What The Hell Does A Normal American Need An Army Assault Weapon For.....Target Practice?

[Divine Wind]

?

Did you even read the comment I was responding to? They were originally making the assertion that the police are there so weapons are not needed. It was mentioned by the person I quoted that the police are never that close unless you live in the inner city.

I was pointing out that is irrelevant - cops are not effective there either in protecting you from crime. They do prevent some crimes in the manner that I mentioned but in the end, if you are being victimized by a criminal I can virtually guarantee that the police are NOT going to be there to help you until AFTER the criminal is done with you be that mean you are robbed, raped or dead.

The argument (and I think you agree here) that the police are there so we do not need to protect ourselves is naive in the extreme.

Thanks for the clarification. Yes, we're agreed.

 

[jon_berzerk]

yes the leftist had/has no idea

not a clue as to what DUE PROCESS is

A slight disagreement. They do know what due process is, but like the Second Amendment, they want to rewrite the Constitution in their own image and eliminate any inconvenient parts.

Due process, the right of self defense and anything else contrary to giving the State absolute power to make decisions for our "best interests" are part of their agenda to be written out or nullified.

her masters know what DUE PROCESS is

she didnt have a clue as to what it is

otherwise agreed

 

[Cecilie1200]

Now that I think of it, she shoots a bow right-handed, too.

Well, the bow is less about your dominant hand and more about your dominant eye, which isn't always on the same side. Basically, your eyes working together "center" your vision between them, but they will base that centering more on one eye than the other. If you point at a distant object with both eyes open, and then close one eye without moving your finger, your finger should appear to move away from the object. If it doesn't, then the eye that's still open is your dominant eye, and is the side you should be using to aim.

My husband is the only person I've ever met who can aim equally well with either eye.

with my recurve i shoot instinctively

whereas with my compound bows i shoot through a peep sight

and regular iron sight with the cross bow

You have to shoot non-compound bows instinctively. If you try to hold the arrow drawn and aim, you'll throw it off entirely. Primitive-style bows require you to shoot them thousands of times - or more - until the bow and arrow become like extensions of your body, and you just "know" the best way to get the arrow to the target.

I shoot archery with the SCA, so no technological advancements are allowed. The bow has to be a style that was used in the Middle Ages, made of wood and other natural resources (although they make allowances for the fact that very few people can afford an "authentic" bow and have to use laminated pressed-wood from modern manufacturers), with wooden arrows (they will allow fake-feather fletching, since real-feather can be tough and expensive to get). Let me tell you, quality wooden arrows are a BITCH to get hold of. Except for a handful of companies who service the recreationist community, the majority of wooden arrows are intended for things like Boy Scout and YMCA summer camps, and they're cheap garbage.

 

[Cecilie1200]

Now that I think of it, she shoots a bow right-handed, too.

Well, the bow is less about your dominant hand and more about your dominant eye, which isn't always on the same side. Basically, your eyes working together "center" your vision between them, but they will base that centering more on one eye than the other. If you point at a distant object with both eyes open, and then close one eye without moving your finger, your finger should appear to move away from the object. If it doesn't, then the eye that's still open is your dominant eye, and is the side you should be using to aim.

My husband is the only person I've ever met who can aim equally well with either eye.

i shoot both right or left handed

I typically fire guns using both hands, because I am beginning to get arthritis, and it can be difficult for me to manage with only one hand. I can't fire a bow with my right hand to save my life. Like I said before, my right hand is completely stupid and useless in most activities.

 

[Cecilie1200]

Gun Control And Mass Shootings: Would Lives Be Saved?

Blogs = "I have no proof, but someone on the Internet says I'm right!"

You should preface that with "LIBERAL blogs= I have no proof, but someone on the internet says I'm right!"

Because I've seen endless blogs well sourced and filled with facts. It's just that none of them are done by the ignorant and ideological liberal.

I still prefer links to the actual sources, rather than to a blog citing sources.

These days, you get people ostensibly on the right citing blogs as proof of things, too, and it's a very bad habit evidencing incredibly sloppy debate skills.

Most all of them provide a link to the source.

I prefer that posters simply include the link directly to the source, because I will not read a blog citation or go to the trouble of following the links. I will read links to reliable sources, but there's a hard limit on how much work I will bother to put into someone else's post.

 

[jon_berzerk]

Now that I think of it, she shoots a bow right-handed, too.

Well, the bow is less about your dominant hand and more about your dominant eye, which isn't always on the same side. Basically, your eyes working together "center" your vision between them, but they will base that centering more on one eye than the other. If you point at a distant object with both eyes open, and then close one eye without moving your finger, your finger should appear to move away from the object. If it doesn't, then the eye that's still open is your dominant eye, and is the side you should be using to aim.

My husband is the only person I've ever met who can aim equally well with either eye.

with my recurve i shoot instinctively

whereas with my compound bows i shoot through a peep sight

and regular iron sight with the cross bow

You have to shoot non-compound bows instinctively. If you try to hold the arrow drawn and aim, you'll throw it off entirely. Primitive-style bows require you to shoot them thousands of times - or more - until the bow and arrow become like extensions of your body, and you just "know" the best way to get the arrow to the target.

I shoot archery with the SCA, so no technological advancements are allowed. The bow has to be a style that was used in the Middle Ages, made of wood and other natural resources (although they make allowances for the fact that very few people can afford an "authentic" bow and have to use laminated pressed-wood from modern manufacturers), with wooden arrows (they will allow fake-feather fletching, since real-feather can be tough and expensive to get). Let me tell you, quality wooden arrows are a BITCH to get hold of. Except for a handful of companies who service the recreationist community, the majority of wooden arrows are intended for things like Boy Scout and YMCA summer camps, and they're cheap garbage.

You have to shoot non-compound bows instinctively.


way back when you could get sights for them

i never used one though i always shot instinctively

If you try to hold the arrow drawn and aim

i found if you hold the bow too tight you will throw off the flight of the arrow

i hold any of my bows with just my pointing finger and thumb

when shooting instinctively you still aim but through an imagined path of flight

accuracy involves a repeated and established anchor point and a

consistent form and intense focus on your target

 

[OKTexas]

I have no problem with the 2nd amendment.......I have no problem with hand guns, shotguns, hunting rifles, etc. Anybody who thinks a normal U S citizen has any need for an automatic rifle capable of military combat has their right wing head so far up their ass that they'll never smell fresh air again. The folks who wrote the 2nd amendment had no knowledge of any weapon more advanced than a single shot musket with a 10-15 second reload time. GET REAL!!!!

Speaking of people with their heads up their asses, have you ever considered the bad precedent being set by using "need" as a requirement for an enumerated right? Any right?

Do you really need a faster computer? Internet access? A printer? Do you need to have freedom of or from religion? Do you need any of those rights...or do the needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few or the one? Have you really considered how dark that path you are suggesting could become?

Trey Gowdy grilled one of the left wing idiots on just this topic.....Dan and Amy, the local radio show played clips of him questioning and idiot from Homeland or the Justice department on the No fly list.....he asked her if we can deprive a person of their 2nd Amendment rights simply by putting them on the list...how about their 5th Amendment rights...or their 8th Amendment rights.......what rights can we strip from people without due process simply by putting them on a list?

Her reply?

Here it is....it's great....

I like Gowdy, but he asked the wrong question. He should have asked her if she considered he ability to travel, including by air, part of her liberty. When she answered in the affirmative, he should have asked why DHS is taking others citizens liberty, by placing them on a no fly list, in violation of their 5th and 6th amendment rights.

 

[jon_berzerk]

I have no problem with the 2nd amendment.......I have no problem with hand guns, shotguns, hunting rifles, etc. Anybody who thinks a normal U S citizen has any need for an automatic rifle capable of military combat has their right wing head so far up their ass that they'll never smell fresh air again. The folks who wrote the 2nd amendment had no knowledge of any weapon more advanced than a single shot musket with a 10-15 second reload time. GET REAL!!!!

Speaking of people with their heads up their asses, have you ever considered the bad precedent being set by using "need" as a requirement for an enumerated right? Any right?

Do you really need a faster computer? Internet access? A printer? Do you need to have freedom of or from religion? Do you need any of those rights...or do the needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few or the one? Have you really considered how dark that path you are suggesting could become?

Trey Gowdy grilled one of the left wing idiots on just this topic.....Dan and Amy, the local radio show played clips of him questioning and idiot from Homeland or the Justice department on the No fly list.....he asked her if we can deprive a person of their 2nd Amendment rights simply by putting them on the list...how about their 5th Amendment rights...or their 8th Amendment rights.......what rights can we strip from people without due process simply by putting them on a list?

Her reply?

Here it is....it's great....

I like Gowdy, but he asked the wrong question. He should have asked her if she considered he ability to travel, including by air, part of her liberty. When she answered in the affirmative, he should have asked why DHS is taking others citizens liberty, by placing them on a no fly list, in violation of their 5th and 6th amendment rights.

that is a great question

 

[Divine Wind]

Most all of them provide a link to the source.

Ageed on both points. It's always great, and smart, to point to a reliable source, but blogs aren't always the best sources since I could start a blog about bat men on the Moon and, well you know.

Facts are always a great introduction to heated discussions. Democrats have always been notorious for "wearing their hearts on their sleeve", whereas Republicans used to be more "business-like". Nowadays I can't tell the fucking difference between Democrats and Republicans except by their agenda. Both are as emotionally irrational as a woman going through menopause.

 

[OKTexas]

[Qded (it has grips molded for a righty), she was pretty good. Not as good as she was left-handed, but probably better than 90% of thugs.

My son is a right handed but left eye dominate.

I recently built him a left handed AR with a Stag Arms upper. Now he can line the sights up on his left shoulder with his left eye.

I'm left eye dominate, but I shoot just fine right handed.

 

[Jarlaxle]

Now that I think of it, she shoots a bow right-handed, too.

Well, the bow is less about your dominant hand and more about your dominant eye, which isn't always on the same side. Basically, your eyes working together "center" your vision between them, but they will base that centering more on one eye than the other. If you point at a distant object with both eyes open, and then close one eye without moving your finger, your finger should appear to move away from the object. If it doesn't, then the eye that's still open is your dominant eye, and is the side you should be using to aim.

My husband is the only person I've ever met who can aim equally well with either eye.

with my recurve i shoot instinctively

whereas with my compound bows i shoot through a peep sight

and regular iron sight with the cross bow

You have to shoot non-compound bows instinctively. If you try to hold the arrow drawn and aim, you'll throw it off entirely. Primitive-style bows require you to shoot them thousands of times - or more - until the bow and arrow become like extensions of your body, and you just "know" the best way to get the arrow to the target.

I shoot archery with the SCA, so no technological advancements are allowed. The bow has to be a style that was used in the Middle Ages, made of wood and other natural resources (although they make allowances for the fact that very few people can afford an "authentic" bow and have to use laminated pressed-wood from modern manufacturers), with wooden arrows (they will allow fake-feather fletching, since real-feather can be tough and expensive to get). Let me tell you, quality wooden arrows are a BITCH to get hold of. Except for a handful of companies who service the recreationist community, the majority of wooden arrows are intended for things like Boy Scout and YMCA summer camps, and they're cheap garbage.

Wouldn't it be easier to make your own? Can't imagine good-quality wood is that hard to find.

 

[Divine Wind]

I'm left eye dominate, but I shoot just fine right handed.

A matter of practice.

I'm left handed, but right-eyed and have always shot right-handed. I have practiced being ambidextrous, but not very good except with a 12 gauge.

 

[Cecilie1200]

Now that I think of it, she shoots a bow right-handed, too.

Well, the bow is less about your dominant hand and more about your dominant eye, which isn't always on the same side. Basically, your eyes working together "center" your vision between them, but they will base that centering more on one eye than the other. If you point at a distant object with both eyes open, and then close one eye without moving your finger, your finger should appear to move away from the object. If it doesn't, then the eye that's still open is your dominant eye, and is the side you should be using to aim.

My husband is the only person I've ever met who can aim equally well with either eye.

with my recurve i shoot instinctively

whereas with my compound bows i shoot through a peep sight

and regular iron sight with the cross bow

You have to shoot non-compound bows instinctively. If you try to hold the arrow drawn and aim, you'll throw it off entirely. Primitive-style bows require you to shoot them thousands of times - or more - until the bow and arrow become like extensions of your body, and you just "know" the best way to get the arrow to the target.

I shoot archery with the SCA, so no technological advancements are allowed. The bow has to be a style that was used in the Middle Ages, made of wood and other natural resources (although they make allowances for the fact that very few people can afford an "authentic" bow and have to use laminated pressed-wood from modern manufacturers), with wooden arrows (they will allow fake-feather fletching, since real-feather can be tough and expensive to get). Let me tell you, quality wooden arrows are a BITCH to get hold of. Except for a handful of companies who service the recreationist community, the majority of wooden arrows are intended for things like Boy Scout and YMCA summer camps, and they're cheap garbage.

You have to shoot non-compound bows instinctively.


way back when you could get sights for them

i never used one though i always shot instinctively

If you try to hold the arrow drawn and aim

i found if you hold the bow too tight you will throw off the flight of the arrow

i hold any of my bows with just my pointing finger and thumb

when shooting instinctively you still aim but through an imagined path of flight

accuracy involves a repeated and established anchor point and a

consistent form and intense focus on your target

You can still get sights for them, although like I said, the group I shoot with doesn't allow their use. And even with a sight, it's still not advised to hold the draw more than a second or so.

I don't really hold my bow at all. I have a strap attached to it that loops over my wrist. I snug it into the web between my thumb and index finger, with my fingers lying on either side and pressing just enough to steady the bow, but not gripping. When I draw, it pulls the bow back against the cradle I form, and when I release, the strap (which is pretty snug against my wrist at all times) catches the weight of the bow on my wrist and keeps it in my hand. It prevents a grip that would create a "jerk" on the release.

I shot a bullseye the first time I ever fired a bow. The only reason I don't rank higher in my organization is that I really, REALLY need to build my back muscles enough to let me draw a heavier bow. Mine is 28 pounds, and simply doesn't have the heft to provide accuracy at the farthest distances. I have a sweet 45-lb that was a gift, but I can barely move the string. I can fire a 35-lb, but only for short periods of time. I need a new bow, and I'm really considering just upgrading to the 35 and working it as much as I can stand, to work the muscles.

 

[OKTexas]

Speaking of people with their heads up their asses, have you ever considered the bad precedent being set by using "need" as a requirement for an enumerated right? Any right?

Do you really need a faster computer? Internet access? A printer? Do you need to have freedom of or from religion? Do you need any of those rights...or do the needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few or the one? Have you really considered how dark that path you are suggesting could become?

Trey Gowdy grilled one of the left wing idiots on just this topic.....Dan and Amy, the local radio show played clips of him questioning and idiot from Homeland or the Justice department on the No fly list.....he asked her if we can deprive a person of their 2nd Amendment rights simply by putting them on the list...how about their 5th Amendment rights...or their 8th Amendment rights.......what rights can we strip from people without due process simply by putting them on a list?

Her reply?

Here it is....it's great....

That was rather hilarious. She had no idea how to respond.

Those advocating for gun control really do not see the second as a right and cannot fathom how the comparison follows. The answer has always been the same - if they really feel that way then they need to change the constitution. Never try that though because it is obvious that such has no chance of ever happening so they, instead, simply try and subvert the constitution itself.

yes the leftist had/has no idea

not a clue as to what DUE PROCESS is

Oh they have a clue when it comes to their victim classes, they just don't give a shit about the rest of us.

 

[Cecilie1200]

Most all of them provide a link to the source.

Ageed on both points. It's always great, and smart, to point to a reliable source, but blogs aren't always the best sources since I could start a blog about bat men on the Moon and, well you know.

Facts are always a great introduction to heated discussions. Democrats have always been notorious for "wearing their hearts on their sleeve", whereas Republicans used to be more "business-like". Nowadays I can't tell the fucking difference between Democrats and Republicans except by their agenda. Both are as emotionally irrational as a woman going through menopause.

Speaking as a woman going through menopause, let me just say that most people today act MORE like drama queen crybabies than I could ever imagine doing, even during the worst hot flash.

 

[Cecilie1200]

Now that I think of it, she shoots a bow right-handed, too.

Well, the bow is less about your dominant hand and more about your dominant eye, which isn't always on the same side. Basically, your eyes working together "center" your vision between them, but they will base that centering more on one eye than the other. If you point at a distant object with both eyes open, and then close one eye without moving your finger, your finger should appear to move away from the object. If it doesn't, then the eye that's still open is your dominant eye, and is the side you should be using to aim.

My husband is the only person I've ever met who can aim equally well with either eye.

with my recurve i shoot instinctively

whereas with my compound bows i shoot through a peep sight

and regular iron sight with the cross bow

You have to shoot non-compound bows instinctively. If you try to hold the arrow drawn and aim, you'll throw it off entirely. Primitive-style bows require you to shoot them thousands of times - or more - until the bow and arrow become like extensions of your body, and you just "know" the best way to get the arrow to the target.

I shoot archery with the SCA, so no technological advancements are allowed. The bow has to be a style that was used in the Middle Ages, made of wood and other natural resources (although they make allowances for the fact that very few people can afford an "authentic" bow and have to use laminated pressed-wood from modern manufacturers), with wooden arrows (they will allow fake-feather fletching, since real-feather can be tough and expensive to get). Let me tell you, quality wooden arrows are a BITCH to get hold of. Except for a handful of companies who service the recreationist community, the majority of wooden arrows are intended for things like Boy Scout and YMCA summer camps, and they're cheap garbage.

Wouldn't it be easier to make your own? Can't imagine good-quality wood is that hard to find.

Define "easier". I know exactly two things about bowyery (not sure even if that's correct): jack and shit. Not only that, I haven't clue one how to do anything with woodworking tools, or even which ones are which. Bowyers (I know THAT'S correct) are specialized and very skilled craftsmen, which is why the work of those who make authentic wood bows command such high prices.

I do, however, fletch my own arrows. I get the shafts from a company in Canada, which makes them from pie-shaped shaft sections pressed together into a round, so that the grain goes all the way around, instead of going through and leaving the shaft vulnerable to shattering and feathering. I like to put the fletchings on in a spiral shape rather than straight lines, which gives the arrow a bit of spin and makes its flight truer.

 

[OKTexas]

Gun Control And Mass Shootings: Would Lives Be Saved?

Blogs = "I have no proof, but someone on the Internet says I'm right!"

You should preface that with "LIBERAL blogs= I have no proof, but someone on the internet says I'm right!"

Because I've seen endless blogs well sourced and filled with facts. It's just that none of them are done by the ignorant and ideological liberal.

I still prefer links to the actual sources, rather than to a blog citing sources.

These days, you get people ostensibly on the right citing blogs as proof of things, too, and it's a very bad habit evidencing incredibly sloppy debate skills.

Most all of them provide a link to the source.

I prefer that posters simply include the link directly to the source, because I will not read a blog citation or go to the trouble of following the links. I will read links to reliable sources, but there's a hard limit on how much work I will bother to put into someone else's post.

OK, but that's on you isn't it?

 

[OKTexas]

I'm left eye dominate, but I shoot just fine right handed.

A matter of practice.

I'm left handed, but right-eyed and have always shot right-handed. I have practiced being ambidextrous, but not very good except with a 12 gauge.

Yep, been doing it that way all my life, well at least for the last 58 years.

 

[Divine Wind]

Now that I think of it, she shoots a bow right-handed, too.

Well, the bow is less about your dominant hand and more about your dominant eye, which isn't always on the same side. Basically, your eyes working together "center" your vision between them, but they will base that centering more on one eye than the other. If you point at a distant object with both eyes open, and then close one eye without moving your finger, your finger should appear to move away from the object. If it doesn't, then the eye that's still open is your dominant eye, and is the side you should be using to aim.

My husband is the only person I've ever met who can aim equally well with either eye.

with my recurve i shoot instinctively

whereas with my compound bows i shoot through a peep sight

and regular iron sight with the cross bow

You have to shoot non-compound bows instinctively. If you try to hold the arrow drawn and aim, you'll throw it off entirely. Primitive-style bows require you to shoot them thousands of times - or more - until the bow and arrow become like extensions of your body, and you just "know" the best way to get the arrow to the target.

I shoot archery with the SCA, so no technological advancements are allowed. The bow has to be a style that was used in the Middle Ages, made of wood and other natural resources (although they make allowances for the fact that very few people can afford an "authentic" bow and have to use laminated pressed-wood from modern manufacturers), with wooden arrows (they will allow fake-feather fletching, since real-feather can be tough and expensive to get). Let me tell you, quality wooden arrows are a BITCH to get hold of. Except for a handful of companies who service the recreationist community, the majority of wooden arrows are intended for things like Boy Scout and YMCA summer camps, and they're cheap garbage.

You have to shoot non-compound bows instinctively.


way back when you could get sights for them

i never used one though i always shot instinctively

If you try to hold the arrow drawn and aim

i found if you hold the bow too tight you will throw off the flight of the arrow

i hold any of my bows with just my pointing finger and thumb

when shooting instinctively you still aim but through an imagined path of flight

accuracy involves a repeated and established anchor point and a

consistent form and intense focus on your target

You can still get sights for them, although like I said, the group I shoot with doesn't allow their use. And even with a sight, it's still not advised to hold the draw more than a second or so.

I don't really hold my bow at all. I have a strap attached to it that loops over my wrist. I snug it into the web between my thumb and index finger, with my fingers lying on either side and pressing just enough to steady the bow, but not gripping. When I draw, it pulls the bow back against the cradle I form, and when I release, the strap (which is pretty snug against my wrist at all times) catches the weight of the bow on my wrist and keeps it in my hand. It prevents a grip that would create a "jerk" on the release.

I shot a bullseye the first time I ever fired a bow. The only reason I don't rank higher in my organization is that I really, REALLY need to build my back muscles enough to let me draw a heavier bow. Mine is 28 pounds, and simply doesn't have the heft to provide accuracy at the farthest distances. I have a sweet 45-lb that was a gift, but I can barely move the string. I can fire a 35-lb, but only for short periods of time. I need a new bow, and I'm really considering just upgrading to the 35 and working it as much as I can stand, to work the muscles.

I have a compound bow from Craigslist; a PSE Nova . Decent and cheap enough for a beginner like me. Buying used included all the goodies including a case.

Fortunately, I live in an area on two acres where I can carry a gun or shoot a bow without 15 cop cars showing up looking for "terrorist activity".

Initially I practiced quite often then fell off and going to target shooting. I should get back into it since it's a lot of fun, a good skill and powerful enough to kill a hog a 30 feet.

 

[Flash]

yes the leftist had/has no idea

not a clue as to what DUE PROCESS is

A slight disagreement. They do know what due process is, but like the Second Amendment, they want to rewrite the Constitution in their own image and eliminate any inconvenient parts.

Due process, the right of self defense and anything else contrary to giving the State absolute power to make decisions for our "best interests" are part of their agenda to be written out or nullified.

The Second Amendment is a tremendous threat to the big out of control Left government that the Libtards love more than life itself and they are determined to do away with it.

They can not stand a force that has the power to resist the power of the government.