[El Gato]

Boy, you could gut (maybe skin, too!) your deer with one shot!

Ain't fer hunting deer, nor even elephants. They're fer hunting tyrants.

They're militia weapons, as defined by the Surpeme Court in the Miller decision of 1939.

[dhuffman@awod.com]

Yes. This is the most succinct and correct comment. They are anti-tyrant weapons. Unfortunately here in the good ol' USA tyrants are the favored form of rule. Democracy is the rule of fools by fools. Americans are to be ruled by laws and not by mere men.

[logic]

How do you figure?

The Miller case determined it was perfectly appropriate for the government to regulate weapons that had no millitary purpouse. They claimed the second amendment only protected weapons with a military purpouse. The case applied that to probably the favored weapon in the trenches of WWI, the sawed-off shotgun.

Therefore, I would suggest, using the same logic, the .50 is perfectly suitable for government bans since it is undeniably used in military combat, it must have no military purpouse...

[School of Rational Thought]

While I have never gone Elk hunting, from what I have seen on some TV shows, those animals are big and these guys take shots at some extreme distances.

It seems that moose are also very large, but can be shot at closer distances.

If I ever were to go hunt water buffalo I think I would want one, especially if being charged. They appear to have skulls like boulders.