Guns used for lawful self defense Pt. 4

[Seth]

So much wrong in that, Seth, I don't know where to begin.

That's because you know I'm right and you're grasping for some sort of rational rebuttal and can't come up with one.

[Seth]

[
Yeah, that's where the 'paranoid' part comes in.

You're not paranoid if they really are out to get you, which they are.

Guns should be registered, every gun.

Yes, tyrants and despots agree with you, it makes it ever so much easier to purge such undesirables after you've gone to their houses to gather up the current "banned weapon of the week." Just ask Hitler's victims how that worked out for them.

Certain guns should be banned.

Why? Because you're a 'fraidy-pants? Do you wet yourself at the mere thought that somebody might have one of those "evil" guns you want to ban? That's your problem, not mine.

No where in that did I say I want the government to take the legally obtained and legally registered weapons from responsible gun owners.

Ah, but the point is that people like you always do so eventually, which makes your protestations and denials empty rhetoric. Once people like you succeed in registering all firearms (er, only those owned by law-abiding citizens who are stupid enough to actually do so, and never, ever the criminals) the inevitable next step is gun bans and confiscations. That's how it always happens. The only thing that protects our 2nd Amendment rights is our right to complete anonymity as to who owns guns and what kind or how many they own. This ambiguity prevents the government from successfully stripping the populace of its arms, which is exactly what you, and your ilk, ACTUALLY want. You're just dissembling because you know you can't have it all at once, so you and your ilk will be satisfied to take it one slow step at a time with an eye on the eventual prize of complete gun bans and total confiscation.

Well, let me tell you little lady, that's not going to happen, no matter what laws Congress passes to try to facilitate it, because tens of millions of gun owners will simply refuse to comply with such laws, and there aren't enough federal marshals in the US to arrest and try all of us, not that they would be able to do so in the first place.

[orpheus]

So much wrong in that, Seth, I don't know where to begin.

That's because you know I'm right and you're grasping for some sort of rational rebuttal and can't come up with one.

If it makes you feel better to think that, Seth, fine with me. Rebuttals don't work with you, since you're not open to reason or evidence. Therefore I'm not going to waste my time.

[Gallstones]

When a person says certain guns should be banned it does mean to take them away.
There is no rational reason to ban any particular gun.

[Gallstones]

I don't understand what difference it makes what arm one kills something with.
Handguns are not less "sporting" than a rifle (if that's the concern).
Handguns suitable for hunting large game are lighter and less cumbersome to tote than a rifle. One has to get closer, that should make them more "sporting".

To carry that out farther, there's no difference between shooting a paper target and a panda.

Paper targets aren't very nourishing and I don't think anyone is eating pandas.

Mere detail.

But I wonder, what do you think of the "Big Ten" hunters?

Do you mean really large game? What is on the list of ten.
Trophy hunting?

[Gawdzilla Sama]

Trophy hunting?

Yeah, trophy hunters. What's your take on them?

[Gallstones]

Trophy hunting?

Yeah, trophy hunters. What's your take on them?

I'm headed out to Carmels for a tall Cold Smoke and a double Wild Turkey.
I'll tell you when I get back.

[Kristie]

[
Yeah, that's where the 'paranoid' part comes in.

You're not paranoid if they really are out to get you, which they are.

Guns should be registered, every gun.

Yes, tyrants and despots agree with you, it makes it ever so much easier to purge such undesirables after you've gone to their houses to gather up the current "banned weapon of the week." Just ask Hitler's victims how that worked out for them.

Certain guns should be banned.

Why? Because you're a 'fraidy-pants? Do you wet yourself at the mere thought that somebody might have one of those "evil" guns you want to ban? That's your problem, not mine.

No where in that did I say I want the government to take the legally obtained and legally registered weapons from responsible gun owners.

Ah, but the point is that people like you always do so eventually, which makes your protestations and denials empty rhetoric. Once people like you succeed in registering all firearms (er, only those owned by law-abiding citizens who are stupid enough to actually do so, and never, ever the criminals) the inevitable next step is gun bans and confiscations. That's how it always happens. The only thing that protects our 2nd Amendment rights is our right to complete anonymity as to who owns guns and what kind or how many they own. This ambiguity prevents the government from successfully stripping the populace of its arms, which is exactly what you, and your ilk, ACTUALLY want. You're just dissembling because you know you can't have it all at once, so you and your ilk will be satisfied to take it one slow step at a time with an eye on the eventual prize of complete gun bans and total confiscation.

Well, let me tell you little lady, that's not going to happen, no matter what laws Congress passes to try to facilitate it, because tens of millions of gun owners will simply refuse to comply with such laws, and there aren't enough federal marshals in the US to arrest and try all of us, not that they would be able to do so in the first place.

Oh my god, I swear you're getting more paranoid and crazy every day....

[Seth]

[
Yeah, that's where the 'paranoid' part comes in.

You're not paranoid if they really are out to get you, which they are.

Guns should be registered, every gun.

Yes, tyrants and despots agree with you, it makes it ever so much easier to purge such undesirables after you've gone to their houses to gather up the current "banned weapon of the week." Just ask Hitler's victims how that worked out for them.

Certain guns should be banned.

Why? Because you're a 'fraidy-pants? Do you wet yourself at the mere thought that somebody might have one of those "evil" guns you want to ban? That's your problem, not mine.

No where in that did I say I want the government to take the legally obtained and legally registered weapons from responsible gun owners.

Ah, but the point is that people like you always do so eventually, which makes your protestations and denials empty rhetoric. Once people like you succeed in registering all firearms (er, only those owned by law-abiding citizens who are stupid enough to actually do so, and never, ever the criminals) the inevitable next step is gun bans and confiscations. That's how it always happens. The only thing that protects our 2nd Amendment rights is our right to complete anonymity as to who owns guns and what kind or how many they own. This ambiguity prevents the government from successfully stripping the populace of its arms, which is exactly what you, and your ilk, ACTUALLY want. You're just dissembling because you know you can't have it all at once, so you and your ilk will be satisfied to take it one slow step at a time with an eye on the eventual prize of complete gun bans and total confiscation.

Well, let me tell you little lady, that's not going to happen, no matter what laws Congress passes to try to facilitate it, because tens of millions of gun owners will simply refuse to comply with such laws, and there aren't enough federal marshals in the US to arrest and try all of us, not that they would be able to do so in the first place.

Oh my god, I swear you're getting more paranoid and crazy every day....

Not really, it's just that the anti-gun forces are on the offensive right now so it's time to take action to protect our rights.

[Seth]

So much wrong in that, Seth, I don't know where to begin.

That's because you know I'm right and you're grasping for some sort of rational rebuttal and can't come up with one.

If it makes you feel better to think that, Seth, fine with me. Rebuttals don't work with you, since you're not open to reason or evidence. Therefore I'm not going to waste my time.

No, it's because you have no rational rebuttal and you're just trying to salve your wounded ego.

[Seth]

Trophy hunting?

Yeah, trophy hunters. What's your take on them?

Brings millions of dollars and much needed food to impoverished regions of Africa. All trophy hunting is very closely controlled to ensure that the species are properly preserved. When it comes to elephants, lions and leopards (among others) there are few permits available and they are carefully controlled and cost a LOT of money. For lions, for example, in most places you can only get a permit to take a lion that's been identified as a stock or man killer, and you have to hunt with a state game agent at your side. Same for nuisance elephants.

Big game hunting is a huge commercial money maker in Africa and most hunting takes place on fenced private preserves for game species that are in no way endangered. The meat is always donated to the local villages, which deeply appreciate both the food and the employment that big game hunting brings.

It's not "Out of Africa" shoot anything you want anymore. Sustainable big game conservation is the watchword these days.

So I have no problem at all with them, and I'd like to go do some hunting myself one of these days.

[Gallstones]

Well fuck, there goes my response.

[Gallstones]

[
Yeah, that's where the 'paranoid' part comes in.

You're not paranoid if they really are out to get you, which they are.

Guns should be registered, every gun.

Yes, tyrants and despots agree with you, it makes it ever so much easier to purge such undesirables after you've gone to their houses to gather up the current "banned weapon of the week." Just ask Hitler's victims how that worked out for them.

Certain guns should be banned.

Why? Because you're a 'fraidy-pants? Do you wet yourself at the mere thought that somebody might have one of those "evil" guns you want to ban? That's your problem, not mine.

No where in that did I say I want the government to take the legally obtained and legally registered weapons from responsible gun owners.

Ah, but the point is that people like you always do so eventually, which makes your protestations and denials empty rhetoric. Once people like you succeed in registering all firearms (er, only those owned by law-abiding citizens who are stupid enough to actually do so, and never, ever the criminals) the inevitable next step is gun bans and confiscations. That's how it always happens. The only thing that protects our 2nd Amendment rights is our right to complete anonymity as to who owns guns and what kind or how many they own. This ambiguity prevents the government from successfully stripping the populace of its arms, which is exactly what you, and your ilk, ACTUALLY want. You're just dissembling because you know you can't have it all at once, so you and your ilk will be satisfied to take it one slow step at a time with an eye on the eventual prize of complete gun bans and total confiscation.

Well, let me tell you little lady, that's not going to happen, no matter what laws Congress passes to try to facilitate it, because tens of millions of gun owners will simply refuse to comply with such laws, and there aren't enough federal marshals in the US to arrest and try all of us, not that they would be able to do so in the first place.

Oh my god, I swear you're getting more paranoid and crazy every day....

Here's the thing, we don't trust you anti gunners--at all--you lie and you are irrational and you are ignorant, and you react and decide based on emotion and you are tresspassers with a complete incapcity for appreciating the consequences of what you would expect.

Now, I want to know, from a person who knows squat all about firearms, which guns should be banned and why?
I want rational, knowledegable, suppoiortable reasons.

[Gallstones]

Trophy hunting?

Yeah, trophy hunters. What's your take on them?

You are not a stupid man. I don't know how much biology you know though so I will use myself as my own authority.

Trophies:
Are males in their reproductive prime, at their peak. Those impressive racks of antlers are very calorie and nutrient expensive. A male in his reproductive prime is on the cusp of decline, a decline that comes up much faster than the rise to get there. An active dominant breeding bull/buck will expend more calories in one season sparring and breeding than all the cows/does he breeds will expend in getstating and lactating. That means he enters the time of deprivation--winter--depleted. Within a year or so of his peak he will be the one succuming to predation, his rack is less impressive and he is the easy mark to predators if he doesn't simply just drop dead. Predators don't provide a kind or gentle death. His DNA is already well represented in the region, his use in sowing his DNA no longer matters. He starts losing challenges to sons and other younger bulls/bucks in condition to take his place.

Trophy hunting provides income to outfitters, guides, suppliers, hotels, restaurants, agencies that support environment and wildlife via hunt tags and licenses, state coffers, taxidermists, game processors--and food banks. Just to name what I can think of in the moment.

This is true whether in North America, South America, or Africa.

Africa, really big game.
The tags are few and very expensive. The entire activity of going to Africa to hunt is expensive. Few people have that kind of money.
There is a need to kill even elephants and lions. Where I live these hunts are referred to as damage hunts. If an elephant is causing damage--say to a well--the locals will have them killed indescriminately. But, by making tags available to remove those elephants identified as being the culprits, then the people are assuaged. Fewer elephants are killed. A lion past his prime, in decline and on his own is an increased danger to prey as easy as humans.

In some of these countries the hunter takes nothing home but memories. Everything harvestable from the animal is distributed to the local people. These hunts feed and also employ a lot of people as guides, camp workers, camp cooks, game processors, meat distributors, etc.

There are ranchers who own thousands of acres of land and who are proactive in creating and maintaining environment that supports game animals. They do this to have trophy animals to hunt. The animals benefit and the land owner benefits by income from hunters. The animals have to be managed on priuvate land as they are on public lands.
It is prudent to remove the eldest animals. This includes cows/does.
The hunter may take nothing but the head and shoulders for a wall mount, but the meat is made available to someone. How is that less ethical than killing, butchering and eating a young spike buck?

[Gallstones]

Paranoid gun nuts are people who are afraid that other people have guns.