Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Hunter's Campfire Meet: PADDLER

Seeing you live in Minnesoduh, you should be accustomed to his MO.



Travis

Professor Sportsman shotguns wabbits. Funny schit.





Travis

GAYdar is pegged at a solid 10.0

Certainly explains that hat.




Dave

i've killed more jackrabbits with a baseball bat than a gun, now that's sporting.

Hitting jacks on the run isn't easy. I once killed one running at 257 paced off yards with my Kimber 22LR. His unlucky day. I killed 7 one day with the Ruger Mk II, at distances between 90 and 125 yards. They were sitting, though.

I'm going to write Chaffetz today with my gun control proposal. We'll see what kind of response I'll get.

So, Shrapnel, I see your inviting yourself down was just bravado. Too bad, I think 'fire members should meet each other.

I sent the following to Jason. Punctuation got lost in the translation:

Dear Representaive Chaffetz,

I wrote the following after Newtown:

On the Prevention of Mass Murders

The recent tragedy in Newtown, like most tragedies, was not the result of one event, but rather a series of failures. It was the result of previously undiagnosed mental illness in an individual who had access to advanced weaponry capable of sustained high rates of fire. Both mental illness and the weapons capable of such destruction were required to produce this tragic loss of life.
Perhaps because this shooting resulted in the death of twenty young children and six educators, it seems the nation is more ready now than ever before to entertain measures to prevent similar occurrences in the future. One could argue that this new willingness to act is the result of the cumulative effects of so many similar events. It matters not which of these is causative, or even if other factors are responsible, the fact remains that we must act.
Various ideas have been advanced; banning the weapons involved, banning high capacity magazines, posting armed security officers in our schools, training and arming our teachers, and a more comprehensive approach to mental illness. These ideas all have their proponents, and varying degrees of merit, depending on one’s experience and point of view.
As a lifelong hunter and avid outdoorsman, it occurs to me that we may already have in place mechanisms to help prevent future disasters. We can, merely by reclassifying certain weapons, reduce access by mentally ill people to the weapons most often used in these shootings. The three most important characteristics of the weapons used in Newtown and other mass shootings are having a semiautomatic action, the capability to use detachable magazines, and the fact that they fire centerfire ammunition. Semiautomatic weapons allow rapid rates of fire, that is, they fire a bullet, eject the spent case, and load a fresh round with each pull of the trigger. Detachable magazines allow for rapid reloading of multiple rounds of ammunition in one motion. The capability of using centerfire ammunition increases the lethality of each round of ammunition, as rimfire ammunition is generally less powerful.
We already have restrictions on the ownership of certain weapons, commonly called NFA firearms. These include fully automatic firearms, referred to by some as machine guns, short barreled rifles and shotguns, and destructive devices. Fully automatic weapons are generally used by the military; the civilian versions are manufactured as semiautomatic. It is interesting to note that studies done by the military have shown that fully automatic weapons are wasteful of ammunition, as the weapon will continue firing so long as the trigger is depressed. Emptying a magazine completely in a matter of seconds actually limits the effectiveness of these weapons in many combat situations. The solution to this problem was developing the ability to switch these arms into “Select Fire” or “Burst” mode. In this mode, the weapon will fire several rounds with each pull of the trigger, but won’t empty the entire clip.
There is little practical difference in situations such as Newtown between weapons that fire three rounds versus those that fire only one each time the trigger is pulled. Both use centerfire ammunition, both require no more than pulling the trigger to fire a round and load another, and both accept detachable magazines of various capacities. Therefore, the most elegant solution to the gun control issue would be to reclassify these weapons, rifle, pistol or shotgun, as NFA firearms. They would be subject to increased restrictions for buying, owning and transferring. Just as with current Class 3 weapons, people could still buy them. Nothing would be banned, not magazines or the weapons themselves. Individuals would be required to register them with the ATF, undergo strict background checks, get a signature from local law enforcement, notify the ATF if they were to be taken across state lines, and pay a tax of $200 per item. This program could easily be applied to weapons currently in circulation.
This solution would not impact guns typically used for sporting purposes, such as hunting and target shooting. Shotguns and rifles used in these ways have typically have fixed magazines. There are a few exceptions, but small design changes could be made that would exempt the guns in question. It would not impair the ability to defend one’s home, as the weapon most recommended for this task by experts is a shotgun. It also would not affect rimfire weapons, such as 22 caliber rifles or handguns.
Reclassification of these guns should be the most acceptable approach to all sides in the debate over gun control. It would not threaten the Second Amendment, it merely compensates for the technologic advances since the days of the musket. It actually corrects a glaring oversight in our current weapon classification system. Manufacturers could still build these weapons, the public could still buy them, and it would do as well as any other proposal to keep them out of the wrong hands. This is not an immediate or comprehensive solution to the problem of mass murders, but it seems a logical component in a multifaceted approach to prevent another Newtown.


Since that writing, several similar shootings have occurred. I will admit that I have not supported or voted for you, and your recent conduct during the Planned Parenthood hearing was rude, condescending, and in the end, embarrassing for you. However, since you are in fact my representative, I would appreciate your thoughtful response to my ideas.

Sincerely,

Jon Middleton MD

I just checked the FBI crime stats for weapon types used in murders. Unfortunately for your plan, in California, 29 were killed with rifles and 48 were killed with shotguns. In New York, 4 people were killed with rifles and 19 with shotguns. Michigan 16 with rifles and 23 with shotguns. Minnesota 0 with rifles, 4 with shotguns. Mississippi 3 with rifles, 8 with shotguns, Pennsylvania 20 with rifles and 22 with shotguns. Rhode Island 1 with a rifle, 14 with shotguns.

Good thing you are willing to be "responsible" and do the "right" thing. Don't worry, the government gives $200 each for long gun turned in.


https://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/u...urder_by_state_types_of_weapons_2013.xls

Don't flatter yourself, I don't think you would enjoy my company any more than I would yours. I don't know how you made it through medical school with your selective reading skills. Of course it is bravado, unless you would really like me to be bitch slap you...

I sent the following to Jason. Punctuation got lost in the translation:

Dear Representaive Chaffetz,

I wrote the following after Newtown:

On the Prevention of Mass Murders

The recent tragedy in Newtown, like most tragedies, was not the result of one event, but rather a series of failures. It was the result of previously undiagnosed mental illness in an individual who had access to advanced weaponry capable of sustained high rates of fire. Both mental illness and the weapons capable of such destruction were required to produce this tragic loss of life.

Very well done sir. Sadly, I am afraid the efficacy of your ideas will be lost on most here, and given the recent sophomoric antics of Congressman Chaffetz, likely him as well.

Who said I used a shotgun?

What do you think of the details of my proposal, Eric? Any suggestions for improvements? I tried to analyze the relevant factors and act in a surgical way. It should help prevent these shootings without unduly impacting responsible gun owners.

At least Chaffetz is in receipt of my thoughts so it's now part of the public record. He's not a statesman, he's just another grandstanding politician. I'll probably get some form letter response by a staffer which will include a request for financial support. But, if he doesn't respond in a meaningful way, the blood from the next mass shooting will be on his hands just as it is on the NRA's.

Too bad, Shrap, looks like you're just another keyboard hero. You blew your chance at credibility. Come on down, I was serious.