That's right, I remember in all the history books about how moose, bears, and wolves were unkillable up until the invention of the fire arms when we were finally able to take them down. Also, who hunts moose, bears, and wolves? Those are usually not something most hunters go out to slay, but the animals that they come across taking down smaller game like quail, various types of deer, turkeys, boars, and others like that and then the subsequent shitting of the pants when they do show up.
Dontrike/Shadow Priest/Black Cell Faction Friend Code - 5172-0967-3866
Last time I was in Finland, I bought a can of cooked bear meat and the f*cking customs people seized it because they were actually worried about Mad Bear Disease.
I know that's off-topic. I just wanted to throw that out there.
EDIT: Actually Mad Bear Disease sounds fucking terrifying. But I'm 100% sure the Finns can handle that shit.
Yep, I told my dad, who has a lifetime NRA membership, single issue voter, all about gun rights because someone told him Obama was coming to take his guns, and he didn't believe me that the NRA was under investigation now for taking Russian money to run ads for Trump. Even though you could clearly see that they doubled their spending from 2012 to 2016 for presidential ad buying.
While the status of the NRA's involvement with Russian money laundering is summarized in this Snopes article updated three days ago, the name you're looking for is Alexander Torshin. Torshin is a high-ranking Russian bank official with direct personal ties to Putin, and even before the NRA get-together he'd met the Trumps before. He's also under investigation as a high-ranking member of an international organized crime group.
While the FBI is on the case, I'm not sure if this officially part of the Mueller investigation or not. That technicality might matter.
If you used a "single" arrow for a large animal you were suicidal or stupid - there's a reason people invented spears. They do a lot better against large animals, especially given how their their hides tend to be. Boar spears were a pretty big thing, as arrows are basically just irritants.
Additionally, a good bow hunter *could* kill an animal as fast as a shooter. And if you're hunting large game, or hunting as a sole means of feeding your family, there's really no other kind. The idea that guns are "better" when it comes to suffering really isn't that true.
If you don't know where to aim / aren't as skilled with a bow compared to a gun, yes. But, again, when you start getting larger than a deer you're generally hunting with either hunting bows that are heavier (if you're using modern tech) and different arrowheads (broadhead vs. bodkin, for example) or spears. Both of which are just as effective as rifles, given that no hunter (particularly one that is hunting to feed their family and depends on a kill) really wants to wound an animal and have to a) chase it for miles, and hope you get there before anything else or b) piss off a moose even more with a non-lethal wound so it charges you.
If you're talking pre-modern techniques, no. But given I've majored in Anthropology and my particular focus has always been pre-modern, I know a fair amount. Yes, there are some cultures that seek to wound only so they can be followed and finished later. No, this is not how modern hunters prefer to do so, nor is it particularly efficient when you're walking in the dead of winter. Nor is it really optimal to wound it so it wanders for a few days, so getting a near-lethal shots has always been fairly important.
So the What He Meant Was crowd came out today to say that Trump is actually for improved background checks. Specifically, this bill introduced after some murdering motherfucker got tired of beating his wife and shot up a church in Texas instead. Cornyn and Hatch are on board.
Obviously it was a long, long time ago that...no, it was November, shit these things just flow together. Anyhow, TheHill has an article about the bill at the time.
As with anything else from the What He Meant Was squad, I'll wait till Trump actually does something, before assuming it's a priority just because they say it is while Trump is golfing and tweeting.Sens. John Cornyn (R-Texas), Chris Murphy (D-Conn.), Tim Scott (R-S.C.) and Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.) introduced legislation on Thursday that would require states and agencies to produce plans for sending records to the National Instant Background Check System (NICS) that would show if an individual is prohibited from buying a gun and verifying that the information is accurate.
The measure would also try to incentivize agencies and states to provide information by blocking bonus pay for political appointees in agencies that fail to upload records to the background check system and rewarding states that follow their implementation plans.
“For years agencies and states haven’t complied with the law, failing to upload these critical records without consequence. ... This bill aims to help fix what’s become a nationwide, systemic problem so we can better prevent criminals and domestic abusers from obtaining firearms," Cornyn said in a statement.
Sens. John Cornyn (R-Texas), Chris Murphy (D-Conn.), Tim Scott (R-S.C.) and Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.) introduced legislation on Thursday that would require states and agencies to produce plans for sending records to the National Instant Background Check System (NICS) that would show if an individual is prohibited from buying a gun and verifying that the information is accurate.
The measure would also try to incentivize agencies and states to provide information by blocking bonus pay for political appointees in agencies that fail to upload records to the background check system and rewarding states that follow their implementation plans.
“For years agencies and states haven’t complied with the law, failing to upload these critical records without consequence. ... This bill aims to help fix what’s become a nationwide, systemic problem so we can better prevent criminals and domestic abusers from obtaining firearms," Cornyn said in a statement.
- - - Updated - - -
Again, not a legal expert, but I think Cruz just tanked his only shot at avoiding the death penalty by saying he was sorry after the shooting. I'm moderately sure part of the insanity plea requires you don't know right from wrong. Apologies kind of destroy that.
Marco Rubio wants him executed and, while he's not technically in a position of authority here, one would assume he knows the facts of the case as much as anyone else, and he's a lawyer.
http://newsok.com/article/5514566 (ignore the slant of this; just linking that people do it)
https://i.pinimg.com/736x/c9/46/44/c...cold-steel.jpg
https://books.google.com/books?id=va...0moose&f=false
Yeah, moose are fucking terrifying. But they're still hunted with spears. Same with bears. Because spears have the weight behind them that arrows do not, and can actually penetrate for a kill or serious wound.
When I say "aim" I'm talking about all of those things as well. Not just the physical act of hitting a stationary target, but accounting for the wind, the distance, and all other factors that go into the shot. I thought that you'd realize that's part of aiming, but I guess not. Your point about cocking up a shot and having trouble with a reshoot goes for a gun as well - if you miss, you're going to have a lot of trouble with a second shot regardless of weapon choice.
as for "why not ban them"... spears are a bit more unwieldy to use against smaller prey (such as humans) for the untrained, as are bows. That being said, historically there have been crossbow restrictions (as they were easier than standard bows) and if mass murderers turn to the bow and get an insane amount of skill to hit and reload in roughly 15s then sure, ban them with guns. You'll note that I never said (and haven't said on this forum ever, to my memory) that guns should be banned though.
“The biggest communication problem is we do not listen to understand. We listen to reply,” Stephen Covey.
The only path to a solution for the gun issue that I see is a major weapons advance in tech. Basically along the lines of the same reason previous devices like knight armor became obsolete. If there were some amazing new advancement that defensively could make bullets drop to the ground mid-air, or something like a laser weapon that made all or most current guns obsolete, then that would be a chance for a paradigm shift in gun control. Then a law could be passed to much more strictly control the production and sale of those new weapons in a way closer to the way the rest of the world controls guns today.
Until then a talk of increased background checks or a ban seems moot when there are over 150M guns in the US currently. Congress could pass a complete AR-15 (and alias) ban on new production tomorrow and there would be millions around for generations. The price might go up a bit, but they would still be easily obtainable in the aftermarket. And rounding them all up isn't remotely practical unless the US went full Orwellian 1984 police state.
“The biggest communication problem is we do not listen to understand. We listen to reply,” Stephen Covey.
“The biggest communication problem is we do not listen to understand. We listen to reply,” Stephen Covey.