Fine. You wanna get snarky and ruin the discourse? Be my guest. I'll
go qualify superlatives elsewhere.


On 04/16/09 13:55, Roger Metzger wrote:
>
>
> You might want to be careful about qualifying superlatives (a bit
> rediculous), but I'd really like to take your advice. Some people might
> think there can't be such a thing as a gun-toting liberal. But consider my
> dilemma: most of my friends are vegetarian pacifists who consider
> themselves to be quite "conservative".
> I, too, consider it unlikely hat anyone will embark on a major crime
> spree armed only with a 1377. But if someone steals mine (unlikely because
> it keep it in the aforementioned steel gun cabinet with a triple-latch
> lock), pumps it up in his car before entering you place of business and
> points it at you, I'd suggest you try to avoid provoking him into
> squeezing
> the trigger. A .177-caliber pellet traveling at between 500 and 600 feet
> per second would do a LOT of damage, particularly if the shot is
> well-placed.
> There is nothing wrong with encouraging/requiring people to think of a
> 1377 as a lethal weapon. Even my DAisy Grizzly should be handled as if it
> were a leathal weapon. But I still haven't tried to find out whether the
> Michigan legislature has "defined" my wife's butcher knife as a firearm.
> That would make about as much sense!
> R.M.
>
> On Thu, Apr 16, 2009 at 2:42 PM, <Brandon.Chase@...
> <mailto:Brandon.Chase%40sun.com>> wrote:
>
> >
> >
> > Having to register a single shot air pistol seems a bit ridiculous. The
> > whole point of gun registration would seem to be a crime deterrent,
> > although the efficacy of such a policy could (and should) certainly be
> > debated. That being said, I'd be hard pressed to imagine someone using
> > an air gun that you have to load (and pump!) for every shot in a major
> > violent crime. It would certainly make for some entertaining
> > headlines, however :)
> >
> > As I've always said, I think the primary factor when it comes to this
> > kind of thing is ignorance. As "gun toting liberals", I think we
> > sometimes forget how profoundly ignorant our non-gun owning liberal
> > friends can be. I recently introduced a very liberal friend of mine to
> > shooting, and I can honestly say he knew absolutely nothing outside of
> > "guns are dangerous", so I sat down with him, filled him in on firearm
> > safety, showed him a few guns and how they work, then we went to the
> > range. Three hours later he was buying his first firearm, a Ruger 10/22.
> >
> > For as long as I've known him (six years), this guy has been vehemently
> > anti-gun, but a little education and hands on experience changed that in
> > one afternoon. I've done this with several friends and acquaintances
> > over the years, and while not all of them got into shooting or ended up
> > buying a gun, they've all had to rethink their position on guns and gun
> > ownership. I know its slow, but I still think its the best way to fight
> > irrational and ineffective gun legislation.
> >
> > Brandon
> >
> >
> > On 04/16/09 11:41, Roger Metzger wrote:
> > >
> > >
> > > But to say that any airgun IS a firearm is as absurd as to claim
> to not
> > > know what "is" is.
> > > Do any of you have any suggestions about how to deal with (rectify)
> > > this absurdity?
> > > R.M.
> > >
> > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> > >
> > >
> >
> > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> >
> >
> >
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
>


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]