By Du definition, I guess I have an assault rifle.

[trof]

It looks like this:

Fairly benign, hunh?
It's a Mossberg .22 caliber semi-automatic rifle.
The little thingy hanging down in front of the trigger is the magazine.
It holds 10 bullets.
How fast can I fire those bullets?
As fast as pulling the trigger 10 times.
bang-bang-bang-bang-bang-bang-bang-bang-bang-bang
About as fast as you read that and made sure there were 10 bangs.

After that I'd have to remove the now empty magazine and reload it.
That would take a few minutes.
OR
I could have another (or more) pre-loaded magazines.
It would only take a few seconds to remove the empty clip and insert the loaded one.

My point is that if we limited the capacity of magazines, I'd be fine with that.
It would be a bit inconvenient, but OK.

If we wanted to go to NO semi-automatic firearms, I could live with that too.
Sure, I could go back to a bolt-action, single shot .22. It would be kind of a pain, but I could do it.
But I feel that I am in a very small minority on that.

Just wanted to try and help clarify things.

[RandySF]

1. This belongs in the gun forum

[Brother Buzz]

7. Open discussion of guns is permitted during very high-profile news events which.....

are heavily covered across all newsmedia.

https://www.democraticunderground.com/10025307978

[politicaljunkie41910]

2. Well as Chris Rock says, "If bullets cost $5000 there wouldn't be any accidental shootings.

Or very few intentional shootings for that matter. Perhaps something to consider.

[Fred Sanders]

3. You prove the point that semi-autos should be banned also since they seem to fire almost

as rapidly, as you attest to, as automatics.

Also...belongs in the Gungeon.

[uponit7771]

4. That device wasn't designed or modeled after a design that was meant to kill massive

... amounts of humans in a short amount of time on the battle field.

It's in no way as efficient as the AR-15 in the hands of the untrained in a multitude of spaces.

Typical gumper straw man noted

[Wounded Bear]

6. Actually it looks like a WWII era carbine...

A lightweight version of the standard military rifle.

[Straw Man]

50. Exactly.

An M1 carbine, like this:

[TheCowsCameHome]

5. Off to the Gungeon with ya.........

You get points for perseverance, though.

[MineralMan]

8. I can count to ten.

Then, I'll take my chances while you're changing magazines and rush you. You won't like what I do with your little Mossberg .22 if I get there, either.

The thing is: Your .22 LR rounds are not all that lethal unless you hit a vital organ, so I'd take my chances if you were shooting people.

[trof]

22. Thanks MineralMan. You make my point.

Or at least one of them.
Limit the capacity of magazines.
Granted, it's a small step, but one we might finally be able to do.

Look, if you wanted to ban gun ownership by civilians entirely, my life would change very little, if at all.

But we're both grown up people and we know hat ain't gonna happen.

How d you eat an elephant?
One bite at a time.

[Straw Man]

51. What will you do while you're counting?

Stand around letting him shoot you? Not advisable, even with a .22 rimfire.

[Old Vet]

65. That would be a big mistake MM, I own a Mossberg Plinkster .22 cal. semi-auto with a 10, 25, or 100

Clip. I have all three, It is by far one of the most accurate weapons I own. Ive got Aguila sniper sub-sonic .22LR 60gr ammo that travels at 900fps. Although its kinda un-stable and tumbles, Its a very lethal round for a .22. Its one of my favorite target shooting rounds to have fun with, Mind you I like weapons for a past time with my friends at the range. I don't hunt, wouldn't kill any animal. iam not good at much in my retirement years but I hit the range at least once a week.

[Lee-Lee]

68. The rush them when they change magazines thing is a myth

You can tell someone with no experience with guns or with any kind of force on force training is trying to sound educated on a subject they are ignorant on when you hear them say something like that.

Every tried to have the composure to start counting rounds under that kind of stress while doing every other task you will have to? Did that person start with 10 rounds or did they load one in the chamber and then a full magazine to have 11? Will they change the magazine when it’s empty or sooner during a pause? Did they?

Those are just the reasons why you can’t know by counting and why anyone who says that has no clue.

The second problem is magazines can be changed in 2-3 seconds. A persons reaction time to realize a person is starting to change magazines, decide to act, start moving, close the distance with the shooter and then try and make contact isn’t enough in almost every case.

Anytime you hear someone say “count the shots and rush them” it’s a clear sign that the person doesn’t know what the hell they are talking about and are spouting off nonsense in their ignorance that isn’t just unrealistic but if someone ever finds themselves in that situation and follows the advice could be deadly. And you should regard anyone spouting such nonsense as totally without credibility on anything regarding firearms.

[mcar]

9. Are you seriously arguing gun semantics

when 17 kids and teachers are being buried after the latest mass shooting?

Maybe it's time to start thinking about the lives of our children and not the defensive, pedantic gun descriptions.

[trof]

23. I guess you missed the point.

Sorry.

[mcar]

31. I guess I did

[Paladin]

33. No, your lame-assed "point" came through, loud and clear. (nt)

[Bradical79]

43. I think the point is to know something about what you want to regulate

Right or wrong, a total gun ban is entirely out of the question, so measures targeting aspects of firearms are needed. If you're too ignorant on the subject you might not know whether a specific proposal makes sense or if it would leave a massive loophole rendering the potential legislation worthless even if it passed.

I don't think anything bad is meant by that post. From a practical standpoint, if you want an "assault weapon" ban (for example) you at least need to be able to articulate what makes something an assault weapon if you want to be an advocate for it.

[BannonsLiver]

69. This is a common tactic

Obfuscate, then obfuscate some more.

“What’s an assault rifle?”

“Can you define it for me?”

“What’s an assault rifle and what’s not? Is this an assault rifle?”

“When is something not an assault rifle?”

“So this (fill in the blank) is it isn’t an assault rifle?”

Rinse and repeat. The goal of a gun fan when discussing guns is to avoid defining what the problem is at all costs.

[mcar]

72. Yep

Deflect, deflect, deflect.

[yagotme]

87. Yeah, they didn't have any problems with the 94 AWB, did they.

Banning cosmetics that could be changed/removed to make an "assault rifle" legal under the current law was a big complaint of the "ban them all" crowd. One must really understand the nomenclature before passing laws banning it. Otherwise, one is wasting a LOT of time trying to Band-Aid a poorly written law.

[John1956PA]

10. In my view, the lack of a forward vertical grip rules it out as an assault weapon.

Of course, the weapon pictured is not an assault rifle because it is semi-automatic, not automatic. As for the nebulous criteria of deeming a semi-automatic rifle an "assault weapon," my view is that the lack of a forward vertical grip on the pictured weapon disqualifies it as an assault weapon.

From https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vertical_forward_grip :

A vertical forward grip is a vertical grip that is designed to attach to a firearm for the forward hand (or "off hand" ). These aid in the maneuverability of the firearm, since the natural angle of a person's outstretched hand is more oriented to grasping objects at a vertical angle, rather than a horizontal one perpendicular to the body.[1] Foregrips can decrease accuracy in precision rifle shooting if the shooter tends to "muscle the weapon".[2]

[trof]

24. True, but I was 'quoting' DU's definition.

[Straw Man]

52. A forward vertical grip is not a defining feature of an "assault weapon."

It's usually an optional add-on. None of these has a forward vertical grip:

[flotsam]

11. For comparison you should put up 2 photos

A Mossberg 715T and a Mossberg 715T Talo edition and then wait for comments...(I've got a Talo)

[Grolph01]

12. It is a good starting point, I will meet here

Six bullets max per load.
All civilian weapons are double action.

Keep all existing semi-auto (single action) at the range or registered and subject to inspection.

The delineation between single and double action is easy for use in legal terms.
Most of us can count to six.

Grolph

[Straw Man]

90. Single-action? Double-action? Are you talking pistols or rifles?

Double-action means the trigger both cocks and releases the hammer. Single-action means that the trigger only releases the hammer; the hammer must be cocked independently of the trigger, either by the rearward movement of the bolt after firing, as with semi-autos, or by the manipulation of a lever, pump, or bolt handle, as with manual repeaters.

There's no such thing as a double-action rifle, except for a few oddballs that are based on revolver actions. As for pistols, are you aware that there are plenty of double-action semi-auto pistols? Not to mention DA/SA, which are both?

Then there are double-action revolvers, which actually function in a manner similar to semi-auto firearms (one shot per trigger pull), whereas single-action revolvers must be cocked for every shot (think cowboy guns).

Either you don't know what the terms double-action and single-action mean, or there's some huge part of your reasoning that is escaping me.

[VOX]

13. All these fucking "ammo processors" should be ILLEGAL TO OWN OR BUY.

No earthly reason for civilians to have such firepower.

[Adrahil]

17. a 22?

Do you want to accomplish something or just rant? If you are just in rant mode, rant on. But you ain't gonna ban 22's any time soon. We need to pose actual executable solutions.

Magazines... I think we can attack that.

[VOX]

20. Yep, you caught me in high-rant mode.

Sorry about that. About once or twice a week I hit flashpoint over the tons of bullshit coming from the “administration,” and I need to vent.

In full agreement about magazines.

[Adrahil]

21. Well done sir (or madame)

I think rants are good for the spirit.

[trof]

25. Exactly. Thanks.

[yallerdawg]

14. Most of the hunting shows I see...

usually have some fellas sittin' in a blind or up in a tree somewhere softly, quietly yakkin' - and then *BOOM* one shot and the beast is dead!

I mean, do we really need more than one shot at a time?

Look what Lee Oswald did with a single shot bolt-action.

I've been on the planet since the '50's - never owned a gun in my life.

[Straw Man]

53. Lee Oswald?

Look what Lee Oswald did with a single shot bolt-action.

He used a bolt-action repeater. Three shots in six seconds is not possible with a single-shot rifle.

[EX500rider]

71. It was kind of a strange choice as I would think the 6.5x52mm ammo would be hard to find in the US.

But I suppose the mail-order price of $19.95 was the selling point for him.
On the same ad surprised he didn't go for the Endfield or Model 1917, both would have had the more easier to find .303 or 30.06 and were the same price for the Endfield and $10 more for the 1917.



https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_F._Kennedy_assassination_rifle

[Spider Jerusalem]

15. a .22LR doesn't do as much damage as .223 Remington/5.56mm NATO, inherently

and the "assault weapons ban" banned magazines of larger capacity than 10 rounds (most AR-15 mags are 20-30 rounds, and there are aftermarket magazines that hold up to 100 rounds).

[Motownman78]

44. Actually, it just banned

the manufacture and sale of new magazines with more than 10 rounds. I was still able to buy a 17 round magazine for my Glock17 while the ban was in effect.

[WhiskeyGrinder]

16. Words and definitions matter -- especially if people want to write legislation.

With all the talk about "high powered rifle" and "detachable magazines," people who want to ban on the basis of phrases start getting into the hunting rifles they say they're okay with very quickly.

[Adrahil]

18. you're wasting your time...

Folks here would rather rant than do anything constructive. I've been trying for years. I get shouted down in righteous indignation. And what do we have to show for it? 17 more dead people, including kids.

[trof]

27. Yes they do. That's what I'm trying to do. Thanks.

[Paladin]

34. This is a political discussion site, not a Senate mark-up session. (nt)

[ProudLib72]

19. I served on a jury for a dumbass who shot his dog with a semi .22

Poking at the poor dog under his bed with the gun in the middle of the night because she was farting. Dog survived minus a few toes. We found the dumbass guilty as hell. I really wanted there to be a count of being a dumbass because he was such a major one.

[LanternWaste]

26. No more and no less than by DU standards, acronyms are no longer rendered in capital letters.

No more and no less than by DU standards, acronyms are no longer rendered in capital letters.

I suppose that's what happens when we pretend DU represents a standard we are compelled to hold ourselves to.

[trof]

28. Uh, what acronym?

[captain queeg]

32. Just walking thru some of these posts

Thought I’d add my 2 cents. I don’t know why people are jumping on you, seemed some reasonable talking points. I haven’t shot a gun in many years but I still have a .22 somewhere in storage.

I saw some people talking about how a .22 isn’t that lethal. I have to call BS in that. That’s what we used to kill cattle with a the slaughterhouse. One shot did the trick. Of course it was point blank range but years ago when I paid attention .22s killed more people in the Us than any other caliber. But that was probably back in the last melinium
Back in the 80s-90s all these high capacity clips were outlawed. Nothing more than 10 shot clip. Really no reason why anyone would need more than that but when that law got reversed everyone went out and bought assault guns and pistols with high capacity clips. We got by before without them. Why are they so necessary now?

[trof]

35. Thank you and welcome to DU.

Yes, you make several good points.
And no, I don't know what I said that seems to have pissed some people off.

[discntnt_irny_srcsm]

39. This is the .22 caliber Iver-Johnson Cadet revolver which killed Robert Kennedy

Anyone who says a .22 isn't deadly is very wrong.

[Dem2]

41. Not sure how true this is...

But my dad told me that .22 is used by assassin's because 1) relatively easy to silence 2) .22 at close range go into skull, but they don't leave. IOW they bounce around in a person's skull, quick low blood death.

OTOH, I have a .22 Ruger, similar configuration to the one in the O/P; the idea that I could defend myself in closer quarters with that heavy, long gun scares me. The shorter barrel, grips, large capacity magazines holding high power ammo (and other conveniences) make the AR military style weapons significantly better for mass murder. Why they aren't outlawed is beyond me, other than I have to note here that the NRA is a terrorist organization guilty of genocide.

[Motownman78]

45. High Capacity clips were able

to be bought during the supposed "ban". Just the manufacture of new ones was forbidden. I bought a 17 round clip for my Glock in 2001.

[captain queeg]

48. Yeah that sounds right

I bought a colt 1911 back then, the last gun I ever bought and it was at least 20 years ago. Only shot it a few times. I remember a coworker brought his new AR-15 to work to show it off (back when people often had guns in their cars). I was just stunned they were back on sale but at that time it was just the tried and true gun nuts, people that always had guns, buying them. I didn’t foresee all the people watching too many movies and TV running out and buying one to be macho. Shit, remember how impressed we were with Dirty Harry with a measly .44 magnum and a .454 elephant gun? Then the firepower started ratcheting up in movies. Now you have to be shooting two pistols at once. Give me a break. I’ll take my .22 rifle and stand 50 yards from you while you are shooting 2 hi capacity 9mm pistols at the same time. You’d be dead before me.

[underpants]

29. Without the pistol grip they don't sell as well

because that's what people see in the movies. That's why there was a restriction on them in the old regulation. Just wanted to add that.

[The_jackalope]

30. What about starting off real simple?

Prohibit the sale to civilians of .223/5.56 ammunition and all semiautomatic firearms that use it. Let's stop getting distracted by what the weapon looks like. Along with a high-cap magazine ban for all calibers (maybe 5 rounds max), that should take care of a lot of the problem.

On edit: But then WTF do I know? I'm a Canadian.

[NickB79]

36. California tried that with .50-cal rifles (banning a specific caliber)

Now there are a bunch of rebarreled .49-cal rifles in the state instead.

[The_jackalope]

37. Well, .223 is a bit more of a public health threat than .50

There aren't many other lightweight rounds that can do that kind of damage, especially in a semi-auto delivery system. It might not fix the whole problem, but a combined approach to the ammunition and the semi-auto weapons that use it would at least do something significant about the Rambo Issue.

I'm not interested in reasons why it wouldn't work, when it's never even been thought through seriously in this context, at least as far as I can tell.

[NickB79]

42. It's not a serious solution

A new .204 caliber barrel for an AR-15 can be produced and sold for under $100 and an idiot with a wrench can install it in 20 minutes. Thats one of the reasons AR's are popular: parts are cheap and easily changed. Dropping the caliber a fraction of an inch would do nothing to change it's lethality; in fact since the bullet is now faster and smaller it may be more lethal. And they already make AR's and ammo in almost every caliber from .17 up to .45, so banning a specific caliber is a game of whack-a-mole that will invariably piss off legitimate hunters who own non-AR guns in the same calibers.

Your suggestion to limit magazines to 5-10 rounds is a much more viable idea IMO.

[The_jackalope]

46. What about prohibiting rifles with interchangeable barrels as well as a caliber and capacity ban?

You guys gotta do something. They're killing your kids, FFS.

[yagotme]

88. ALL rifle barrels interchange.

Some just have more specialized tools, and take longer. One of the popular things with the AR is, you push out 2 pins, take the upper off, and get another upper in a completely different caliber (as long as the magazine fits the lower). .223-.204-7.62x39-.450 Bushmaster, et cetera, et cetera. Takes less than a minute.

[Lee-Lee]

59. I am not interested in reasons it wont work

You sunmerized the attitude of most people with half baked ideas and loud voices on this matter- and also demonstrated why you have such a hard time getting people to take you seriously.

[The_jackalope]

63. I don't really care if people "take me seriously"

I'm not in politics, I don't have a public voice. These are my attitudes and opinions. An expression of my deep revulsion with American society.

[Straw Man]

57. Nothing is simple.

Prohibit the sale to civilians of .223/5.56 ammunition and all semiautomatic firearms that use it.

These rifles (and many more like them) use .223/5.56 and aren't semi-auto:


I'm not sure where this notion that .223/5.56 is uniquely powerful and deadly comes from. Virtually all the deer and big game rounds are more powerful and destructive.

[flotsam]

38. If you really want to take the testosterone out of firearms

pass a law that all firearms produced and sold in the US must be "Hello Kitty" themed including full pink powder coating. And make repaints illegal...

[Gabi Hayes]

54. Ouchy!

Thread winner rychear

Maybe have to take a peenpic for their ID?

[Whiskeytide]

40. Your post raises an issue Ive been thinking about ...

... the last few days. I think the appearance of these guns is telling us a lot about the people who own them.

I understand what is being said about the AR-15 being no different from your rifle in terms of action. I think most here get that.

But the AR-15 appearance is distinctly military in style. It may not be an assault weapon as that is defined historically, but it “looks” just like one. Most hunters don’t use such a “tricked out” weapon to hunt. Most hunters use a hunting rifle. The forward grips, banana mags, bayonet mounts - mostly unnecessary for hunting.

I’ve read posts saying the only difference is the appearance. Fair enough.

So what does that tell us about the purchaser? He - or she - “wants” a weapon that looks like an assault weapon. Why?

Most of the time when I see this weapon style (outside of a movie) it’s in the hands of a mass shooter or a militia member occupying a wildlife refuge. I’m sure by far the majority who own one are pretty responsible with it, and would never think of harming an innocent. But I also think there is a reason that it is the weapon style of choice for deranged minds. If your head is in a bad place, or if you genuinely believe you will have to defend your house and family from the government or Zombies or roving bands of democrats trying to redistribute your stuff, you think AR-15 style.

Just my observation. But I think perhaps not making guns look like the toys unhealthy minds want to play with might help keep guns out of the hands of unhealthy minds.

[OhioBlue]

56. yes, I think "gun culture" and normalization needs to be part of the discussion.

I saw a FB post earlier where a group was trying to organize a march on Columbus in light of Kasich's statement about an AWB. It just started as a group and one guy adds like minded guys who then add their friends... at the time I looked, it had around 600 members but maybe 20 posting on the thread about organizing a march. I clicked through to look at everyone of the 20 poster's profiles. They chose profile pics posing with guns, one with a rebel flag head band, their language is aggressive. They're discussing if they should open carry.

Gun raffles - in my area - it is the quickest and easiest way to raise money. If you get a set number of people to sell your tickets and raffle off a gun or guns, you can make a quick $5k for the baseball league or money for a family dealing with cancer and lots of groups do it now because it takes a lot less effort than throwing a spaghetti dinner or soliciting donations for a basket raffle... more normalization. There is a gun raffle from some group going on perpetually in my rural area. Note - I am not condoning nor have I ever participated in one.. I'm just sharing what I see. Gun raffles used to be more contained to hunting groups and held at locations that would have some affiliation with hunting groups.

Every week the local newspaper has a circular from the local hunting/fishing store - at least 50% of their advertising is for guns including AR15, Sig Sauer, etc. It didn't used to be like this.

Edit to add: We have guns that my husband uses to hunt. Gun culture around here used to be way different. It was more focused on hunting. Not many people I knew had hand guns. That has grown more pervasive too with concealed carry. That is a whole other topic of assholeishness that I see. CCW permit is way to easy to get and there are plenty that shouldn't have it.


My neighbor has a buddy that goes over to his house, dressed in fatigues with blackout under his eyes and goes in his back yard and ammojaculates for hours with his AR15. He never talked to neighbors beforehand to see if there were any vets with PTSD or dogs that hid behind the couch and peed because of his chest pumping ammo dumps. He doesn't take a 4wheeler out back before hand to make sure no neighbor kids are building a fort in the woods or the amish are tending the field... He is an asshole that thinks it is his 2a right to be an asshole and somehow he is more patriotic for it.

It's a fucking mind meld in the years since the AWB expired and lots of these ammojaculating assholes brandishing AR15 type weapons are 1 divorce, job loss or death of a loved one away from being the next "law abiding citizen" that inexplicably snapped and the right will say it wasn't the gun... it was evil and you can't ban evil without ever thinking about the fact that the pervasiveness of these types of weapons may just contribute to a culture and group think that feeds the snap from reality.

[Whiskeytide]

80. Thats my take. Somehow the gun industry...

... in the pursuit of greater profits, went from making tools to making toys. They sought out -and in fact cultivated - a demographic that collects guns and ammo for some pretty crazy reasons. Now they pretend to be mystified that their customers act crazy and treat guns like toys.

[Iggo]

47. Aw.

[hunter]

49. Why?

[LonePirate]

55. That gun and all others should be banned regardless if they are assault rifles, semi-automatics, etc

[Sophia4]

58. I'm curious.

What do you do with that gun?

Is it mostly ornamental?

Do you shoot it?

For sport?

I can't imagine that there is a lot of skill or sport involved in shooting it.

Do you live somewhere in the country where you have reason to fear intruders or wild animals?

Why do you and others want that kind of gun?

I'm really interested. I have never talked about owning or using such a gun with anyone. I play the piano. I knit. I cook. I garden. Love to walk and work out. What in the world is the attraction to owning such a gun. I just can't understand it at all. Is there some kind of social thing to it? Is it a matter of being like the buddies?

What is the point in those guns?

[Demsrule86]

62. That is a hunting gun. As another poster noted you can't hunt with an AR 15 as it destroys the meat.

Also, we used guns like that in my misspent youth for target practice ( I would never hunt) also clay pigeon shooting ...now the guys used shotguns for skeet shooting but too hard on the arms and shoulder for me. My Grandpa and all his family hunted. He taught all of us how to handle a gun (girls and boys). We were not even allowed to point sticks at each other. And if one of us had touched any of his guns or pointed a gun at someone...well we wouldn't have sat down for a week. Gun safety was very important...he didn't walk around with a gun either like some of the losers I see taking one to the grocery store in Ohio...such big men really (sarcasm). My family was poor (before my time). My Mother ate wild turkey, duck, possum, squirrel, rabbit and venison. She hated all game meat and anything to do with farming...wouldn't even plant flowers.

[Lee-Lee]

67. An AR-15 does not destroy the meat

Where does this nonsense come from?

It’s realky a round on the low end of the scale as far as power goes, and in fact in many states it is considered to small and low powered for deer hunting. Although modern rounds have made it more capable of that.

I have a friend who hunts wild boars with .223 and he gets plenty of very nice meat.

[Demsrule86]

83. Yeah an AR 15 destroys meat...I have seen it.

[Straw Man]

89. With what kind of rounds?

That matters. But you knew that.

[Calculating]

79. ar15 does NOT destroy the meat lol

Maybe a .50BMG would. .223 is actually considered underpowered for a lot of types of hunting.

[Demsrule86]

82. Really well my cousin shot a deer with it...and it was mangled unbelievably...horrible in fact.

No one in their right mind would hunt with an AR 15...and those who claim to are simply trying to make the NRA's bullshit seem real.

[Lee-Lee]

64. Here is one answer

“I can't imagine that there is a lot of skill or sport involved in shooting it”

I guess for someone with no experience with guns or idea how they work, this question would make sense.

But in reality it takes just as much skill to be accurate with a semi-auto rifle as it does a bolt action or any other rifle.

You may be basing that question on the notion that people are just pulling the trigger as fast as they can or not aiming or some other impressions you have gotten from TV or how people describe guns on here. I am guess so from the nature of your question.

In reality the basics of shooting a rifle are the same no matter if we are taking a .22 like that, an AR-15, a WWII M-1 Carbine of a level action Winchester made in 1899. It is a skill one refines. You have to maintain correct sight alignment with the front and rear sight. As you focus and learn to be more and more accurate this requires an ever increasing amount of skill. Your breathing will cause the end of the barrel to move causing sight alignment to shift, so you have to learn to both control your breathing and to time your shots between breaths. You don’t hold your breath because that leads to becoming less stable later as your body tries to compensate.

When I shot .22 on the rifle team in college I was at the peak of my ability for precision rifle shooting, and I was to the point where I could actually see the movement of the sights from my pulse.

Olympic shooters are that good x100.

Then you have to master trigger pull. To be accurate you need a slow, steady squeeze so that you don’t shift the aim as you pull. Pulling with the meaty part of your fingertip, if you pull with the end it can shift one way and if you pull with the joint the opposite and shift your aim.

We were shooting at targets where the outside ring was the size of a quarter and to get a bulls-eye and 10 points the target was the size of period on a typical typed paper. You couldn’t see that period, of course, but you know it was in the center of that circle.

So it’s a relaxing sport. It demands the amount of relaxation and control of your body that people often seek in yoga. But at the same time it is one with measurable ways to compete against others or yourself. There is always the drive to be a little more accurate or be able to make that shot a little further away. It’s a sport or hobby you can never totally master and there is always room for improvement.

A typical .22 like that is an inexpensive, easy way to enjoy it on whatever level or whatever way you want to. When you get outside the urban and suburban areas in the USA the vast majority of homes in rural areas will have some sort of semi-auto .22 rifle used for recreational purposes and for pest control or hunting. It’s more common than pickup trucks.

I do applaud you for asking those kinds of questions, being willing to learn. Most here won’t do that on this subject nor admit they don’t have any experience with it.

I have a rifle much like that but made by Ruger. When I go squirrel hunting with my dad (more to just be with him than I enjoy hunting, but it is fun) I carry it. I shoot it a lot, because it’s cheap to shoot, not that loud, and lets me keep in practice. When I teach firearms safety courses to people with no experience with guns it is usually the first rifle I start then out on.

The one I have also has a 10rd detachable magazine and can take larger magazines. And it’s been in production and sold since 1964 and it looks like over 6 million have been made. I will bet almost all are still around. That’s about as many made as Honda Civics have been sold in the last 20 years and the cars typically end up off the road in 12-15 years, so as a frame of reference just that one kind of gun is more common in lawful use in American homes than Honda civics are, and think about how many of those you see a day.

[trof]

81. Very, VERY good! I'd rec this if I could. Thank you.

[trof]

75. Squirrels mostly. Some target practice.

They cause a lot of damage $$$$ to vehicle wiring, PVC vent stacks, mailboxes, anything they can gnaw on.

Yes, it does take a fair amount of skill to be able to hit what you're aiming at.
Try it sometime.

[Demsrule86]

60. I want assault weapons banned...and yours sounds like it should be banned...if you can get off

that many bullets so quickly. Of course AR 15's are way more dangerous than what you describe...And you can get huge magazines...think Las Vegas, but all should be banned.

A gun saved my life you know...when I was living in WV in the middle of nowhere ...some guys showed up one night when the ex was out partying...I have no doubt they would have killed me and my child. but I had a loaded shotgun, pistol and a rifle. Lucky for them I grabbed the shotgun hoping to scare them off. I did my best to kill them but the gun bucked (ex says shotguns no gun for a lady so I had limited experience)...if I had the rifle one of two would be dead) Still there was blood on the ground. I have never advocated taking guns away from those who want to hunt or protect themselves (before now...not sure we can continue this way)...or even target practice. But that being said guns need be registered from manufacture to destruction, permitted (no domestic abusers and gangbangers get guns legally), also no one should have a gun before they can buy a beer, and guns need to be insured (liability).

[Sophia4]

70. Your gun protected you, but what if you had been blind?

Your having a gun in the house would have just made it easier for the intruders to kill you.

What if you had been too weak or too young to shoot it?

Again, the gun would have been more dangerous to you than not having a gun.

What if you were then not permitted to have a gun for some reason such as depression or some nonviolent mental disorder? What if you were mentally challenged?

Guns are for people who are fit.

Guns make survival all the more difficult for the disabled.

Not having guns is much better for those who are not so perfectly able to defend themselves.

On a farm, out in the country, guns are perhaps needed.

But I live in a city, and I don't want any guns at all possessed by people who are not members of the police force in my city. They serve no purpose.

If people want to shoot for sport, let them form gun clubs and leave their guns on the gun club premises-- locked up, please.

We do not need guns in cities. And if someone has one and having it is a felony, then you can easily, and police can easily, identify criminals because they are the people who have guns. Militias can be formed and regulated and their weapons kept in an armory. That satisfies the 2nd Amendment.

[Demsrule86]

84. I lived on 20 acres so I had a gun...I was taught by my Grandpa and my ex how to use it properly...

I didn't walk around with it strapped to my hip at the grocery store. I live in a suburb now...and I sold the guns except for the one my Grandpa gave me...gave it to my brother. I want guns regulated and automatics Banned. If the courts had not interpreted the second amendment incorrectly giving individuals a right to carry, I would think banning all guns would be the best idea. But I will settle for what I can get at the moment. I live in fear that some crazy with a gun will shoot up my daughter's college. My post was supposed to say that although a gun did save my life...now I feel we must do something to stop the senseless killing and get guns off the streets. Guns kill way more people than they save.

[Sophia4]

86. Thanks. We are on the same page.

When a person lives out in the country where the local police are miles away perhaps, the person needs a good gun but should not have to risk a gun fight with a military style weapon.

[jmg257]

61. By legal definition, I don't. Sure a mini-14 has detachable mags and fires

5.56 or 7.62 in semi-auto, but without the pistol grip and muzzle brake, its perfectly fine.

[left-of-center2012]

66. What are you hunting with your .22 where you need 10 cartridges?

As a kid, I hunted squirrel with a single shot .22, while my brothers used shotguns.

[johnpowdy]

73. I really hope you turn that gun into the police during a buy back....

Why do you need 10 bullets?

[Ms. Toad]

74. No gun looks, or is, benign.

They are designed to hurt or kill the target.

While there may be valid reasons to do so (for food, for safety, etc.), using a gun for its intended purpose is not a benign.

[tymorial]

76. Why would you post this? You are just going to be wrecked in responses.

I understand what you are trying to say but you probably just added yourself to a ton of ignores 😞

[guillaumeb]

77. And like all guns, it is designed to kill people.

Did you have another point?

[50 Shades Of Blue]

78. FUCK this ugly piece of shit murderous gun.

[johnpowdy]

85. Makes me shake in anger just seeing it