[–] Thrus2 0 points 3 points 3 points (+3|-0) ago
Well if you bow hunt you are much lower on the list, at least until they figure out how hard it is to find a bow being shot vs an arrow as well as that bullet proof does not mean cut proof so an arrow my be a totally different ball game for basic protection (some are both).
[–] captainstrange 0 points 2 points 2 points (+2|-0) ago (edited ago)
Theres a reason why congress and senators are going to come after bolt actions specifically.
They're less of an issue than ARs.
Also, in a shooting war, ammo will become scarce, regardless of how much "stockpiling" americans have done.
Patriots will resort to bolt-actions because the damage per round is higher, and distance plus concealment are a good tradeoff versus the fully automatic weapons common to military and police departments.
They will come after bolt-action rifles because without them, hit and run tactics will be more expensive and have to be conducted in close quarters for smaller forces to be effective.
And in the process they'll follow with "well ARs are really like bolt-action sniper rifles too!"
And the rest will be history.
[–] captainstrange 0 points 1 point 1 point (+1|-0) ago
Thanks, what I should have wrote was "ammo efficiency."
One shot versus full auto.
[–] RampancyLambentRaven 0 points 1 point 1 point (+1|-0) ago (edited ago)
yeah but they need to false 🇺🇸 and have FBI/Mossad/CIA/ATF/ 👮♀️ do a mass shooting with one and hopefully they'll get caught.
[–] hang_em_high 0 points 1 point 1 point (+1|-0) ago
I wonder if anyone actually has taken down a plane or pilot in flight with a sniper rifle.
[–] jesus_is_lord 0 points 1 point 1 point (+1|-0) ago (edited ago)
[–] My-Name-is-Mud 0 points 2 points 2 points (+2|-0) ago
The Portland situation has already shown this.