Baptist Churches Use's Gun Giveaways For Jesus

You are correct, I was going by my experience at the gun range. There is a reason why I don't hunt, and that is because I'm a lousy shot. I know there is a difference though. All I'm going by is my coworkers who actually hunt, and they prefer a rifle over a handgun.

Handguns have less kick to it, but I find a rifle to be more accurate at distance.

I tried hunting once it isn't that fun without beer. Sit near a tree with a gun which is no different than every other day of my life.

I don't hunt because I have no reason to kill animals, and as far as I'm concerned: hunting for sport should be outlawed.

As far as deer: make them extinct.

Deer taste delicious though.

Sometimes, they'll even risk the penalty of getting caught picking up road kill during the off season for the meat if its fresh. Talking about elk, deer, etc.

damn straight!

Statistics show that the VAST majority of break-ins are perpetrated while people are not at home, where there is minimal lighting, and by small-time criminals. The most effective way to protect your home/family is deterrent. Signage of burglar alarms, good exterior lighting, and neighborhood watch programs cut the number of break-ins by (estimates by DoJ) up to 95%.

Monitored alarms have a typical response time of 6mins in suburban areas and up to 18mins in rural, which admittedly is too long to catch most intruders. That is from the initial alarm state to LEO's arriving at the residence.

Again, I'm not talking about the situation everyone seems to assume when an armed and violent person breaks into your house with the intent of hurting someone. That's a very very remote possibility, but it does happen, and there are tons of statistics showing that you are more likely to injure yourself, a family member, or a pet than successfully fend off an armed intruder. Top that off with the fact that most responsible gun owners (the only ones worth using for any of these examples) will have the weapon unloaded and secured. I defy even the most experienced gun owner to unsecure, load, ascertain the identity and intentions of an "intruder" and land a shot while disoriented and scared in the dark in less time than it takes for said intruder to find and hurt them.

People have grandiose ideas of heroism, chances are they will end up shooting their own family member who is sneaking back in after a party or something.

You promote gun rights for the sake of killing human beings but you object to hunters who, whether doing it for sport, food, or both, are necessary to keeping down the populations of certain species? Deer will literally eat themselves out of house and home and then die en masse if we don't thin their numbers. Not killing them is less humane than killing them.

Which is why I don't object to hunting rifles. Because I'm apparently more cognizant of the purposes of guns beyond flinging projectiles.

As for deer extinction, that would have devastating results on our ecology, too. Which is why there are hunting seasons and limits.

There are measures for transitioning them back to sustainable populations. Similar measures were used to reduce the population of now closed commercial fisheries in Oregon and Washington. But, you are right, you cannot simply stop thinning a herd you have built up.

I'd be interested to know what those measures are. Since we've effectively destroyed most of the peak predators, especially here in the Northeast, there's not a lot to keep them from breeding out of control. And deer are nearly as prolific as rodents in that respect. Unless we have a way to buff up the local wolf and cougar populations, I can't see any way to keep them in check except by regular hunting. If the population gets too big and interest is low during a given year, rangers will go out and kill them, after all.

And that's just deer. There are plenty of other animals out there that we hunt. I have family who have survived many a winter on moose, for instance. I wouldn't recommend it, though, as it is gamey as hell.

Not that bad, in a lot of areas (at least around here) their natural predators are gone, we killed them, that's why they allow people to kill them, as nature can't keep them in check anymore, we'd be better off without the disgusting creatures.

I'd say we kill them all right now and be done with it.

No I defend gun rights to defend gun rights, nothing more. I definitely don't promote killing people.

Stop trying to act like you're better than people just because you can't admit that the purpose of a gun is to shoot a projectile, nothing more.

Mostly it consists of re-introducing predators, restoring remote habitats, etc. It's not an easy process, to be sure, but governments around the world have had relative success re-stabilizing populations in specific areas. Broad scope control of wild animal populations and ecosystems has failed miserably, however.

I'll admit though: that I just *** hate deer.

First id like to see statistics that are unbiased. Everyone claims to get "statistics" from biased sources on either end. Or a biased anti-gun website that makes these statistics up. Places with more gun laws (even not in the US) have a higher violent crime rate. When they speak of "gun violence" they also include gang shootings. Which gangs shouldn't have firearms to begin with. Which the US government was found out to be supplying arms to drug cartels. Its Not grandiose ideas of heroism. There is always an open possibility to kill the people you love without directly intending to. You assume that all gun owners have no special training or don't take any precautions in the home. Nothing is going to be fail proof. Just like when you go out in a vehicle everyday you could not be paying attention and get into a car accident indirectly killing people or people within the vehicle. But because guns are the common topic atm its in human nature to demonize something, eradicate it hoping it will solve the issues behind the killing nature that is human kind. Responsible gun owners will *** the situation not go in with guns blazing.

Cops are also less trained. Knew someone who was a police officer in a different state. He said all he had to do was land on the paper which explains why some police officers miss shoot and shoot kids. But its ok they're cops and government right? Not speaking on behalf of other governments but the US's is about corrupt as it gets. Second amendment serves a purpose its not a "hunting" amendment. But you have a choice not to participate pretty easy solution. We all agree keep the guns out of the hands of the criminals but dont keep the guns out of the hands of law abiding citizens because of irrational fear.

Sorry *some cops are less trained then people who go for whatever carry permit in whatever state.

All my points are based on government published statistics (DoJ) I've seen over the last few years. I don't necessarily believe they are more accurate or less biased, but it would be dishonest to use most independent agency's statistics as well. Either way, the range of variance isn't as large as you may think.

As far as accuracy goes with a firearm or injuring ones self or family if a threat were to occur..I hardly shoot but last time I did I out shot a Veteran who was 25th Infantry... there are citizens that train harder then cops or military.

The second amendment is a hot topic these days. Its not about hunting or sport. but to keep Tyrants at bay. I see many people who may be from other countries I say one thing only to you. Mind your own please. I don't tell France what laws they should have. I don't tell Russia to ban Vodka or bears or what ever.

If you do not like firearms don't own one. As far as "responsible gun owners" go A responsible person keeps their firearm at the ready keeps trained with it and knows the ins and outs. its not about locking it up. Most safes I can break into with a pocket knife. or just carry the thing off. most Firearm owners dont have bolted 1 thousand pound safes.

As far as hunting goes your basic set up for Hog hunting is a handgun either large caliber or some sort of auto loader (Glock Browning Sig etc) with an auto loading rifle (Semi Auto such as AR15 SKS RFB etc) and a large blade(Kabar Buck Ontario etc) and smaller skinning blade. so depending on the game your gear will change. Mission Specific mission drives gear what are you hunting?

Big game like Deer Elk Moose I would prefer a large caliber revolver such as 357,44,500 etc a nice bolt action rifle. in my state rifles are illegal to hunt with unless its a pistol caliber rifle.such as a rifle in 357.

A lot of people try and demonize a type of firearm such as an AR15 I don't own one dont even want one. but the round it shoot is a 5.56 or .223 Remington the .223 was designed for varmint hunting. Despite the rumors about the round its not powerful. Only reason the Military picked it up was because it was small and light. your common hunting round is more powerful then a .223 a 30-30 will completely blow up a water mellon while a 223 or 556 will punch a tiny little hole in it.

I don't know any trophy hunters the only hunters I know hunt for the dinner table. and if Im coyote hunting I'll take my Mini 14 with jungle mags (2 30 round mags) folding stock and my 1911 with a large knife.

People got worked into a fit because some church is giving away some firearms. the culture is different outside your big cities. in a big city this probably would be illegal but outside the city where the buffalo roam and natives still scalp white men..(being sarcastic) its a whole different world. Most of the people who are against firearms you probably never been in the same room as one let alone actually shot.

Its second nature to me handling a piece of machinery. There is no magic or fairy dust. your computer does not turn on unless you turn it on. your TV does not change channels unless you change it your self. Firearms are the same way. very few firearms actually go off when you drop them if you have one that does its freaking ancient.. Firearms don't cause mass killings humans do. reason why its so bad here in the states is because we have to many people who intend to do bad. we don't have a "gun" problem we have an idiot problem.

Honestly you're a lot more likely for your computer to turn on or your TV to change channel than a gun to fire without pulling the trigger.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qBFJEEp9NOg for the lulz

could do without the hate baiting sticker at the end, but other than that, not too terribly funny, but I get their point.

This tread is amazing. Half the people dont even know what they are talking about. The ones that do know I love the comments. Just as a little info. Here in Colorado you can not hunt with a handgun. Nor can you hunt with any big game "deer, elk, bear, moose" with a rifle caliber smaller then .243. That is .223, .22-250 because they are not powerful enough round to take down larger animals without perfect placement. The Division of Wildlife wants to make sure if you shoot something that you can and will find it and it not running off and dieing later thus wasting the animal. Everyone I know that trophy hunts uses the whole animal. Also the reasons the government decided to go with the .223/5.56 for many of the weapon was that it's not a kill round, once the enemy is shot and wounded "not killed" it take 1-2 more guys to grab the wounded and move them to safety. Thus getting 2-3 enemies out of battle. Yes it can kill but less likely. Also the recoil of the round is less for full auto weapons and, the cost per round is far less and very plentiful. The enemy leaders/prime targets are 90% of the time shot by snipers at distance with 300 win. mags, .308s, 50bmg and the like. Also evil finds a way no matter what. You can make a bomb to level a city block with stuff you can buy legally at the super market and google how to do it. So we can go on and on about pros and cons and you still wouldn't change my mind about banning guns.

5.56 and 7.62 are popular because they are universal as well. Being able to utilize any enemy ammunition you get your hands on is a strong asset.

I hate deer as well Jet, last time I went deer hunting I had a clean shot and hit the base of his left antler at 250 yards, blew it clean off. He bolted of course, and all I was left with was the antler, which hangs on my wall, mocking me. *** deer.

That was the theory in Nam honestly I think the M14 in 308 should have never been replaced. It may fly in the western world but when the idea of pulling your dead or dying fireteam to safety is using a dang hook or just leaving them there kinda messes up that theory! Honestly the Armalite was only accept because of cost. but that is neither here nor there.

Depends on the state for what the laws are. but im more likely to go Coyote hunting the deer hunting. Don't need Coyotes messing with my friends chickens and live stock. they will even kill hogs too (Bacon for people who don't know!)

Try the pains of deer hunting with a bow. Much more stalking and much more satisfying.

Didn't Jesus say something about putting the sword down?

Nah, *** that, we give you swords.

And they shall beat their plowshares into swords and go forth and study war.

Or something along those lines.....

Interestingly enough Russian guns will chamber 7.62 Nato rounds but western guns can't 7.62 Russian ammo. Shoulder angle.....

Like a Mosin Nagant can chamber a 308? There is a company making an AR15 in 5.45x39 I think it was S&W

A Mosin will not shoot a .308. The .308 is also the same as a 7.62x51mm. The Mosin is a 7.62x54r. The case length is different. The r means Russian. Most American .308 bolt action hunting rifles will not shoot a 7.62x51mm. The AR10/.308 which is the big brother to the AR15 is the one that can use both. I have 2 Mosins, a Remington .308, an DPMS AR10. All take different ammo which sucks but it happens.