Posted on 11/03/2013 11:47:25 AM PST by Red in Blue PA
I don’t hunt, but I will join the hunter army when it starts culling the Leftist herd.
It’s why the liberals want to take away firearms of any type...mostly the cousins of true military assault rifles...just think what would have happened if the British didn’t allow the Colonialist muskets - only crossbows or sling shots...made a big difference to stand toe-to-toe with the Brown Bess when one was armed like wise!
Texas? Please include us.
I don't think the DNR people would ever support anything like a legal hunting season on Liberals. But I think a private hunting preserve stocked with wild Occupy Wall Street types would be quite popular...
The last I saw, there are 90 million gun owners who own somewhere around 400 million firearms, 75 million of which are rifles. Yamamoto was right when he talked about a rifle behind every blade of grass.
I do desire a double rifle in .45-70 or .30-06 for hunting mid to larger game.
***just think what would have happened if the British didnt allow the Colonialist muskets.***
Back in the 1870s the British in South Africa ordered all blacks to register their “Birmingham gas pipes”, a slang term for a trade musket.
The guns were then seized. Natives who protested got their muskets back so damaged they were useless.
Unlicensed hunter here too. Millions own guns that do not possess licenses. I won’t need one til they make one for hunting commies.
While this is a nice sentiment, it is absolutely disillusion. Push comes to shove, a vast majority of that army of hunters people like to talk about will willingly fall in line when threatened with force from the government.
This conservative army swells again by the number of individuals that have arms but do not hunt.
Now percentagewise you are making me feel downright greedy.
“A disorderly mob is no more an army than a heap of building materials is a house.” - Socrates
And if every hunter has at least one firearm. Two firearms. Three firearms.
While this is a nice sentiment, it is absolutely disillusion.
I'm not so sure, given the math...
Push comes to shove, a vast majority of that army of hunters people like to talk about will willingly fall in line when threatened with force from the government.
I agree, but let's look at the numbers. Let's say the vast majority is 90%. That leaves approx. two million hunters. Let's say for the argument, that 40% of that 2M are vets. Now, get into organizing (command structure, commo, logistics, force multipliers, training, etc.), and what do you have? The force structure (minus the toys), of the current U.S. Army.
Food for thought. Thirty three percent of the colonists were against the British. Only about 30% of those actually fought. You know how that turned out.
Think about it. Not as dismal as you would postulate...although the carnage would make the first war between the states look like a walk in the park on a warm spring day.
5.56mm
Hunters are no disorderly mob. If they were, hundreds would be shot and killed on opening day every year in every state. Hunters already follow some pretty strict rules with no oversight.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.