Personally I don't believe a petty thief deserves the death penalty but that's
And unlike you, the thought of killing another human being doesn't put a smile
on my face, it makes me ill.
I'm surprised you aren't over in Iraq.
You would have a great time.
On Tue, 08 Jun 2004 23:52:34 GMT, email@example.com
If someone breaks into my house, they are doing so with the understanding
that I am likely to be able to defend myself. As such, it is reasonable
and prudent to think that they are likewise able and willing to do me
and my family harm. As such, I will stop them from being a threat
before they can hurt me or my family.
How little you understand us. Killing someone, even a worthless shit of
an intruder, is the last thing I'd want to do. But don't you DARE take
away my means to defend myself from that same worthless intruder.
Boy, are you sick! Or just a troll.
First, I've never shot anyone and hope I never have to. But if
some doped up @#!$% breaks into my house while I'm home, I'd
much rather I kill him than vice versa.
Would you rather I called 911 so the police could haul me and my
family off to the morgue when they finally got there?
war in Iraq. But I do admit wondering why all those so-and-so's
dancing around to celebrate another dead US soldier don't at
least get a fire hose turned on them.
On Wed, 9 Jun 2004 15:13:53 -0700, Larry Blanchard
I sometimes think of my 1911 as 911.
In fact, I thought that's where they got the number from.
<watson - who can't shoot a decent group with the 1911, on a windless
day, with a full minute between rounds, with it sitting on a sandbag -
but finds it to be heavy enough to make a damned fine club.>
Thomas J.Watson - Cabinetmaker (ret.)
tjwatson1ATcomcastDOTnet (real email)
Large caliber handguns have been used for hunting for over a century, in
addition to military or self-defence purposes. Originally designed because
low-powered weapons of yore needed a great big ball to stop anything. If you
want to single out a handgun, try small caliber. No sporting use, small size
not required for target practice, and makes for easy concealment. .22LR and .25
ACP guns probably make up a large percentage, if not majority, of guns used in
Assault rifles were designed to shoot people, fair enough. But this is just one
of my pet peeves. The definition (real, ie military) is that of a shortish
rifle, firing a medium-power round, capable of full automatic fire, and
featuring a straight stock to reduce climb at full auto.
First one, OK, nothing special or deadly about a short rifle (and claims of
concealment are BS).
Second one, also nothing too interesting, the most common short deer caliber
(30-30) is balistically close to that of the AK-47, while M-16 and AK-74 rounds
are actually based on varmint (yes, it's a real classification) hunting rounds.
The most popular hunting round overall is the 30-06 (once the standard military
round) and considerably more powerful than something an assault rifle fires.
Third one, full auto. FA weapons have been illegal to produce or transfer in
the USA without multi-month background checks, waiting periods, and hefty
taxes. Very few are in public circulation. So that can be removed from this
Finally, the straight stock. Not too useful on a US-legal rifle, although it
makes one more comfortable to shoot.
Anyway, once you take away the FA and physical appearance there isn't a lot of
difference between an SSR-99 and your basic (and more powerful) Wal-Mart
hunting rifle. The features used in federal or state laws to identify
AWs--flash hider (FYI: used to prevent flash blinding the user, not for covert
actions), pistol grip stock, bayonet lug, and removable magazine--don't aid the
killing of folks very well. The extra-special lethality is highly overrated, as
is the talk of no legitimate use.
Something like a US-type AK rifle is excellent for hunting or target practice,
as it's reliable, easy to clean, cheap to service, and makes for less
discomfort in firing.
If you aren't shooting people then you are using the gun for a
Cites? I've never heard that before in my life. You can use quite a small
weapon for killing someone at short range. As best I know, the .45 caliber was
the best compromise between power and size. Especially in the 1850s, when
anything small had no range or power, and larger balls couldn't be used in
revolvers of managable size. The "modern" .45 (.45 ACP from the turn of the
century) was a similar choice. Nowdays the military and police no longer use
them because a smaller, faster 9mm or .40 S&W works better for them.
There are many countries with large numbers of gun owners, many with much
looser laws than the US. In Swizterland almost anthing goes for private
ownership other than full-auto (and you're required to have a FA weapon if
you're of military age, as most would be part-time militia). I believe Finland
is a country where you can legally own virtually anything (machine guns,
silencers, etc.) short of modern cannons and explosive weapons.
Anyway, that's as deep as I'm going to get on this one. Folks who get into
arguments like this online should really realize that no one, on either side,
will ever come across as normal or sane to the other. Ditto goes for a lack of
debate "winners" or convincing anyone else of whatever view you might hold. One
of those many topics inlcuding abortion, party politics, religion, Ford vs.
Chevy, PC vs. Mac, etc, etc that will never, ever, be solved in the court of
Nothing's wrong with hashing it out if you're so inclined, but everyone
involved should know you're not getting anywhere. I gave up on debating deep
social, moral, or mental views online.
I generally remove myself from discussions that are pushed into the
just-plain-goofy range, but this really strike me as curious. I've never
anything to a tree, and I wouldn't eat pets. I've eaten game animals, and I've
killed vermin that were clawing their way into my nice house. I've never hunted
purely for "sport" or pleasure, and never intentionally maimed anything. I do
it mainly because something other than prepackaged (and frequently
inhumanely-killed) meat is welcome after a while, and because I can.
Using hackneyed redneck or nutcase stereotypes, or insults is very unbecoming,
and does not add an aura of intelligence to those using them. Same goes for
pansy, fraidy-cat, or communist barbs frequently thrown by people on the other
side of the argument.
Speak for yourself. I have yet to personally meet any gun owner who enjoys
carnage or has any pathological or bizarre interest in firearms. Folks
assigning particular attributes to the mind of a nonviolent gun owner is
personal opinion, and the point at which discussions like this no longer have
On 09 Jun 2004 03:10:50 GMT, firstname.lastname@example.org (GTO69RA4) calmly
This guy isn't discussing, he's trolling. Pass.
He won't have a valid one if he even comes back. EOF
"i" before "e", except after "c", what a weird society.
http://diversify.com Dynamic Website Applications
Now, back to treated lumber for bird houses...
Consensus seemed to be it's a bad thing, except for sparrow houses.
But what about bats? (I know... bats aren't birds, they're bugs) I've
seen a couple of sites that say use pine for bat houses, and I've seen
other sites and posts that claim to have turned bats from hickory or
ash so I guess you shouldn't use hickory or ash for a bat house, right?
I've always heard bats were good to have around. Why would anyone want
to turn them away and are they allergic to hickory and ash or do they
just not like it? If you made a cross from hickory or ash would it kill
a vampire twice, once as a vampire and once as a bat? What if you made
it from hickory AND ash? That would be cool.
Also, I thought bats were flying critters and crickets couldn't fly. So
whats this nonsense I read about cricket bats? How do cricket bats even
*catch* the crickets? All the crickets I've seen are under rocks and
boards and stuff. No way can a bat fly under that.
And how damned big are the bats that can catch and eat baseballs? Those
would scare the hell out of me.
Man, I hope I never see a a baseball bat. Or a softball bat. Or a
That's a scary thought. Good thing I've got two ash trees in the back
yard. Even if one of them has a pine bat house on it.
I mean a bat house, made from pine. I have no idea what a pine bat even
looks like. Hope it's smaller than a volleyball bat.
If you know what I mean...
Hear ya on that one Dave. An the term arbitarirly defined as "assault "
rifle is interesting. Has to do with the styling like having a flsh
surpressor or "military" style stock. oesn't have anything to do with the
letahlity of it. Most shooting deaths in the US are by .22s. Which most
people won't call an assault rifle. Then again the M16 is a .222 Yep it's
a high powered .22.
Me I only own four guns. An old Walther 38 my Dad picked up in Germany
during WWII, a ,25 derringer five shot Webly aand two rifles I use to hunt
with a British Enfield .303 (Infantry issue) and an 1897 Marlin lever action
.38-55. Only things I'ver shot were game animals and the occassional hog
HomeOwnersHub.com is a website for homeowners and building and maintenance pros. It is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here.
All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.