I hear AR's are popular with Coyote & Wild Boar Hunters, though. .

Dems are acting like sharks in blood filled water over gun control these days.

jetblasted wrote:

More idiots that think the 2nd Amendment is about hunting

dpnewell wrote:

I have an AR set up with a Bushmaster 24" Varmint barrel for yotes. I use a 5 round mag with a 30 backup in the bag, just in case. Makes a great gun for this as the rounds are so small in diameter it doesn't hurt the pelt so bad.

edin508 wrote:

I would hope any hunter had more ammo than needed. Imagine only having one or two shots and you wound the animal rather than killing it with one shot. I would hope the hunter had enough ammo to put the poor animal out of it's misery. These idiots have ruined any chance of having a meaningful discussion of the real issue here. Treatment of the mentally ill. I almost wish a mental illness caused some sort of visible wound. It seems no one takes it seriously if they can't see the problem.

CelticBomber wrote:

TV discussion/debate I watched a week or two back:

Counter argument:How do we find out they are mentally ill enough to massacre until after they do so?

Another is: It's not the pseudoephedrine that makes the methamphetamine, its the drug addict/dealer who obtains it and makes the meth. Taking volumes of pseudophed out of peoples' hands by reducing and controlling supply, reduces the opportunity to make meth.

Thus, guns in and of themselves aren't the problem. It is what a few do with them that is, but perhaps changing part of the supply line could change the ability for some of those "few".

Won't change any one's mind, but certainly made me think for a while.

rfenst wrote:

TV discussion/debate I watched a week or two back:

Counter argument:How do we find out they are mentally ill enough to massacre until after they do so?

Another is: It's not the pseudoephedrine that makes the methamphetamine, its the drug addict/dealer who obtains it and makes the meth. Taking volumes of pseudophed out of peoples' hands by reducing and controlling supply, reduces the opportunity to make meth.

Thus, guns in and of themselves aren't the problem. It is what a few do with them that is, but perhaps changing part of the supply line could change the ability for some of those "few".

Won't change any one's mind, but certainly made me think for a while.

rfenst wrote:

I would hope any hunter had more ammo than needed. Imagine only having one or two shots and you wound the animal rather than killing it with one shot. I would hope the hunter had enough ammo to put the poor animal out of it's misery. These idiots have ruined any chance of having a meaningful discussion of the real issue here. Treatment of the mentally ill. I almost wish a mental illness caused some sort of visible wound. It seems no one takes it seriously if they can't see the problem.

CelticBomber wrote:

J a c k o f f is a bad word ? WTF!!!!

dubleuhb wrote:

We only need a couple rounds to slow'em down. Afterwards, we sport a Bowie knife clenched between our teeth as we run off into the thicket to finish'em off.

Abrignac wrote: