UL with a gun?

>>>Bring a bazooka or a cannon if you like and it calms your nerves.<<<

Do that make a titanium version? ;)

That's a good idea… Ti Potato cannon. I would buy it!

Assault weapons are no more deadly than a bolt action rifles. please tell me how a handle and a clip make them more deadly? 95 percent of all civilian owned assault weapons are semi automatic. They are not "machine pistols". That would imply full auto and that takes a special license and a lot of money to purchase one because they are not cheap.
Assualt weapons are easily vilified even though Assault weapons are used in about one-fifth of one percent (.20%) of all violent crimes.
Barrett rifles, assault weapons and magazines are lawfully owned by people like me who like to target shoot and dont like to spend more time reloading than shooting.
The fact remains that criticism of assualt rifles has no reason other than people want to ban guns and they are a easy target to pick as they try to chip away at my right to bear arms. And after that it will be bolt action rifles and pretty soon its like England and we cant own any firearms.

Would the low use of assault weapons during violent crimes have anything to do with their being banned? Defining assault weapons as fully automatic. I don't believe any semi-automatic weapon would be considered an assault weapon.

I am a hunter and NRA guy. I also grew up around gang stuff and never saw a fully automatic weapon.

I guess that stat quoted seems to be proportional to the lack of access to them.

.

You would think that only full auto would be considered assault weapons. But the assualt weapons ban covered all semiautomatic weapons that had a detachable magazine and a handle. The attempts to ban guns defy logic.

Hi Dave

To some extent, I would hope you guys would self-police and put things in the right channels.
:-)

Cheers

You’re right Thomas: it defies logic, it defies reason, it defies… fashion.

Sputnik World Enterprises redefines your right to bare arms, with AFFORDABLE FIREPOWER!!!!

I did not slog through the ten pages of this thread in order to see what tangent everybody probably shifted to, but i will say this in response to the OP.

Nobody should censor comments, just as nobody should censor what products people choose to review. If it has to do with backpacking, and the rifle did, then anybody can review it.

Apologies if this has been said already.

i understand both sides of the conversation. they both make sense to me. if i were to step back 100 years, there is no way i would travel into the wilds without a rifle. today, my food is pre-killed. i don't need a weapon for survival.

the reviews of fish poles and talk of fishing techniques is telling when compared to a single review of a firearm. granted, a bullet is lasting where a hook can be removed and the fish released. sport fishing and fishing for food have both been covered in the forums here.

if the site reviews the latest Glock handgun or Remington target rifle, then i would have to question the direction of the site. right now, i am fine with the review given the stated purpose of the site.

i did consider my feelings on the matter for a few days and seeing the review has held me off from becoming a life member. i have no problem with those that hunt, just be safe and ensure the safety of those who might be in the wild with you.

politics regarding guns has no place on the forum. my voice is heard with my vote and wallet.