I believe it, because it’s true. They aren’t “necessary” for the sport. GUNS aren’t necessary for the sport of hunting. NONE of this has anything to do with the 2nd Amendment.
>>I believe it, because it’s true. They aren’t “necessary” for the sport. GUNS aren’t necessary for the sport of hunting.
I agree. If an AR-15 isn’t a suitable hunting rifle, then no rifle is. Real hunters with real skills use a stone knife and their wits and athletic prowess.
Exactly so. When my brother tells me he prefers to hunt with a black powder rifle, he's not being a Fudd. If he tells me (which he has not) that I shouldn't hunt with an AR-pattern rifle, let alone own one, he would be a Fudd.
Well snowflake (that is you, and absolutely you have fully earned the moniker) hunting isn’t necessarily “a sport.” Sometimes it is a necessary chore required to keep an agricultural business functional.
You are dismissed. Come back when you have at least a vague understanding of the topic, instead of the smarmy pretentiousness you have been exhibiting.
+3. On point.