Under the Bed!
I really fail to see why everyone is so dead set against machine gun laws. What in the world would a law abiding person want with a machine gun? It's all very well to say that our rights are being encroached upon, and plead the second amendment, and say it's fun and enjoyable. But if we have a lot of legal machine guns floating about, then I'm going under the bed and staying there. I'm all for shooting and less restriction of sporting and target weapons, but let's keep things within sane limits.
Aside from that, you have a wonderful magazine. I would like to see more articles like the one H. J. Erfurth is doing on the army's new machine guns, and less fire and brimstone boys on why we should be able to hunt woodchucks with hand grenades.
Stan Washburn
Chicago, ILL
----------------
"Wake Up, America"
With respect to William B. Edwards' article, May 1958Ñ"Re Guns In The Desert:"
Wake up, America-
Take note, free world-
We need nation wide automatic weapons training.
John F. Woodhull
Eagle Pass, Texas
So--how'd those reasonable restriction/sporting purposes concessions work out for you in Chicago, there, Stan? I'm sure you considered Mr. Woodhull an extremist. Thanks for all those chains you enabled, by the way. I wish you'd have stayed under the damn bed.
And the debate goes on today.
The September 1958 issue of GUNS Magazine is now online.
Hey, look who wrote the first letter in "Crossfire"! You don't see that nowadays, particularly from Democrats!
Also, meet a blind Russian gun designer! Read what Roy E. Weatherby had to say about high velocity. All this and more, plus the great period ads...
7 comments:
GUNS Sept '58: Gotta love the photo of the guy smoking while reloading shot shells.......lol........
This was shortly after the Korean War, right? You'd think people would have had a clue. Yes, it's much better to take city boys with no gun experience whatsoever and stick advanced weaponry in their hands and ship them out to face an enemy whose Boy Scouts can field-strip an AK blindfolded.
Now we're getting the same argument about SEMI-autos.
I live in Alaska. Pretty much anyone who wants a full auto gun has one.
If you can afford the ammo, you surely can afford the transfer tax.
I don't care to have an automatic weapon. But that's simply because keeping it fed would bankrupt me. I know beyond a doubt that I'd ride that horsey slap to Mexico!
It is my personal opinion that We The People should be able to buy whatever we want, and whatever we can afford.
If I could afford the fuel and shells for one, I ought to be able to own an Abrams tank! I bet you if more Americans owned tanks, we'd have much less trouble with our politicians.
...and NO I'm not joking.
+1 to gunrights4us. Picture a world where your militia outfit is a squadron of F-4Es. :-D
ajw,
Affording the transfer tax isn't the problem. The hoops you have to jump through are insulting. However, the thing is the actual price for transferable ful-auto weapons is ridiculously high. While i can afford a $200 transfer tax, I can not afford a $15,000 M16, assuming that they are still that cheap.
The thing is, these types of restrictions are okay for OTHER countries. Just not for the US where the right of the people to keep and bear arms in enshrined in our founding documents.
"If you can afford the ammo, you surely can afford the transfer tax."
Someday SOON we may be hearing people like you say that about bows and arrows...
Post a Comment