The problem isn’t that we don’t have access to factual information. The problem is that we have TOO MUCH access to information, much of it being inaccurate or slanted. We are also far too willing to accept the conclusions of others without ever questioning how those conclusions were reached or what those conclusions are based on. Some maintain this is a product of the way we educate our children (learning facts instead of learning critical thinking). I, personally believe that is part of the problem.

More to come when this interminable closing month is finally terminal.

In Wisconsin, a number of freshman Democrats have come up with the bright idea of banning hollowpoint (expanding) ammunition. Their “rational” is that “The military uses hollowpoint ammunition”. It is obvious that none of these idiots have A) served in the military or B) knows anything about military small arms. The military has been using jacketed ball ammo since 1899. To add insult to injury, these idiots are also not aware that under existing laws in the State of Wisconsin, to hunt bear or deer, you are required by law to use expanding ammo.

http://www.redstate.com/briansikma/2013/02/15/democrats-see-to-ban-hunting-ammunition-in-wisconsin/?utm_source=twitterfeed&utm_medium=twitter

In Washington State, at least three Democrats have proposed a law that gives local sheriffs the ability to “inspect” the homes of anyone registered as having an “assault weapon” in their home. Apparently no one informed these Democrats that such a law would blatently violate the Fourth Amendment.

It isn’t just the CEO of the NRA that has lost his marbles in the ongoing gun debacles. Democrats all over the US are also getting in touch with their inner wingnut.

http://www.examiner.com/article/washington-gun-control-proposal-said-to-violate-fourth-amendment-to-constitution

I don’t say this to be combative or harsh. I say it to be exactly realistic. You are arguing and striving (very well, I might add) against a fantasy opponent. The terrible thing about such an enemy is that every rational idea thrown out for discussion suddenly and not surprisingly becomes all about the worst of possible outcomes even when they are not remotely realistic. In the sixties, it was all about the Domino Effect. Every country even next to a communist nation would itself become communist. It was “inevitable”, in the words of John Birch. How’d that work out? In the 80′s, it was Welfare Queens. Anyone on the gubmint dole would buy Cadillacs, huge TVs and booze, because whatever. These are fear fantasies that have grossly colored our discussions of policy.

Right here, you call for opposition to *any* government proposal for gun control, though not so charmingly you refer to those as ‘restriction on gun rights’. That includes the very policy positions you and I have agreed that we think are rational, good for law enforcement and actually protect the public. Yet still, you go back to the extreme and think I should apologize to you for stating that what won’t happen really won’t happen. No, Moorcat. I am not apologizing for attempting to get you to give up an extreme position, one that only serves such that the better ways of proceeding are discarded.

I had not heard about ammo sales requiring a background check (except under Feinstein’s bill which can’t pass Congress as it stands now). Do you have further information on that?

Do Democrats proposing such legislation know how much they hurt the movement for rational gun regulation when they propose this kind of legislation?

When I get home (to my complete zombiekit) I would carry only the hk416 and all my knifes. (19″ cold steel machete, 7″ hunting knife, 12 throwing knifes, 4″ spring knife) and a baseball bat as a backup. And a wrench ofc.

If the ZA were to occur in Montana, I doubt it would get very far. The number of guns and ammunition in private hands in this state would rapidly reduce the zombie numbers to zero. Our only problem would be killing the masses of zombies migrating in from other areas.

That said, if the ZA were to occur right now, I would use a combination of my SKS (I have over 2,000 rounds for it right now), and either my Mosin Nagant 91/30 or my Remington 742. Since the 742 is a 30.06 and there is abundant ammo for it available for reloads, it would probably be the better choice, even though the Mosin has better range. Moreover, with the non-standard furniture I have on the gun right now, it is lighter and more stable than the Mosin.

I am hoping to pick up the PMR 30 pistol in the not too distant future. The more I read about that handgun, the more I want one. I still like the .45 cal Springfield Armory 5.25″ XDM for a carry gun, but the PMR 30 would make a better choice for plinking and zombies (as well as being a hell of a lot cheaper to shoot).

If the ZA was occurring in Montana, I would be tempted to head for the open and steep country. If properly supplied with potential movements holding caches, small groups of people could kill insane amounts of zombies. Traps could be set. I think I’d want ability to shoot at range, but move frequently. Since my strategy would be to take to the hills, I think reliability would also be important. In weather and tight situations Guns would be damaged all the time in a ZA, and I’d want something tough. I think I’d go with the M14.

In an urban setting, it would be entirely different. I probably wouldn’t last long. My gun would be a shotgun with a tight choke.

If a real ZA occurred right now, I’d have to equip myself with my hunting rifle, a M91/59 Moisin Nagant, with peep sights. This being the only gun I have a sufficient amount of ammo for in a potential ZA. It actually is so ugly as to look as though it has been through a ZA, and I would feel less than prepared.