Posted on 01/20/2013 4:28:26 AM PST by Kaslin
My buddy, Green Beret badass Bryan Sikes, shot a massive whitetail buck last week during our South Texas Purple Heart Adventure. He whacked said muy grande with a LaRue Tactical OBR chambered for the glorious .308 Win. round. Oh and BTW, Sikes used a high capacity magazine during this hunt.
For those of you who aren’t hip to the LaRue, it is a weapon that progressive darlings say we should not have because we don’t “need” such a weapon for hunting.
Hunting, according to these wizards of odd, is what they think our founding fathers had in mind when they penned that pesky Second Amendment, and according to these control freaks we don’t need a tactical weapon with a high capacity magazine to hunt with.
First off, dipsticks, the Second Amendment has nada to do with hunting. The founding fathers weren’t worried about their right to put the bam to Bambi (although we should be because progressives hate hunting and would love nothing more than to bring that activity to a grinding halt). If you don’t believe me, just corner one of these little darlings and ask them what they think about hunting.
Secondly, who are they to tell us what we “need” or don’t need when it comes to anything? Typical of the Left, they think they know what’s best for we the people. If you want to talk about “needs,” Ms. Leftist, we don’t need iPhones, Porsches, crazy straws, American Idol, beer, leaf blowers, and I don’t need a gorgeous Italian wife. But that’s America, folks. Stay out of our business.
Regarding the need for high capacity magazines for hunting, please tell the ranchers in the west when they’re doing depredation work on predators and nuisance animals that they don’t need such weapons. You might be surprised.
Now, for the record, I do not have a black weapon. I’m a bolt action, lever action, double rifle, and traditional side-by-side shotgun freak. I like the classic lines of beautiful sporting guns.
However, the more I contemplate our current milieu I’m beginning to think that a semi-auto, like the LaRue Tactical chambered for the .308, has got to be the ultimate gun. Why? Well, it’s quite effective on game up to moose, and it has been proven in battle against tyrants—which is exactly what the Second Amendment is all about, namely, whacking overreaching, freedom-strangling little King George wannabes should they oppress.
I've been exclaiming this for weeks in debates with gun owners and gun grabbers alike.
I usually get dumbfounded looks in response. I had one reply, "What do you mean? I can because it's my right and the government can if they want to."
It was then I had the dumbfounded look.
Please, please, please, pretty please, liberal fascists - ban American Idol. I swear I won't resist. Please?
Yesterday I attended the gun rally at the state capital in Madison, Wisconsin. I was surprised that most of Madison’s drum pounding, bell ringing, shouting progressives gave it a pass - only two grey haired ladies with posters were way at the back. One sign said “Ban Assault Rifles” and the other said “Guns Are Not A Substitute for a Penis”. I walked over and politely introduced myself and asked them what an assault rifle was. One of the ladies said “Big, powerful guns that kill children”. Since her sign had a big picture of an AK47, I asked her what kind of rifle that was. She had no idea. I pointed out that the AK47 she chose to show was neither particularly large nor particularly powerful and that any rifle could kill children. I suggested to her that she might want to spend a few minutes online to learn a bit about the things she hates so much. That’s when the penis sign lady’s face got all twisted and she tells me “you’re just so stupid” and she stormed off. The assault rifle sign lady assured me that she knew everything she needed to know on the subject and wouldn’t bother to learn anything more.
“That’s when the penis sign lady’s face got all twisted..”
Heh, heh! I wonder if these two belong to the “Rsging Grannies” radical group.
Doug Giles writes some great stuff.
That’s “Raging Grannies”....
Memo to self: finish coffee before posting......
Looks like a great firearm. Unfortunately, by the time you attach a scope worthy of the gun, you’ve got the better part of $5K invested. Ouch.
Gun banners know protecting hunting was not the point of the 2nd. Their emphasis on hunting is an attempt to keep hunters from opposing their bans, ie, we want try to grab your guns if you let us take those scary guns.
Of course, today’s hunting rifle is tomorrow’s ‘sniper’ rifle and “wao needs a rifle designed to kill children at extreme distances”. Or, the shotgun that was “designed to spray a lethal swarm of lead pellets across a schoolyard”.
Forget about hunting. The 2nd Amendment addressed the right of the people to have and use guns (if necessary) to protect the 1st Amendment. Notice the numerical order of the amendments.
Our founding fathers knew that the government would fear the people if tyranny came into play and the people knew without guns (arms) the people would reverse the role and fear the government. After all, America was founded upon the rights of freedom that were not in England.
When anyone mentions “guns” and “hunting” in the same breath when relating to gun control, I just about go wild.
The people need to stop even talking about having guns solely for hunting and speak upon the real reason for having the freedom to own firearms....period.
Notice how the Ministry of Propaganda keeps hammering us on the had with the phrase “GUN VIOLENCE!” Well, HUNTING is now the reason that we only need 1 cartridge guns in the minds of liberals. As a matter of fact we have politicians telling us how many bullets maximum it takes to kill any animal.
I’m not worried about how many bullets it takes to kill an animal, I’m worried about how many bullets it takes to kill armed FEMA troops that are coming to kill or capture me.
The last three white tail deer I put in the freezer were shot with an AR-15 in 6.8 SPC. One shot one kill.
Speaking of one shot, one kill, to any liberals (er, now “progressives”) who might read this: your fear of the private right to keep and bear arms is rooted deep in your psyche. You really know that the Second is not about deer hunting, it is really about hunting tyrants and you know that it will be necessary to be a tyrant in order to force the little people to support and pay for your secular Utopia.
So, you would like to forbid the little people from having any means to oppose and thwart the tyranny you yearn for. That is why you want to control the internet. That is why liberals self-selected to control the news media. That is why you rage like Gollum over your Precious when conservative blogs tell truth that makes a mockery of your “news”. That is why you want to ban guns.
So, you libs are trying to whittle away at private ownership of firearms. From 30 to 10 to 7 to “five or six” to 3 to 1 to NONE. But do you know that the best sniper rifle is the single shot bolt action rifle? And the sniper doesn’t need a magazine at all, because after he takes his one good shot, he knows to scoot as fast as possible before anyone can figure out from what direction that shot came, that is if they heard it at all.
And there are millions of little people who are very good at shooting deer. So, in the course of time, you libs will wake up to the deadly sniper practice taking place each year while hunting deer, and that sport and way of life will come under your withering Gollum-like rage.
I have them go hunting with VP Dick Cheney.
Great article, but, and I say this with much respect to your feelings, let’s just leave beer out of this “don’t need” mentality. No offense intended.
I own a real live official assault weapon. It’s a Mod 98 Mauser with a wooden sporter stock and a scout scope. It’s the only one of my rifles that actually meets the definition of an assault weapon. It was actually used in battle as the officially designated rifle issued by a world power.
I’m convinced if I were to put it alongside a semi-automatic Bushmaster AR and ask a leftist to point to the assault rifle not one right guess would be heard.
As others have pointed out here this is the only point of discussion and there is NO discussion.
And there are millions of little people who are very good at shooting deer. So, in the course of time, you libs will wake up to the deadly sniper practice taking place each year while hunting deer, and that sport and way of life will come under your withering Gollum-like rage.
As a long time hunter I always follow 1 shot rule. This is out of respect for the animal. When I choose to take its life I want it to be sudden and final.
Wounding an animal to subject it to a slow agonizing death is not the goal.
The truth is, Progressives don’t care about weapons in the hands of criminals. In fact, they rather like them since they allow Progressives to keep trying to ban all firearms.
Progressives don’t like weapons in the hands of law abiding citizens. Why? Because those weapons are likely to be used on Progressives if they get too obnoxious.
If somebody wants to take your firearms away it is probably because they are about to do something to you that you will object to - violently. Like confiscate the contents of your 401K for instance.
Your health care, your guns, your 401k, your right to post on the internet anonymously, your right to drive your car without GPS tracking mileage (only for purposes of taxation?), the right to buy and sell using cash, your right to educate your children as you please, your right to buy/sell gold/silver without informing government (background check for gold coins), your right to decline to approve of same sex marriage, your right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.
At some point, we must obey the fundamental principles expressed in the Declaration of Independence:
“...But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security.—Such has been the patient sufferance of these Colonies; and such is now the necessity which constrains them to alter their former Systems of Government...”
Happily the closer we get to this point, the more easily it will be for people to see that the present government is more dangerous to liberty and prosperity than what a Constitutional Convention might produce and that would pass ratification of the surviving States.
“One lady said “”Big bad guns kill children”” “
By that logic we should be banning abortion doctors and clinics as they have surely killed more children in the last 30 yrs than guns.
We hardly use the 556's anymore, the 6.8 stag is always with me, 110 TTSX, 29 grains H322 and kids and I have taken all kinds of caribou, a bunch of bear, and a few wolves with that sweet little gun. Two years back, family members got 3 moose with our AR-10 in 338 fed and can't wait to break in the 308 Scar. We have 4X32 & 3.5X35 red dot/ghost ring Acogs on all three and happier with those Acogs than any expensive Leupold I have ever purchased.
Ya, there are a whole bunch of AR owners that hunt with their ARs and won't part with them under any conditions or threats.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.