I as curious about why some folks insist that a ban on military style weapons would really impede their lifestyle................so I asked. It turns out that these weapons make very poor hunting tools, and the owners of such also had the appropriate hunting weapons in their arsenals. The consensus appears to be, that these military type weapons are for "self defense", so I asked "against what or whom?". Here's what they said;

Defense against home invaders. When I pointed out that a rifle bullet could pass through a wall easily and kill a member of their own family or neighbor, they appeared not to have considered that. Oh well.

Defend against the Government - in case they come after their weapons. When I asked how they thought they'd fare against armed military personnel, they appeared not to have given that much thought. Yeah, big deal.

Defend against armed invasion when the shit hits the fan. Yep, "Preppers", or near enough, except the folks around here don't have the secret underground shelters and huge stocks of food, etc. They just don't like the idea of a neighbor stealing their stuff after a major catastrophe. When I pointed that that all their neighbors were similarly armed, and it would be a toss up about who would survive such an exchange, they appeared not to have thought that far. Huh.

Defend against everybody else who is similarly armed. I think we've pretty much covered that already.

Since their reasoning was marginal at best, the only logical conclusion is that they want these types of weapons because they're cool............and some folks don't want them to have them. I suspect my youngest son ( who has more than one assault weapon. How many can you use at once? ), feels that owning them makes his balls bigger. I did disabuse him of that notion a little bit. We had a timed test, where he tried to take me out with his bushmaster, while I defended with my Katana............I marked him 3 times before he could jack a round and take the safety off.

I as curious about why some folks insist that a ban on military style weapons would really impede their lifestyle................so I asked. It turns out that these weapons make very poor hunting tools, and the owners of such also had the appropriate hunting weapons in their arsenals. The consensus appears to be, that these military type weapons are for "self defense", so I asked "against what or whom?". Here's what they said;

Defense against home invaders. When I pointed out that a rifle bullet could pass through a wall easily and kill a member of their own family or neighbor, they appeared not to have considered that. Oh well.

Defend against the Government - in case they come after their weapons. When I asked how they thought they'd fare against armed military personnel, they appeared not to have given that much thought. Yeah, big deal.

Defend against armed invasion when the shit hits the fan. Yep, "Preppers", or near enough, except the folks around here don't have the secret underground shelters and huge stocks of food, etc. They just don't like the idea of a neighbor stealing their stuff after a major catastrophe. When I pointed that that all their neighbors were similarly armed, and it would be a toss up about who would survive such an exchange, they appeared not to have thought that far. Huh.

Defend against everybody else who is similarly armed. I think we've pretty much covered that already.

Since their reasoning was marginal at best, the only logical conclusion is that they want these types of weapons because they're cool............and some folks don't want them to have them. I suspect my youngest son ( who has more than one assault weapon. How many can you use at once? ), feels that owning them makes his balls bigger. I did disabuse him of that notion a little bit. We had a timed test, where he tried to take me out with his bushmaster, while I defended with my Katana............I marked him 3 times before he could jack a round and take the safety off.

I as curious about why some folks insist that a ban on military style weapons would really impede their lifestyle................so I asked. It turns out that these weapons make very poor hunting tools, and the owners of such also had the appropriate hunting weapons in their arsenals. The consensus appears to be, that these military type weapons are for "self defense", so I asked "against what or whom?". Here's what they said;

Defense against home invaders. When I pointed out that a rifle bullet could pass through a wall easily and kill a member of their own family or neighbor, they appeared not to have considered that. Oh well.

Defend against the Government - in case they come after their weapons. When I asked how they thought they'd fare against armed military personnel, they appeared not to have given that much thought. Yeah, big deal.

Defend against armed invasion when the shit hits the fan. Yep, "Preppers", or near enough, except the folks around here don't have the secret underground shelters and huge stocks of food, etc. They just don't like the idea of a neighbor stealing their stuff after a major catastrophe. When I pointed that that all their neighbors were similarly armed, and it would be a toss up about who would survive such an exchange, they appeared not to have thought that far. Huh.

Defend against everybody else who is similarly armed. I think we've pretty much covered that already.

Since their reasoning was marginal at best, the only logical conclusion is that they want these types of weapons because they're cool............and some folks don't want them to have them. I suspect my youngest son ( who has more than one assault weapon. How many can you use at once? ), feels that owning them makes his balls bigger. I did disabuse him of that notion a little bit. We had a timed test, where he tried to take me out with his bushmaster, while I defended with my Katana............I marked him 3 times before he could jack a round and take the safety off.

I as curious about why some folks insist that a ban on military style weapons would really impede their lifestyle................so I asked. It turns out that these weapons make very poor hunting tools, and the owners of such also had the appropriate hunting weapons in their arsenals. The consensus appears to be, that these military type weapons are for "self defense", so I asked "against what or whom?". Here's what they said;

Defense against home invaders. When I pointed out that a rifle bullet could pass through a wall easily and kill a member of their own family or neighbor, they appeared not to have considered that. Oh well.

Defend against the Government - in case they come after their weapons. When I asked how they thought they'd fare against armed military personnel, they appeared not to have given that much thought. Yeah, big deal.

Defend against armed invasion when the shit hits the fan. Yep, "Preppers", or near enough, except the folks around here don't have the secret underground shelters and huge stocks of food, etc. They just don't like the idea of a neighbor stealing their stuff after a major catastrophe. When I pointed that that all their neighbors were similarly armed, and it would be a toss up about who would survive such an exchange, they appeared not to have thought that far. Huh.

Defend against everybody else who is similarly armed. I think we've pretty much covered that already.

Since their reasoning was marginal at best, the only logical conclusion is that they want these types of weapons because they're cool............and some folks don't want them to have them. I suspect my youngest son ( who has more than one assault weapon. How many can you use at once? ), feels that owning them makes his balls bigger. I did disabuse him of that notion a little bit. We had a timed test, where he tried to take me out with his bushmaster, while I defended with my Katana............I marked him 3 times before he could jack a round and take the safety off.

I as curious about why some folks insist that a ban on military style weapons would really impede their lifestyle................so I asked. It turns out that these weapons make very poor hunting tools, and the owners of such also had the appropriate hunting weapons in their arsenals. The consensus appears to be, that these military type weapons are for "self defense", so I asked "against what or whom?". Here's what they said;

Defense against home invaders. When I pointed out that a rifle bullet could pass through a wall easily and kill a member of their own family or neighbor, they appeared not to have considered that. Oh well.

Defend against the Government - in case they come after their weapons. When I asked how they thought they'd fare against armed military personnel, they appeared not to have given that much thought. Yeah, big deal.

Defend against armed invasion when the shit hits the fan. Yep, "Preppers", or near enough, except the folks around here don't have the secret underground shelters and huge stocks of food, etc. They just don't like the idea of a neighbor stealing their stuff after a major catastrophe. When I pointed that that all their neighbors were similarly armed, and it would be a toss up about who would survive such an exchange, they appeared not to have thought that far. Huh.

Defend against everybody else who is similarly armed. I think we've pretty much covered that already.

Since their reasoning was marginal at best, the only logical conclusion is that they want these types of weapons because they're cool............and some folks don't want them to have them. I suspect my youngest son ( who has more than one assault weapon. How many can you use at once? ), feels that owning them makes his balls bigger. I did disabuse him of that notion a little bit. We had a timed test, where he tried to take me out with his bushmaster, while I defended with my Katana............I marked him 3 times before he could jack a round and take the safety off.

I as curious about why some folks insist that a ban on military style weapons would really impede their lifestyle................so I asked. It turns out that these weapons make very poor hunting tools, and the owners of such also had the appropriate hunting weapons in their arsenals. The consensus appears to be, that these military type weapons are for "self defense", so I asked "against what or whom?". Here's what they said;
AR's are ideal for coyote hunting for one. The guys here hunt daily, and rifle of choice is the ar15. It would be futile to use a bolt action on something running at 300+ yards. By the way, they get results, near 100 critters this winter.
Defense against home invaders. When I pointed out that a rifle bullet could pass through a wall easily and kill a member of their own family or neighbor, they appeared not to have considered that. Oh well.

Defend against the Government - in case they come after their weapons. When I asked how they thought they'd fare against armed military personnel, they appeared not to have given that much thought. Yeah, big deal.

Defend against armed invasion when the shit hits the fan. Yep, "Preppers", or near enough, except the folks around here don't have the secret underground shelters and huge stocks of food, etc. They just don't like the idea of a neighbor stealing their stuff after a major catastrophe. When I pointed that that all their neighbors were similarly armed, and it would be a toss up about who would survive such an exchange, they appeared not to have thought that far. Huh.

Defend against everybody else who is similarly armed. I think we've pretty much covered that already.

Since their reasoning was marginal at best, the only logical conclusion is that they want these types of weapons because they're cool............and some folks don't want them to have them. I suspect my youngest son ( who has more than one assault weapon. How many can you use at once? ), feels that owning them makes his balls bigger. I did disabuse him of that notion a little bit. We had a timed test, where he tried to take me out with his bushmaster, while I defended with my Katana............I marked him 3 times before he could jack a round and take the safety off.

I as curious about why some folks insist that a ban on military style weapons would really impede their lifestyle................so I asked. It turns out that these weapons make very poor hunting tools, and the owners of such also had the appropriate hunting weapons in their arsenals. The consensus appears to be, that these military type weapons are for "self defense", so I asked "against what or whom?". Here's what they said;

Defense against home invaders. When I pointed out that a rifle bullet could pass through a wall easily and kill a member of their own family or neighbor, they appeared not to have considered that. Oh well.

Defend against the Government - in case they come after their weapons. When I asked how they thought they'd fare against armed military personnel, they appeared not to have given that much thought. Yeah, big deal.

Defend against armed invasion when the shit hits the fan. Yep, "Preppers", or near enough, except the folks around here don't have the secret underground shelters and huge stocks of food, etc. They just don't like the idea of a neighbor stealing their stuff after a major catastrophe. When I pointed that that all their neighbors were similarly armed, and it would be a toss up about who would survive such an exchange, they appeared not to have thought that far. Huh.

Defend against everybody else who is similarly armed. I think we've pretty much covered that already.

Since their reasoning was marginal at best, the only logical conclusion is that they want these types of weapons because they're cool............and some folks don't want them to have them. I suspect my youngest son ( who has more than one assault weapon. How many can you use at once? ), feels that owning them makes his balls bigger. I did disabuse him of that notion a little bit. We had a timed test, where he tried to take me out with his bushmaster, while I defended with my Katana............I marked him 3 times before he could jack a round and take the safety off.

I as curious about why some folks insist that a ban on military style weapons would really impede their lifestyle................so I asked. It turns out that these weapons make very poor hunting tools, and the owners of such also had the appropriate hunting weapons in their arsenals. The consensus appears to be, that these military type weapons are for "self defense", so I asked "against what or whom?". Here's what they said;

Defense against home invaders. When I pointed out that a rifle bullet could pass through a wall easily and kill a member of their own family or neighbor, they appeared not to have considered that. Oh well.

Defend against the Government - in case they come after their weapons. When I asked how they thought they'd fare against armed military personnel, they appeared not to have given that much thought. Yeah, big deal.

Defend against armed invasion when the shit hits the fan. Yep, "Preppers", or near enough, except the folks around here don't have the secret underground shelters and huge stocks of food, etc. They just don't like the idea of a neighbor stealing their stuff after a major catastrophe. When I pointed that that all their neighbors were similarly armed, and it would be a toss up about who would survive such an exchange, they appeared not to have thought that far. Huh.

Defend against everybody else who is similarly armed. I think we've pretty much covered that already.

Since their reasoning was marginal at best, the only logical conclusion is that they want these types of weapons because they're cool............and some folks don't want them to have them. I suspect my youngest son ( who has more than one assault weapon. How many can you use at once? ), feels that owning them makes his balls bigger. I did disabuse him of that notion a little bit. We had a timed test, where he tried to take me out with his bushmaster, while I defended with my Katana............I marked him 3 times before he could jack a round and take the safety off.