On 2/14/2022 8:50 PM, John B. wrote:
> On Mon, 14 Feb 2022 11:42:35 -0500, Frank Krygowski
> <frkrygow@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
>
>> On 2/13/2022 7:33 PM, John B. wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 2/13/2022 12:52 PM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
>>>>> You're giving the advantages applicable to a combat weapon.
>>>>> What's the advantage of making combat weapons available to every
>>>>> fan of shoot-em-up video games? Is it that they can have more fun
>>>>> "pretending" while they shoot at silhouette targets?
>>>>>
>>>>> Does that advantage really outweigh the proven risk of multiple mass
>>>>> shootings, of risk to law enforcement officers, of risk to random bystanders?
>>>>>
>>>>> Why do so many other countries disagree? How do Canadians even manage?
>>>>>
>>
>>> I think that the real point is that the U.S. Constitution - the basic
>>> law of the land - assures the citizenry the right to own and bare
>>> arms. I'm sure that some would wish that law didn't exist but it does.
>>> And, I might add, it has been tested by the Supreme Court and, so far,
>>> it remains in place.
>>
>> You're oversimplifying. "The right to bare [sic] arms" was established
>> back around 1790 or so, in very different times. For roughly 200 years,
>> case after case in the Supreme Court acknowledged that the preceding
>> phrase regarding "A well-regulated militia" was important context
>> informing that phrase; and that in any case, the amendment did NOT mean
>> that any person could own any type of armament; that restrictions were
>> necessary.
>>
>> Then the NRA became a heavily politicized tool of gun manufacturers and
>> the extreme right wing. An organization that was once about
>> marksmanship, with very rational positions (e.g. restrictions on
>> concealed carry, restrictions on combat-optimized weapons) began
>> opposing any and all restrictions on any and all kinds of guns. It
>> helped fund political campaigns that resulted in a Supreme Court for
>> which decades, perhaps centuries of precedents count less than the
>> wishes of the far right.
>>
>> The Second Amendment worked pretty well as originally intended, in a
>> nation that was almost all wilderness, with low-tech firearms and
>> socially responsible patriots willing to join well-regulated militias.
>>
>> But that's not the modern world. I think that's why other modern
>> civilized nations didn't repeat our Second Amendment mistakes.
>
> You are rationalizing again. The right, or more accurately, order, to
> own a firearm and ammunitions dates back to the earliest days in
> American. The Virginia (1619) ordinance shown below issues a mandate
> for persons to produce their arms at a particular place and time.
>
> “All perfons whatfoever upon the Sabbath days fhall frequent
> divine fervice and fermons both forenoon and afternoone; and
> fhal bring their peices, Swordes, poulder, and fhott”[
>
> Translated that says thay you are ordered to bring your guns and
> ammunition to church (:-)

Right. In 1619. As I've said, the constitution was written when America
was largely wilderness, and when "well regulated militias" had recently
helped throw off rule from abroad. None of that (including "well
regulated militias") is applicable to the "Everybody gotta have combat
guns!" claims of today.

> As for the NRA? Well democracy in action, one might say. Although like
> all of your arguments you demonize it.

The influence of huge money in election campaigns is a serious weakness
in American democracy. The NRA political wing fights even the most
rational measures that a majority of Americans and a majority of its own
members support.

https://iop.harvard.edu/get-involved/harvard-political-review/vast-majority-americans-support-universal-background-checks

https://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/377455-poll-most-nra-members-support-comprehensive-background-checks

> And, it might be noted that the U.S. since at least 1934 with the
> National Firearms Act has had laws controlling various sorts of
> firearms and individual States have their own laws regarding firearms.

Right! Thanks for corroborating what I previously wrote. But there are
AR nuts and other gun nuts claiming any regulations violate the 2nd
Amendment - as if dozens of legal precedents and Supreme Court decisions
now have no value.

> But lets face it Frank, you live in an extremely criminal society with
> the greatest number of convicted and incarcerated criminals in the
> world. More then 10% higher then the next largest and 6 times greater
> then Canada - that you like to mention. And, 5 to 7 times greater then
> other developed nations.

I understand our shameful statistics. But any proposals to mimic
policies of much safer or nations (including even Canada, with whom we
share a border!) are called traitorous.

--
- Frank Krygowski

On Tuesday, February 15, 2022 at 11:19:37 AM UTC-5, cycl...@gmail.com wrote:
>
> Russell and Flunky have the idea that a woman can do anything a man can.
> This was the same BS by which they were attempting to put women into combat.
> They do not have the physical strength and fortitude to protect themselves in such
> conditions and hence become a burden upon the men who of needs must then protect them.

Right, where would society be if women ever thought they could do anything more than birth babies? They shouldn't even be allowed to vote, lest their vapors take hold of them while in the polling booth! They need big strong men like tommy to protect them!
> These guys have never fired a 12 gauge or high powered rifle and yet are pretending knowledge they don't have.

I used to go hunting on occasion with my father and grandfather - duck hunting with a 12 gauge. Besides that, list one place in this forum where I ever spoke of any firearm expertise. I don't consider myself a firearms expert, and have never stated anything that would lead anyone to believe otherwise. This is another case of you imagining I've written something I didn't.

> I have never seen woman, even good trap shooters fire even a full box of 12 gauge and trap shot are light.
> I think that they more commonly were shooting 20 gauge. It fit their physique much better.

More fishing with dynamite - this search took me all of five minutes:
https://abcnews.go.com/US/jersey-girl-10-rising-competitive-shooting-star-prove/story?id=27318927
"Ten-year-old Shyanne Roberts loves purple: Purple sneakers, purple bike -- even her semi-automatic shotgun is purple.“[It’s] a Beretta 1301, 12 gauge,” she said, holding up a firearm that is longer than she is tall."

https://www.twincities.com/2018/03/31/with-gun-sponsorships-and-support-a-14-year-old-girls-rise-on-the-active-shooting-circuit/
“Despite her small size, she went right for the 12-gauge,” said Kate Arnzen, owner of Arnzen Arms, an Eden Prairie gun shop, one of Dakota’s first sponsors. “Some kids are more intimidated doing the rifle and shotgun. Not her.”

https://www.nytimes.com/2011/06/12/sports/the-skeet-shooter-kim-rhode-has-sights-trained-on-fifth-olympic-medal.html
"Kim Rhode slips two shells into her 12-gauge shotgun, yells “Pull!” and takes dead-aim on the first target, then a second one whizzing through the air. She hits both cleanly, leaving orange clouds of chalk hanging in the cool air."

https://scliving.coop/sc-life/sc-life-features/young-guns/
"16-year-old Bonnie Wyatt steps easily into her shooting stance, leaning forward slightly with the stock of her 12-gauge Beretta shotgun pressed tightly into her right shoulder."

https://www.commercialappeal.com/story/sports/high-school/2020/06/18/emily-ferguson-one-eyed-trap-shooter-sports-awards-courage-award-winner/5318649002/
"Emily Ferguson assembles her Beretta 692 12-gauge shotgun at the Memphis Sports Shooting Association in Lakeland"

Lessee....All USA generals went to west point, women can't handle a 12 gauge, the supreme court ruled large capacity magazine bans are unconstitutional....just another typical week of Tommy thinking he knows what he's talking about - and failing miserably.
"Magazines available up to 30 rounds for visiting gay bath houses" - Tom Kunich

On 2/15/2022 8:35 AM, Tim R wrote:
> On Monday, February 14, 2022 at 11:21:45 PM UTC-5, John B. wrote:
>> But given the high level of crime in the U.S., will banning guns
>> effect the homicide rate by a large percentage. Certainly the
>> anti-gunners claim it will. Which may be an over simplistic notion.
>>
>
> As a direct effect, no. And especially if the ban is directed at a particular type of weapon that seems scary but is rarely used in homicide. (I can't tell you how often I've heard this conversation: "We've got to do something!" "but, that won't actually have any effect because..." "I don't care, we've gotta do SOMETHING!")
>
> Indirectly, possibly. Here's why I think that. Culture always trumps regulation and enforcement. The US is a culture that solves problems with violence including guns. Legislation with little direct effect can sometimes be part of a culture shift. It's annoying but possible. An example is the European law against spanking.
>
> The first thing I'd do to reduce gun violence is get rid of the death penalty. Our legal and justice system has codified into our psyche that killing people is a good way to solve problems. That wouldn't have a large effect immediately, but it can be a part of an overall strategy to change some of our habits. Remember when they asked Ghandi what he thought about western civilization, he replied, "it would be a very good idea."
>
> Everyone wants an easy fix. Not all problems have easy fixes.

I agree that not every problem has an easy fix. And certainly, the level
of gun violence in the U.S. fits that description.

The first step is to accept that it is a problem. There are those here
who have not accepted that fact, despite IMO irrefutable data. I'm glad
Tim is not among those deniers.

And I agree that "culture" is powerfully important. I've railed against
"fashion," which might be defined as short-term culture - meaning things
that begin as a fashion among certain groups can grow to become a much
more pervasive aspect of culture.

(I also agree with Tim that the death penalty, as practiced in the U.S.,
has little to no value.)

But about guns and culture: The U.S. is awash with pro-gun messaging.
Almost every TV drama features a shootout. The good guys demonstrate
impossible shooting skills while the bad guys blast away with rapid fire
ARs and AKs. This in a nation where the average cop _never_ fires his
service weapon on duty before he retires.

Put that "gun toting hero" messaging together with ads like this:
https://i2.wp.com/blog.cheaperthandirt.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/11/nov_2021_rdf_ad_desktop.jpg?w=500&ssl=1
(and please note the word "combat") and people become more and more
convinced that they MUST arm themselves, to protect against those
criminals they see on TV. Then the very same guns they buy get used by
or on family members; or become targets of home burglaries, and are
released into the wild, contributing to the problem. That problem
directly affects the police who are charged with responding to incidents
of violence, and who are met with violence.

It's not an easy problem to solve - at least, in the U.S., given the
influence of NRA money and the density of many voters.

Personally, I have no respect for the attitude that access to one's
personal choice of firearm is more important than the lives of tens of
thousands, or than the negative economic consequences of a nation awash
in guns. I think those sorts of gun nuts deserve a bit of mockery.

I'd like to see that show up in media that affect culture. We need more
movies where the guy with the AR is fat, balding, paranoid and
intellectually deficient.

Let's have art imitate reality for a change.

--
- Frank Krygowski

On 2/15/2022 11:43 AM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
> On 2/14/2022 3:31 PM, AMuzi wrote:
>> On 2/14/2022 1:15 PM, funkma...@hotmail.com wrote:
>>> On Monday, February 14, 2022 at 2:11:59 PM UTC-5,
>>> timoth...@gmail.com wrote:
>>>> Whatever the actual numbers are, isn't it clear that the
>>>> mass shootings are a tiny percentage of the homicides?
>>>> And that the focus on the AR15 really is applicable only
>>>> to that tiny percentage?
>>>>
>>>> I would do a couple things to reduce all gun homicides
>>>> instead.
>>>
>>> Â That sounds like you're advocating a more broad based
>>> approach to gun control, rather than focusing on assault
>>> weapons?
>>> "Magazines available up to 30 rounds for visiting gay
>>> bath houses" - Tom Kunich
>>>
>>
>> Few 'mass' events are jihadis or maniacs, fewer still with
>> AR-15 or any long gun:
>>
>> https://abcnews.go.com/US/dead-injured-early-morning-shooting-bar/story?id=77147828
>>
>>
>> Then again, firearms are only a subset of violence. Ever
>> 'borrow' tools? Always return them promptly!
>>
>> https://923wnpc.com/morristown-man-killed-over-dispute-about-tools/
>>
>>
>> Not that any murder is 'OK' but, in the world as we find
>> it, there are much larger problems, such as
>> hospital-acquired fatal sepsis for 70,000 Americans per
>> yer and steadily growing, despite efforts (or feints?) to
>> control it. All equally dead.
>
> Andrew, I think you've overused the "much larger problems"
> phrase.
>
> First, if your shop were burglarized, I don't think you'd
> want cops to say "We're not going to bother investigating
> that or recover your goods. Home burglaries are a bigger
> problem these days." After all, society can work on multiple
> problems simultaneously.
>
> But more important, there's no universally agreed list of
> biggest problems. Indeed, there's serious disagreement. (I'm
> always astonished that the ludicrous "The government will
> take all our guns away!" is considered a bigger problem than
> tens of thousands of annual gun deaths.)
>
> Feel free to give us your personal list of Most Important
> Problems. We could discuss.
>

I have had about a dozen bike shop burglaries over the
years, everything from smashed window and 3 BMX bikes to a
truck bashed through a loading dock door and loss of thirty
new bicycles in cartons.

I've also had two home burglaries, both with a ram to split
open the door frame, one front door one back door.

There's some partial insurance coverage but then again teh
rate jumps after a claim. After filing a report I have never
ever had any followup whatsoever from any police department
on a burglary.

What would you expect? Television plots resolved neatly in
30 minutes? That's not how things don't work in the real world.

As far as scale and scope, the history of suffering
subjugation and destruction of unarmed populations is well
known. No thanks.

--
Andrew Muzi
<www.yellowjersey.org/>
Open every day since 1 April, 1971

On 2/15/2022 4:26 AM, John B. wrote:
> ... the other day I read that "Negro" is a derogative term
> so I'm a bit gun shy talking to USians. It seems, from what I read,
> that the correct term in the U.S. is Afro-American, or perhaps
> African-American, which makes me wonder about inhabitants of South
> Africa (for example) are they Afro-Africans?

It's getting too complicated for me.

African-American Charlize
Theron:https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charlize_Theron

--
- Frank Krygowski

On 2/15/2022 2:04 PM, AMuzi wrote:
>
>
> As far as scale and scope, the history of suffering subjugation and
> destruction of unarmed populations is well known. No thanks.

Hmm. Are you worried the Canadians will invade and subjugate us?
Canadians seem to do fine - better than us - with much more logical gun
policies (and much less paranoia).

Or did you seriously think Obama was going to take away all your guns?

--
- Frank Krygowski

On Tuesday, February 15, 2022 at 2:23:57 PM UTC-5, Frank Krygowski wrote:

> Hmm. Are you worried the Canadians will invade and subjugate us?

> - Frank Krygowski

It has happened before. Canada committed two dastardly acts that I can recall (granted there was some provocation).

1. They invaded and conquered Detroit.
2. They gave it back.

On 2/15/2022 1:23 PM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
> On 2/15/2022 2:04 PM, AMuzi wrote:
>>
>>
>> As far as scale and scope, the history of suffering
>> subjugation and destruction of unarmed populations is well
>> known. No thanks.
>
> Hmm. Are you worried the Canadians will invade and subjugate
> us? Canadians seem to do fine - better than us - with much
> more logical gun policies (and much less paranoia).
>
> Or did you seriously think Obama was going to take away all
> your guns?
>

Canadian citizens have their own new and large problems.

Mr Trudeau today invoked National Emergency powers rather
than relent in his various population control orders:
https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/trudeau-premiers-cabinet-1.6350734

That's the brief anodyne report. Here are the chilling details:
https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/emergencies-act-explainer-1.6351504

A perusal of the writings, minutes and arguments of the
Framers shows nothing about targets or hunting in relation
to our beloved 2d. The keyword is 'tyranny'.

--
Andrew Muzi
<www.yellowjersey.org/>
Open every day since 1 April, 1971

On Tuesday, February 15, 2022 at 3:37:46 PM UTC-5, AMuzi wrote:

> Framers shows nothing about targets or hunting in relation
> to our beloved 2d. The keyword is 'tyranny'.
> --
> Andrew Muzi

A keyword that somehow didn't make it into the actual 2cnd.

Just saying.

On 2/15/2022 3:37 PM, AMuzi wrote:
> On 2/15/2022 1:23 PM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
>> On 2/15/2022 2:04 PM, AMuzi wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> As far as scale and scope, the history of suffering
>>> subjugation and destruction of unarmed populations is well
>>> known. No thanks.
>>
>> Hmm. Are you worried the Canadians will invade and subjugate
>> us? Canadians seem to do fine - better than us - with much
>> more logical gun policies (and much less paranoia).
>>
>> Or did you seriously think Obama was going to take away all
>> your guns?
>>
>
> Canadian citizens have their own new and large problems.

Large as in 70-something feet, parked blocking traffic. But not large as
in "percentage of population." I think they'll get it under control.

> A perusal of the writings, minutes and arguments of the Framers shows
> nothing about targets or hunting in relation to our beloved 2d. The
> keyword is 'tyranny'.

Right. As in the "Tyrant King George," which was almost certainly a
distortion.

The closest we came tyranny since was January 6, when a sore loser
wanted to remain in power despite the clear will of the people.

--
- Frank Krygowski

On Tuesday, February 15, 2022 at 10:21:42 AM UTC-8, Frank Krygowski wrote:
> On 2/14/2022 8:50 PM, John B. wrote:
> > On Mon, 14 Feb 2022 11:42:35 -0500, Frank Krygowski
> > <frkr...@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
> >
> >> On 2/13/2022 7:33 PM, John B. wrote:
> >>>
> >>>> On 2/13/2022 12:52 PM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
> >>>>> You're giving the advantages applicable to a combat weapon.
> >>>>> What's the advantage of making combat weapons available to every
> >>>>> fan of shoot-em-up video games? Is it that they can have more fun
> >>>>> "pretending" while they shoot at silhouette targets?
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Does that advantage really outweigh the proven risk of multiple mass
> >>>>> shootings, of risk to law enforcement officers, of risk to random bystanders?
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Why do so many other countries disagree? How do Canadians even manage?
> >>>>>
> >>
> >>> I think that the real point is that the U.S. Constitution - the basic
> >>> law of the land - assures the citizenry the right to own and bare
> >>> arms. I'm sure that some would wish that law didn't exist but it does..
> >>> And, I might add, it has been tested by the Supreme Court and, so far,
> >>> it remains in place.
> >>
> >> You're oversimplifying. "The right to bare [sic] arms" was established
> >> back around 1790 or so, in very different times. For roughly 200 years,
> >> case after case in the Supreme Court acknowledged that the preceding
> >> phrase regarding "A well-regulated militia" was important context
> >> informing that phrase; and that in any case, the amendment did NOT mean
> >> that any person could own any type of armament; that restrictions were
> >> necessary.
> >>
> >> Then the NRA became a heavily politicized tool of gun manufacturers and
> >> the extreme right wing. An organization that was once about
> >> marksmanship, with very rational positions (e.g. restrictions on
> >> concealed carry, restrictions on combat-optimized weapons) began
> >> opposing any and all restrictions on any and all kinds of guns. It
> >> helped fund political campaigns that resulted in a Supreme Court for
> >> which decades, perhaps centuries of precedents count less than the
> >> wishes of the far right.
> >>
> >> The Second Amendment worked pretty well as originally intended, in a
> >> nation that was almost all wilderness, with low-tech firearms and
> >> socially responsible patriots willing to join well-regulated militias.
> >>
> >> But that's not the modern world. I think that's why other modern
> >> civilized nations didn't repeat our Second Amendment mistakes.
> >
> > You are rationalizing again. The right, or more accurately, order, to
> > own a firearm and ammunitions dates back to the earliest days in
> > American. The Virginia (1619) ordinance shown below issues a mandate
> > for persons to produce their arms at a particular place and time.
> >
> > “All perfons whatfoever upon the Sabbath days fhall frequent
> > divine fervice and fermons both forenoon and afternoone; and
> > fhal bring their peices, Swordes, poulder, and fhott”[
> >
> > Translated that says thay you are ordered to bring your guns and
> > ammunition to church (:-)
> Right. In 1619. As I've said, the constitution was written when America
> was largely wilderness, and when "well regulated militias" had recently
> helped throw off rule from abroad. None of that (including "well
> regulated militias") is applicable to the "Everybody gotta have combat
> guns!" claims of today.
> > As for the NRA? Well democracy in action, one might say. Although like
> > all of your arguments you demonize it.
> The influence of huge money in election campaigns is a serious weakness
> in American democracy. The NRA political wing fights even the most
> rational measures that a majority of Americans and a majority of its own
> members support.
>
> https://iop.harvard.edu/get-involved/harvard-political-review/vast-majority-americans-support-universal-background-checks
>
> https://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/377455-poll-most-nra-members-support-comprehensive-background-checks
> > And, it might be noted that the U.S. since at least 1934 with the
> > National Firearms Act has had laws controlling various sorts of
> > firearms and individual States have their own laws regarding firearms.
> Right! Thanks for corroborating what I previously wrote. But there are
> AR nuts and other gun nuts claiming any regulations violate the 2nd
> Amendment - as if dozens of legal precedents and Supreme Court decisions
> now have no value.
> > But lets face it Frank, you live in an extremely criminal society with
> > the greatest number of convicted and incarcerated criminals in the
> > world. More then 10% higher then the next largest and 6 times greater
> > then Canada - that you like to mention. And, 5 to 7 times greater then
> > other developed nations.
> I understand our shameful statistics. But any proposals to mimic
> policies of much safer or nations (including even Canada, with whom we
> share a border!) are called traitorous.

Why do you continue to cast your bullshit around. Your ineffective arguments were brought before the Supreme Court and denied. Period. End of story.

On Tuesday, February 15, 2022 at 9:49:25 AM UTC-6, cycl...@gmail.com wrote:
> On Monday, February 14, 2022 at 5:44:44 PM UTC-8, jeff.li...@gmail.com wrote:
> > On Mon, 14 Feb 2022 13:49:42 -0800 (PST), Tom Kunich
> > <cycl...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > >Not to mention the 35,000 auto deaths per year almost entirely due to speeding.
> > Nope. Speeding only contributed to about 1/3 of the fatalities in the
> > US.
> >
> > "Motor Vehicle Crash Deaths"
> > <https://www.cdc.gov/vitalsigns/motor-vehicle-safety/index.html>
> >
> > Major risk factors for crash deaths in the US.
> > - Not using seat belts, car seats, and booster seats
> > contributed to over 9,500 crash deaths.
> > - Drunk driving contributed to more than 10,000 crash deaths.
> > - Speeding contributed to more than 9,500 crash deaths.
> >
> > Incidentally, the number of deaths for 2020 were either 38,000 or
> > 42,000 depending on whether you want to include accidents in driveways
> > and parking lots, and include delayed fatalities up to a year after
> > the accident:
> > <https://www.vox.com/22675358/us-car-deaths-year-traffic-covid-pandemic>
> On your brightest day you couldn't figure out how to close your front door lock. Drunk driving deaths are almost entirely from speeding. You cannot get killed from not wearing seat belts unless you get into an accident and in these cases either one of the other vehicle is speeding. You have absolutely no analytical ability so why do you think you have?

???????????
So when the drunk driver crosses the center line on the highway and crashes into an oncoming car and kills the occupants, the cause is speeding? The crossing the center line isn't even presented in court as evidence. Whether the car crossing the center line being driven by a drunkard was speeding or not is irrelevant. They were speeding! According to Tom. Speeding was the cause of death. Interesting.

And when a drunk driver runs a stoplight or stop sign and crashes into cars in the intersection, they were speeding. Failing to stop at the red light or stop sign is irrelevant. They were speeding. Whether they were speeding or not when they ran the red light or stop sign does not matter. That is why the people hit in the intersection died. Speeding. Interesting.

Tommy, before you pass, you need to write a book or describe to an author what it is like living with your mental capacity. Describe how your brain operates. Then sell this book. And make a movie too. I am positive it would go down as one of the greatest, most infamous horror movies in all time. It would rival Freddy the masked killer movie. And rival Texas chainsaw murderer.

On Tuesday, February 15, 2022 at 10:21:44 AM UTC-8, funkma...@hotmail.com wrote:
> On Tuesday, February 15, 2022 at 10:59:11 AM UTC-5, cycl...@gmail.com wrote:
> > On Tuesday, February 15, 2022 at 2:57:47 AM UTC-8, funkma...@hotmail.com wrote:
> > > On Monday, February 14, 2022 at 6:56:39 PM UTC-5, cycl...@gmail.com wrote:
> > > > On Monday, February 14, 2022 at 1:55:13 PM UTC-8, funkma...@hotmail..com wrote:
> > > > > On Monday, February 14, 2022 at 3:10:47 PM UTC-5, cycl...@gmail.com wrote:
> > > > > > On Monday, February 14, 2022 at 11:53:20 AM UTC-8, Frank Krygowski wrote:
> > > > > > > On 2/14/2022 2:18 PM, Tom Kunich wrote:
> > > > > > > > On Monday, February 14, 2022 at 8:59:51 AM UTC-8, Frank Krygowski wrote:
> > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > > >> I believe most people who target shoot ARs have subconscious fantasies
> > > > > > > >> of blowing away The Other Guys. But only if it should become necessary,
> > > > > > > >> of course!
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > I would be willing to limit them to five rounds only if the first two went through your brain.
> > > > > > > And that's precisely the type of fantasy I'm discussing. It's vulgar,
> > > > > > > crude and cowardly. It should not be promoted, let alone glorified.
> > > > > > Frank, YOUJUST FUCKING LIED ABOUT IT. You'd be OK if the magazines were limited to 5 rounds? That means to anyone with the use of English that you see AR15's as a threat. Tell us more of your damned lies. I'm sure that you can abuse English enough to try it.
> > > > > tommy's temper tantrum #3247
> > > > > "Magazines available up to 30 rounds for visiting gay bath houses" - Tom Kunich
> > > > Flunky's support of lies #8,438.
> > > Show me where Frank lied.
> > > 1) You're the one that mentioned limit to 5 rounds. Frank said nothing about that.
> > > 2) Frank does see AR15 style assault weapons as a threat. He's repeatedly stated that and hasn't made any statements to the contrary.
> > >
> > > Show us the lie you pathetic moron.
> > > "Magazines available up to 30 rounds for visiting gay bath houses" - Tom Kunich
> >
> > AQs a sickening disgusting POS I would have imagined
> Yes, you are in fact a sickening disgusting piece of shit (Basic grammatical structure, sparky - You just called yourself a POS in that sentence).
> > you would understand that Frank sees AR15's as a threat simply from the fact that he wants to limit the magazine capacity to some arbitrarily low number.
> Maybe, maybe not, but he didn't lie about it.
> > I realize that your low IQ doesn't allow you the ability to understand any of this but the Supreme Court with people a lot brighter than you could every even wish to believe you are
> Mark this day on your calendar, sparky is finally right about something. The supreme court justices are certainly smarter than I am. I make no qualms about it, and it doesn't damage my my ego. There is no doubt however you don't feel the same.
> > has ruled that magazines cannot be limited by dumb asses like you or Frank. That must have really ruined your day when that decision was made.
> > Please, like Frank's good little puppy, make another attempt to distort the English Language when everything I said has been ruled true by the Supreme Court.
> What decision would that be sparky? Last I heard, the 9th circuit court of appeals upheld Newsomes large capacity ban, and it hasn't made it to the US supreme court yet (and I know a stay was issued pending the anticipated US supreme court challenge, and Yes skippy, we know, You'll write a letter to Chief Justice Roberts and he'll take your argument that it's a 2nd amendment violation and overturn the ruling).
>
> Funny how these states including DC currently have high-capacity magazine bans: California, Colorado, Connecticut, Hawaii, Maryland, Massachusetts, New Jersey, New York, Vermont, in spite of this supreme court ruling.
> Funny how the following municipalities have high-capacity magazine restrictions or bans: Denver, Colorado; Cook County, Illinois; Aurora, Illinois; Chicago, Illinois; Oak Park, Illinois; Albany, New York; Buffalo, New York; New York, New York; Rochester, New York, in spite of this supreme court ruling.
>
> Please. Show a link to the US supreme court decision that ruled magazine sizes cannot be limited.
> > I'll be waiting for more of your remote bravery.
> And I'm still waiting for you to follow though with your "bravery' of promising to cave my skull in.
> "Magazines available up to 30 rounds for visiting gay bath houses" - Tom Kunich

I'm still waiting for you to come here and shut me up human garbage pile. Your courage behind a pseudonym is very impressive for a stupid little twerp that made the mistake of showing that he was a midget.

On Tuesday, February 15, 2022 at 10:54:38 AM UTC-8, funkma...@hotmail.com wrote:
> On Tuesday, February 15, 2022 at 11:19:37 AM UTC-5, cycl...@gmail.com wrote:
> >
> > Russell and Flunky have the idea that a woman can do anything a man can..
> > This was the same BS by which they were attempting to put women into combat.
> > They do not have the physical strength and fortitude to protect themselves in such
> > conditions and hence become a burden upon the men who of needs must then protect them.
> Right, where would society be if women ever thought they could do anything more than birth babies? They shouldn't even be allowed to vote, lest their vapors take hold of them while in the polling booth! They need big strong men like tommy to protect them!
> > These guys have never fired a 12 gauge or high powered rifle and yet are pretending knowledge they don't have.
> I used to go hunting on occasion with my father and grandfather - duck hunting with a 12 gauge. Besides that, list one place in this forum where I ever spoke of any firearm expertise. I don't consider myself a firearms expert, and have never stated anything that would lead anyone to believe otherwise. This is another case of you imagining I've written something I didn't.
> > I have never seen woman, even good trap shooters fire even a full box of 12 gauge and trap shot are light.
> > I think that they more commonly were shooting 20 gauge. It fit their physique much better.
> More fishing with dynamite - this search took me all of five minutes:
> https://abcnews.go.com/US/jersey-girl-10-rising-competitive-shooting-star-prove/story?id=27318927
> "Ten-year-old Shyanne Roberts loves purple: Purple sneakers, purple bike -- even her semi-automatic shotgun is purple.“[It’s] a Beretta 1301, 12 gauge,” she said, holding up a firearm that is longer than she is tall."
>
> https://www.twincities.com/2018/03/31/with-gun-sponsorships-and-support-a-14-year-old-girls-rise-on-the-active-shooting-circuit/
> “Despite her small size, she went right for the 12-gauge,” said Kate Arnzen, owner of Arnzen Arms, an Eden Prairie gun shop, one of Dakota’s first sponsors. “Some kids are more intimidated doing the rifle and shotgun. Not her.”
>
> https://www.nytimes.com/2011/06/12/sports/the-skeet-shooter-kim-rhode-has-sights-trained-on-fifth-olympic-medal.html
> "Kim Rhode slips two shells into her 12-gauge shotgun, yells “Pull!” and takes dead-aim on the first target, then a second one whizzing through the air. She hits both cleanly, leaving orange clouds of chalk hanging in the cool air."
>
> https://scliving.coop/sc-life/sc-life-features/young-guns/
> "16-year-old Bonnie Wyatt steps easily into her shooting stance, leaning forward slightly with the stock of her 12-gauge Beretta shotgun pressed tightly into her right shoulder."
>
> https://www.commercialappeal.com/story/sports/high-school/2020/06/18/emily-ferguson-one-eyed-trap-shooter-sports-awards-courage-award-winner/5318649002/
> "Emily Ferguson assembles her Beretta 692 12-gauge shotgun at the Memphis Sports Shooting Association in Lakeland"
>
> Lessee....All USA generals went to west point, women can't handle a 12 gauge, the supreme court ruled large capacity magazine bans are unconstitutional....just another typical week of Tommy thinking he knows what he's talking about - and failing miserably.
> "Magazines available up to 30 rounds for visiting gay bath houses" - Tom Kunich

So now you're accepting the fact that women can outride you any day of the week. Interesting.

On Tuesday, February 15, 2022 at 10:54:47 AM UTC-8, Frank Krygowski wrote:
> On 2/15/2022 8:35 AM, Tim R wrote:
> > On Monday, February 14, 2022 at 11:21:45 PM UTC-5, John B. wrote:
> >> But given the high level of crime in the U.S., will banning guns
> >> effect the homicide rate by a large percentage. Certainly the
> >> anti-gunners claim it will. Which may be an over simplistic notion.
> >>
> >
> > As a direct effect, no. And especially if the ban is directed at a particular type of weapon that seems scary but is rarely used in homicide. (I can't tell you how often I've heard this conversation: "We've got to do something!" "but, that won't actually have any effect because..." "I don't care, we've gotta do SOMETHING!")
> >
> > Indirectly, possibly. Here's why I think that. Culture always trumps regulation and enforcement. The US is a culture that solves problems with violence including guns. Legislation with little direct effect can sometimes be part of a culture shift. It's annoying but possible. An example is the European law against spanking.
> >
> > The first thing I'd do to reduce gun violence is get rid of the death penalty. Our legal and justice system has codified into our psyche that killing people is a good way to solve problems. That wouldn't have a large effect immediately, but it can be a part of an overall strategy to change some of our habits. Remember when they asked Ghandi what he thought about western civilization, he replied, "it would be a very good idea."
> >
> > Everyone wants an easy fix. Not all problems have easy fixes.
> I agree that not every problem has an easy fix. And certainly, the level
> of gun violence in the U.S. fits that description.
>
> The first step is to accept that it is a problem. There are those here
> who have not accepted that fact, despite IMO irrefutable data. I'm glad
> Tim is not among those deniers.
>
> And I agree that "culture" is powerfully important. I've railed against
> "fashion," which might be defined as short-term culture - meaning things
> that begin as a fashion among certain groups can grow to become a much
> more pervasive aspect of culture.
>
> (I also agree with Tim that the death penalty, as practiced in the U.S.,
> has little to no value.)
>
> But about guns and culture: The U.S. is awash with pro-gun messaging.
> Almost every TV drama features a shootout. The good guys demonstrate
> impossible shooting skills while the bad guys blast away with rapid fire
> ARs and AKs. This in a nation where the average cop _never_ fires his
> service weapon on duty before he retires.
>
> Put that "gun toting hero" messaging together with ads like this:
> https://i2.wp.com/blog.cheaperthandirt.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/11/nov_2021_rdf_ad_desktop.jpg?w=500&ssl=1
> (and please note the word "combat") and people become more and more
> convinced that they MUST arm themselves, to protect against those
> criminals they see on TV. Then the very same guns they buy get used by
> or on family members; or become targets of home burglaries, and are
> released into the wild, contributing to the problem. That problem
> directly affects the police who are charged with responding to incidents
> of violence, and who are met with violence.
>
> It's not an easy problem to solve - at least, in the U.S., given the
> influence of NRA money and the density of many voters.
>
> Personally, I have no respect for the attitude that access to one's
> personal choice of firearm is more important than the lives of tens of
> thousands, or than the negative economic consequences of a nation awash
> in guns. I think those sorts of gun nuts deserve a bit of mockery.
>
> I'd like to see that show up in media that affect culture. We need more
> movies where the guy with the AR is fat, balding, paranoid and
> intellectually deficient.
>
> Let's have art imitate reality for a change.

Frank, every single country in the world with mixed cultures has violence issues. Most much worse that then US. The Chinese have the idea that all Asian countries should be under their dominance and they have the military might and the mindset to do that as well. You have John who knows nothing arguing how nice the Chinese are as they kill other cultures to extinction. Eliminating guns has absolutely nothing to do with that problem. They were killing each other with weapons before that.

I might agree with you that the death penalty is not a deterrent except it is. We see the plain results of elimination of the death penalty in California as a massive increase in violent crime since you do not have prison space for everyone. This has the same result everywhere else your argument was successful. Soundly good isn't being good.

Sniveling about the NRA? Yet you're all for massive government assault on the 2nd Amendment while crying over the quite small group protecting gun owners purely on donations.

And you want to depict gun owners falsely in the media. You could go to any gun range and see who gun owners are and yet you call them fat, balding, paranoid and
intellectually deficient. I wonder if this isn't a picture of you?

On Tuesday, February 15, 2022 at 12:37:46 PM UTC-8, AMuzi wrote:
> On 2/15/2022 1:23 PM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
> > On 2/15/2022 2:04 PM, AMuzi wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >> As far as scale and scope, the history of suffering
> >> subjugation and destruction of unarmed populations is well
> >> known. No thanks.
> >
> > Hmm. Are you worried the Canadians will invade and subjugate
> > us? Canadians seem to do fine - better than us - with much
> > more logical gun policies (and much less paranoia).
> >
> > Or did you seriously think Obama was going to take away all
> > your guns?
> >
> Canadian citizens have their own new and large problems.
>
> Mr Trudeau today invoked National Emergency powers rather
> than relent in his various population control orders:
> https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/trudeau-premiers-cabinet-1.6350734
>
> That's the brief anodyne report. Here are the chilling details:
> https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/emergencies-act-explainer-1.6351504
>
> A perusal of the writings, minutes and arguments of the
> Framers shows nothing about targets or hunting in relation
> to our beloved 2d. The keyword is 'tyranny'.
Frank thinks of himself as looking like Trudeau and the Truckers being fat, balding, paranoid and intellectually deficient. He cannot stand the fact that it wasn't the NRA whom he sees as some sort of hyperdrive lobby group that is preventing gun control but the Supreme Court voicing the true reason for the inclusion of the 2nd Amendment. Frank simply will argue anything rather than admit that he is wrong.

On Tuesday, February 15, 2022 at 1:08:31 PM UTC-8, timoth...@gmail.com wrote:
> On Tuesday, February 15, 2022 at 3:37:46 PM UTC-5, AMuzi wrote:
>
> > Framers shows nothing about targets or hunting in relation
> > to our beloved 2d. The keyword is 'tyranny'.
> > --
> > Andrew Muzi
> A keyword that somehow didn't make it into the actual 2cnd.
>
> Just saying.

Well, the framers of the Constitution were rather well spoken than the group of us here. The Constitution reads very easily. My question is why do you suppose Franks hasn't read anything about it and the questions that went into every one of the original Amendments. For crying out loud - the man TAUGHT COLLEGE and knows so little of the history of this country that he shouldn't have qualified to teach kindergarten.

On Tuesday, February 15, 2022 at 2:50:54 PM UTC-8, russellseaton1@yahoo.com wrote:
> On Tuesday, February 15, 2022 at 7:46:03 AM UTC-6, AMuzi wrote:
> > On 2/14/2022 11:20 PM, russell...@yahoo.com wrote:
> > > On Monday, February 14, 2022 at 2:24:26 AM UTC-6, John B. wrote:
> > >> On Sun, 13 Feb 2022 23:15:08 -0800 (PST), "russell...@yahoo.com"
> > >> <ritzann...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >>
> > >>> On Saturday, February 12, 2022 at 6:55:05 PM UTC-6, cycl...@gmail.com wrote:
> > >>>> On Saturday, February 12, 2022 at 4:43:54 PM UTC-8, timoth...@gmail.com wrote:
> > >>>>> On Saturday, February 12, 2022 at 7:24:12 PM UTC-5, Tim R wrote:
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> Some discussion earlier about the military mindset and tradition.
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> I read a fascinating book about the evolution of the military long arm over time, and there was violent disagreement from the earliest days over the choice of calibre which continues to this day. The title escapes me.
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> The original musket was in .69 caliber. By the Civil War this had shrunk to .58, over the bitter resistance of what they called gravel bellies. Soldiers could carry more ammo, so they British sshot more ammo, so somebody had to pay for, procure, and deliver more ammo.
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> .45 caliber owned the late 1800s, with the .30 appearing near the end. The Phillippine conflict still had mostly trapdoor springfields in .45 but I the .30 Krag was used. Every reduction was fought ferociously by the oldtimers.
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> There were extensive tests of lethality (sheep I think), range, and accuracy at Aberdeen Proving ground, and out to about 1000 yards the .276 did as well as the larger calibers.
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> In Vietnam we went to .223, which I think is the sweet spot - smaller loses range and penetration, larger loses ability to carry enough ammo and recoil hurts accuracy for most soldiers. (I recently rewatched Zulu. Those rifles were Martini-Henrys in .577/.450, meaning they were a .577 cartridge case necked down to fire a .450 caliber 480 grain bullet. Recoil had to be extreme with that loading, and the average soldier probably weighed about 140.)
> > >>>> Recoil isn't very important. Women skeet shooter use 12 gauge full loads without having any problems shooting entire matches with guns that recoil a great deal more than the M1A. I couldn't even feel the recoil of the M1 carbine which shoots a 30 caliber round.
> > >>>
> > >>> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ErN5UNx5XqM
> > >>> Above is a video of a girl shooting an M1 Garand. Video is only 58 seconds in length. She is sitting at a table and the rifle is on a rest. For some reason her chair has wheels. But everytime she fires a 30-06 shell, her shoulder flies backwards 6 inches and her head snaps back off of the buttstock. A 30-06 rifle cartridge is not a light recoil weapon.
> > >>>
> > >>> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0Kig2kaHZEg
> > >>> This video is of a man firing the M1 Garand in 30-06. He handles the recoil better. He is standing. But it still kicks and recoils. It is not a light recoil weapon. Video is 2:14 in length and the M1 starts at about 25 second mark.
> > >> Well, I've shot the M1 in a number of rifle matches you (or I) are
> > >> concentrating on the sights and the target and it is more a matter of
> > >> getting back on target. The same in 12 gauge trap shooting. The bird
> > >> flies and you are concentrating on swinging the gun and leading and
> > >> honestly you hardly notice the recoil.
> > >>
> > >> Prone with the M1
> > >> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qc6pKWqJ1QE
> > >> Standing with the M1
> > >> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3xg1n3G43Q0
> > >> Girl shooting Trap
> > >> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q2mW6wE_R78
> > >> --
> > >> Cheers,
> > >>
> > >> John B.
> > >
> > > Girl? John, you need to get out there in the world a little bit more and look around some. Your perception might be getting a little too close to Tommy boy's.
> > >
> > OK I clicked the last video link. She actualy is shooting
> > trap. And she's good at it. What was your objection?
> > --
> > Andrew Muzi
> > <www.yellowjersey.org/>
> > Open every day since 1 April, 1971
> The "girl" part of John's description. I don't know how old you are Andy. But I am positive even the oldest of old folks on earth would not use the word "girl" to describe the person who shot trap in the video.

Well, the body structure of men and women is entirely different. The idea that you could pretend that they are physically equal is the sort of thing you would expect from they leftists that are putting tranny men into women's sports with the easily predicted results that women's sports have been entirely destroyed.

On Tuesday, February 15, 2022 at 3:20:05 PM UTC-8, russellseaton1@yahoo.com wrote:
> On Tuesday, February 15, 2022 at 10:19:37 AM UTC-6, cycl...@gmail.com wrote:
> > On Tuesday, February 15, 2022 at 5:46:03 AM UTC-8, AMuzi wrote:
> > > On 2/14/2022 11:20 PM, russell...@yahoo.com wrote:
> > > > On Monday, February 14, 2022 at 2:24:26 AM UTC-6, John B. wrote:
> > > >> On Sun, 13 Feb 2022 23:15:08 -0800 (PST), "russell...@yahoo.com"
> > > >> <ritzann...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > >>
> > > >>> On Saturday, February 12, 2022 at 6:55:05 PM UTC-6, cycl...@gmail..com wrote:
> > > >>>> On Saturday, February 12, 2022 at 4:43:54 PM UTC-8, timoth...@gmail.com wrote:
> > > >>>>> On Saturday, February 12, 2022 at 7:24:12 PM UTC-5, Tim R wrote:
> > > >>>>>
> > > >>>>> Some discussion earlier about the military mindset and tradition.
> > > >>>>>
> > > >>>>> I read a fascinating book about the evolution of the military long arm over time, and there was violent disagreement from the earliest days over the choice of calibre which continues to this day. The title escapes me.
> > > >>>>>
> > > >>>>> The original musket was in .69 caliber. By the Civil War this had shrunk to .58, over the bitter resistance of what they called gravel bellies. Soldiers could carry more ammo, so they British sshot more ammo, so somebody had to pay for, procure, and deliver more ammo.
> > > >>>>>
> > > >>>>> .45 caliber owned the late 1800s, with the .30 appearing near the end. The Phillippine conflict still had mostly trapdoor springfields in ..45 but I the .30 Krag was used. Every reduction was fought ferociously by the oldtimers.
> > > >>>>>
> > > >>>>> There were extensive tests of lethality (sheep I think), range, and accuracy at Aberdeen Proving ground, and out to about 1000 yards the .276 did as well as the larger calibers.
> > > >>>>>
> > > >>>>> In Vietnam we went to .223, which I think is the sweet spot - smaller loses range and penetration, larger loses ability to carry enough ammo and recoil hurts accuracy for most soldiers. (I recently rewatched Zulu. Those rifles were Martini-Henrys in .577/.450, meaning they were a .577 cartridge case necked down to fire a .450 caliber 480 grain bullet. Recoil had to be extreme with that loading, and the average soldier probably weighed about 140.)
> > > >>>> Recoil isn't very important. Women skeet shooter use 12 gauge full loads without having any problems shooting entire matches with guns that recoil a great deal more than the M1A. I couldn't even feel the recoil of the M1 carbine which shoots a 30 caliber round.
> > > >>>
> > > >>> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ErN5UNx5XqM
> > > >>> Above is a video of a girl shooting an M1 Garand. Video is only 58 seconds in length. She is sitting at a table and the rifle is on a rest. For some reason her chair has wheels. But everytime she fires a 30-06 shell, her shoulder flies backwards 6 inches and her head snaps back off of the buttstock. A 30-06 rifle cartridge is not a light recoil weapon.
> > > >>>
> > > >>> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0Kig2kaHZEg
> > > >>> This video is of a man firing the M1 Garand in 30-06. He handles the recoil better. He is standing. But it still kicks and recoils. It is not a light recoil weapon. Video is 2:14 in length and the M1 starts at about 25 second mark.
> > > >> Well, I've shot the M1 in a number of rifle matches you (or I) are
> > > >> concentrating on the sights and the target and it is more a matter of
> > > >> getting back on target. The same in 12 gauge trap shooting. The bird
> > > >> flies and you are concentrating on swinging the gun and leading and
> > > >> honestly you hardly notice the recoil.
> > > >>
> > > >> Prone with the M1
> > > >> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qc6pKWqJ1QE
> > > >> Standing with the M1
> > > >> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3xg1n3G43Q0
> > > >> Girl shooting Trap
> > > >> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q2mW6wE_R78
> > > >> --
> > > >> Cheers,
> > > >>
> > > >> John B.
> > > >
> > > > Girl? John, you need to get out there in the world a little bit more and look around some. Your perception might be getting a little too close to Tommy boy's.
> > > >
> > > OK I clicked the last video link. She actualy is shooting
> > > trap. And she's good at it. What was your objection?
> > Russell and Flunky have the idea that a woman can do anything a man can.. This was the same BS by which they were attempting to put women into combat. They do not have the physical strength and fortitude to protect themselves in such conditions and hence become a burden upon the men who of needs must then protect them.
> >
> > These guys have never fired a 12 gauge or high powered rifle and yet are pretending knowledge they don't have. I have never seen woman, even good trap shooters fire even a full box of 12 gauge and trap shot are light. I think that they more commonly were shooting 20 gauge. It fit their physique much better.
> Tommy, only you think a woman can do anything a man can. Everyone else on earth realizes there are physical differences between males and females. An obvious one is size and strength. Men are bigger and stronger. On average.. The Olympics are on right now. If you look at the results for events where men and women to the same thing. Such as cross country skiing and skating, you will see the men are always faster than the women. And in things like weight lifting, the weights the men lift are much greater than the weights the women lift. I'm guessing there is women weight lifting now days. I know there is women boxing. But everyone but Tommy knows there are physical differences in women and men.
>
> Regarding combat. In some combat jobs, positions, physical strength and endurance is a necessity. Such as a foot soldier carrying a pack of ammo and equipment during a battle. Men have a decided advantage. But there are also many combat positions where physical strength is not a requirement. Tank crew for instance. The gun loader I believe hand loads the shells in the barrel. Physical strength needed. But the driver just drives the tank. How strong do you need to be to shift gears and push the gas/diesel/turbine pedal? Couldn't a woman do that just as well as a man? And the person who sights the gun and talks on the radio? Does that require physical strength? Another example. Mine sweeper. People who use those metal detectors to find land mines and clear a path so vehicles and men won't get blown up. How much physical strength is needed to hold a mine sweeper, metal detector? Or to dig up a land mine with a little shovel?

I really have this problem with your continually arguing my exact opposite of what I said. Why do you do this? You have no other reason to live unless you argue and I don't say things that you can successfully argue against so you simply put the opposite thing from what I say into my mouth?

Do you suppose that anyone other than Flunky and John don't see what you're doing?

On Tuesday, February 15, 2022 at 2:37:46 PM UTC-6, AMuzi wrote:
> On 2/15/2022 1:23 PM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
> > On 2/15/2022 2:04 PM, AMuzi wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >> As far as scale and scope, the history of suffering
> >> subjugation and destruction of unarmed populations is well
> >> known. No thanks.
> >
> > Hmm. Are you worried the Canadians will invade and subjugate
> > us? Canadians seem to do fine - better than us - with much
> > more logical gun policies (and much less paranoia).
> >
> > Or did you seriously think Obama was going to take away all
> > your guns?
> >
> Canadian citizens have their own new and large problems.
>
> Mr Trudeau today invoked National Emergency powers rather
> than relent in his various population control orders:
> https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/trudeau-premiers-cabinet-1.6350734

Quotes from the article:
"This is about keeping Canadians safe, protecting people's jobs and restoring confidence in our institutions," he said." Trudeau said this.

"Interim Conservative Leader Candice Bergen accused Trudeau of dividing Canadians.
"We've seen the prime minister wedge, divide and stigmatize Canadians he doesn't agree with and by doing so he creates so many barriers in terms of trying to solve this problem," she said."
Trump?????????????

>
> That's the brief anodyne report. Here are the chilling details:
> https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/emergencies-act-explainer-1.6351504
>
> A perusal of the writings, minutes and arguments of the
> Framers shows nothing about targets or hunting in relation
> to our beloved 2d. The keyword is 'tyranny'.
> --
> Andrew Muzi
> <www.yellowjersey.org/>
> Open every day since 1 April, 1971

On Tuesday, February 15, 2022 at 5:02:54 PM UTC-6, cycl...@gmail.com wrote:
> On Tuesday, February 15, 2022 at 10:54:38 AM UTC-8, funkma...@hotmail.com wrote:
> > On Tuesday, February 15, 2022 at 11:19:37 AM UTC-5, cycl...@gmail.com wrote:
> > >
> > > Russell and Flunky have the idea that a woman can do anything a man can.
> > > This was the same BS by which they were attempting to put women into combat.
> > > They do not have the physical strength and fortitude to protect themselves in such
> > > conditions and hence become a burden upon the men who of needs must then protect them.
> > Right, where would society be if women ever thought they could do anything more than birth babies? They shouldn't even be allowed to vote, lest their vapors take hold of them while in the polling booth! They need big strong men like tommy to protect them!
> > > These guys have never fired a 12 gauge or high powered rifle and yet are pretending knowledge they don't have.
> > I used to go hunting on occasion with my father and grandfather - duck hunting with a 12 gauge. Besides that, list one place in this forum where I ever spoke of any firearm expertise. I don't consider myself a firearms expert, and have never stated anything that would lead anyone to believe otherwise. This is another case of you imagining I've written something I didn't.
> > > I have never seen woman, even good trap shooters fire even a full box of 12 gauge and trap shot are light.
> > > I think that they more commonly were shooting 20 gauge. It fit their physique much better.
> > More fishing with dynamite - this search took me all of five minutes:
> > https://abcnews.go.com/US/jersey-girl-10-rising-competitive-shooting-star-prove/story?id=27318927
> > "Ten-year-old Shyanne Roberts loves purple: Purple sneakers, purple bike -- even her semi-automatic shotgun is purple.“[It’s] a Beretta 1301, 12 gauge,” she said, holding up a firearm that is longer than she is tall."
> >
> > https://www.twincities.com/2018/03/31/with-gun-sponsorships-and-support-a-14-year-old-girls-rise-on-the-active-shooting-circuit/
> > “Despite her small size, she went right for the 12-gauge,” said Kate Arnzen, owner of Arnzen Arms, an Eden Prairie gun shop, one of Dakota’s first sponsors. “Some kids are more intimidated doing the rifle and shotgun. Not her.”
> >
> > https://www.nytimes.com/2011/06/12/sports/the-skeet-shooter-kim-rhode-has-sights-trained-on-fifth-olympic-medal.html
> > "Kim Rhode slips two shells into her 12-gauge shotgun, yells “Pull!” and takes dead-aim on the first target, then a second one whizzing through the air. She hits both cleanly, leaving orange clouds of chalk hanging in the cool air."
> >
> > https://scliving.coop/sc-life/sc-life-features/young-guns/
> > "16-year-old Bonnie Wyatt steps easily into her shooting stance, leaning forward slightly with the stock of her 12-gauge Beretta shotgun pressed tightly into her right shoulder."
> >
> > https://www.commercialappeal.com/story/sports/high-school/2020/06/18/emily-ferguson-one-eyed-trap-shooter-sports-awards-courage-award-winner/5318649002/
> > "Emily Ferguson assembles her Beretta 692 12-gauge shotgun at the Memphis Sports Shooting Association in Lakeland"
> >
> > Lessee....All USA generals went to west point, women can't handle a 12 gauge, the supreme court ruled large capacity magazine bans are unconstitutional....just another typical week of Tommy thinking he knows what he's talking about - and failing miserably.
> > "Magazines available up to 30 rounds for visiting gay bath houses" - Tom Kunich
> So now you're accepting the fact that women can outride you any day of the week. Interesting.

Tommy boy, you need to expand your circle of acquaintances. I have ridden with women who cold out ride me. Speed, distance. They were stronger bicyclists than me. On the bike anyway. In a physical fist fight I might have taken them. Maybe.

Back in 2007 I rode Paris Brest Paris. 750 mile brevet from a Paris suburb to Brest on the ocean and back. Time limit of 90 hours. I rode it a bit faster. I placed #678. Yeah!!!!!!!! There were 3607 finishers out of a total starters of 5159. 12 women were faster than me. Yes a whole dozen women rode faster on PBP 2007 than me. One was from the USA. Other 11 were foreigners. Although for a French ride with a world wide participation, I am not sure how the word "foreigners" really applies. It doesn't bother me too much that 12 women rode faster than me.

On Tuesday, February 15, 2022 at 6:12:21 PM UTC-6, russellseaton1@yahoo.com wrote:
> On Tuesday, February 15, 2022 at 5:02:54 PM UTC-6, cycl...@gmail.com wrote:
> > On Tuesday, February 15, 2022 at 10:54:38 AM UTC-8, funkma...@hotmail.com wrote:
> > > On Tuesday, February 15, 2022 at 11:19:37 AM UTC-5, cycl...@gmail.com wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Russell and Flunky have the idea that a woman can do anything a man can.
> > > > This was the same BS by which they were attempting to put women into combat.
> > > > They do not have the physical strength and fortitude to protect themselves in such
> > > > conditions and hence become a burden upon the men who of needs must then protect them.
> > > Right, where would society be if women ever thought they could do anything more than birth babies? They shouldn't even be allowed to vote, lest their vapors take hold of them while in the polling booth! They need big strong men like tommy to protect them!
> > > > These guys have never fired a 12 gauge or high powered rifle and yet are pretending knowledge they don't have.
> > > I used to go hunting on occasion with my father and grandfather - duck hunting with a 12 gauge. Besides that, list one place in this forum where I ever spoke of any firearm expertise. I don't consider myself a firearms expert, and have never stated anything that would lead anyone to believe otherwise. This is another case of you imagining I've written something I didn't.
> > > > I have never seen woman, even good trap shooters fire even a full box of 12 gauge and trap shot are light.
> > > > I think that they more commonly were shooting 20 gauge. It fit their physique much better.
> > > More fishing with dynamite - this search took me all of five minutes:
> > > https://abcnews.go.com/US/jersey-girl-10-rising-competitive-shooting-star-prove/story?id=27318927
> > > "Ten-year-old Shyanne Roberts loves purple: Purple sneakers, purple bike -- even her semi-automatic shotgun is purple.“[It’s] a Beretta 1301, 12 gauge,” she said, holding up a firearm that is longer than she is tall."
> > >
> > > https://www.twincities.com/2018/03/31/with-gun-sponsorships-and-support-a-14-year-old-girls-rise-on-the-active-shooting-circuit/
> > > “Despite her small size, she went right for the 12-gauge,” said Kate Arnzen, owner of Arnzen Arms, an Eden Prairie gun shop, one of Dakota’s first sponsors. “Some kids are more intimidated doing the rifle and shotgun. Not her.”
> > >
> > > https://www.nytimes.com/2011/06/12/sports/the-skeet-shooter-kim-rhode-has-sights-trained-on-fifth-olympic-medal.html
> > > "Kim Rhode slips two shells into her 12-gauge shotgun, yells “Pull!” and takes dead-aim on the first target, then a second one whizzing through the air. She hits both cleanly, leaving orange clouds of chalk hanging in the cool air."
> > >
> > > https://scliving.coop/sc-life/sc-life-features/young-guns/
> > > "16-year-old Bonnie Wyatt steps easily into her shooting stance, leaning forward slightly with the stock of her 12-gauge Beretta shotgun pressed tightly into her right shoulder."
> > >
> > > https://www.commercialappeal.com/story/sports/high-school/2020/06/18/emily-ferguson-one-eyed-trap-shooter-sports-awards-courage-award-winner/5318649002/
> > > "Emily Ferguson assembles her Beretta 692 12-gauge shotgun at the Memphis Sports Shooting Association in Lakeland"
> > >
> > > Lessee....All USA generals went to west point, women can't handle a 12 gauge, the supreme court ruled large capacity magazine bans are unconstitutional....just another typical week of Tommy thinking he knows what he's talking about - and failing miserably.
> > > "Magazines available up to 30 rounds for visiting gay bath houses" - Tom Kunich
> > So now you're accepting the fact that women can outride you any day of the week. Interesting.
> Tommy boy, you need to expand your circle of acquaintances. I have ridden with women who cold out ride me. Speed, distance. They were stronger bicyclists than me. On the bike anyway. In a physical fist fight I might have taken them. Maybe.
>
> Back in 2007 I rode Paris Brest Paris. 750 mile brevet from a Paris suburb to Brest on the ocean and back. Time limit of 90 hours. I rode it a bit faster. I placed #678. Yeah!!!!!!!! There were 3607 finishers out of a total starters of 5159. 12 women were faster than me. Yes a whole dozen women rode faster on PBP 2007 than me. One was from the USA. Other 11 were foreigners. Although for a French ride with a world wide participation, I am not sure how the word "foreigners" really applies. It doesn't bother me too much that 12 women rode faster than me.

I forgot to mention, and should mention, Paris Brest Paris is a brevet in the randonneur world. It is NOT a race. Speed, time, is kept just to make sure you beat the cutoff times. So placing isn't really about a winner, per se. I was #678 across the line or in total time needed. But in reality I should just say I finished or did not finish. No placement.

On 2/15/2022 5:50 PM, russellseaton1@yahoo.com wrote:
> On Tuesday, February 15, 2022 at 7:46:03 AM UTC-6, AMuzi wrote:
>> On 2/14/2022 11:20 PM, russell...@yahoo.com wrote:
>>> On Monday, February 14, 2022 at 2:24:26 AM UTC-6, John B. wrote:
>>>> On Sun, 13 Feb 2022 23:15:08 -0800 (PST), "russell...@yahoo.com"
>>>> <ritzann...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On Saturday, February 12, 2022 at 6:55:05 PM UTC-6, cycl...@gmail.com wrote:
>>>>>> On Saturday, February 12, 2022 at 4:43:54 PM UTC-8, timoth...@gmail.com wrote:
>>>>>>> On Saturday, February 12, 2022 at 7:24:12 PM UTC-5, Tim R wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Some discussion earlier about the military mindset and tradition.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I read a fascinating book about the evolution of the military long arm over time, and there was violent disagreement from the earliest days over the choice of calibre which continues to this day. The title escapes me.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> The original musket was in .69 caliber. By the Civil War this had shrunk to .58, over the bitter resistance of what they called gravel bellies. Soldiers could carry more ammo, so they British sshot more ammo, so somebody had to pay for, procure, and deliver more ammo.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> .45 caliber owned the late 1800s, with the .30 appearing near the end. The Phillippine conflict still had mostly trapdoor springfields in .45 but I the .30 Krag was used. Every reduction was fought ferociously by the oldtimers.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> There were extensive tests of lethality (sheep I think), range, and accuracy at Aberdeen Proving ground, and out to about 1000 yards the .276 did as well as the larger calibers.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> In Vietnam we went to .223, which I think is the sweet spot - smaller loses range and penetration, larger loses ability to carry enough ammo and recoil hurts accuracy for most soldiers. (I recently rewatched Zulu. Those rifles were Martini-Henrys in .577/.450, meaning they were a .577 cartridge case necked down to fire a .450 caliber 480 grain bullet. Recoil had to be extreme with that loading, and the average soldier probably weighed about 140.)
>>>>>> Recoil isn't very important. Women skeet shooter use 12 gauge full loads without having any problems shooting entire matches with guns that recoil a great deal more than the M1A. I couldn't even feel the recoil of the M1 carbine which shoots a 30 caliber round.
>>>>>
>>>>> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ErN5UNx5XqM
>>>>> Above is a video of a girl shooting an M1 Garand. Video is only 58 seconds in length. She is sitting at a table and the rifle is on a rest. For some reason her chair has wheels. But everytime she fires a 30-06 shell, her shoulder flies backwards 6 inches and her head snaps back off of the buttstock. A 30-06 rifle cartridge is not a light recoil weapon.
>>>>>
>>>>> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0Kig2kaHZEg
>>>>> This video is of a man firing the M1 Garand in 30-06. He handles the recoil better. He is standing. But it still kicks and recoils. It is not a light recoil weapon. Video is 2:14 in length and the M1 starts at about 25 second mark.
>>>> Well, I've shot the M1 in a number of rifle matches you (or I) are
>>>> concentrating on the sights and the target and it is more a matter of
>>>> getting back on target. The same in 12 gauge trap shooting. The bird
>>>> flies and you are concentrating on swinging the gun and leading and
>>>> honestly you hardly notice the recoil.
>>>>
>>>> Prone with the M1
>>>> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qc6pKWqJ1QE
>>>> Standing with the M1
>>>> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3xg1n3G43Q0
>>>> Girl shooting Trap
>>>> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q2mW6wE_R78
>>>> --
>>>> Cheers,
>>>>
>>>> John B.
>>>
>>> Girl? John, you need to get out there in the world a little bit more and look around some. Your perception might be getting a little too close to Tommy boy's.
>>>
>> OK I clicked the last video link. She actualy is shooting
>> trap. And she's good at it. What was your objection?
>> --
>> Andrew Muzi
>> <www.yellowjersey.org/>
>> Open every day since 1 April, 1971
>
> The "girl" part of John's description. I don't know how old you are Andy. But I am positive even the oldest of old folks on earth would not use the word "girl" to describe the person who shot trap in the video.

I disagree. Women of an age similar to mine still seem to refer to each
other as "girls."

--
- Frank Krygowski

On 2/15/2022 6:00 PM, russellseaton1@yahoo.com wrote:
>
> Tommy, before you pass, you need to write a book or describe to an author what it is like living with your mental capacity. Describe how your brain operates. Then sell this book. And make a movie too. I am positive it would go down as one of the greatest, most infamous horror movies in all time. It would rival Freddy the masked killer movie. And rival Texas chainsaw murderer.

That really is a brilliant idea! And hey, maybe Jute could help!

Just think, Tom, you'd finally have a chance at the fame you deserve!

(And we'd be free of the two top trolls for a while.)

--
- Frank Krygowski

On 2/15/2022 6:02 PM, Tom Kunich wrote:
>
> So now you're accepting the fact that women can outride you any day of the week. Interesting.

Tom, if you don't know any women who can outride you any day of the
week, you need to meet more interesting women.

Hell, one woman I know very well and have ridden with extensively
recently _ran_ 100 miles, solo. I have no doubt she could outride me if
she chose to.

Although I'll add, we haven't seen any clues that any women at all
currently associate with you.

--
- Frank Krygowski