Recognizing the Long Game – Quote of the Day

courtesy kitsapsun.com

“I was kind of upset. It’s a domino effect. They take one thing and they pick at it and pick at it until it’s eventually all gone. Next thing you know a Remington 700 is going to be a long-range sniper rifle that you don’t need for hunting.” – Robert Smallwood in At South Kitsap, students who support gun rights find their own forum [via kistapsun.com]

 

comments

  1. avatar Moltar says:

    He’s right you know. The FUDDS would do well to actually listen to him. Sure right now it’s all good they’re only banning bumpstocks and trying to ban those nasty black rifles that nobody hunts with, but what happens next? What happens after they ban those features and guns that you don’t “need” for hunting? You think it’ll be over? Ha, nope next they go for all semi autos, then bolt guns, then lever guns, then pump action guns, and then revolvers. Now I know there’s probably a FUDD out there somewhere saying well what’s that got to do with me? I hunt with a bow or black powder muzzle loader. Well see they may not come after a total ban on those, but you can guarantee they will institute some sort of regulation or background check/permit process that makes owning and buying those much much more difficult. So sure you stand up there FUDDS and you stump for those AR15 bans, you throw in on those semi auto bans, but just remember when that semi auto ban hits it’s probably going to include your Benelli. Every gun ban isn’t the end, it’s only a stepping stone to the next big ban and YOU are only one tragedy away from losing YOUR hunting rifle.

    1. avatar Art out West says:

      Do you think many Fudds still exist? I think most of them have woken up by now.

      By the way, left-handed boot action “sniper rifles” are especially dangerous. They allow evil lefties to shoot faster. I’m a lefty, and I want to get a left-handed boot action. I’m glad that I’m one of the good lefties.

      1. avatar Jandrews says:

        I think there are. I just took a handgun safety course in my state (WY) as a requirement for acquiring a CFP for travel to other states.

        The guy teaching it was a total FUDD. Was out of date on terminal performance of modern ammo (talked up .45acp’s stopping power compared to other common handgun calibers), talked shit about ARs being “more than people need for defense” etc.

        And this dude is *teaching* others. It’s a problem.

        1. avatar MamaLiberty says:

          Sadly, that problem is true of most all formal education processes these days. I’m so sorry you got a FUDD. Please don’t let that fool be the end of your search for good instruction. I’m retired now, but I know there are a lot of good instructors left in Wyoming. Please find one or more.

        2. avatar Garrison Hall says:

          I found myself in conversation with a FUDD a few years ago. He started the conversation with the all-too familiar I’m-a-gun-owner-but-I-don’t-think-anybody-needs-30-rounds-to-defend-themselves. To which I simply replied, “How in the hell would you know”? End of argument. The guy, a friend, never mentioned guns or gun-control to me again.

      2. avatar Quasimofo says:

        Ask any PA hunter who was looking forward to the PGC finally allowing semiautos for deer/bear/elk last year if Fudds exist…

    2. avatar anarchyst says:

      The problem is, we have allowed the anti Second Amendment crowd to define the terms.
      A firearm is a tool which possesses no evil intent on its own. Assigning intent to an inanimate object is the epitome of insanity. Demonizing a weapon on “looks alone” also marks the accuser as an unstable individual who is also insane. Call them out on their illogic and insanity.
      Another dirty tactic the anti-Second Amendment crowd uses exposes children to potential and actual harm by putting them in “gun-free zones”. These people care not one wit about children, but uses them for their own nefarious purposes.
      We need to TAKE BACK the argument…
      When the antis blame the firearm for the actions of a criminal, state that: “a firearm is an inanimate object, subject only to the intent of the user”. Firearms ARE “equalizers” and are used to preserve life and make a 90 lb. woman equal to a 200 lb. criminal”.
      When the antis attempt to justify their “gun free zones” counter their misguided argument with “you mean, criminal safety zones” or “victim disarmament zones”.
      State that “we protect our money, banks, politicians and celebrities, buildings and facilities with PEOPLE WITH GUNS, but protect our children with “gun-free zone” signs”.
      When the antis state that: “you don’t need and AR-15”, counter with, “Who are YOU to consider what I need or want?”
      When the antis criticize AR-15s in general, counter with: “you mean the most popular rifle of the day, use able by even the smallest, weakest person as a means of self-defense. Besides, AR-15s are FUN to shoot”. Offer to take them to the range and supply them with an AR-15, ammunition and range time. I have made
      many converts this way.
      When the antis state that: “You don’t need an AR-15 to hunt with”, counter with “AR-15s ARE used for hunting, but in many states, are prohibited from being used to take large game because they are underpowered”.
      When the antis state that: “AR-15s are high powered rifles”, correct them by stating that “AR-15s with the .223 or 5.56mm cartridge are considered medium-powered weapons–NOT “high-powered” by any means”.
      When the antis state that: “the Constitution was written during the time of muskets, and that the Second Amendment should only apply to “weapons of that time period”, state that: “by your logic, the First Amendment should not apply to modern-day telecommunications, internet, television, radio, public-address systems, books and newspapers produced on high-speed offset printing presses. Only “town-criers” and Benjamin Franklin type printing presses would be covered under the First Amendment”.
      When the antis state that “only law enforcement and government should possess firearms”, remind them of the latest school shooting, as well as Columbine, where “law enforcement” SAT ON THEIR HANDS while children were being murdered, citing “officer safety”, afraid to challenge the shooter, despite being armed to the hilt. The government-run murderous sieges at Ruby Ridge and Waco are also good examples of government (mis)use of firearms. Let’s not forget the millions murdered under communism by their governments AFTER their firearms were confiscated.
      This tome can be used to counter any argument against any infringement of our Second Amendment.

      1. avatar whoopie says:

        And no term is as ambiguous as “sporting use.” Who decides what defines “sporting?” If “real hunters” don’t need a semi-auto, tomorrow they won’t need a lever action and then a bolt action with 5 rd. internal magazine. Finally hunting with a gun or target shooting will be deemed “unsportsman like.” Then they’ll go after archery.

    3. avatar Red in CO says:

      Yep, as that’s exactly what happened in Australia. The useful idiots were shocked when their old bolt gun was suddenly reclassified as a “high powered sniper rifle”

    4. avatar aircooled says:

      The problem with FUDDS is that they don’t even know that they are FUDDS. Same thing goes for stupid people.

      1. avatar Jackass Jim says:

        When You’re Dead, You Don’t Know You’re Dead. It’s Only Difficult For Others. It’s The Same Way When You’re Stupid.

    5. avatar Francis King says:

      Yeah. The slippery slope argument. Or, you come forwards with a realistic series of gun regulations which enable the good guys to own guns, stops the bad guys from even getting a sniff of a gun, and which can tell the difference between the two groups.

      Then the gun issues slip below the radar scan, the gun owners quietly getting on with their thing, and the non gun owners get on with theirs.

      Since Mr Lapierre is sure to have some of his pay related to membership of the NRA, and nothing boosts NRA membership like a bit of paranoia, it could be argued that he has been set up to fail.

      1. avatar Rick the Bear says:

        Gun regulations, “realistic” or otherwise are fated to fail. As we saw with the TX shooting, the brilliantly unconstitutional Lautenberg Amendment (ex post facto, doncha know) didn’t work as the USAF didn’t report his conviction.

        The anti-rights groups responded by proffering more restrictive measures that can’t fail to help. Wash, rinse, repeat.

        How about “allowing” people to buy, own, and bear what they want and punish bad behavior?

      2. avatar Kroglikepie says:

        No, and fuck you. Not one more inch. We have tried playing ball for nearly 100 years and the anti-gunners ALWAYS WANT MORE. What part of that do you not understand. THE ANTI-GUNNERS ALWAYS WANT MORE. Repeat that as often as necessary until it gets through your thick skull.

      3. avatar Scoutino says:

        Surely you are kidding, right? When did any “regulation” ever stopped bad guys from getting their hands on anything they want? Drugs? How is another law going to change that? Murder is illegal and it doesn’t seem to stop all those murderers from committing it.

        Gun grabbers will not stop. Ever. Gun shot is already at about 100th place amongst causes of death – well under the radar. But grabbers will not be satisfied until they make even pictures of firearms illegal and only government agents and criminals are armed.

        No, thank you! And I want my rights back!

      4. avatar Hannibal says:

        “Or, you come forwards with a realistic series of gun regulations which enable the good guys to own guns, stops the bad guys from even getting a sniff of a gun…”
        -If you think this is possible means you don’t know enough about guns or laws. You will not now or ever find a circumstance where laws will keep guns in the hands of the “good guys” only, because the “bad guys” will break laws and steal guns.

        The reason the pro-gun side is done with “realistic… regulations” is that they’re always regulating the good guys. Every ‘compromise’ is one-way.

        If you want to get support for gun laws that gun owners don’t want (because they won’t work), even ones you think are “realistic”, offer something that gun owners DO want. That’s what compromise is.

    6. avatar anonymoose says:

      Yew jus need ta git yerself a good crawcebow, suuuuhn.

    7. avatar FUD says:

      Your use of the term FUDS makes you a jerk, so that anything you have to say after that is just piss in the wind.

      1. avatar Scoutino says:

        Fudds, not FUDS. As “wascally wabitt hunting Elmer Fudd”, you know?

  2. avatar Shire-man says:

    Yup. Dont forget, Fudds, that the same people who hate the guns also hate hunting. Even if you buy into the 2nd is for hunting and nobody needs X to hunt memes you’re still going to lose it all because the same orgs pushing gun violence nonsense also rejoice at the dwindling number of hunters and constantly push to restrict hunting from every angle possible. When they say nobody needs X to hunt they really mean nobody needs to hunt.

    Fudds arent only killing our gun rights they’re killing their own hunting rights.

    1. avatar anonymoose says:

      You need 10mm and 6.5 Grendel to hunt memes. Accept no substitutes.

    2. avatar MarkPA says:

      Excellent point.

      A far more severe problem is apparent from the deaths by gunshot statistics. How many rounds suffice for:
      – suicide (2/3’rds of gun deaths)
      – homicide, most of which are 1-on-1
      – armed robbery
      – assault
      – accident

      It is incontrovertible that if American society wants to make a dent in deaths by gun-shot then they will have to go after single-shot type actions.

      The tiger will eat you last, but he will most assuredly have you for desert.

  3. avatar Huntmaster says:

    The writing isn’t on the wall, they’ve engraved on your eyeballs. In case nobody has noticed the conversation is beginning to turn from so called assault rifles to any semi automatic firearm, large caliber rifles and of course what is erroneously called a large capacity magazine. So many people are now saying, “You don’t need an assault rifle”. And “You don’t need a magazine holding thirty rounds”. And now… It’s military STYLE weapons. Like the Rushbo says, “Words mean things folks”.

  4. avatar Freebird says:

    NRA – ILA issued an ALERT for Pennsylvania I read elsewhere…… O.K. that’s good , BUT … the Bills Listed are Different than those just advanced except SB – 501.

    For all their money and hundreds of employees ….. this is just plain SAD !
    If we can find this stuff easily online , why can’t they ? — ( or don’t they want to ? )

    These are current bills in PA. House , others may be added ;
    http://triblive.com/state/pennsylvania/13552063-74/pennsylvania-lawmakers-to-advance-5-bills-intended-to-reduce-gun-violence

  5. avatar Indiana Tom says:

    The 2A is for duck hunting and double barrel shotguns. All you need anyway. Nobody needs a Military Grade Assault Ghost Weapon with an Overcapacity Magazine.

    1. avatar Indiana Tom says:

      Remember, the 5.56mm round is too powerful for civilians per our top Generals.

  6. avatar TrappedInCommiefornia says:

    I don’t think it’ll actually ever get to the point where they will ban all bolt action rifles, they’ll just make the process of owning and hunting with it so difficult that most people won’t bother with it. There will be limits on calibers, amount of ammo you can own, places you can shoot. Prices for a hunting license will be ridiculous, as will the price of tags (if you’re lucky enough to draw one). Only the rich and well connected will have the option to enjoy a good hunt.
    But it’s all okay as long as the fudds get to virtue signal and speak out against those evil black rifles of war and death. /sarc

    1. avatar Huntmaster says:

      “I don’t think it’ll actually ever get to the point where they will ban all bolt action rifles, they’ll just make the process of owning and hunting with it so difficult that most people won’t bother with it.”

      Really? That is just a bunch of gobbledygook doublespeak. Really makes me feel better you’re on our side.

      1. avatar Rick the Bear says:

        The change in FFL regs during Clinton reduced the number of FFLs.

        The CLEO attitude & regs changes in MA reduced the number of LTCs.

        Read “Emily Gets Her Gun” for an idea at how the bureaucratic hoops in DC interfere with home gun ownership in DC.

        Stupid laws in CA limit the models of firearms legally available. In MA, too.

        Really? Yes, really.

        1. avatar MarkPA says:

          The drop in the number of FFLs needs to be used against the UBC drive.

          OK, so you guys want UBCs. You want everyone who wants to loan a gun to a neighbor to make two round trips to his friendly-neighborhood-FFL. And, by the way, you want to restrict the number of FFLs to the smallest possible number. No more kitchen-table FFLs.

          So, in rural areas, where will the FFLs be? They will be concentrated in each State’s few large cities; perhaps hundreds of miles from gun-users’ homes.

          In those counties with markets capable of supporting several FFLs, your plan is to drive-up the cost of doing business until there is only a single FFL in the county. That FFL will have a monopoly on access to NICS.

          We won’t let you get away with this plan. If you want to propose a UBC bill then it better open-up NICS access to easy-access by any legitimate applicant; e.g., notaries public, hardware stores, gas stations. If you aren’t willing to make this “common-sense” change then your true-stripes will be evident to all. You want to make life for gun-owners as onerous as possible. Our Congress-critters won’t stand for this; and we will vote-out-of-office those that defy our will.

          In the grand scheme of things, this point on the number of FFLs is seemingly miniscule. There are lots of other GRAND PRINCIPLES to draw attention to. But this misses the point.

          The point is that every gun-control Act must ultimately be committed to writing in the form of a Bill. Legislators must vote on the text in each such Bill. Legislators would prefer to be out-of-town when a controversial bill comes up for a vote; but this isn’t always an out. So, the legislator needs to ask himself two questions:
          – What do I tell my constituents if I vote Yes?
          – What do I tell my constituents if I vote No?

          We want to give our friendly legislators some simple messages to give their constituents after voting “No”:

          “I couldn’t vote for this well-meaning gun-control bill because it would be unconscionable to make peaceable law-abiding gun-owners in my District/State to comply with the requirement that they X or Y or Z.”

          It doesn’t matter what X or Y or Z might be; it only matters that they:
          – would be punished by one side if they had voted Yes;
          – would be forgiven by the other side if they had voted No.

      2. avatar Toni says:

        HUNTMASTER did you notice the /sarc at the end 🙂 yes it was intended as sarcasm. it was also getting into the typical doublespeak of the left that was written about in George Orwells 1984 and also to a more limited degree in Animal Farm. it is the sort of language the left use to change meanings of things. have a good read of these and also Saul Allinsky’s “Rules For Radicals”. may help you understand what he was actually saying and that he was deliberately using that language to emphasize the lefts mindset.

        he was not trying to be an anti… just using their language in a sarcastic way to show their standards….. of which there are none……. my comment is not a dig at you either 🙂

  7. avatar GS650G says:

    Just wait until another democrat gets in the white house. They won’t bother with social spending or anything else but gun bans and confiscation. we are about 3 years away from it being illegal to possess most of the firearms today.
    Our victories of past mobilized the more militant leftists and as soon as mass shootings took place they quickly put attention on the hardware. Shrewd but predictable.
    We played by the rules and stood behind laws and the legislative process while the other side worked emotions, media, and fabricated the level of support they had.
    I’m unsure what it’s going to take to keep what we have now, it’s all in play. Despite having a SCOTUS majority and hopes for a larger one the district courts, states and even cities are passing their own laws. Funny how these laws are enforced to a T while other laws are ignored.

    1. avatar Klaus Von Schmitto says:

      “we are about 3 years away from it being illegal to possess most of the firearms today…..”

      Sounds like I should get my affairs in order.

    2. avatar MarkPA says:

      @GS650S: You get it.

      The leaders of the Antis are experts at activating their supporters. We aren’t Jr. Varsity. We think it suffices to chant mantras about the Constitution, Rights, etc.

      I know what the 2A end-game is; and, I pray that we can resolve the dispute before it comes to that. To do so we have to get good at the political game. That’s:
      – SCOTUS;
      – Trump
      – US Senate
      – voters

      Not hard to figure out; but, it takes waking-up and looking up above the rim of one’s fox-hole.

  8. avatar former water walker says:

    BREAKING…Illinois lunatic murders 4 at Tennessee waffle house with AR 15-NAKED. Not kidding😡😩😖😟

    1. avatar Freebird says:

      Nothing good happens at Waffle House at 3am. — ” Naked Man ” … I’m SURE drugs had NOTHING to do with this as MSM focuses all attention on the tool used. Also note the speed with which we know everything about bad guy description ( WHITE GUY ) and gun used ( EBR ).

      Meanwhile , other ‘ demographics ‘ enjoy a vague PC description when slinging crack and and car-jacking Grandma. — ( in those cases we hear , ” Male with red shirt fled scene ” … and thats all )

      1. avatar Scoutino says:

        You know the perp’s race by its ommittion from his description. It works against the intended effect – it suggests default value if not mentioned otherwise.

  9. avatar Mutt says:

    3D printing could be our solution. Whatever happened to Cody Wilson?

    Cryptocurrencies could solve the virtue-signalling bank-that-won’t-fund-guns issue.

    1. avatar Geoff PR says:

      “3D printing could be our solution. Whatever happened to Cody Wilson?”

      The next time the Leftists get the levers of power, they will outlaw homemade guns…

      1. avatar Klaus Von Schmitto says:

        Without question. That will be at the top of the list.

      2. avatar Scoutino says:

        In Cali you have to get serial number registered before you finish that 80% lower. No more (legal) ghost guns.

    2. avatar Vic Nighthorse says:

      Cody Wilson is as active as ever. Just go to his sight ghostguns to see what he is up to.

  10. avatar Gordon in MO says:

    The long game may be a recent discovery to some people but it has been the real deal for a hundred years in America. Here is a quote from 1944 about the communist agenda:

    “The American people will never knowingly adopt socialism. But, under the name of “liberalism,” they will adopt every fragment of the socialist program, until one day America will be a socialist nation, without knowing how it happened. I no longer need to run as a Presidential Candidate for the Socialist Party. The Democratic Party has adopted our platform.”
    ― Norman Mattoon Thomas
    This gives you an idea of the “long game”.

    The communist party has been grooming people and working them into positions of influence until they now control most “positions of influence”. Universities, schools, judges, legislators, “charitable trusts”, bureaucrats, lawyers, media and on and on.

    When Hillary accused conservatives of a “vast right wing conspiracy” this is what she was diverting attention from.

    Trump may slow their progress down but when they get back in power they will push America over the cliff.

    They do want all your guns and they will kill to achieve that goal. And after they get all the guns they will eliminate anyone they consider a threat to their agenda. History tell the story, USSR, China, Cambodia, VietNam, North Korea, research the numbers killed in the 20th century.

    Be Prepared !

    1. avatar Toni says:

      Agreed completely. here in australia all the majors are basically communist/fascist if you look at their actions and not just what they say and sadly many of the minors are just towing the line to stay afloat. labor (which used to be conservative but working class) and the greens are the hardcore communist party today and they may as well be the same party. bring on the revolution before it is too late i say.

    2. avatar MarkPA says:

      Absolutely right. The 2A is one small but essential step in the long-game.

      In this respect, we as advocates for one issue (2A) must look for strategic alliances with advocates for other issues. I need not enumerate these; use your own imagination.

      Every advocate for some allied issue (agriculture, exports, law-enforcement, . . . ) is as committed as we are to avoid the end results of “politics by other means”. Such potential allies will be amenable to listening to our view-point as candidate allies with mutual interests in a Constitutional republic where sovereignty is vested in the People.

  11. avatar Green Mtn. Boy says:

    The long game is the second American revolution,Lets Dance !

  12. avatar anarchyst says:

    Quite often, firearms owners are their own worst enemies. The duck hunters don’t like the AR-15 “black rifles” so they see no problem if attempts are made to ban them. The traditional rifle owners don’t like machine guns, so they have no problem with them being legislated out of existence. Some pistol owners see nothing wrong with certain long guns being outlawed just as some rifle owners would have no problem seeing pistols banned.
    Friends, ALL firearms advocates must “hang together” and realize that an assault on ANY means of firearms ownership and self-defense is an assault on ALL forms of firearms ownership and self-defense.
    There is absolutely NO ROOM for complacency among ANY Second Amendment supporters. An attack on one is an attack on ALL…
    ALL firearms laws are unconstitutional on their face. Imagine the hue and cry if “reasonable” restrictions were placed on First Amendment activities, especially with the “mainstream media”. The Second Amendment is clear–what part of “shall not be infringed” do politicians and the media not understand…of course, they understand full well…it’s part of their communist agenda…

  13. avatar Gun Owning American says:

    Fudds are about the worst traitors that you can find.

  14. avatar Ralph says:

    It’s not the “long game.” It’s the “long con.” And millions of Americans are falling for it, hook, line and sinker.

  15. avatar CZJay says:

    In California they effectively banned handguns (and carrying). They put restrictions on what kind of handguns could be sold, they are so restrictive Californians can’t buy any newly designed handguns. The handguns on the list now are there until the manufacture doesn’t pay the recurring fee to stay on the list. Even if you find a gun worth carrying, you won’t be allowed to carry it unless you pay off the police or politicians.

  16. avatar BierceAmbrose says:

    When every fall leads to the next, “slippery slope” isn’t an argumennt, it’s a description.

  17. avatar SurfGW says:

    FUDDS are alive and well and will often advertise that they are FUDDS to appear more reasonable and credible to the general population who is often intimidated by AR15 owner “tactifools” / “posers”

  18. avatar ironicatbest says:

    AR AR AR you’d think an AR and a Gock are the only two firearms in existence. AR for home defense? Really. What are you defending your home against? Seven gang bangers that could have been taken out with a shotgun. Or defense against a government gone corrupted. How did that work out for Randy Weaver and David Koresh. Honestly I would be perfectly fine with defending my home with a shotgun and hunting with a bolt action rifle. F -uck U D-affy D-uck

    1. avatar Vic Nighthorse says:

      Randy Weaver and David Koresh made a stand against a vastly superior opponent. Making a stand like that is suicidal. Conducting guerilla warfare even with inferior numbers and weapons has proven effective time and time again, but FUDDs aren’t smart enough to grasp that. You can stick with a shotgun or a blunderbuss even if you want but leave the notion of what is needed or not for others to others.

    2. avatar uncommon_sense says:

      IronicAtBest,

      Weaver and Koresh were forced to fight their enemy on their enemy’s terms which is why they lost. Looking at it another way, their enemy launched a surprise attack with overwhelming numbers. Weaver and Koresh, without reinforcements, never had a chance.

      Our Second Amendment does not guarantee that everyone who owns firearms will survive a tyrannical government. Rather, our Second Amendment guarantees that everyone who owns firearms can — with non-trivial losses — eliminate a tyrannical government.

  19. avatar Jross says:

    100% correct.

    And you know what? I’ll help them. I’ll be the one helping them make their arguments not sound so stupid. With my help there wont be any “Shoulder thing that goes up.”

    You know why? Because I don’t hunt nor do I have access to ranges to use a bolt action that’s close enough that I’d be willing to drive to. Because after semi autos are gone, they’ll never come back in my life time. I’m not going to bother with the disgusting rifles they have in California or dumb ranges like in Australia with the pistols locked in place so you can’t off yourself.

    I’m sick of defending the freedoms of fudds only to have them turn around and say crap like “Well I hunt and I was in the army and I KNOW what these are capable of and civilians have no business owning them.”

    So hell, fine. That’s the way they’re going to play it? You fight to take away my means of self preservation, I’ll fight to take away your bolt guns. And it would be easy, the constitution doesn’t say anything about hunting.

    1. avatar MarkPA says:

      There is an alternate way to play the divide-and-conquer tactic.

      Address both sides.
      – what kind of “common sense” gun is suitable-to-the-task of suicide?
      – what kind of “common sense” guns are suitable-to-the-task of gun-crime?

      If you want to eliminate suicide-by-gun, 1-on-1 homicide-by-gun, armed-robbery by gun, you have to eliminate single-shots, double-barreled and handguns with a capacity of 5 – 6 – 7 rounds. That’s the end-game. Black-rifles, bayonet-mounts, pistol-grips and even 30-round magazines won’t put a dent in the statistics.

      So, if you gun-controllers are really serious about 30,000 deaths by gunshot per year, then go for it.

      Fudds, sports shooters, they’re coming for you. We told them how, and now they are on to your guns.

  20. avatar John Thayer says:

    Lefty rifle or reversed image?

    1. avatar JR Pollock says:

      I’m going with reversed image. It’s possible that he has a 3 turret scope, but given that most pictures are taken with smartphones that mirror the image, it probably was taken in selfie mode. No visible watch, or anything else to determine it short of blowing up the photo to be able to read the lettering on the scope.

      1. avatar tsbhoa.p.jr says:

        that’s c for carhart.

  21. avatar Joe R. says:

    “Next thing you know a Remington 700 is going to be a long-range sniper rifle that you don’t need for hunting. ”

    Then it’s time to make it a sniper rifle now. See how that works? It sucks, but, you get to say when.

  22. avatar Fred D says:

    Like everything else in life now a days LAWYERS are the root of the problem !
    There has to be a disclaimer on a stick of bubble gum !
    The bull washing LAWYERS have weaseled themselfs into every aspect of life !
    A criminal breaks your window to inter your property illegaly and cuts HIMSELF on the broken glass ,, and some LAWYER runs up & says YOUR glass was sharp & therefore posed a safety Hazzard , therefore it’s YOUR FALT the criminal was injured , and then some LAWYER judge agrees , releases the criminal & fines you $10,000 for your irresponsible glass !
    Why are the vast majority of public servant offices filled with or saught after by LAWYERS ??
    Because their liers & cheats , trained to twist language beyond it’s meaning , or court forbid its intent ! A woman spills her cup of coffee on herself , trying to eat , drink , put on her makeup , talk on the phone , all while trying to drive , & some LAWYER gets her a gazzilian dollars because the forkin coffee was hot !
    A LAWYER says a man should be allowed to use the ladies bathroom because he likes to wear lace panties !
    LAWYERS gain public servant offices and say OUR 6 YR old should be taught homosexuality in 1st grade , even before OUR Children are aware of carnal knowledge , now our 1st graders aren’t taught carpentry , or rocket science , but they NEED to be taught about sexual perversion ! Lawyer sponsored indoctrination of the youth , because homosexuals have rights far above accountants or doctors or millwrights !
    LAWYERS made it against the LAW to drive your truck without a seat belt on , because they care more about your best interest than you do ! But the LAWYERS have stolen SSI money to the point that hundreds of thousands of tax payers have lost all they payed into for 35-45 yrs ! I guess the LAWYERS no longer think SSI is in the publics
    best interest !
    The volumes of laws on the books can easily fill the library of Congress to the point you can’t open the front door , so many LAWYER imposed LAWS that 2/3 of them aren’t even enforceable because the ” so called ” authorities can’t keep track of all of them !
    LAWYERS are our biggest problem !
    An AMERICAN rents some land ” I say rent ” because LAWYERS say you have to pay taxes on THEIR land , ” so long as you have to pay on something else you loose it , it’s never yours , it’s THEIRS , you just rent it ! And the LAWYERS say if you want to lay a 4’×4′ slab to set an air conditioner on , you have to pay for a permit to get their permission to alter THEIR land !
    LAWYERS are our biggest problem !
    LAWYERS have made thousands of laws on gun control , none of them work , & they can’t enforce most of them , and only seek to enforce the ones that affect the law abiding CITIZENRY , yet LAWYERS want to write more gun laws !
    The one thing , one , that you can trust a LAWYER to do , is to keep writing laws , because that promotes & protects their lucrative careers !
    LAWYERS are our biggest problem !

    1. avatar Toni says:

      yep quite agree and truth be known the FF’s were quite against the whole titles BS that the judicial system uses that they got from Brittan. in fact most of the judiciary after the war of 1812 were trained in Brittan and that is where the titles BS started

Write a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

button to share on facebook
button to tweet
button to share via email