About that “military-style” buzzword

Erin Palette wrote an excellent explanation of the anti-gunner’s favorite scaredy-word, “military-style”. The effort isn’t even limited to firearms — just trying carrying a sword or a sabre in Japan, England or many US states!

Perhaps the only firearms that don’t look like military…actually, I can’t think of a single exception. Even Olympic air guns share construction features with military air guns of the 18th century, and their pellets are made of scary lead. Even Airsoft “guns” — toys projecting harmless plastic pellets — are banned in many countries, such as China.

So anyone speaking of banning some subset of firearms only wants to rape your rights “a little”…an inch at a time. Don’t even try to negotiate with people are outright evil.

This entry was posted in civil rights, pistol, rifle, rkba, self-defense, shotgun, weapon and tagged , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

13 Responses to About that “military-style” buzzword

  1. Phil Ward says:

    I’m pretty sure I can still buy sharpened blades in the UK, I have a number in my house including a nice warrior series Katana.

    Now, if they’d ban the cheap 20 pound wall hangers that neds twat each other with I’d be quite happy 🙂

  2. Eugene says:

    Oleg, with all respect, there are at least two incorrect statements in your post. First, airsoft guns are not banned in Israel, and second, Israel has never guaranteed any gun rights to its citizens (in fact, Israel does not have a constitution at all). Still, any Israeli citizen may apply for the handgun license and get an approval if there’s any “good cause” (e.g. that person is a resident of so-called “occupied territories”, or employed by a private security company).

  3. Oleg Volk says:

    I mis-remembered “restricted” as “banned”: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Legal_issues_in_airsoft#Israel Fixed now. I also amended “buy” to “carry” for the sword entry for accuracy. Thank you for the fact-checking — I am not as good a writer as I think at 2am.

  4. I am not as good a writer as I think at 2am.

    & complaining about us staying up late……!:)

  5. Paul Koning says:

    One of my relatives asked the other day “Who other than military needs a semi-automatic weapon?”. I replied that, first of all, military weapons are usually full auto. I then added:

    When you see someone refer to “military style semi-automatic rifle” it may be they are confused. More likely is that they are trying to mislead you. You KNOW they are trying to mislead you when they call it an “assault rifle”.

  6. LarryArnold says:

    There’s also an unintended consequence of banning “military guns” for civilians. It restricts the firearms available for military and police, and raises their price. One of the reasons our military gets a good deal on Berettas, and particularly on spare parts and magazines, is mass production to feed the larger civilian market. LEOs can select from a wide variety of handguns, either as individuals or agencies, because of that same huge civilian market.

    It’s also true of ammo. The U.S. military is currently buying huge quantities of 5.56mm, 7.62mm, 9mm, etc. on a civilian market that wouldn’t exist if civilian use of “military” cartridges were banned.

    And I just don’t see how the military would ever have thought of developing the .50 cal rifle, and all the new variants, without the civilians who back in the 1980s were just tinkering around with the BMG cartridge. Like your .338 Lapua.

  7. MAJ Mike says:

    Hell, every firearm I know is a military-type firearm, to include the Ruger MkII Bull-barrel .22LR target pistol. My battalion was issue the Rugers for pistol training.

    Do my replica Roman Pilum and Hoplite spear count as military-type weapons too? How about the Katana? The Prussian cavalry saber?

  8. JOhn A says:

    How about rocks? Ref. David-Goliath.

  9. Stephen Lee says:

    Clever positioning of the magazine to hide his wild beard! 😉

Comments are closed.