I’m Getting Rid Of My Semi-Automatic Battle Rifle
BY Herschel Smith
7 years, 1 month ago
On the issue of gun control or reform, there should be some middle ground. Gun owners and 2nd Amendment supporters need to give some, as do anti-gun folks. Civilians should not be able to own military-style weapons. I do believe Americans should have the right to own weapons for home self-defense and for hunting, but there are too many weapons available to civilians that were originally designed for the battlefield. And as Las Vegas shows, once again, there are too many Americans willing to turn civilian life into a battlefield. I think what worries some gun owners is who decides what is military, and what is for sp ort. I am deciding for myself.
My action may not change anything, but the truth is, if my semi-automatic battle rifle were stolen, or fell into the wrong hands, it would be devastating. So to put my money where my mouth is, I am getting rid of mine and donating it to a law enforcement agency.
The gun I’m getting rid of is called an M1A Springfield Scout, or Civilian M14. It shoots a 308 or 7.62-51 NATO. It is a semi-automatic and can send bullets 1,000 yards (700, accurately) as fast as I can pull the trigger. It has a 10- and 20-round clip. You could probably get an even bigger one.
It was designed for the military in the mid-1950s and is still used by special forces. It is much more powerful and accurate than an AR-15 or an AK47. I purchased it because it is a great gun and the truth is I’m still a boy at heart (and mind, too). I convinced myself I needed it because — Hey, there a lot of crazy people with weapons out there that I may need to defend myself from. I also told myself I needed to kill wild hogs. I’ve only seen wild hogs once. I have used the rifle to hunt deer but I have a bolt-action rifle for the same purpose, which is all anyone needs for deer hunting.
After the shooting happened in Las Vegas and the details began to come out, I knew this man had to have a weapon like mine. I know I don’t need this rifle, and neither does anyone else. Selling it would be hypocritical because it would go back into gun circulation. I plan to give mine to the Mississippi Department of Wildlife, Fisheries and Parks — the game wardens in my state. It is a very expensive gun — it cost me $1,300, not counting the scope — so this is not a particularly easy thing to do. But it will mean I’m not a part of the problem, at least in my mind. My plan is to put any tax write-off towards charitable giving.
I will keep my other guns for hunting and self-defense. Some people will say I’ve overreacted, others will say I have not gone far enough. Getting rid of and eventually banning assault rifles and other military-style guns will not end the violence, but it will help.
No it won’t. All this means is that you’ve decided to rid yourself of the best means of defending your family. In the event of multiple home invaders, you’ve made the decision to let your family perish because of emotional distress you sustain caused by watching the television.
Oh, and here’s a suggestion, Fudd. Call it a magazine, not a clip. At least you’ll sound like a pseudo-educated Fudd.
On October 12, 2017 at 6:39 am, Talktome said:
So on one side, we have 2A as it’s intended. On the other, take all the guns. So, it’s somehow reasonable for “both sides” to compromise and meet in the middle? That is intellectually lazy. Why the heck should we allow any of our rights, as enumerated in the constitution to be gutted, just because one side decides they don’t like those rights and therefore wants compromise on the position? F them and their emotional hand wringing. And this freakin guy – probably gets all weepy during pc commercials. He’s well on his way to being a lib prog toady. Virtue signaling at its finest.
On October 12, 2017 at 7:18 am, Blake said:
Wow, I’m impressed, the guy can really shoot! 700 yards, accurately, as fast as he can pull the trigger? I want video.
On October 12, 2017 at 7:38 am, Frank Clarke said:
The notion of “compromise” includes BOTH sides giving up something they treasure as an inducement to the other side to do likewise.
What are they giving up?
On October 12, 2017 at 8:09 am, Heywood said:
Wow…the idiocy displayed in that little blurb is amazing.
On October 12, 2017 at 8:39 am, Fred said:
So again, my rights are based upon somebody else’s feelings about his perceived need and then projected onto me to limit my rights…because feelings.
This person is unable to solve simple logic problems. I can’t read it all. Ugh.
On October 12, 2017 at 11:27 am, Sean said:
“”I know I don’t need this rifle, and neither does anyone else.”” – so the moron is giving it to the government. That’s all I need to know….
On October 12, 2017 at 2:49 pm, moe mensale said:
“Civilians should not be able to own military-style weapons.”
Obviously, he’s not familiar with our country’s history. From before we became a nation until not that long ago, there was very little difference between military and civilian weaponry. That all changed primarily due to the 1939 US v Miller Supreme Court case and the 1968 Gun Control Act and its “sporting purpose” BS.
But I’m not one to tell anybody not to throw their money away. Especially when it isn’t going to change anything.
On October 12, 2017 at 4:06 pm, DAN III said:
ALCON,
Was there an actual name attributed to the author and evident to me, emasculated “civilian” who allegedly wrote this anti-firearm essay for time.com ?
BTW….now that I am no longer .mil I am also not of the “civilian” persuasion either. I am a CITIZEN ! A specific distinction afforded those who understand the difference between subject/civilian and a CITIZEN.
On October 12, 2017 at 4:49 pm, Pat Hines said:
What a whiney little bitch. I’m embarrassed he’s from the south. One wonders if he was made a “castrati” at an early age.
On October 13, 2017 at 10:24 am, willford said:
MORONS like this shouldn’t be allowed to own weapons. YOU JUST CAN’T FIX STUPID! IF this DUNCE let these do gooders talk him into this move, he is really a IMBECILE and needs to be UNARMED. I do feel bad for his kin, Kinda. BBBBAAAAAAAHHHH I like being a sheep
BBBAAAHHH!!!
On October 13, 2017 at 3:20 pm, June said:
2A supporters need to “give some”? You mean like with the National Firearms Acts of 1934 and 1938, the Gun Control Act of 1968, the Crime Control Act of 1990, the Brady Law and Assault Weapons Ban of 1994, the creation of the National Instant Criminal Background Check (NICS) system in 1998, the 1999 bill requiring trigger locks on all newly manufactured handguns and extending waiting period and background check requirements to sales of firearms at gun shows or perhaps one of the hundreds or thousands of “giving some” at the state and local level?
On October 15, 2017 at 12:12 pm, Ned said:
Something happens somewhere, so some random guy emasculates self for the betterment of others, and to set a good example.
Cuck.
On October 16, 2017 at 7:36 am, Moshe Ben Avram said:
As a Jew, I can give you 6 million reasons why giving up your gun and gun control doesn’t work.