, for both removing the photo and for the openness to reconsidering it. respectfully seeing a subject from different perspectives is the beginning of understanding our differences. Deserves a :banana:

My pleasure. It's all good.

The quoter can delete the quote/photo as well

Glad to see this handled in an adult way as well

Carry on

BK

I asked him to edit his quote and he did.

[cfox]

I enjoy the flavor of dead animal as much as the next guy, so while not a hunter, I can't pass judgement hunters. I do, however, detest the trophy hunters on TV that sit there with their dead elk or whatever waxing in orgasmic tones how "beautiful" the animal is. I mean, wasn't it more beautiful when it was alive? You go to a game farm in Texas so you can shoot a baited animal in order to put its head on your wall? I don't get that.

[SlackMan]

Now that we're past all that "dead animal stuff," can we get on with talking about how everyone should own an assault rifle?! :banana: ;)

[Louis]

Now that we're past all that "dead animal stuff," can we get on with talking about how everyone should own an assault rifle?! :banana: ;)

You're from Texas and that's all ya got? A puny assault rifle? For a guy like you I'd expect something a bit more manly:

http://static.tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pub/images/rambo_poster_3857.jpg

[SlackMan]

You're from Texas and that's all ya got? A puny assault rifle? For a guy like you I'd expect something a bit more manly:

http://static.tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pub/images/rambo_poster_3857.jpg

I should have clarified that I was talking about an assault rifle suitably "kitted out." I'd take a grenade launcher over what Rambo has.

[SlackMan]

One more pic for all those gear-oriented cyclists who may not realize that M4s are like Barbies for men!

[Louis]

I can see it now: Rambo vs SlackMan - battle of the Hard Men. ;)

[pbarry]

Oh great, now we're talking regional stereotypes!? ;)
What's next, Chenbuterol vs. EPO? Wool vs. Lycra jerseys? Seitan vs. Tempeh?
When will it end???
:banana::banana::banana:

[SlackMan]

... Wool vs. Lycra jerseys? ...
:banana::banana::banana:

If you bring up polarizing issues, you'll get the thread locked! :mad:

[Louis]

Oh great, now we're talking regional stereotypes!? ;)


Or in your case, pot-head vs slacker ski bum vs mountain man !

[Bruce K]

Can we at least clarify terminology?

An assault rifle is a fully automatic weapon. They are illegal in most states except with law enforcement or military personnel.

The AR-15 and variants is a semi-automatic rifle that offers a wide variety of accessories. It functions the same as many "traditional" looking rifles. One trigger pull = one shot.

The AR stands for Armalite, the company that first developed the rifle for the US military, not assault rifle.

BK

[pbarry]

Or in your case, pot-head vs slacker ski bum vs mountain man !

Don't forget the trustifarian organic farmers..

I'm offended by the pot-head reference, and request that you remove the offending terminology. JK! [Wish I was a smoker, tho... Times are good in CO.]

[parris]

Well I for one think jmoore is a horrible and abusive parent! I mean what's wrong with you? Making your son hunt with a Mossburg in 20 gauge!? If you REALLY cared he should've been properly kitted out with a nice 28. SHEESH! :D

[F150]

arghh, cannot get US stats to load

[jmoore]

Well I for one think jmoore is a horrible and abusive parent! I mean what's wrong with you? Making your son hunt with a Mossburg in 20 gauge!? If you REALLY cared he should've been properly kitted out with a nice 28. SHEESH! :D

Its a .410. Fixed full choke. At least get it right.

He will get my Weatherby 20ga semi auto soon enough. Then I'll get a custom 20ga O/U for me. Or maybe a Beretta Silver Pigeon.

Sent from my XT1058 using Tapatalk

[parris]

.410 full choke? Giddy up that's double tough to hit with. After reading my reply I owe you an apology. I was thinking along the brand of shotgun not gauge when I wrote it along the lines of campy vs shimano. The gauge thing was an afterthought. But looking at what and how I wrote it I was out of line. Sorry for that.

For the members who are following this who aren't shooters a light shotgun in 20 gauge can often have a nasty bite in the recoil department. I clearly messsed up by a careless and ham fisted choice of words.

[avalonracing]

I do, however, detest the trophy hunters on TV that sit there with their dead elk or whatever waxing in orgasmic tones how "beautiful" the animal is. I mean, wasn't it more beautiful when it was alive?

I've also noticed that before. Bizarre.

[jmoore]

.410 full choke? Giddy up that's double tough to hit with. After reading my reply I owe you an apology. I was thinking along the brand of shotgun not gauge when I wrote it along the lines of campy vs shimano. The gauge thing was an afterthought. But looking at what and how I wrote it I was out of line. Sorry for that.

For the members who are following this who aren't shooters a light shotgun in 20 gauge can often have a nasty bite in the recoil department. I clearly messsed up by a careless and ham fisted choice of words.

We are good. I knew you were joking. No apology necessary. I was impressed you picked up that it was a Mossberg!

I should have added a :) or two.

Sent from my XT1058 using Tapatalk

[rab]

I've also noticed that before. Bizarre.

speaking of bizarre and trophy hunting, ever see the "Bone Collector" logo, a pretty common sticker I noticed in vehicle windows in Texas. I found it to be a real head scratcher. A human skull formed from the antlers of a trophy deer? What exactly is that supposed to mean? I know skulls are often used to indicate some level of perceived badass-edness but...

For what it is worth, I come from a hunting background and respect (what I consider) true hunting, where anything killed is fully utilized, as opposed to trophy hunting.

sorry to steer this a bit more off course but the above comment made me think of those silly stickers.

[MadRocketSci]

First, I commend everyone for keeping this thread open, and for the most part respectful and civil. Second, I find this thread, and others, anthropologically fascinating in illustrating the role culture and parental influences have on people.

I can imagine swapping two people from each "side," in terms of where they were raised (example, Australia/Europe vs the US), and reading the same words in their posts except that the names have been swapped. Which side is the truth? Neither, it's all POV.

Interesting for this parent, the extent of which our own beliefs and biases are passed on generationally.

[jmoore]

I will invite any non-hunter to join me. We can shoot and you can tag along on on a hunt to see what it really is first hand.

Sent from my XT1058 using Tapatalk

[biker72]

He will get my Weatherby 20ga semi auto soon enough.

Sent from my XT1058 using Tapatalk

Nice shotgun...:)
I had a Browning A5 16 gauge when I was a kid. Never much of a hunter. I shoot targets with pistols these days.

Your son will really like that Weatherby.

[jmoore]

Nice shotgun...:)
I had a Browning A5 16 gauge when I was a kid. Never much of a hunter. I shoot targets with pistols these days.

Your son will really like that Weatherby.

You can never go wrong with a Browning A5, esp in Sweet 16.

It is a Weatherby SA08 full synthetic they introduced a few years back. $400 new. I bought one of the very first ones in Dallas. It is essentially a copy of a Beretta 391 (which I have in 12ga). Handles great and very light. They are now nearly $600 new, so a great investment. He thinks its super cool :)

Sent from my XT1058 using Tapatalk

[Onno]

There are more than just 2 types, vis hunters and non-hunters. There are also former hunters. I grew up in northern Canada, and did a fair bit of hunting and shooting as a kid, with my father and brother. The first few kills were at first shocking, and then thrilling. Leopold writes about always remembering the first bird you kill on the fly. I too still have vivid memories of that, 40 years later. But as I got older, I couldn't reconcile the thrill of killing with my sense of respect and love for the lives of the animals. I didn't need to kill and eat them, and primary reason for doing it was that it was fun (which it was). And so I stopped. I find my memories of hunting both exciting and troubling, so I'm glad I had the experience. But I can't really accept that hunting for fun or sport is unproblematic, even if you eat what you kill, and don't hang the heads.

[biker72]

You can never go wrong with a Browning A5, esp in Sweet 16.

It is a Weatherby SA08 full synthetic they introduced a few years back. $400 new. I bought one of the very first ones in Dallas. It is essentially a copy of a Beretta 391 (which I have in 12ga). Handles great and very light. They are now nearly $600 new, so a great investment. He thinks its super cool :)

Sent from my XT1058 using Tapatalk
I've been out of the firearms scene for a number of years but recently got interested again. Any firearm that had Weatherby stamped on it was always high quality. Looks like your SA08 is no exception.

[professerr]

There are more than just 2 types, vis hunters and non-hunters. There are also former hunters. I grew up in northern Canada, and did a fair bit of hunting and shooting as a kid, with my father and brother. The first few kills were at first shocking, and then thrilling. Leopold writes about always remembering the first bird you kill on the fly. I too still have vivid memories of that, 40 years later. But as I got older, I couldn't reconcile the thrill of killing with my sense of respect and love for the lives of the animals. I didn't need to kill and eat them, and primary reason for doing it was that it was fun (which it was). And so I stopped. I find my memories of hunting both exciting and troubling, so I'm glad I had the experience. But I can't really accept that hunting for fun or sport is unproblematic, even if you eat what you kill, and don't hang the heads.

I have to admit I was surprised at the number of posters and mods here who are into guns and hunting. In my family, those in the medical fields (mostly) long ago cleaved off, when it comes to gun ownership, from the gun enthusiasts.

I’ve been hunting once. It was not fun for me at all. It felt wrong at a visceral level, and when I learn that someone enjoys hunting I accept that they are different from me. I will not teach or encourage a child to kill something.

There are many abandoned practices in human history that were defended by adherents on grounds of tradition and culture. I think the momentum of history is against this one too.

[Gsinill]

There are many abandoned practices in human history that were defended by adherents on grounds of tradition and culture. I think the momentum of history is against this one too.

Well said...

[Louis]

It felt wrong at a visceral level, and when I learn that someone enjoys hunting I accept that they are different from me. I will not teach or encourage a child to kill something.

There are many abandoned practices in human history that were defended by adherents on grounds of tradition and culture. I think the momentum of history is against this one too.

+1

I can't get over the killing part.

All you have to do is watch and listen to a pig being bled to death, and as the cries get weaker and weaker you have to realize that something bad is occurring. And even if it's killed in a fraction of a second instead of many long, long minutes, that doesn't make it a whole lot better. It's still killing. Doing it for sport is IMO even worse.

Because they can't communicate directly to us via speech we've convinced ourselves that it's somehow OK to raise and kill animals for our benefit, but long ago I concluded that the less of that that's done in my name the better. Every time I smell ahead of me on the highway a cattle or pig transport truck then pass it, I feel terrible and avert my eyes. My only consolation is that it isn't being done for me, and maybe over the years the lack of my demand for those products has spared a handful of creatures that horrible fate.

[Dead Man]

I think the momentum of history is against this one too.

This isn't like saying "gay" in reference to things that suck, or genocide, or using PCBs. On the contrary: for as long as we eat meat, hunting will always be the ethically superior method of obtaining it.

Or do you think meat purchased in the supermarket has less harmful impact on the world?

[Louis]

Or do you think meat purchased in the supermarket has less harmful impact on the world?

So does that somehow make it all OK, because what's behind Door #2 is even worse?

[Dead Man]

So does that somehow make it all OK, because what's behind Door #2 is even worse?

I don't personally possess the conviction that all death is necessarily ethically wrong... so I'm thinking you and I can't line up on this one. By simply being alive, eating or not, our existence causes death. I don't draw distinctions of value from type of life to another, with the exception of human life. Even if we don't believe there be a creator who created us to be distinct from all other forms of life, we still possess at least one thing unique from all known forms of life: self profession of rights, specifically the right to live.

My life requires death. The only alternative to causing death is to cause my own death. Some fanatics think that's valid.

Others have a perspective that makes distinctions between the value of different types of life- you apparently have your own code. Killing for the purpose of consuming the flesh of the dead is apparently not OK with you. Where DO you draw the line?

[Louis]

Where DO you draw the line?

I've seen plenty of both done, and I don't have a problem distinguishing between agricultural cultivation and animals. Sentience does make a difference.

Edit: But yes, I do feel bad even when plants die needlessly. I dislike seeing food wasted, and in the US there's tons of that happening every day.

[christian]

There are many abandoned practices in human history that were defended by adherents on grounds of tradition and culture. I think the momentum of history is against this one too.
I don't hunt, but I don't think there is any question that, given the larger impact man has had on the environment, well-managed hunting is pretty easily defensible as ethical.

First, with the lack of natural predation, some species have multiplied to levels where they are pests - witness deer in southern New York, moose in Sweden, wild boars just about every where. It seems obvious that hunting moose is preferable to striking them with cars (the inevtiable other outcome). It seems equally obvious that hunting boar is preferable to significant loss of native species of plants and animals.

Additionally, the practice of hunting and eating the meat is surely preferable to most forms of modern agriculture. In hunting, the animal lives in its natural habitat and expresses its species essence until the end of its life, and the kill is reasonably quick and humane. In modern farming, the animal lives the majority of its life in a severely constricted environment, often eating things which are nothing like its natural food, and then is killed reasonably quickly and humanely. I know which, if given the choice, I'd pick.

In other words, I think it's reasonable to oppose hunting. But to do so with any ethical consistency requires, at minimum, strict vegetarianism.

[Louis]

In hunting, the animal lives in its natural habitat and expresses its species essence until the end of its life, and the kill is reasonably quick and humane.

True, and to some extent I agree, but it isn't a reasonable alternative. There just isn't enough space available to feed the world at an affordable cost. We can't all simply eat venison.

[Dale Alan]

I don't hunt, but I don't think there is any question that, given the larger impact man has had on the environment, well-managed hunting is pretty easily defensible as ethical.

First, with the lack of natural predation, some species have multiplied to levels where they are pests - witness deer in southern New York, moose in Sweden, wild boars just about every where. It seems obvious that hunting moose is preferable to striking them with cars (the inevtiable other outcome). It seems equally obvious that hunting boar is preferable to significant loss of native species of plants and animals.

Additionally, the practice of hunting and eating the meat is surely preferable to most forms of modern agriculture. In hunting, the animal lives in its natural habitat and expresses its species essence until the end of its life, and the kill is reasonably quick and humane. In modern farming, the animal lives the majority of its life in a severely constricted environment, often eating things which are nothing like its natural food, and then is killed reasonably quickly and humanely. I know which, if given the choice, I'd pick.

In other words, I think it's reasonable to oppose hunting. But to do so with any ethical consistency requires, at minimum, strict vegetarianism.
Well said,you nailed it IMO.

[unterhausen]

I saw this thread and thought it was going on because of the gun aspect. Personally, I see nothing wrong with hunting. In fact the hunters around here would probably be in favor of paving over the woods if they couldn't hunt, so I want them on my side on that particular matter. The problem I have is with ammosexuals that fetishize guns in and of themselves. I've had a gun pointed at my head twice, I didn't like it and it bothers me a lot that the negligent discharge rate is obnoxiously high around here.

[Louis]

This is also a cultural thing. Currently in France there's a huge hullabaloo about the proposed new "1000 cow farm." Protests, blocking of the roads, etc etc.

Le Monde story (http://www.lemonde.fr/planete/article/2014/09/16/la-ferme-des-mille-vaches-retour-sur-trois-ans-de-conflits_4487536_3244.html?xtmc=mille_vaches&xtcr=4)

In the US folks have few problems with industrial-scale raising of animals, despite the horror-stories happening on a daily basis.

[Louis]

I saw this thread and thought it was going on because of the gun aspect.

As usual, we've drifted.

[Tony T]

+1

I can't get over the killing part.

All you have to do is watch and listen to a pig being bled to death, and as the cries get weaker and weaker you have to realize that something bad is occurring.

What about fishing?

[Louis]

What about fishing?

What about it?

[Tony T]

What about it?

Well, they're not "cute" and don't scream when they are taken out of the water to suffocate.

You shared your thoughts on slaughtering a pig, what about fishing?

[Louis]

Well, they're not "cute" and don't scream when they are taken out of the water to suffocate.

You shared your thoughts on slaughtering a pig, what about fishing?

You can't really speak under water, so I wouldn't expect them to have vocal cords and of course lacking them, they can't scream. But as you point out, dying due to lack of oxygen is probably not fun.

The ability to create loud sounds is not a criterion for sentience, just something a lot of animals do when in pain. I don't eat snails either, and you can kill them with nary a peep.

[daker13]

I've seen plenty of both done, and I don't have a problem distinguishing between agricultural cultivation and animals. Sentience does make a difference.

Thanks.

I'm a vegetarian and I've avoided this thread. Personally, I don't have a problem with hunting, since I consider factory farming to be the real problem. I prefer not to debate with people who eat meat, because the topic rarely ever goes anywhere. I consider food choices to be one's own business.

But I admit I'm annoyed by the argument, beloved by some meat eaters (my father in law, for instance, never seems to tire of it), that the death of a carrot is equivalent to the death of a cow or a sheep or a lamb, and so (I suppose) vegetarians are hypocritical because they kill heads of lettuce and potatoes and such. For many people, carrots don't think and feel and suffer the way that a dog or a cat or a cow does, and so we distinguish between plants and animals in what we eat. Plants aren't sentient, as Louis says. And yes, I know that you can hook up electrodes to a houseplant, and the houseplant will respond in a way that looks sort of like a human emotion, etc., etc. The distinction between an animal and a plant, in terms of their respective abilities to feel and suffer, really shouldn't be that hard to grasp.

I really do respect everyone's right to make their own choices, and I have zero interest in bringing anyone around to my own point of view, but the 'carrot=cow' argument has always bothered me.

[Louis]

I really do respect everyone's right to make their own choices, and I have zero interest in bringing anyone around to my own point of view, but the 'carrot=cow' argument has always bothered me.

Agreed.

I don't really expect to convince anyone, but as long as folks are putting their opinions out there, I'm more than willing to express my contrary position.

I don't think anyone really believes the "carrot = cow" line of argument. It's just the only thing they can think of. If they do believe it, they just haven't seen enough of what really happens out there in the world.

Edit: And you can also tell your father in law that we are aware that some field mice do get caught up in the combine. As was pointed out up-thread, mere existence implies having an impact on the world, some of it negative. I can live with that.

The alternative is to curl up in a corner and die, and I don't plan on doing that any time soon.

[jlwdm]

We went on a 2 week plus African Safari a number of years ago. It was amazing to see most of the animals spending 24 hours per day just tying to survive. All animals had other animals to fear. Survival of the fittest was the name of the game. Lots of violent deaths.

Jeff

[parris]

^ Was it a dangerous or plains game safari? I've got some friends who've done both as well as some gunning for birds.

[Climb01742]

I wish there was some way to arm all the prey that hunters 'hunt' and make death an equally possible outcome on both sides, then see how many 'hunters' there would be. Unless you're going after grizzlies with a knife, it's not hunting. It's murder on completely unequal grounds. Yes, creatures are killed enabling me to live, but I take no pleasure in. Hunters profess pleasure in such an unequal endeavor and tart up murder into something akin to a virtue. Husbandry of wildlife is one thing. Sport 'hunting' is quite another. Thus ends my pissing into the wind of America's gun fantasies.

[Tony T]

Yes, creatures are killed enabling me to live, but I take no pleasure in.

Not really a valid argument. We can live without eating meat.
(Though I wouldn't want to, I take pleasure in eating a good steak :))

http://greeneggblog.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/06/IMG_2670060512.jpg

[oldpotatoe]

Not really a valid argument. We can live without eating meat.
(Though I wouldn't want to, I take pleasure in eating a good steak :))



I think the difference is killing for sport and entertainment. That part I will not condone nor be a part of.

Hunters in the USA don't need to hunt to eat meat either.

[pbarry]

I wish there was some way to arm all the prey that hunters 'hunt' and make death an equally possible outcome on both sides, then see how many 'hunters' there would be. Unless you're going after grizzlies with a knife, it's not hunting. It's murder on completely unequal grounds. Yes, creatures are killed enabling me to live, but I take no pleasure in. Hunters profess pleasure in such an unequal endeavor and tart up murder into something akin to a virtue. Husbandry of wildlife is one thing. Sport 'hunting' is quite another. Thus ends my pissing into the wind of America's gun fantasies.

Unless you are a vegetarian, or a factory farm red meat consumer who has visited the killing floor of a slaughterhouse, (and still find that a preferable source of animal protein), your argument is purely emotional and anthropomorphic.

[Louis]

Interesting that so many folks' argument boils down to this: if you aren't willing to go 10 miles, then your 5 miles aren't any better than my 4 miles.

[rustychisel]

Unless you are a vegetarian, or a factory farm red meat consumer who has visited the killing floor of a slaughterhouse, (and still find that a preferable source of animal protein), your argument is purely emotional and anthropomorphic.

A much misunderstood and overused term, but since one side of the point under debate involves the human condition, I'd find it surprising if a little anthropomorphism didn't creep in.

Speaking personally, I abhor hunting for hunting's sake, roughly in line with the position taken by Old Potatoe, but here in Australia we have a massive feral animal problem.

in the outback and desert, feral camels and goats
in the scrub and vegetated areas, feral goats and pigs
and there are others, feral cats abound etc.

If I lived in the area and was a committed hunter, I have no issue with destroying as many feral pigs as possible, but that would be hoping to achieve an end by the means available.

It's a far cry from taking pleasure in maiming or killing of many species in the name of sport, no matter how you dress it up as a 'rite of passage', 'it's my right' or 'we always do it like that around here'.

The issue of weaponry itself is perhaps even more divisive, and to this forum, but since we started at hunting, I'll confine comments thus... the idea that raising a child to be a responsible citizen in any way involves finding an animal and KILLING it is anathema. It makes no sense, morally or ethically.

[Louis]

but since we started at hunting, I'll confine comments thus... the idea that raising a child to be a responsible citizen in any way involves finding an animal and KILLING it is anathema. It makes no sense, morally or ethically.

It does make sense historically - gotta be a throwback to the days of the wild frontier.

http://lookingglassreview.com/assets/images/Davy_Crockett_a_life_on_the_frontier.gif

[professerr]

I don't hunt, but I don't think there is any question that, given the larger impact man has had on the environment, well-managed hunting is pretty easily defensible as ethical.

First, with the lack of natural predation, some species have multiplied to levels where they are pests - witness deer in southern New York, moose in Sweden, wild boars just about every where. It seems obvious that hunting moose is preferable to striking them with cars (the inevtiable other outcome). It seems equally obvious that hunting boar is preferable to significant loss of native species of plants and animals.

Additionally, the practice of hunting and eating the meat is surely preferable to most forms of modern agriculture. In hunting, the animal lives in its natural habitat and expresses its species essence until the end of its life, and the kill is reasonably quick and humane. In modern farming, the animal lives the majority of its life in a severely constricted environment, often eating things which are nothing like its natural food, and then is killed reasonably quickly and humanely. I know which, if given the choice, I'd pick.

In other words, I think it's reasonable to oppose hunting. But to do so with any ethical consistency requires, at minimum, strict vegetarianism.


I think you make a number of good points, and culling deer and using the meat for food might be better than some of the other options. But no one I know who hunts does so to prevent moose from being hit by cars, to protect native species, to protest the immorality of beef production, or any of the numerous other justifications I’ve heard. I think it is about the hunting (well, most just sit) and killing.

[MadRocketSci]

This is the exact "discussion" (which inevitably turned into a flame war) I had 20 years ago while working on Sun Sparc 2 workstations in the middle of the night on comp.sys.rec.WhoKnowsWhat. Nothing has changed. It'd almost be easier to talk someone out of their religion.

Like i mentioned before, it's all POV, unless you believe in an ultimate moral authority which defines the "truth." Historically speaking, it's been part of the culture in the US since the frontier days of self-reliance or die, and has retained its strength and passion by being passed down generationally when people are most receptive to suggestion (which I define as pre-pubescent youth).

How do you see yourself in the world/universe? An active participant of the natural order and food chain? Or a being with the ability and desire to extract him/herself from that chain, and to be merely an observer and protector of such? There is no right or wrong answer here IMHO...just how you personally see the worth of another creature's death and possible pain/suffering in contrast to the gain such death/suffering provides.

I have respect for vegetarians, as I consider them stronger people than myself. I also have respect for people who reduce their need for factory-farmed meat through sustainable and humane (quick-death) hunting. All other views on the subject are private and drive my own actions and decisions.

[parris]

^ very well stated. This subject seems to be one where agreeing to disagree may be a good course of action.

[Tony T]

IMO, I have no problem with hunters using the proper "tool" (i.e. a 30/30, or whatever single shot rifle). I respect hunters that use a bow, as that takes more skill than a rifle. Its the "hunters" that use automatic assault rifles to take down a deer that I don't understand.

[Joachim]

Its the "hunters" that use automatic assault rifles to take down a deer that I don't understand.

Automatic assault rifles are illegal in the US. Legally only law enforcement and the military can use automatic weapons.

[Dead Man]

IMO, I have no problem with hunters using the proper "tool" (i.e. a 30/30, or whatever single shot rifle). I respect hunters that use a bow, as that takes more skill than a rifle. Its the "hunters" that use automatic assault rifles to take down a deer that I don't understand.

When I hunt, which is ever more rarely, I use what you would call "assault rifles" exclusively.

Can I help with your understanding?

[Dead Man]

Automatic assault rifles are illegal in the US. Legally only law enforcement and the military can use automatic weapons.

Not true. Common misconception. They're perfectly legal, just require hoops be jumped through.

[Tony T]

Automatic assault rifles are illegal in the US. Legally only law enforcement and the military can use automatic weapons.

I'm not a hunter and don't own guns, so my terminology is incorrect.
However, I'm referring to a Bushmaster, which is a semi automatic rifle. I don't understand why this would be needed to take down a deer.

[Tony T]

When I hunt, which is ever more rarely, I use what you would call "assault rifles" exclusively.

Can I help with your understanding?

Yes. Why is this superior to an old style 30/30 single action rifle (with a scope) when hunting a deer?

[Dead Man]

I think we need some clarity....

"automatic" means the weapon fires and re-chambers automatically.

There are at least two varieties of "automatic" firearm: Semi, and full. There's also "burst" varieties, but let's keep it simple.

"Semi-automatic" means the weapon will fire and re-chamber a round from the magazine, but will not allow additional rounds to fire until the trigger has been released and re-pressed. Boom, boom, boom, boom, for as long as there is ammunition in the magazine.

"Full-automatic" means the weapon will fire and re-chamber a round and continue firing for as long as the trigger is depressed, until malfunction or ammunition is depleted. Boomboomboomboomboom.

"automatic" firearms are perfectly legal in the US and Canada and pretty much anywhere guns are legal. Most modern pistols are automatics, most modern rifles are automatics.

"Machinegun" is how the US federal government differentiates between semi- and full-automatic. If the weapon fires more than one round per trigger pull, they define the weapon as "machinegun," and require an BATF registration to own. There are a lot of rules and regulations involved, and you have to pay $200 for a "tax stamp," but they're LEGAL.

[Dead Man]

I'm not a hunter and don't own guns, so my terminology is incorrect.
However, I'm referring to a Bushmaster, which is a semi automatic rifle. I don't understand why this would be needed to take down a deer.

Yes. Why is this superior to an old style 30/30 single action rifle (with a scope) when hunting a deer?

A 30/30 isn't "needed" to take down a deer either. Should "need" factor in?

It's superior because it's a lot more accurate, has a flatter ballistic trajectory, significantly longer range, and allows for 5 rounds to be fired in rapid succession (if we're assuming you're not using a semiautomatic 30/30, which do exist). They're also extremely modular, so you can use the same receiver for hunting fern hollows, brush, clearcut, or prairie.

It's a more precise tool, allowing for cleaner kills. If you hip-shot a buck with a 30/30, he will run off and bleed to death before you can take a second shot. If you hip-shot a buck with a 62gr. Partition Tip, odds are better he won't be able to get away as quickly to begin with, but either way, you can immediately follow up with a second shot and put the animal down.

Hunters will debate about the ethic of using the .224" bullet (.223Rem or 5.56Nato), but these weapons are available in just about every caliber commonly in use, to include traditional hunting loads.

[Tony T]

Not being a hunter, I'll be the first to say that "I don't know what I'm talking about", but I guess I see the Bushmaster as a gun that even I could pick up with little or no experience , go out hunting and come home with a deer. I don't think I could do that with a 30/30 because if I was not accurate with the 1st shot, the deer would get away.

[Dead Man]

Not being a hunter, I'll be the first to say that "I don't know what I'm talking about", but I guess I see the Bushmaster as a gun that even I could pick up with little or no experience , go out hunting and come home with a deer. I don't think I could do that with a 30/30 because if I was not accurate with the 1st shot, the deer would get away.

No, not at all. You need exactly the same skill level with either weapon. You could learn to shoot the Bushmaster (which isn't a great brand, BTW- they're the Huffy of the semiautomatic sport rifle world) a bit faster (sooner) than the 30/30, but it would still require range time and some degree of instruction to do so. Every weapon has a ballistic pattern that has to be learned, and that's aside from basic marksmanship.

Having a semiautomatic gun doesn't make you a better killer any more than having a faster car makes you a better race car driver. The capability is expanded, but only for those capable of utilizing it.

[daker13]

...no one I know who hunts does so to prevent moose from being hit by cars, to protect native species, to protest the immorality of beef production, or any of the numerous other justifications I’ve heard. I think it is about the hunting (well, most just sit) and killing.

When I was growing up in the north country, a good sized deer would make a real difference to a family's grocery bill over the course of a winter... for some people, hunting really does make a difference in their ability to provide for their family.

I've found myself in the odd position of being an anti-deer vegetarian, since I'm very concerned with the impact that Lyme disease has had on our ability to be outdoors here in the northeast... While I think deer are cute, and would never shoot one myself, I recognize that there's some evidence that culling the deer population would do something about all the ticks (which actually haven't been bad this summer). I'm a pretty committed vegetarian (not vegan), but I do think Lyme disease is debilitating enough, and pervasive enough, to warrant some thinning of the herd.

By the way, on the professorrr's last point: my wife did a year-long pathology fellowship in upstate New York, and I remember that quite a lot of the autopsies were done, ironically, on hunters who died from heart attacks while walking in the woods during hunting season. So keep those pedals turning, hunters--cardio is very important!

[MadRocketSci]

was climbing lookout mtn this weekend and saw a dead deer on the side of the road near the bottom. Came down 35 minutes later and it was gone. Not something I would partake but hope whomever did used it well...

[93legendti]

IMO, I have no problem with hunters using the proper "tool" (i.e. a 30/30, or whatever single shot rifle). I respect hunters that use a bow, as that takes more skill than a rifle. Its the "hunters" that use automatic assault rifles to take down a deer that I don't understand.

Unless you have a problem with the color black, an m-4 is a perfectly suitable hunting weapon for game that require a .223/5.56 caliber.

My .22lr looks like an m-4, but is suitable for rabbits, squirrels, etc...the proper tool is the caliber of the bullet. The price was right and I like the color black.

No one is using a machine gun to hunt. The recoil lifts the barrel off target and the hunter would miss wildly. Soldiers don't even use them, unless they are using suppressing fire. Automatic fire is rarely accurate enough to hit a moving target from a long distance. It will cause the enemy to seek cover, alter its accuracy or cease firing. Soldiers I know fire 3 rounds per target, fired individually, so accuracy won't be affected. If more are needed, so be it.

[Tony T]

No one is using a machine gun to hunt.

I already corrected that statement, I was referring to a Bushmaster-type rifle

[Joachim]

Just to make this complete thread not OT...

[Dead Man]

Unless you have a problem with the color black, an m-4 is a perfectly suitable hunting weapon for game that require a .223/5.56 caliber.

My .22lr looks like an m-4, but is suitable for rabbits, squirrels, etc...the proper tool is the caliber of the bullet. The price was right and I like the color black.

No one is using a machine gun to hunt. The recoil lifts the barrel off target and the hunter would miss wildly. Soldiers don't even use them, unless they are using suppressing fire. Automatic fire is rarely accurate enough to hit a moving target from a long distance. It will cause the enemy to seek cover, alter its accuracy or cease firing. Soldiers I know use fire 3 rounds per target, fired individually, so accuracy won't be affected. If more are needed, so be it.

Yea, I don't know why the myth of full-auto somehow increasing the lethality of people in general won't die. Full-auto is great for an extremely narrow range of applications- suppressing fire from fixed positions (belt-fed), SMGs in the hands of HIGHLY trained individual in CQB situations, and pretty much nothing else. Shooting at a deer on full-auto would result in a lot of bullets smacking trees. If your first shot was accurate, you might hit the deer once, but nothing else would go anywhere near it.

[Dead Man]

Now... if you had a platoon of deer assaulting your position, you could employ full-auto to good effect... spray the whole group down, you MIGHT get one or two hits, but the advantage would be that they'd all hit the deck and advance would be slowed to a literal crawl.

THAT'S what full auto does.

[Louis]

As usual, you guys have to go with the NRA sponsored 100% max firepower solution.

Everyone knows that deer whistles are way more effective in a full-bore Cervidae assault - the sound stops them all in their tracks. Gunfire might take down a few, but mostly just causes panic and the majority of them will keep coming at you.

[Dead Man]

NRA can suck it. They've orchestrated compromises that have eroded 2nd Amendment rights, worst of all FOPA- which was completely ineffective, didn't protect anything, and banned the private transfer of new manufacture machineguns.

Your gun enthusiasm hard-core does NOT support the NRA.

[gdw]

"They've orchestrated compromises that have eroded 2nd Amendment rights, worst of all FOPA- which was completely ineffective, didn't protect anything, and banned the private transfer of new manufacture machineguns."

Good, civilians don't need machine guns.... new or old.

[93legendti]

Now... if you had a platoon of deer assaulting your position, you could employ full-auto to good effect... spray the whole group down, you MIGHT get one or two hits, but the advantage would be that they'd all hit the deck and advance would be slowed to a literal crawl.

THAT'S what full auto does.

Ok, that made me laugh.

I have fired a Negev, auto 5.56, accurate it isn't. Even that, or a .50 cal, no one fires rapid fire so the whole belt is discharged in one go...the barrel gets too hot.


The machines gunner is the favorite guy in the platoon. My friend cried when they made him machine gunner in his elite unit, because that guy usually develops knee problems and has to leave that unit. My friend didn't want to leave the unit...he made it thru his full 3 years...

[Dead Man]

"They've orchestrated compromises that have eroded 2nd Amendment rights, worst of all FOPA- which was completely ineffective, didn't protect anything, and banned the private transfer of new manufacture machineguns."

Good, civilians don't need machine guns.... new or old.

They don't need bikes either.

[bluesea]

An SBR would be all I need.

[Dead Man]

An SBR would be all I need.

Can't have those in Haweewee, can you?

[Bruce K]

My favorite "wish" rifle is a Springfield M1A1 in 7.62/.308 on iron sights

BK

[jmoore]

Not being a hunter, I'll be the first to say that "I don't know what I'm talking about", but I guess I see the Bushmaster as a gun that even I could pick up with little or no experience , go out hunting and come home with a deer. I don't think I could do that with a 30/30 because if I was not accurate with the 1st shot, the deer would get away.

The ability to put a bullet accurately on target at some distance down range is but a small piece of hunting. The weapon of choice is simply a tool and preference of the user.

Hunting involves much more than simply walking outside and shooting the first thing you see. Much more. What you don't see are the endless hours of preparations of the land to make it suitable for the animals to thrive and the hours and years of practice to make the hunter proficient and capable to make a decision when the opportunity presents itself. If it ever does. And most times it does not.

Getting hung up on caliber and gun choice is akin to arguing what is the correct gravel bike. The answer, as always is, it depends and whatever you are most comfortable with.

Sent from my XT1058 using Tapatalk

[professerr]

This is the exact "discussion" (which inevitably turned into a flame war) I had 20 years ago while working on Sun Sparc 2 workstations in the middle of the night on comp.sys.rec.WhoKnowsWhat. Nothing has changed. It'd almost be easier to talk someone out of their religion.

Like i mentioned before, it's all POV, unless you believe in an ultimate moral authority which defines the "truth." Historically speaking, it's been part of the culture in the US since the frontier days of self-reliance or die, and has retained its strength and passion by being passed down generationally when people are most receptive to suggestion (which I define as pre-pubescent youth).

How do you see yourself in the world/universe? An active participant of the natural order and food chain? Or a being with the ability and desire to extract him/herself from that chain, and to be merely an observer and protector of such? There is no right or wrong answer here IMHO...just how you personally see the worth of another creature's death and possible pain/suffering in contrast to the gain such death/suffering provides.

I have respect for vegetarians, as I consider them stronger people than myself. I also have respect for people who reduce their need for factory-farmed meat through sustainable and humane (quick-death) hunting. All other views on the subject are private and drive my own actions and decisions.

I’m not sure if you think I’m flaming anyone. That isn’t my intention, and I’m not calling for hunting to be prohibited or to otherwise impose my view on others’ choices in the matter. That said, the posts and pictures above about children, guns and killing did prompt me to express my view and my experiences. Plenty of people I know and respect in many aspects also are hunters.

As for hunting and guns being part of US culture, that is certainly true. The demographics of hunters suggests, however, that we don’t even need to get to the ethical arguments about hunting to see that its place in US culture will continue to decline. Gun ownership itself, well, that’s another story and another thread.

[parris]

Bruce K. My only "problem" with wish rifles, shotguns, pistols is that at least for me it's a very n+1 situation. There are actually 3 firearms that I kick myself for not buying when I had the chance. In ranking from low to high they were a pre64 transition era Super Grade model 70 in 30/06 that was owned by one of the Winchester custom shop engravers. A first year model 12 Black Diamond grade trap gun with English walnut that was fantastic from the back fence. And the biggest was a 1936 Superposed Lightning with 30 inch barrels that had great wood and felt like it was built for me. I still kick myself over that one when I'm on the clays course.

[Bruce K]

The interesting thing is that my bicycles would need to lose 1 before adding another.

I am at the point of not really wanting anything other than the Springfield. I am a target shooter with my focus on the Civilian Marksmanship Program with my Stag 5.56 (baseball group on iron sights at 100 yards seated or prone - still working on off hand standing ) and our club's indoor pistol league with a S&W 22-a.

The Springfield (I believe) would be more accurate at long distance than the Stag, but otherwise I am satisfied with what I own.

BK

[Charles M]

Can't have those in Haweewee, can you?You can nearly anywhere now with Sig's "arm brace". Just get an AR pistol and attach the brace.

The bigger issue is that .223 and 556 and .762 make for crappy rounds in short barrels. The better option is 300 blackout and I don't believe there is a pistol with that round by anyone yet.

[Dead Man]

You can nearly anywhere now with Sig's "arm brace". Just get an AR pistol and attach the brace.

The bigger issue is that .223 and 556 and .762 make for crappy rounds in short barrels. The better option is 300 blackout and I don't believe there is a pistol with that round by anyone yet.

Oh yea... forgot about the whole "pistol" "arm brace" thing. That happened after I'd kind of gotten out of tactical shooting a few years ago. I paid full tax value for my shorties...

I'll totally disagree that 5.56 is a poor load for SBR, though- it's all in your intended application. Anything under 250m and there's basically no effect on fragmentation, expansion for soft nose/PT loads, and with a 50/200 zero, your ballistic arc is still within like 2" rise or drop, so no holdover outside of point-blank range.

Add low recoil, high capacity, STANAG magazines, and ready (relatively) inexpensive availability, and it's a GREAT load in general.

I stalk deer with my Mk18 with 62 gr. PTs... all well under 250 (more like 7m or less). Perfectly adequate for pacific northwest blacktail.

[Dead Man]

Here's an upper from Palmetto for $7 benjis....

http://palmettostatearmory.com/index.php/cmmg-300-aac-blk-12-5-cm-mc-pistol-gas-system-lpgb-mid-fsb-30b8af7.html

[jmoore]

Oh yea... forgot about the whole "pistol" "arm brace" thing. That happened after I'd kind of gotten out of tactical shooting a few years ago. I paid full tax value for my shorties...

I'll totally disagree that 5.56 is a poor load for SBR, though- it's all in your intended application. Anything under 250m and there's basically no effect on fragmentation, expansion for soft nose/PT loads, and with a 50/200 zero, your ballistic arc is still within like 2" rise or drop, so no holdover outside of point-blank range.

Add low recoil, high capacity, STANAG magazines, and ready (relatively) inexpensive availability, and it's a GREAT load in general.

I stalk deer with my Mk18 with 62 gr. PTs... all well under 250 (more like 7m or less). Perfectly adequate for pacific northwest blacktail.

Now we are talking about some fun stuff!

I'm not am AR guy but a nice 5.56 might make me change mind. LaRue Tactical makes some nice stuff. And made in Texas so could go down and watch them build it.

OK, I need to quit talking or its.going to get expensive!

Sent from my XT1058 using Tapatalk