Re: Moose/Sentol

[Jim <alarminex@xxxxxxx>]

On Oct 1, 12:51=A0pm, "petem" <petem...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> Bow hunter, black powder hunter and long fire arm hunter.. Any way I can =
use
> to go for a steak I will use.. ;-))
>
> That part is totally true, but they had to draw a line, you cant argue th=
at
> this type of weapon can be hide easily and could be a treat to many poepl=
e..
>
> > Where is the logic in that ? Their reasoning is the barrel is too
>
> Like I said, that drew a line, where would they have it done to be ok for
> you?? 17 inch?? 18?? 22??
>
> for you 16 is too short, then it will be 19 for another.. cant please eve=
ry
> one and the others..
>
> Shooting spor is not the sport that have the best support from the whole
> community, when people think of it, the see a bunch of red neck that kill
> nice animals..
> Even in my family some think of me as a heartless man for hunting moose a=
nd
> deer..But they will kindly eat the large moose steak I am cooking fort th=
em
> on my BBQ =A0;-))
>
> Listen, It wont matter.. Its been too late 30 years ago.. It was too late
> when UK passed law on fire arms in 1920...-

I don't think Robert is so much concerned about the size of the
restricted firearm as much as he is about the fact that there is any
restriction at all. I think you already know that.

The problem here, there and anywhere that the gun banners want to
restrict the public from owning firearms is that it is written in
history time and time again that an unarmed populace is subject to
enslavement by the very government that passes these laws for the
publics supposed protection. The government that passes the gun
banning laws "knows" that it would never enslave the people but they
don't ever think about the fact that they are preparing the way for
some government in the futuer will do it. All of this is always in
complete contradiction of the actual statistics that show that ( in
the US anyway) that those states with the least restrictive firearms
laws have the lowest crime rates. I know that in other countries with
lesser stabilized governments that this does not occur, and, of
course, the gun banners will use those statistics to justify more
restrictions in our countries. Take a look at the long history in the
United Nations to get a good view of where all of this misinformation
comes from and what financially supported world wide organization are
behind the gun banning in countries that have more stabilized
governments. Fortunately here in the US, part of our bill of rights
says that we have the right to be armed. In other countries with out
this protection, gun banning is much easier. The UN gun banners know
this and thus we have England and Austrailia as good examples of what
can happen when you take firearms from the population. You should also
look at how bad the crimes rates are in England and Austrailia since
the citizens no longer have the same access to firearms but the
criminals do. I posted a link to an article I just read, in one of my
earlier posts about the misconceptions that people have about where
the worst mass killings have occurred. Mostly in countries with the
most restricive firearm laws.