• Guest, The rules for the P & N subforum have been updated to prohibit "ad hominem" or personal attacks against other posters. See the full details in the post "Politics and News Rules & Guidelines."
  • Community Question: What makes a good motherboard?

Legislation introduced by Senate Democrats today targets civilian sniper rifles.

Page 2 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
Status
Not open for further replies.

waggy

No Lifer
Dec 14, 2000
68,155
8
81
It's probably best we all get hysterical and outraged before we do any fact checking to see if the OP is correct.


/s
actually most think teh story is BS or remarking how 223 would be useless for real hunting.

not good for the deer.

I hunt but never take a shot that unless its a good shot that kills fast. i hate hunters that take shots that hit and then the deer runs off and you have to track it. ugh.
 

Lithium381

Lifer
May 12, 2001
12,464
2
0
This is common sense legislation. You don't need a high powered rifle with a scope to go hunting. Think of how they used to do it when the constitution was drafted and the bill of rights was written. They were using muzzle loaders most without rifling and they managed to hunt just fine. This is why the public looks down on you gun-nuts. You can't give up just a little for the common safety.

Nobody is trying to take your guns, you'll still be allowed to hunt. Even those of you complaining, "but i have to use my 30-06 manslaughter rifle for deer". Nothing is going to stop you from that. You just can't put a scope on it or have too many bullets in your clips. Two is plenty for hunting! The deer isn't even shooting back. This doesn't limit shotguns either!
 

nehalem256

Lifer
Apr 13, 2012
15,670
6
0
This is common sense legislation. You don't need a high powered rifle with a scope to go hunting. Think of how they used to do it when the constitution was drafted and the bill of rights was written. They were using muzzle loaders most without rifling and they managed to hunt just fine. This is why the public looks down on you gun-nuts. You can't give up just a little for the common safety.

Nobody is trying to take your guns, you'll still be allowed to hunt. Even those of you complaining, "but i have to use my 30-06 manslaughter rifle for deer". Nothing is going to stop you from that. You just can't put a scope on it or have too many bullets in your clips. Two is plenty for hunting! The deer isn't even shooting back. This doesn't limit shotguns either!
A real man wrestles the deer to the ground and slits its throat with a hunting knife.

Are you a real man or aren't you? :D
 

CrackRabbit

Lifer
Mar 30, 2001
16,641
57
91
This is common sense legislation. You don't need a high powered rifle with a scope to go hunting. Think of how they used to do it when the constitution was drafted and the bill of rights was written. They were using muzzle loaders most without rifling and they managed to hunt just fine. This is why the public looks down on you gun-nuts. You can't give up just a little for the common safety.

Nobody is trying to take your guns, you'll still be allowed to hunt. Even those of you complaining, "but i have to use my 30-06 manslaughter rifle for deer". Nothing is going to stop you from that. You just can't put a scope on it or have too many bullets in your clips. Two is plenty for hunting! The deer isn't even shooting back. This doesn't limit shotguns either!
So in other words, you're making stuff up hoping to get a response.
Isn't that pretty close to the 'dictionary definition' of trolling?
 

davmat787

Diamond Member
Nov 30, 2010
5,514
24
76
This is common sense legislation. You don't need a high powered rifle with a scope to go hunting. Think of how they used to do it when the constitution was drafted and the bill of rights was written. They were using muzzle loaders most without rifling and they managed to hunt just fine. This is why the public looks down on you gun-nuts. You can't give up just a little for the common safety.

Nobody is trying to take your guns, you'll still be allowed to hunt. Even those of you complaining, "but i have to use my 30-06 manslaughter rifle for deer". Nothing is going to stop you from that. You just can't put a scope on it or have too many bullets in your clips. Two is plenty for hunting! The deer isn't even shooting back. This doesn't limit shotguns either!
Sounds like you want to increase the chances of an inhumane kill of the animal. A scope allows for more accurate shot placement, increasing the likelihood of a clean kill.

Hunters do way more to honor the animal they are eating than anyone buying meat at the grocery store. They also help the animal populations stay at a healthy level, limits vary yearly according to population estimates. Hunters also do a ton for conservation through fees paid, you should check out how much land has been conserved.

In short, what is a more humane method of killing? A clean shot to the heart area, or putting a chicken on a hook while alive, conveying them by the thousands around a warehouse on its way through saws that whittle it down to size?
 

blankslate

Diamond Member
Jun 16, 2008
8,465
421
126
So... wasn't April Fool's 15 days ago?

If the legislation is real it should be easy for the OP to provide a link to it on a .gov site or for others to have found it with the google machine...
 
Jun 26, 2007
11,925
0
0
I agree, this is ridiculous. I have a hunting rifle that wouldn't be legal under these guidelines. It holds 3 rounds, caliber is .300 Win Mag and it has a 10x scope. It also has a muzzle brake so that probably makes it an assault rifle.

You have a muzzle brake on a .300 Win Mag?

That is like having a studded recoil catcher on a bb gun.
 

Paratus

Lifer
Jun 4, 2004
14,357
7,121
146
If this legislation was real what would they do with this $17,000 Linux powered rifle with "Auto Aim"

http://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2013/03/bullseye-from-1000-yards-shooting-the-17000-linux-powered-rifle/



Bullseye from 1,000 yards: Shooting the $17,000 Linux-powered rifle
ARM CPUs, lasers, and Wi-Fi make firing this weapon an experience like no other.

by Lee Hutchinson - Mar 31 2013, 8:00pm CDT
CYBERWAR GEEK TOYS
442

1000 yards is a long, long way away.
Steven Michael
My photographer, Steve, squints through a computerized scope squatting atop a big hunting rifle. We're outdoors at a range just north of Austin, Texas, and the wind is blowing like crazy—enough so that we're having to dial in more and more wind adjustment on the rifle's computer. The spotter and I monitor Steve's sight through an iPad linked to the rifle via Wi-Fi, and we can see exactly what he's seeing through the scope. Steve lines up on his target downrange—a gently swinging metal plate with a fluorescent orange circle painted at its center—and depresses a button to illuminate it with the rifle's laser.

"Good tag?" he asks, softly.

"Good tag," replies the spotter, watching on the iPad. He leaves the device in my hands and looks through a conventional high-powered spotting scope at the target Steve has selected. The wind stops momentarily. "Send it," he calls out.

Steve pulls the trigger, but nothing immediately happens. On the iPad's screen, his reticle shifts from blue to red and drifts toward the marked target. Even though I'm expecting it, the rifle's report is startling when it fires.

A second later, the spotter calls out, "That's a hit!"

Steve has just delivered a .338 Lapua Magnum round directly onto a target about the size of a big dinner plate at a range of 1,008 yards—that's ten football fields, or a tick over 0.91 kilometers. It's his very first try. He has never fired a rifle before today.
 
Last edited:

thraashman

Lifer
Apr 10, 2000
10,898
1,042
126
So in other words, you're making stuff up hoping to get a response.
Isn't that pretty close to the 'dictionary definition' of trolling?
I think there should be a vote to send the OP on vacation for posting a troll thread that he apparently knows was completely false.
 
Jun 26, 2007
11,925
0
0
If this legislation was real what would they do with this $17,000 Linux powered rifle with "Auto Aim"

http://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2013/03/bullseye-from-1000-yards-shooting-the-17000-linux-powered-rifle/

Bad aim, we've got 99.6 accuracy with the .406 port bot.

Pretty much the same as with humans firing it using the palm program to calcualte wind speed and drop.

It's just more high powered and can hit a target 2 miles away with enough force to kill a man wearing a helmet.
 

Paratus

Lifer
Jun 4, 2004
14,357
7,121
146
Bad aim, we've got 99.6 accuracy with the .406 port bot.

Pretty much the same as with humans firing it using the palm program to calcualte wind speed and drop.

It's just more high powered and can hit a target 2 miles away with enough force to kill a man wearing a helmet.
Well it's impressive that with the scope and let's not forget a wind spotter a newb can hit targets that far out.

I expect military folks with the right equipment can and do out shoot this no problem. It's just the accessibility that's neat.
 
Jun 26, 2007
11,925
0
0
Well it's impressive that with the scope and let's not forget a wind spotter a newb can hit targets that far out.

I expect military folks with the right equipment can and do out shoot this no problem. It's just the accessibility that's neat.
If an American can ever hit a target it would impress me so... i suppose this is impressive.
 

Londo_Jowo

Lifer
Jan 31, 2010
17,304
158
106
londojowo.hypermart.net

frowertr

Golden Member
Apr 17, 2010
1,371
41
91
Common sense legislation would be to make it illegal Nehalm to breed thus removing his genes from the pool... One can hope.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

ASK THE COMMUNITY