SaigaKen 338 Posted January 29, 2011 Report Share Posted January 29, 2011 Read an awesome idea from Spenceman today.....Will this work? spenceman, on 29 January 2011 - 11:00 AM, said: Since plinking isn't a shooting sport because it would neuter the law, and the definition of a shooting sport can change, I say we do our damnedest to neuter the law. Someone with some technical know how could set up the United States Plinking Association. Membership could be free or $1, a set of rules could be developed, and upon becoming a member (here's the technical part) a computer generated membership card and unique member number could be created then printed out at home. If done right it could have a million plus members within in a year or two and they would likely have to recognize plinking as a sport with so many members. Good chance for someone to make some money I say (if you get rich off my idea please throw me a bone now and then ). Sadly they have established a crap double standard by stating that despite "non-sporting" weapons being used in sporting events doesn't automatically make them sporting. However a sporting weapon can be used in non-sporting purposes and it's just fine. Anyway, this study is nothing to fear in and of itself, and as stated before it provides RAA a leg to stand on to have Saigas imported with the FCG and pistol grip where they were intended to be, and with fewer modifications to be done before the import the prices could actually come down. On the other hand the ATF will have to address modifications from the sporting purpose which could mean some unpleasant changes to 922r (at least bureaucracies move slow). 6 Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Heath_h49008 442 Posted January 29, 2011 Report Share Posted January 29, 2011 You aren't alone in this idea... But really, all we need is 3-gun, ACTS, and the other tactical/run-n-gun matches recognized as "Sporting use". That would open the door to call the ugly black weapons of the world, and might be a whole lot easier than starting from scratch. IMHO Quote Link to post Share on other sites
slostang 80 Posted January 29, 2011 Report Share Posted January 29, 2011 I love it! Quote Link to post Share on other sites
TO THE FLOOR IN A 63 121 Posted January 29, 2011 Report Share Posted January 29, 2011 I love the idea too but I think the key is that matches and 3 gun events need to fall under sporting purpose. I also propose that you go to a match or if your already going then bring a friend. Our club is always wanting more guys to come out and shoot matches...even though about 60 normally show up. If you already go you know how much fun it is and if you don't normally go, try it it is a good time. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Heath_h49008 442 Posted January 29, 2011 Report Share Posted January 29, 2011 Wouldn't it just take a single rider by one of our congress critters? One little addendum to a bill, or one little uncontested entry in the Congressional record stating that "X" competition is now recognized as a legitimate shooting sport. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
SaigaKen 338 Posted January 29, 2011 Author Report Share Posted January 29, 2011 Any members compete 3 gun in PA? If someone were to head this up, we could get at least one rep forum member from each state and attack this across the board.... Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Heath_h49008 442 Posted January 29, 2011 Report Share Posted January 29, 2011 Any members compete 3 gun in PA? If someone were to head this up, we could get at least one rep forum member from each state and attack this across the board.... It's not a bad idea. I'll poke around with a few of my more politically connected friends. It can't hurt. I just don't know the best way to attack this opening. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
SaigaKen 338 Posted January 29, 2011 Author Report Share Posted January 29, 2011 (edited) Any members compete 3 gun in PA? If someone were to head this up, we could get at least one rep forum member from each state and attack this across the board.... It's not a bad idea. I'll poke around with a few of my more politically connected friends. It can't hurt. I just don't know the best way to attack this opening. Once we establish forum members from each state.....any of those members that are members of other gun groups could get those groups to join with our efforts....We can reach a huge audience across the internet (We need a good "gun educated" president) He could coordinate actions to "state reps" and those state reps could coordinate will thier state group members Edited January 29, 2011 by Saiga Power Quote Link to post Share on other sites
SaigaKen 338 Posted January 29, 2011 Author Report Share Posted January 29, 2011 Moderators: Do you have the ability to: #1 identify members by state? #2 sent out mass PM's to each states group (once we have something to send) This would allow us to obtain volunteers for "state reps" and provide those "state reps" with thier state forum members This can get more detailed as we go.....Guess the first step is Presidential volunteers (and then a vote?) Quote Link to post Share on other sites
lbsrdi 1,078 Posted January 30, 2011 Report Share Posted January 30, 2011 Great idea, count me in. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
ewoketeer 35 Posted January 30, 2011 Report Share Posted January 30, 2011 I'm in Quote Link to post Share on other sites
G O B 3,516 Posted January 30, 2011 Report Share Posted January 30, 2011 We are are medicating the wrong end of the horse! What we need to attack is "sporting purposes" this language is in direct opposition the 2nd amendment, and as such is both onerous and illegal. (legal term "arbitrary and capricious" terms that should be included in all correspondence about this BS rule). Quote Link to post Share on other sites
SaigaKen 338 Posted January 30, 2011 Author Report Share Posted January 30, 2011 We are are medicating the wrong end of the horse! What we need to attack is "sporting purposes" this language is in direct opposition the 2nd amendment, and as such is both onerous and illegal. (legal term "arbitrary and capricious" terms that should be included in all correspondence about this BS rule). i agree 100%....that is part of it..... Quote Link to post Share on other sites
spicoli 12 Posted January 30, 2011 Report Share Posted January 30, 2011 I agree that "sporting purposes" contradicts the 2nd amendment. But, lets face it, you have to beat them at thier own game. I like the idea. If a million people are a member of the "Plinkers Sporting Association", they will have a hard time ignoring it. Its a great idea, and if its free, most firearm owners would probably join. Remember, this report is to see how much resistance there is to outlaw Saiga-12s. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Heath_h49008 442 Posted January 30, 2011 Report Share Posted January 30, 2011 If 3 gun is a sport, then EVERYTHING they ban has a sporting use. I'm in Michigan, and I'm going to contact some friends who work with MCRGO. 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites
SaigaKen 338 Posted January 30, 2011 Author Report Share Posted January 30, 2011 If 3 gun is a sport, then EVERYTHING they ban has a sporting use. I'm in Michigan, and I'm going to contact some friends who work with MCRGO. In addtion to the gun itself, we need to have justification for (folding stocks,forearm rails, lights, large capacity, etc) Quote Link to post Share on other sites
308SAIGA 55 Posted January 31, 2011 Report Share Posted January 31, 2011 (edited) I wonder how the Gov is going to take it when I tell them that I do not use my guns for sporting purposes? I own them because I am in the US militia to defend this country against it's enemies foreign or "DOMESTIC" as directed to me by the Constitution of these United States of America...... My suggestion is to contact the President and, "NICELY", explain that this bill will make us all criminals, and that the only ones who will care less about the bill will be criminals. Gun laws should be directed toward criminals with death penalties in the use of such. That putting more laws on law abiding citizens just is not constitutional, That the courts themselves put a person in jail instead of giving them the death penalty because the SCOUTS state that it is unconstitutional because they will feel pain by such. Remind him and ask "what about the people that where killed by these criminals, did they not feel the pain and anguish? What about the people that are left behind, the families, the mothers & fathers, sisters & brothers, don't they feel the pain and continue the feel the pain knowing that they have to support these criminals while they are incarcerated?" This is what I am doing, since they bill has to be signed be the president of the US.............. ETA: By the way the 2nd amendment has nothing to do with sporting purposes and everthing to do with my first paragraph...... Edited January 31, 2011 by 308saiga 3 Quote Link to post Share on other sites
bigmegina 3 Posted January 31, 2011 Report Share Posted January 31, 2011 308sagia +1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Tusken Raider 6 Posted January 31, 2011 Report Share Posted January 31, 2011 So in response from the last post. Why not begin an actual, formal, militia organization? I am not talking like the whack jobs idiots we all know and hear about. I mean hell, most of us are already in the fed database because we own guns, have ccw permits, etc. So what the hell stops us? Quote Link to post Share on other sites
yooper 8 Posted January 31, 2011 Report Share Posted January 31, 2011 (edited) this idea is awesome. im in michigan. i could email my district representative, Tim Walberg , republican, and see what i get. i doubt im actually emailing him, but sombody from his office anwsers when i email them. Edited January 31, 2011 by yooper14 Quote Link to post Share on other sites
unearthlyevil 2 Posted January 31, 2011 Report Share Posted January 31, 2011 I don't shoot 3 gun, but am interested in it, as it looks quite fun! The plinking association idea does have merit. Anyone going to the Pittsburgh Gun Show in Monroeville Sunday, Feb 6th? I will be there, let's get together and see what we can come up with! Quote Link to post Share on other sites
SaigaKen 338 Posted January 31, 2011 Author Report Share Posted January 31, 2011 (edited) I don't shoot 3 gun, but am interested in it, as it looks quite fun! The plinking association idea does have merit. Anyone going to the Pittsburgh Gun Show in Monroeville Sunday, Feb 6th? I will be there, let's get together and see what we can come up with! I'll try and be there for that.....hope its better than the one that was at Mills Mall.... I'll PM ya my mobile # Edited January 31, 2011 by Saiga Power Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Spindrift 6 Posted January 31, 2011 Report Share Posted January 31, 2011 I'm from assachusetts. Good luck finding ANYONE here to support or even address any new gun legislation. It's a third rail to all the deocRATs here. This "sporting" BS in nonsense. Who the hell put THAT spin on owning guns? It's pretty pathetic that I'm a AABPI certified executive body guard and can only carry 10 rounds in my mags. Don't forget MITT ROMNEY shoved this law up our arse when he runs for president! Along with state forced health care. My understanding is that there are some militias who train and act regularly as first responders in emergency situations in their area. The come out when there are missing persons and form organized search parties, and fill sand bags during floods, whatever is required. THAT is good publicity, and just being good people. Problem is, very few politicians want to take the offensive on gun issues, and that is the problem. We're always playing defense. I think every Governor should TAX people who don't own a gun because they are a LIABILITY to the state for not being able to defend their own damn home, and clearly depend on the police more than gun owners. I ALSO believe that whenever a lunatic shoots people in a gun free zone, legal action should be taken against whomever CREATED that gun free zone. AND, if you are denied a gun permit and are mugged, raped, robbed, or beaten or killed you/your family should sue the person who denied you the right to defend yourself. I'm ALL FOR going on the offensive. Hit them with so many lefts they'll be begging for a right, and won't have time to think about new anti gun legislation because they're too busy being sued! Quote Link to post Share on other sites
bigmegina 3 Posted January 31, 2011 Report Share Posted January 31, 2011 (edited) the us constitution says every white male between the ages of 18 and 48,who is not a member of the organized militia [army or national guard]is in the unorganised militia.he must have his own arms and be ready to defend his home town or country [not foreign countries]from all enimines foreign or domesict.simple isn"t it?sooner or later they will come for you because you are a gunowner.your problem is you think like a free man.they do not care about the guns,they are useless without someone to use them.you will either go to camp fed,or bullet in the head.or you can do what our ancestors did when they came for them.they gave them bullets first.you will have to make that choice when the time comes.all the talk and discussion is just bullshit. Edited January 31, 2011 by bigmegina Quote Link to post Share on other sites
roachtron 49 Posted January 31, 2011 Report Share Posted January 31, 2011 Well here is my attempt at this idea. Just go to this website and sign the petition http://www.ipetitions.com/petition/supportsportingpurpose/. Maybe if there are enough supporters it will get noticed and can also be used in a letter to the atf. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
308SAIGA 55 Posted January 31, 2011 Report Share Posted January 31, 2011 the us constitution says every white male between the ages of 18 and 48,who is not a member of the organized militia [army or national guard] is in the unorganised militia.he must have his own arms and be ready to defend his home town or country [not foreign countries]from all enimines foreign or domesict.simple isn"t it?sooner or later they will come for you because you are a gunowner.your problem is you think like a free man.they do not care about the guns,they are useless without someone to use them.you will either go to camp fed,or bullet in the head.or you can do what our ancestors did when they came for them.they gave them bullets first.you will have to make that choice when the time comes.all the talk and discussion is just bullshit. Fixed it for you, at least most of it, too many errors to correct... Please re-read the US Constitution and copy and past it to get the words right... The US National Guard did not come into affect until 1907 and was no way mentioned in the Constitution, there was no such a thing as the US Army in 1776 either...... So please facts only, thank you...... Quote Link to post Share on other sites
ewoketeer 35 Posted February 2, 2011 Report Share Posted February 2, 2011 Where to start...the '68 GCA was the start of the 'sporting purposes' clause to the best of my knowledge. Senator Dodd's (on of the originators)father was involved in the Nuremburg Trials and supposedly got a hold of documents regarding Hitler's gun-control agenda(hmmm...). It flies in the face of 2A, Title 10, Section 310 USC, Title 10 Section 311 USC, Title 32 Section 109 USC, Title 32 Section 313 USC, US v. Miller 1939, US v. Verdugo-Urquidez 1990... Heller v. DC (more recently). Unfortunately, I don't have the horsepower to see this dealt with properly Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.