Replies

"Military rifles are selective fire. They can be fired both semi-automatic, and fully automatic."

We both know that. We also both know how easy it is to convert them to fully automatic - not that I give a horse's ass about that.

"They are not "military" rifles. "

If you know how to handle a semi-automatic M 1 Garand, it should be pretty easy to figure out how to operate an M14. I guess an M16 isn't that much different. And THAT is the real reason for the Second Amendment.

"No one I know does that. "

You are hanging out with the "right" people. But visit a gun show or some of the larger gun stores and see all those fine WW1 rifles butchered by "sportization".

"And even if someone does... so what?"

I think a piece of history should be preserved, not destroyed. If they want a light bolt action for hunting they should go out and buy one - not wreck something that might have been at the Argonne Forest or Chateau-Thierry.

We also both know how easy it is to convert them to fully automatic

I don't know that. I've heard that claim made by the Brady Campaign and other gun-control advocates, as an excuse to ban semi-automatic firearms.

If you know how to handle a semi-automatic M 1 Garand, it should be pretty easy to figure out how to operate an M14. I guess an M16 isn't that much different. And THAT is the real reason for the Second Amendment.

Agreed, 100%.

However, none of this is to the topic at hand.

It is one thing to make a cogent argument that a certain firearm/cartridge combination may be unsuitable for a particular type of game, situation, etc.

E.G. I know some people who hunt deer with the .223 Remington, and others who consider the cartridge too weak for deer hunting. (I leave that debate to them.)

However, that isn't what Zumbo and other elitist, myopic "traditionalists" such as him do.

Zumbo stated that semi-automatic rifles, such as the AR-15, were unsuitable for hunting. Period.

He then went even further, and said they should be banned "from the praries (sic) and woods".

In doing this, he plays into the hands of the Brady Campaign, etc. whos' propaganda campaign for "common sense" gun control is never ending.

The Brady Campaigns' idea of "common sense" gun control includes a ban on so-called "non-sporting" firearms. This means a ban on all semi-automatic rifles, with detachable magazines.

Shortly after Zumbo posted his comments to his blog, the Brady Campaign was already using Zumbos' statements to further their subversive, anti-gun agenda (I posted links earlier).

Jim Zumbos words may very well be used in an attempt to convince legislators (many of whom are are uneducated about firearms), to ban these "terrorist" rifles.

While we both know the Second Amendment isn't about hunting, there are too many legislators who don't.

This is why I originally replied to you, and your comment that "He's right about hunting and military rifles."

Zumbo isn't right.

Millions of people hunt each year, with semi-automatic rifles. Semi-automatic rifles are no less suitable for hunting than bolt or lever action rifles. By stating otherwise, Jim Zumbo merely displayed his elitism and his admitted ignorance.