Outcome of Vegas shooting?
- Thread starter RACER X
- Start date
The #1 community for Gun Owners in Texas
Member Benefits:
Fewer Ads! Discuss all aspects of firearm ownership Discuss anti-gun legislation Buy, sell, and trade in the classified section Chat with Local gun shops, ranges, trainers & other businesses Discover free outdoor shooting areas View up to date on firearm-related events Share photos & video with other members ...and so much more!
Member Benefits:
Let's be realistic, the leftists are clever enough to demonize a kid's slingshot, if it gets them on the way to furthering their agenda (somethng about ham sandwiches & grand juries comes to mind, also, but that's another chapter). Battle rifles shoot too fast, hunting rifles shoot too far, handguns are too sneaky, shotguns are too vicious, .22s are too cheap, available & quiet.... Face it, the left doesn't hate firearms because of some real or imagined threat to public safety. They hate them because firearms afford the masses, who they allegedly serve, some meaningful if drastic form of redress to the excesses of an over-reaching central government.
Most leftest's I've met only spout out what they have heard with no real thoughts of their own on the matter, does that make them clever? No, I can teach some birds to repeat what I say.
I agree...Useful idiots.
This, on a gun board, for shame... The movie "Zulu" depicts the Battle of Rorke's Drift which took place in 1879. The rifles used in "Zulu" were Martini-Henrys and Martini-Enfields:
The first "proper" Mauser bolt action was the Model 1871.
Review the movie. Adendorff was Boer scout. He didn't shoot what the Brits did. In fact, I don't think he even touched a Brit rifle in the movie. And while we're on the subject, in the scene where Stanley Baker is shakily loading his revolver, it was a Webley, which was not issued to British troops until 16 years after the battle. There are anachronisms all through the movie, so let's not get TOO obsessive about things.
Had Adendorff been carrying a BLUNDERBUSS, it would not have altered the meaning of the exchange.
Had Adendorff been carrying a BLUNDERBUSS, it would not have altered the meaning of the exchange.
Last edited:
Let me get this straight, the outcome of the Las Vegas shooting is that many movies didn't depict history correctly? Well that is surprising!
Yah, the point I was trying to make kinda got lost in a shining moment of unwavering fascination with the incredibly non-sequitur.
I was equating the British (Welsh, actually, though the Zulus made no distinction) with our Leftist Demo-tards who seek to disarm the U.S. general population. I equated the Zulus with American gun owners and others who wish to make it QUITE clear that it is none of the central government's business what sort of firearms (if any) their electors own, nor in what quantity.
Bromhead's exclamation that they must have killed 60 Zulu in the first encounter seems analogous to the Leftist Demo-tards' misguided notion that everything wrong with the U.S.A. will be put right when their electors (hereinafter called "serfs") are deprived of any means of armed resistance.
Adendorff's wry comment about the 60 dead leaving only 3940 left with which to contend, served as a reminder that the battle has only begun, and that his and the Brits' survival is far from certain.
Now, the fact that the Brits/Welsh actually survived the onslaught and the Zulu all quit and went home is where my analogy breaks down. BUT, the outcome is also a reminder that a small, highly trained, well-armed, well-organized force can be VERY problematic to a larger, less organized, under-armed, less organized force which seeks to only evict invaders or shrug off oppressors.
In retrospect, I guess the analogy is a bit strained. But it seemed darned appropriate, before my 5th morning cup of coffee. <shrug>
I just think that the majority of the U.S. military would be very wary of attacking those that just might be their friends and family. I also don't believe much of command would be willing to go along with it either.
In any case, I'm on the downward slide of life, but I still have some fight in me. And as my new tee shirt says, I don't kneel.
I live near Ft Hood. You might be surprised at the number of NCOs and officers that have said they would refuse an unlawful order. I sell lots of ammo daily to soldiers that will refuse too. The left would have less help from the military than they think.
from an idjit coffeeholic
from an idjit coffeeholic
Did you forget the Civil War???
The one where folks chose sides rather than go against their own beliefs?
Not at all, and you can read for yourself about the officers that left the Union army in favor of the south. One such soldier was named Robert E. Lee who was asked to be the commanding general of the Union Army.
exactly.
