For those of you that don't know about Jim Zumbo's career killing move this weekend, lets just say it was amazing to see. Do a web search and you will see what I'm talking about. But, right on the heel's of Zumbo's bullshit comes this from the Brady camp:

Even Remington's top gun writer agrees on Assault Weapons

With important writers such as this on our side, it is clear that we have a cultural imperative to remove dangerous terrorist rifles from our streets, and our woods.

Jim Zumbo is a writer for the prestigious Outdoor Life magazine and represents the views of America's true sportsmen. He is also sponsored by Remington.

but this is the other part

Monday, February 19, 2007

The tragic proliferation of Sniper Rifles

I would like to take a moment to comment on the proliferation of Sniper Rifles.
Sniper Rifles are typically equipped with a high-powered scope, and every single one of them can blow through the body armor cops wear. They can even penetrate multiple police cars. Does the Second Amendment protect cop-killer Sniper Rifles? The NRA certainly thinks so, along with the powerful gun lobby that wants your children and your law enforcement officers to be at risk from these weapons of mass destruction. Some of these Sniper Rifles can even penetrate ballistic or armored glass, lightly armored vehicles, and armored limousines. Senator Ted Kennedy attempted to solve this with an important bill that would have banned armor piercing ammunition and protected lawful firearm commerce:

"Another rifle caliber, the 30.30 caliber, was responsible for penetrating three officers' armor and killing them in 1993, 1996, and 2002. This ammunition is also capable of puncturing light-armored vehicles, ballistic or armored glass, armored limousines, even a 600-pound safe with 600 pounds of safe armor plating.....

..It is outrageous and unconscionable that such ammunition continues to be sold in the United States of America.."

Should our elected officials live under the threat of reprisal on their lives from disgruntled constituents? The Gun Lobby seems to think so. We disagree.

Sniper Rifles can be equipped with precision optics above even what the Military uses, allowing a sniper to deliver rounds within millimeters of accuracy - enabling them to engage targets at distances of well over one hundred meters. Is there a pressing need to be able to kill with accuracy at that distance? It is too far to justify as self defense. It is too far for hunting. It is only useful for those who wish to murder from afar.

Large caliber Sniper Rifles such as the .50 Browning Machine Gun can derail freight cars, shoot down aircraft and helicopters, damage vital ground equipment such as power substations, fuel tanks, and air traffic control, and cause complete chaos. For more information on why large caliber machine-gun rounds must be banned, visit http://www.50caliberterror.com. A shipment of large caliber machine-gun round sniper rifles made by Steyr turned up in Iran, and are being used on our own soldiers, as the .50 bullets easily defeat their body armor, their up-armored humvees, and even APCs.

Many forward thinking, progressive politicians such as Ted Kennedy, Chuck Schumer, Barbara Boxer, Nancy Pelosi, Hillary Clinton, and Barack Obama have voted against Center-Fire Rifle Ammunition of types for Sniper Rifles, but due to the pressure and massive financial resources of the gun industry, the necessary steps to protect our homes and lives have not been attained.

Sniper Rifles have been used by murderers and spree killers for years, with notable incidents such as the Beltway Snipers, the Clocktower Sniper, and more.

ANY rifle configured and equipped as a sniper rifle has no sporting purpose especially as a hunting rifle. They are too big and heavy to take to the field. Designed for distance shooting, they are useless for the ranges at which game animals are normally shot, and when used on sporting sized game at range they often just wound the animal, inhumanely forcing it to die slowly while the would-be hunter tracks it to finish it off. Most Sniper Rifles fire atypically large cartridges and ultra high velocity ammunition that can travel much greater distances that standard ammunition. The danger imposed from missed shots and ricochetes from these specialty rounds is unreasonable.

Most of these rifles carry multiple rounds, with either an automatic mechanism, or a quick toggle action to rapidly move another bullet into the breech, ready to fire into another victim. In most states, they are nearly unrestricted. Anyone over the age of 18 can buy one. If they can't pass a background check, they skirt the NCIS system by going to a gunshow, or finding a private sale in the newspaper. A murderer camped at a distance from a public gathering could quickly turn it into a massacre dwarfing anything we have seen before in the United States, if they had a Sniper Rifle. If they adopted hit and run tactics, entire portions of our country could be shut down.

Sniper Rifles shoot a high powered bullet that is almost always fatal. They are designed for one thing- delivering powerful overkill with deadly precision. You don't need the kind of power and accuracy that can kill a man at five hundred yards for hunting rabbits or defending your house.

We should also give commendations to France because many years ago they designated any firearm capable of shooting military ammunition as a military arm, illegal to posess without a special permit and unlawful to use for hunting. The 223, 308, 7mm mauser, 30-06, and 6.5x55 have no place in the hunting fields of France. Firearms shooting these calibers are military weapons only designed for killing PEOPLE and should be kept out of the hands of the general population. Because they have no hunting purpose, there is no reason for civilians to own them.

Every state in the USA has hunting equipment rules that limit the caliber of firearm used to take game. They also limit the types of rifles, length, magazine capacity, etc. States should amend these hunting regulations to restrict the use of "sniper" rifles, specialty "sniper" cartridges, and "sniper" ammunition. Limits on weight, barrel length, bipods and tripods, thumbhole stocks and pistol grips, night vision type scopes, scopes of excessive magnification, super magnum and high velocity ammunition, and military slings should be imposed. They have no place in the hunting fields of America and hunting usage should not be used as an argument for civilians to own such firearms and weapons. There are more than ample hunting rifles, cartridges, and rounds of ammunition to choose from without them.

Let us hope that in a safer, saner America, we will succeed in our efforts to restrict the deadly spread of long distance murder rifles.

She isn't calling for "sniper rifles." She is calling for our hunting rifles.

ANY rifle configured and equipped as a sniper rifle has no sporting purpose especially as a hunting rifle. They are too big and heavy to take to the field. Designed for distance shooting, they are useless for the ranges at which game animals are normally shot, and when used on sporting sized game at range they often just wound the animal, inhumanely forcing it to die slowly while the would-be hunter tracks it to finish it off. Most Sniper Rifles fire atypically large cartridges and ultra high velocity ammunition that can travel much greater distances that standard ammunition. The danger imposed from missed shots and ricochetes from these specialty rounds is unreasonable.

someone should have told this dillhole about reality. I especially like how he classifies sniper rifles....when we currently use bolt-action weapons like the M40A1, which is based on the Remington 700 and shoots a .308 bullet.....this jackass is running around talking about how our sniper rifles are full-automatic.

Well the Democrats are back in power. They're going to try their shit again.

Well the Democrats are back in power. They're going to try their shit again.
Thats why I'm planning on stocking up on mags and such so when the prices skyrocket I can make some money.

Not to mention try and buy up as many "sniper rifles" via private sale that I can.

Maybe I should finish my AR build first though since its one of those evil 'assault rifles' :peace:

I'm stocking up on as much ammo as I can.

I could probably understand regulating .50, no one in their right mind takes that hunting.

But the 30-06? I know pig hunters who use nothing but that to insure a quick kill.

Why should any firearm be regulated?

The second amendment is not meant to protect your right to hunt. It protects your right not to be hauled off to a death camp or be overrun by a foreign or domestic government.

Why should any firearm be regulated?

The second amendment is not meant to protect your right to hunt. It protects your right not to be hauled off to a death camp or be overrun by a foreign or domestic government.

I'm not saying it should be, nothing should be regulated in my mind. The government exsists to keep people from killing each other, and prevent stealing, as far as I'm concerned.

However, I also look at things from the other perspective. If you're trying to rationalize regulating anything it should be the things that have no practical application other than killing other people.

As far as I can tell nothing kills a home invader better than a 12 gauge full of buckshot, which is also capable of bringing home a tasty meal the other 99% of the time I'm not killing home invaders. So, since gun regulations are going to happen regardless, I figure focus on protecting the useful first, then focus on protecting the others. Its pragmatism at its finest.

If you're trying to rationalize regulating anything it should be the things that have no practical application other than killing other people.


But you don't get it.

What more practical use is there for a firearm other than killing someone? Don't be ashamed of owning firearms intended for killing people. That's how they're trying to brain wash us.

There may come a time when you have to leave your house. That shotgun doesn't work very well in open spaces.

Like I said, I don't agree, BUT looking at it through the brainwashed lens, thats the logic I see applied.

For open spaces "Blackie", my buddies .308 SAS carbine is the bomb.

I'm glad you don't agree with it. But don't go along with it. The military gets more advanced weapons every day. While gun critics try to move us back every day.

After a while it will be the equivalent of taking a rock to a laser gunfight.

Many forward thinking, progressive politicians such as Ted Kennedy, Chuck Schumer, Barbara Boxer, Nancy Pelosi, Hillary Clinton, and Barack Obama have voted against Center-Fire Rifle Ammunition of types for Sniper Rifles,
Woh did I read that right?? Is there a printed list of calibers they want to ban? Whats going to keep the age old reloaders from reloading spent casings?? If they spent half the time they do trying to ban our shit they could feed some kids in africa or somthing....

But you don't get it.

What more practical use is there for a firearm other than killing someone? Don't be ashamed of owning firearms intended for killing people. That's how they're trying to brain wash us.

There may come a time when you have to leave your house. That shotgun doesn't work very well in open spaces.


I don't on a gun, and never will (yay canada!), but this guy at least knows what your constitution is for. The 2nd amendment is to protect YOU from the GOVERNMENT. is a pea shooter going to deal with a tank? probably not.

I could probably understand regulating .50, no one in their right mind takes that hunting.
thats how it starts. Today you understand the regulations on a .50. Tomorrow you understand the regs on a .408 CheTac. The next day on a .338RUM, on and on until all you are left with nothing but the bb guns.

if I lived in the states I'd probably have some form of powerful rifle, just because.

yeah. Stock up like this fine American did. good game.

http://www.cnn.com/2007/US/03/02/ammo.found.ap/index.html

If you need a sniper rifle for protection, you fucked up somewhere. Therefore it is for sport. Lets call it what it is.

Outlawing the weapon wont save cops lives either. That's like shutting down the freeway in both directions so the cop can give a speeder a ticket in safety.

If you need a sniper rifle for protection, you fucked up somewhere.
who said we needed it for protection? Why should it need to be for protection only? Why shouldn't sporting purposes be considered on the same level as protection levels?

And here I thought the right to bear arms had something to do with being able to defend yourself against your government.

I like the Swiss approach :P


Right now, I only own one gun.


It's got an inductive pickup. I aim it at the crank on people's cars when I'm doing a tuneup.

It's got an inductive pickup. I aim it at the crank on people's cars when I'm doing a tuneup.

hehe I just got it ;)

who said we needed it for protection? Why should it need to be for protection only? Why shouldn't sporting purposes be considered on the same level as protection levels?

I was thinking about aiming at feds, coming towards your property, when i wrote that. I think owning a sniper rifle is a good thing. I don't buy lawmakers banning any firearm, from law abiding citizens, a good solution.

"When guns are outlawed only outlaws will have guns."

I can think of at least 40 people off the top of my head that enjoy shooting there larger caliber rifles while hunting out west. 750yards+ is all they shoot and they make a trip out that way every year to do so. I wish I could join them it would be quite fun.

Wait wait wait what??

We should also give commendations to France because many years ago they designated any firearm capable of shooting military ammunition as a military arm, illegal to posess without a special permit and unlawful to use for hunting. The 223, 308, 7mm mauser, 30-06, and 6.5x55 have no place in the hunting fields of France. Firearms shooting these calibers are military weapons only designed for killing PEOPLE and should be kept out of the hands of the general population. Because they have no hunting purpose, there is no reason for civilians to own them.

Lemme read that again. Wasnt the 30-06 originally made for killing larger game in the midwest or before that.

We should also give commendations to France because many years ago they designated any firearm capable of shooting military ammunition as a military arm, illegal to posess without a special permit and unlawful to use for hunting. The 223, 308, 7mm mauser, 30-06, and 6.5x55 have no place in the hunting fields of France. Firearms shooting these calibers are military weapons only designed for killing PEOPLE and should be kept out of the hands of the general population. Because they have no hunting purpose, there is no reason for civilians to own them.



Just makes it easy for another Nazi invasion to roll over those pussy sons of bitches.

Yeah but in France, they have calibers that are balistically the same as the 'military' calibers, juust with small differences in case length or bullet weight or whatnot so that it doesnt fall into the 'military caliber' category. Trust me, us gun owners are clever. We know legal loopholes to these bullshit laws. And since there are soooo many intertwining bullshit laws, there are plenty of loopholes to take advantage of.

Now what you should really worry aobut would be a new gun ban bill some dumbshit NY senator proposed.

And i quote;

"THE MOST SWEEPING GUN BAN EVER INTRODUCED IN CONGRESS;
McCarthy Bill Bans Millions More Guns Than The Clinton Gun Ban

On Feb. 14, 2007, Representative Carolyn McCarthy (D-N.Y.) introduced H.R. 1022, a bill with the stated purpose, "to reauthorize the assault weapons ban, and for other purposes."

McCarthy's verbiage warrants explanation. Presumably, what she means by "assault weapons ban" is the Clinton Gun Ban of 1994. Congress allowed the ban to expire in 2004 for multiple reasons, including the fact that federal, state and local law enforcement agency studies showed that guns affected by the ban had been used in only a small percentage of crime, before and after the ban was imposed.

With the nation's murder rate 43% lower than in 1991, and the re-legalized guns still used in only a small percentage of crime, reauthorizing the Clinton Gun Ban would be objectionable enough. But McCarthy's "other purposes" would make matters even worse. H.R. 1022 would ban every gun banned by the Clinton ban, plus millions more guns, including:

. Every gun made to comply with the Clinton ban. (The Clinton ban dictated the kinds of grips, stocks and attachments new guns could have. Manufacturers modified new guns to the Clinton requirements. H.R. 1022 would ban the modified guns too.)

. Guns exempted by the Clinton ban. (Ruger Mini-14s and -30s and Ranch Rifles; .30 cal. carbines; and fixed-magazine, semi-automatic, center-fire rifles that hold more than 10 rounds.)

. All semi-automatic shotguns. (E.g., Remington, Winchester, Beretta and Benelli, used for hunting, sport shooting, and self-defense. H.R. 1022 would ban them because they have "any characteristic that can function as a grip," and would also ban their main component, called the "receiver.")

. All detachable-magazine semi-automatic rifles-including, for example, the ubiquitous Ruger 10/22 .22 rimfire-because they have "any characteristic that can function as a grip."

. Target shooting rifles. (E.g., the three centerfire rifles most popular for marksmanship competitions: the Colt AR-15, the Springfield M1A and the M1 "Garand.")

. Any semi-automatic shotgun or rifle an Attorney General one day claims isn't "sporting," even though the constitutions of the U.S. and 44 states, and the laws of all 50 states, recognize the right to use guns for defense.

. 65 named guns (the Clinton law banned 19 by name); semi-auto fixed-magazine pistols of over 10 rounds capacity; and frames, receivers and parts used to repair or refurbish guns.

H.R. 1022 would also ban the importation of magazines exempted by the Clinton ban, ban the sale of a legally-owned "assault weapon" with a magazine of over 10 rounds capacity, and begin backdoor registration of guns, by requiring private sales of banned guns, frames, receivers and parts to be conducted through licensed dealers. Finally, whereas the Clinton Gun Ban was imposed for a 10-year trial period, H.R. 1022 would be a permanent ban.

Please be sure to contact your U.S. Representative and urge him or her to oppose
H.R. 1022!

You can call your U.S. Representative at (202) 225-3121."

http://www.discountgunmart.com/headed.htm

That's pretty fucked up. If anyone came into my house and tried to fuck with my family, friends, pets; they would have 6 .223 rounds in their fucking skull. :-D

or nine .30 caliber lead balls in their chest.

why use a gun like that where overpenetration is an issue? I would much rather have a 12 gauge shotgun with some steel bird shot, short barrel, and 8 round tube. Don't want to give em lead poisoning. The sound of a pump shotgun loading has been shown to deter more criminals then the slide of a 1911 being actuated.

Not to say I don't have my glock right beside my shotgun. Would rather shoot 9mm hollow points (overpenetration again) then 45ACP. Can even get 9mm frangibles now.

Overpenetration can be a good thing. What if there is another bad guy behind the perp?

How about this...

Remember the shooting in the 90s where the father and son team robbed the bank. They had full body armor, and Ak47s....

The only way they killed them was by going to a CIVILIAN GUN STORE and buying large caliber weapons. Had they not been there or had those guns been baned, they probably would have killed ALOT more people.

Overpenetration can be a good thing. What if there is another bad guy behind the perp?

Indiana Jones? :P

you know it

if I lived in the states I'd probably have some form of powerful rifle, just because.

..and you should, its right and duty. For the very purpose of protecting yourself from the government should they get to grab happy... and hey, if they come wearing body armor so be it...you'll be prepared.