MidnightRider

Your personal contacts might be an example of anecdotal confirmation bias. I'm not speaking regionally although it certainly does appear that certain regional VA systems (like Phoenix) were engaged in misconduct more often than others. Could be, but not on my account. Just hearing them bitch every time they have been, or have to do, is enough for me. Of course, this could be a regional thing. While I think the current state of the VA is incomprehensibly f#cked up, I'm sure there have to be some facilities providing quality care to our vets. Have you ever been to a VA hospital for care? I'm genuinely curious as to what your thoughts are on it. As I said, I found it to be depressing as hell and thoroughly mismanaged. I sat in a waiting room one time for 8 hours only to have them tell me at the end of the day that I would have to reschedule. That was with an appointment. I was misdiagnosed several times as well before a civilian doc got it right. I'm not trying to pile on the VA (they really don't need any help), just conveying my experiences.

According to the vast majority of vets, the VA provides very good health care. (But that doesn't mean that there aren't serious problems that need to be addressed now.) I truly hope that is the case but I can honestly say, I don't know a single one (personally, and I know a lot) that is happy with the care they are receiving. My few interactions with them (I flatly refuse to use the VA unless it is necessary i.e. disability re-appraisal) have been disappointing and downright depressing, to say the least. Are you speaking regionally?

I bet police will continue to violate our rights anyways. Only if you let them. Education is the key in ANY interaction with the police. Know the laws and know your rights. Me? I only roll the window down enough to slide my proof of ins and registration through the window. I hold up my license to display to the officer that I have one. I never roll the window down enough for them to even think about gaining control of anything that is mine, that I don't want them to have. Also; encrypt, encrypt, encrypt! Can't emphasize that enough. Oh, and record every interaction.

I was born and raised in NE but never knew that wild turkey thrived there. I guess I was too fixated on slaying pheasant. I have however, fired a hot 3 1/2 turkey load (unbeknownst to me at the time). Be sure you're prepared! Are the turkey located throughout the state? What is the best region to hunt them? I have already made plans to go here in KY this fall but I would love to set something up in NE for maybe next spring.

Stop what? My argument was never with Carl, it was with Junior but apparently Carl felt that it was directed towards him so I got a bit pissy. I have no issues with him, never have. I actually agree with a lot of what he says in other threads and comes across as an intelligent and competent dude. Why you all up in my Kool Aid, homie?

Did you see me call the Mini 14 an assault rifle anywhere in this thread? Or have you seen me call the Mini 14 an assault rifle anywhere else? You seem awfully hung up on the term "assault rifle" for someone who is complaining about a focus on semantics. Similarly, you seem awfully misinformed (or at least uninformed) about the Mini 14 for someone who seemed gleeful about other people spreading misinformation. Carry on. The mini 14 was never the point and I admit that I don't know a lot about this platform. The point was that all of the gun control idiots run around sreaming ban assault rifles when most have no clue as to what one truly is. None of the weapons depicted in that image are assault rifles but I've seen them, and many others, incorrectly (probably intentionally) labeled as such. They are semi-automatic rifles. Nothing more but I'm sure you already knew that as well. My posts were actually directed to Junior as he was the one proposing the ban on assault rifles, high cap mags etc. and you chimed in so that may be where you're getting some of your misguided impressions of my intent. Again, you knew where I was going with this and you're intentionally muddying the waters. Misinformation indeed. Have the best day ever. Edit: So yeah, I'm ALL KINDS of hung up on the term. Its the lynchpin of any gun grabbers argument. And that is just plain dumb.

Come on Carl, I'm convinced you're being intentionally obtuse now. You know where I'm going with this but would rather argue semantics instead. Select fire is the difference between the pic of the 14s I posted and a true assault rifle. You're not going to squeeze that trigger as quickly as a full auto cycles.

One is a real "assault rifle" and can shoot fully automatic. The other cannot. Actually, my understanding is that most M-16s in service are no longer fully automatic. That is correct but they are still select fire, just like some M-4s so his intent is on point. That full auto thing didn't work out very well in Vietnam and sucks for accuracy anyway.

Yes. It certainly is. How so? We're talking mini-14 here, not the LEO/MIL AC 556. I'll give you the first Mini-14 on that list. Fully loaded. I'll take the second Mini-14 on that list. Fully loaded. Let's see who can fire off 20 rounds first. That'd be your requested difference in firing rate. At this point, you're referring to volume of fire, not rate of fire but I'm sure you already know this.

Junior, Too many text boxes to directly quote. It sounds to me as though you trotted out the tired "well the constitution was written over 200 years ago and the Forefathers could not have possibly envisioned the America of today, therefore it is no longer applicable" argument. If I am mistaken, my apologies.

Yes. It certainly is. How so? We're talking mini-14 here, not the LEO/MIL AC 556.

Yes, if I applied myself. Conversely, if one were so inclinded, they could Google all or some of that themselves. I'm really not interested in pulling up this admin's parade of failures (again) because, frankly, its too damned depressing. Help yourself though, I'm sure you could come up with more than what I listed. So what do you suggest should be done? Get on a Cornhuskers football forum and bitch about it?

Truth.

Jameson's and Heineken. Slainte'!

So, you're advocating prison time for me for exercising my second ammendment rights? ............. Your opinion. BTW, 2nd Amendment was a musket era ..... single shot. And used to be slavery was okay. You need to keep up 21st century time. Always makes me chuckle that people think the founding father's writings in 1789 must translate literally to modern times, with no room for interpretation. As if they had crystal balls to determine what would work in the colonial era, the industrial revolution, and the current tech era. I mean honestly, if we are interpreting amendments literally, then we should have militias rather than a professional standing army. "The means of defence against foreign danger, have been always the instruments of tyranny at home. Among the Romans it was a standing maxim to excite a war, whenever a revolt was apprehended. Throughout all Europe, the armies kept up under the pretext of defending, have enslaved the people." -- James Madison Go do some research: The right to keep and bear arms isn't unlimited: “Like most rights, the right secured by the Second Amendment is not unlimited” (p. 54). The Court upheld restrictions like the prohibition of arms by felons and the mentally ill, and carrying in certain prohibited places like schools and courthouses. What is protected are weapons "in common use of the time" (p.55). This doesn't mean weapons in common use “at that time,” meaning the 18th Century. The Court said the idea that it would is “frivolous” and that “the Second Amendment extends, prima facie, to all instruments that constitute bearable arms, even those that were not in existence at the time of the founding" (p.8). The Court's criteria includes weapons in popular widespread use “that [are] overwhelmingly chosen by American society" (p. 56), and “the most popular weapon chosen by Americans” (p. 58). Edit: Oops: http://mic.com/articles/24557/9-things-you-didn-t-know-about-the-second-amendment Edit: double tap. Typing's hard.

So, winner take all then? I'm in! Who's first? I'm in. I challenge a duel !! Warning, I received a military Small Arms Expert Marksmanship Ribbon (I'm serious), 75 out of 75 bullseye target in M-16 weapon (yearly). Impressive, I did that with many weapons as well. Got the same bling and everything. Sadly, I cannot oblige: http://www.sos.ky.gov/admin/land/resources/articles/Documents/CodeDuello.pdf Actually, I'm kinda afraid of rifles because I'm a lefty. Shell trajectory (M-16) was very close to my big nose !! Ouch. Can I get a leftie, please?!

So, winner take all then? I'm in! Who's first? I'm in. I challenge a duel !! Warning, I received a military Small Arms Expert Marksmanship Ribbon (I'm serious), 75 out of 75 bullseye target in M-16 weapon (yearly). Impressive, I did that with many weapons as well. Got the same bling and everything. Sadly, I cannot oblige: http://www.sos.ky.gov/admin/land/resources/articles/Documents/CodeDuello.pdf Edit: The link I provided is not meant to imply that I am an elected official in the state of Kentucky. I do, however, intend to be appointed King of the World some day so I'm just looking ahead.

So, winner take all then? I'm in! Who's first?

So, you're advocating prison time for me for exercising my second ammendment rights? ............. Your opinion. BTW, 2nd Amendment was a musket era ..... single shot. And used to be slavery was okay. You need to keep up 21st century time. Huh, that's strange. Last time I checked, the Constitution was still in effect. Did I miss something? If you had anything of substance to add (which you didn't), that idiotic slavery comment ruined any chance of it. Wow, dude. substance: 5th Amendment before 13th Amendment. There is no substance to your argument, it is f#cking ridiculous to compare the enslavement of an entire race of humans, to the right of a single American to defend him/herself from the evils of this world.

So, you're advocating prison time for me for exercising my second ammendment rights? ............. Your opinion. BTW, 2nd Amendment was a musket era ..... single shot. And used to be slavery was okay. You need to keep up 21st century time. Always makes me chuckle that people think the founding father's writings in 1789 must translate literally to modern times, with no room for interpretation. As if they had crystal balls to determine what would work in the colonial era, the industrial revolution, and the current tech era. I mean honestly, if we are interpreting amendments literally, then we should have militias rather than a professional standing army. "The means of defence against foreign danger, have been always the instruments of tyranny at home. Among the Romans it was a standing maxim to excite a war, whenever a revolt was apprehended. Throughout all Europe, the armies kept up under the pretext of defending, have enslaved the people." -- James Madison Go do some research: The right to keep and bear arms isn't unlimited: “Like most rights, the right secured by the Second Amendment is not unlimited” (p. 54). The Court upheld restrictions like the prohibition of arms by felons and the mentally ill, and carrying in certain prohibited places like schools and courthouses. What is protected are weapons "in common use of the time" (p.55). This doesn't mean weapons in common use “at that time,” meaning the 18th Century. The Court said the idea that it would is “frivolous” and that “the Second Amendment extends, prima facie, to all instruments that constitute bearable arms, even those that were not in existence at the time of the founding" (p.8). The Court's criteria includes weapons in popular widespread use “that [are] overwhelmingly chosen by American society" (p. 56), and “the most popular weapon chosen by Americans” (p. 58).

So, you're advocating prison time for me for exercising my second ammendment rights? ............. Your opinion. BTW, 2nd Amendment was a musket era ..... single shot. And used to be slavery was okay. You need to keep up 21st century time. Always makes me chuckle that people think the founding father's writings in 1789 must translate literally to modern times, with no room for interpretation. As if they had crystal balls to determine what would work in the colonial era, the industrial revolution, and the current tech era. I mean honestly, if we are interpreting amendments literally, then we should have militias rather than a professional standing army. "The means of defence against foreign danger, have been always the instruments of tyranny at home. Among the Romans it was a standing maxim to excite a war, whenever a revolt was apprehended. Throughout all Europe, the armies kept up under the pretext of defending, have enslaved the people." -- James Madison And I always chuckle when people think it doesn't translate to today. BTW, welcome back. I asked you a question in this thread that you've surely had time to research. Are you going to answer it, or not? What is an assault rifle? I'll add another; why do you want to limit mag capacity? What's the purpose?

I'm not seeing that same buttstock on the 14. If it is, it is. Wasn't trying to spread misinformation. You're detracting from the real question though that I have yet to see you or anyone else answer. Is the functionality of any of those 4 guns different from the others, in terms of firing rate? And the million dollar question that EVERYBODY is dancing around; what is an assault rifle?

So, you're advocating prison time for me for exercising my second ammendment rights? ............. Your opinion. BTW, 2nd Amendment was a musket era ..... single shot. And used to be slavery was okay. You need to keep up 21st century time. Huh, that's strange. Last time I checked, the Constitution was still in effect. Did I miss something? If you had anything of substance to add (which you didn't), that idiotic slavery comment ruined any chance of it. Wow, dude.

So, you're advocating prison time for me for exercising my second ammendment rights? Are you serious? Here's how it works: Let's say I have this cake. It is a very nice cake, with "GUN RIGHTS" written across the top in lovely floral icing. Along you come and say, "Give me that cake." I say, "No, it's my cake." You say, "Let's compromise. Give me half." I respond by asking what I get out of this compromise, and you reply that I get to keep half of my cake. Okay, we compromise. Let us call this compromise The National Firearms Act of 1934. There I am with my half of the cake, and you walk back up and say, "Give me that cake." I say, "No, it's my cake." You say, "Let's compromise." What do I get out of this compromise? Why, I get to keep half of what's left of the cake I already own. So, we have your compromise -- let us call this one the Gun Control Act of 1968 -- and I'm left holding what is now just a quarter of my cake. And I'm sitting in the corner with my quarter piece of cake, and here you come again. You want my cake. Again. This time you take several bites -- we'll call this compromise the Clinton Executive Orders -- and I'm left with about a tenth of what has always been MY DAMN CAKE and you've got nine-tenths of it. Then we compromised with the Lautenberg Act (nibble, nibble), the HUD/Smith and Wesson agreement (nibble, nibble), the Brady Law (NOM NOM NOM), the School Safety and Law Enforcement Improvement Act (sweet tap-dancing Freyja, my finger!) I'm left holding crumbs of what was once a large and satisfying cake, and you're standing there with most of MY CAKE, making anime eyes and whining about being "reasonable", and wondering "why we won't compromise". I'm done with being reasonable, and I'm done with compromise. Nothing about gun control in this country has ever been "reasonable" or a genuine "compromise". You and people like you are a threat to my rights and liberties. So yeah, f#ck that.

Magazine capacity between 1 and 2-4. #4 is probably more concealable (depending mostly on whether that is actually a folding stock). I'd argue that none of them are very good hunting rifles even though I shot more than a few coyotes with one. I should have been more clear. Is the functionality of the action any different in any of the above weapons? #1 can hold only one round because no magazine is inserted but I know of magazines in a capacity of up to 30 being produced for this weapon. #4 actually has a sliding stock and those can vary but I don;t think enough to easily conceal the weapon. A couple more questions, if you would, please. Do you know the definition of an assault rifle? Not what the media wants everyone to think about the big, bad scary black guns but a true assault rifle. Do you support an assault rifle ban? To be clear, none of thte weapons platforms above are assault rifles but I'm genuinely curious as to what others here believe the definition of assault rifle, to be. When it comes to gun control, misinformation is the name of the game.