5Likes

04-12-2012, 01:00 AM
|
|
Beartooth Regular
|
|
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 45
|
|
|
deleted....
|

04-12-2012, 07:20 AM
|
 |
Beartooth Regular
|
|
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Shell Rock, Iowa
Posts: 43
|
|
|
I own a large variety of guns, several are the "evil black rifles" In all honesty the AR-15 is a really good coyote gun, and the AR-10 makes a really good deer gun. They are very easy to disassemble but yes they do look sinister in a way, but I love them, its fun to shoot them and they are really accurate, Ive got a AK, a AR15, SKS, and a 8mm Hakim with a modifed MG13 mag. I don't see them as an assualt weapon, mearly a over grown ruger 10/22, no one has problems with a 22 with a large capacity mag but seem to hate the larger caliber guns because they are "scary looking". But to each his own, in my opinion the black rifles are more of the range guns then my hunting guns. I don't want to wear out the hunting guns as they put meat on the table. but the AK and AR are not much to look at, the ak is downright UGLY but for some reason its simple action and reliability keeps it in the gun safe. So wearing out the AK doesnt bother me where as my 336 and 870 supply me with food and what not. Can't see the AR15 ever being used to hunt deer as it is a light cartridge. But man is it fun blasting tannerite with it.
|

04-12-2012, 11:09 PM
|
 |
Beartooth Regular
|
|
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Houston, TX. USA
Posts: 129
|
|
If cost is the issue, I'm surprised that the SKS isn't more popular.
That is if quality isn't a criteria for purchase.
__________________
Scot
Good Golf, good Aim, and anyting else that makes you happy !
|

04-13-2012, 03:21 AM
|
|
Beartooth Regular
|
|
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Mooresville, IN
Posts: 7,349
|
|
|
I don't know how you "wear out" a deer hunting gun; there are more than 10 million deer hunting guns out there still being used and they're older than most AR's. As far as not seeing the AR15 "ever being used to hunt deer as it is a light cartridge", well...the AR15 is a platform, not a cartridge. Swap the 223 barrel out for a round that delivers a bit more bullet weight and you've got a ton of options to hunt deer with. Quite a few folks are already doing that and Remington brought out the 30 AR cartridge specifically to hunt with.
__________________
Ask me about QDMA.
|

04-13-2012, 06:18 AM
|
 |
Beartooth Regular
|
|
Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 1,234
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by broom_jm
I don't know how you "wear out" a deer hunting gun; there are more than 10 million deer hunting guns out there still being used and they're older than most AR's. .
|
If you shoot as much as me I bet you could "wear out" a deer rifle.  I have over 2000 rnds thru my Marlin XL-7 30-06 and it is only 3 yrs old.
__________________
"I don't drink or smoke, I spend my money on gunpowder and gasoline."
|

04-13-2012, 09:49 AM
|
|
Beartooth Regular
|
|
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Mooresville, IN
Posts: 7,349
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by dmsbandit
If you shoot as much as me I bet you could "wear out" a deer rifle.  I have over 2000 rnds thru my Marlin XL-7 30-06 and it is only 3 yrs old. 
|
OK, so let's say you shoot 500/yr and it takes 8,000 rounds before accuracy falls enough to matter for a hunting rifle. That's another 12 years of shooting, at which point you can spend about as money as it takes to replace a barrel on an AR, swap out your existing barrel for a new one, and you're back in business. If most of your first 2,000 rounds were load development and you're basically done with that for the next few years, you might only shoot 100 or 200 rounds a year for a while. That barrel might last another 30 to 50 years, at those lower numbers.
Besides, you got that new flat-top AR10 to play with, so I bet the Marlin XL7 is lucky to get 100 rounds through it, this year!
__________________
Ask me about QDMA.
|

04-29-2012, 04:02 AM
|
 |
Beartooth Regular
|
|
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: Northwest Illinois
Posts: 350
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by HarryS
Broom got it right on both accounts.
Most of the ARs were made as military rifles, collected and reissued so few needed.
The 870 was basically (except for a few mil) was/is a commerical gun. Few ARs were left in battle, bet you lots of ars burried in sand.
IIRC AR stands for Armalite, the company that picked it up after Fairchild, and sold them to the Air Force then to Colt.
I'll never give up on my bolt, or single shot rifles for a mattel.
It IS more correct to call and AR an "auto" than say the 1911 auto. The Ar was a full auto with the select fire originally in it. Later with the 2 or 3 shot automatic function, it is still and auto. the 1811 is only a semi-auto.
I never thought of AR fans as being "the Darkside"....but if you guys say so....I'll just believe you!!!
|
Auto in reference to the 1911 refers to "auto loading" not automatic fire. "Semi-auto" refers to whether or not it fires more than one round per trigger pull. All semi-autos are auto-loading. So, saying .45 Automatic (Colt Pistol) is correct nomenclature.
__________________
NRA Benefactor Member
Illinois State Rifle Assoc.
U.S. Navy Vietnam
Extremism in the defense of liberty is no vice - Barry Goldwater
When Injustice becomes Law, Resistance becomes Duty - Thomas Jefferson
|

12-27-2012, 11:19 AM
|
|
Beartooth Regular
|
|
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 89
|
|
|
[QUOTE=dmsbandit;612120]Broom_jm,
I like you and I think you bring alot to the forum, but please do not call the AR-15 an assault weapon. An assault weapon is a selective fire weapon that requires a class 3 license. The ignorant politians, media, and non gun owning people call them assault weapons due to their ignorance.
Was listening to a pro-gun radio talk show host talking about this very issue the other night.
He said there is a certain segment of society that feel that that the AR's are ugly deamon posessed devil guns and all though they are no more deadly than any other gun, the appearance of them just gives these people the creeps for some reason. It's simply a matter of asthetics.
The talk show host then went on to ask "What the h--- is an "Assult Weapon" anyway?????
He said, "heck a screwdriver, baseball bat, or a fork can be an assult weapon if you assult somebody with it". Same way a screwdriver, bat, fork, or an AR can be a "Defense Weapon" if you use it as such.
And then some argue......"Well the only purpose the AR was created was to kill people"!
Logic tells me that this is a pretty good quality for a rifle to have ESPECIALLY for defensive purposes.
I imagine the victims in the Sharon Tate mansion would have loved to have had a CAR-15 at the ready when they met the Charles Manson bunch one dark and dreary night.
Sure would have beat the heck out of their bolt action .22 squirel gun.
Some wise man once said "Prepare for the worst....and hope for the best"!
Last edited by harkknight; 12-27-2012 at 11:22 AM.
|

12-27-2012, 12:06 PM
|
|
Beartooth Regular
|
|
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Nevada
Posts: 643
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by broom_jm
"A rose by any other name..."
Like I said, nomenclature aside, they are made with one intent.
|
Yes, broom. The rifles are manufactured for the military for one purpose: To terminate those who would deign to destroy our nation and the Freedom with which God has endowed us. Per civilians owning the semi-auto version, we are 100% responsible for how we use it when we have it in our direct possession. It could even be said that we are 99.9% responsible for it when it's locked up in our gun safes or in its zip-up case in the closet. The key word here is RESPONSIBLE. That philosophy has all but evaporated in the last several decades-- since about 1965.
When I have my weapons in hand-- whichever one it might be-- I fully accept that everything I do with it and everything that transpires as a result of my direct possession of it (even if a friend is shooting it)-- is my responsibility. Mine and mine alone. After all, it was me whom gave the gun to my friend. It's cowardice to attempt to transfer any blame for whatever happens to my friend. It's MY gun. I remanded it to his control. That makes me immediately responsible. It's for the jury to determine whom exactly is decidedly responsible at trial in an established court of law. Ain't America grand?
Happy New Year, broom. Blessings on your house...
|

12-27-2012, 07:05 PM
|
 |
Beartooth Regular
|
|
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: Northwest Illinois
Posts: 350
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by nvshooter
Yes, broom. The rifles are manufactured for the military for one purpose: To terminate those who would deign to destroy our nation and the Freedom with which God has endowed us. Per civilians owning the semi-auto version, we are 100% responsible for how we use it when we have it in our direct possession. It could even be said that we are 99.9% responsible for it when it's locked up in our gun safes or in its zip-up case in the closet. The key word here is RESPONSIBLE. That philosophy has all but evaporated in the last several decades-- since about 1965.
When I have my weapons in hand-- whichever one it might be-- I fully accept that everything I do with it and everything that transpires as a result of my direct possession of it (even if a friend is shooting it)-- is my responsibility. Mine and mine alone. After all, it was me whom gave the gun to my friend. It's cowardice to attempt to transfer any blame for whatever happens to my friend. It's MY gun. I remanded it to his control. That makes me immediately responsible. It's for the jury to determine whom exactly is decidedly responsible at trial in an established court of law. Ain't America grand?
Happy New Year, broom. Blessings on your house...
|
Only problem with that is that left-wing liberal types have no idea what responsibility is, never mind making it their way of doing things.
__________________
NRA Benefactor Member
Illinois State Rifle Assoc.
U.S. Navy Vietnam
Extremism in the defense of liberty is no vice - Barry Goldwater
When Injustice becomes Law, Resistance becomes Duty - Thomas Jefferson
|

02-19-2013, 01:01 PM
|
|
Registered User
|
|
Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: S.E. Wisconsin
Posts: 9
|
|
|
what's ar mean
By now we all know it means Armilite rifle. But the .223/5.56 wasn't designed to kill as most posters have said, incorrectly, it was designed to wound. The reason is it takes two men to take care of a wounded man and noone to take care of a dead man. Just my 2 cents.
Last edited by jaymzm715; 02-19-2013 at 01:05 PM.
|

02-19-2013, 06:08 PM
|
 |
Beartooth Regular
|
|
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Loomis, WA
Posts: 297
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by broom_jm
There is a debate over whether or not "AR" means "automatic rifle" or "auto-loading rifle". Given that the difference between the two is a one or two parts, I stand by my original wording.
I've shot AR-10's and AR-15's...they don't do much for me. I find them entirely utilitarian, on top of being uglier than a 2AM mistake in judgement. I'm glad we live in a country where we can pick n' choose what guns we shoot because I find the AK's and AR's about as interesting and attractive as a lawn mower. They are purpose-built, and do a great job at what they are built for, but shooting people has absolutely NO appeal, to me.
Again, if the enemy ever brings the fight to our shores, I will most assuredly take a different stance. Regardless, this does explain why they are not more popular than they are, with many shooters.
|
Be aware the enemy is already here and he didn't use plane's or boats.
|

02-20-2013, 07:47 AM
|
|
Beartooth Regular
|
|
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: Kentucky
Posts: 29
|
|
Personally, the only reason that I don't own a AR is due to price. Don't get me wrong, if I had the money my house would be stupidly full of AR's  . I just cant justify the cost. The criminal will have to accept my financial situation and understand that 12ga 00Bk will simply have to due. (Only due to my bank account, not by choice.)
As mentioned above in other posts many Americans think AR's are the weapons of Satan's minions. You simply cant convince stupid people that have been led like sheep by the media to believe good people can and will use them for good. Look at states with strict gun control, there is little to no positive influence with guns in there society. They will never hear of a life being saved by an AR, they will never see a gang being stopped by a good guy with an AR. The media rules America gentlemen. If you can control peoples eyes, you can control what they see.
__________________
NRA Member
|

02-20-2013, 08:07 AM
|
 |
Beartooth Regular
|
|
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: Northwest Illinois
Posts: 350
|
|
|
It really has nuthin' to do with 'assault weapons'
If you boil this all down to the core, it isn't 'assault weapons', or magazine capacity, or any of the other garbage the left wing zealots use to try to justify more gun control.
This is, and always has been, about control of the people. The first gun control laws were implemented in New York City in the 1850's when we started to get the huge waves of immigrants from Europe. These laws were passed to prevent these immigrants (race had nothing to do with it) from obtaining the means to protect themselves from slum landlords and their thugs who preyed on them and ran protection rackets. This was all supported by the Democrats in Tammany Hall of Boss Tweed fame. Race entered the picture after the Civil War when they added negroes to the list for the same reasons as immigrants.
In modern times, it is still Democrats who hate guns, and for the very same reasons. An armed people can't be co-opted, coerced, intimidated, or suppressed by corrupt government officials and their attempts to dismantle the Constitution and subjegate the people.
The last time around it was King George III and the Redcoats. This time its Obama and Homeland Security.
__________________
NRA Benefactor Member
Illinois State Rifle Assoc.
U.S. Navy Vietnam
Extremism in the defense of liberty is no vice - Barry Goldwater
When Injustice becomes Law, Resistance becomes Duty - Thomas Jefferson
|

02-21-2013, 07:27 AM
|
 |
Beartooth Regular
|
|
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Anchorage, Alaska
Posts: 3,638
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by rifter
If you boil this all down to the core, it isn't 'assault weapons', or magazine capacity, or any of the other garbage the left wing zealots use to try to justify more gun control.
This is, and always has been, about control of the people. The first gun control laws were implemented in New York City in the 1850's when we started to get the huge waves of immigrants from Europe. These laws were passed to prevent these immigrants (race had nothing to do with it) from obtaining the means to protect themselves from slum landlords and their thugs who preyed on them and ran protection rackets. This was all supported by the Democrats in Tammany Hall of Boss Tweed fame. Race entered the picture after the Civil War when they added negroes to the list for the same reasons as immigrants.
In modern times, it is still Democrats who hate guns, and for the very same reasons. An armed people can't be co-opted, coerced, intimidated, or suppressed by corrupt government officials and their attempts to dismantle the Constitution and subjegate the people.
The last time around it was King George III and the Redcoats. This time its Obama and Homeland Security.
|
Rifter, if you're gonna talk politics and history, you should at least get your party behavior and platform historically correct. Prior to the shift in 1964 over the Civil Rights act that infuriated Southern Democrats like Strom Thurmond and the rest of the Klansmen, the Democratic party had been the Conservative party of big business and reactionaries, like the current Republican Party.
Boss Tweed and Tammany Hall were all about the money and controlling the flow and keeping the aliens down.
I realize this completely messes with the narrative people have told themselves but this is the short version of historical fact. Yes, at one time, the Republican Party, the Party of Lincoln, was the Progressive party in the United States. Then Johnson signed the 1964 Civil Rights Act and the Dixiecrats jumped ship to the Republican Party and The Democratic Party became the more progressive party.
Now Both are owned by big business because we have allowed them to buy us out.
__________________
Be popular? Heck, I have enough friends.
and...
"That way lies madness".
|

02-21-2013, 07:35 AM
|
 |
The Hog Whisperer (Administrator)
|
|
Join Date: Jan 2001
Posts: 24,112
|
|
|
Closed. Do the general politics somewhere else, please.
__________________
MikeG
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by faucettb
Welcome to the forum. Rules are simple, be nice and join in.
|
|
| Thread Tools |
|
|
| Display Modes |
Rate This Thread |
Linear Mode
|
|
Posting Rules
|
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
HTML code is Off
|
|
|
All times are GMT -8. The time now is 07:52 AM.
|
|
|