Dick's Sporting Goods CEO on decision to no longer sell assault-style rifles: 'We don’t want to be a

[driftdiver]

Henry Rifle 45-70 loads
 
I asked Henry rifle technical representative what loads their rifle was designed to handle - those for the old Springfield Trapdoors, the lever actions like the Win 1886 or the Ruger#1 falling blocks actions? The response was any manufactured load with bullets of 405 grains or less. So I sent him the page from Hodgdon reloading data showing loads for the Ruger#1 or equivalent with loads under 405 grains, some of which reach 50,000 cup and asked would these be acceptable. The response was we do not recommend reloads and will not therefore comment on those but it is safe to use any manufactured load with bullets of 405 grains or less.

I guess I knew what their response would be, but I still dislike their attorneys as all the manufacturers know reloads will be used and don't care enough about the safety of their customers to give us pertinent specs for the rifles or even refer us to the generally used reloading data which would keep us safe assuming we follow the data correctly.


http://www.marlinowners.com/forum/45-70-govt/137160-henry-rifle-45-70-loads.html

I've loaded for several different 45/70 rifles that would handle differing pressures safely.

I have not been able to discern the save pressure level for the Henry.

@Elderberry
Its not that they don't care about your safety.  Its that they dont care to be sued.  Any answer other then the one he gave you opens them up to shyster lawyers.   Because you know some bonehead would hurt themselves and then try to sue.

[Jazzhead]

@Jazzhead
BTW, owning a firearm is not an extremist position.   

Don't be a fool.  No one is trying to take your precious guns away.   Your right is protected by the Constitution.   But all rights under the Constitution are subject to one degree or anther to reasonable regulation.  Every last one. 

I say own all the guns you want.  Just be responsible and register them.   

[driftdiver]

Don't be a fool.  No one is trying to take your precious guns away.   Your right is protected by the Constitution.   But all rights under the Constitution are subject to one degree or anther to reasonable regulation.  Every last one. 

I say own all the guns you want.  Just be responsible and register them.

@Jazzhead

Right, got any bridge for sale?

[roamer_1]

Just be responsible and register them.

No.
Now what?

[Cyber Liberty]

Just be responsible and register them.

[INVAR]

Your right is protected by the Constitution.   But all rights under the Constitution are subject to one degree or anther to reasonable regulation.  Every last one.

And again, you have argued the plain fact that we do not have "rights' except in name only.  Yo have relegated them to government-granted privileges only allowed to be exercised if and when you conform to government mandates, taxes, fees and regulations.

That makes them a government regulated privilege, not a Right.  And all of us understand that Government-granted privileges can and will be rescinded and revoked and properties confiscated as history teaches time and again.

I say own all the guns you want.  Just be responsible and register them.

And when we refuse to comply... then what?

[WingNot]

I say own all the guns you want.  Just be responsible and register them.

My response echo's Chuck Heston's.

[RoosGirl]

Don't be a fool.  No one is trying to take your precious guns away.   Your right is protected by the Constitution.   But all rights under the Constitution are subject to one degree or anther to reasonable regulation.  Every last one. 

I say own all the guns you want.  Just be responsible and register them.

I never did catch what part of the Constitution you claim covers individual ownership of guns, since it seemed your were arguing the other day that A2 was specifically about militia.

[Frank Cannon]

Don't be a fool.  No one is trying to take your precious guns away.

You can answer without insults

[INVAR]

I never did catch what part of the Constitution you claim covers individual ownership of guns, since it seemed your were arguing the other day that A2 was specifically about militia.

His life and reasoning revolves around the infallible decrees judges in black robes have to rule about what they think the parchment means and says.

His meddlesome tyrannical mindset continually crafts argumentation that essentially says the same thing:  your Rights are not Rights at all - but privileges granted at the benevolent allowance of government and their courts, as long as snowflakes like him are placated because they do not trust you or I with liberty.

[Jazzhead]

I never did catch what part of the Constitution you claim covers individual ownership of guns, since it seemed your were arguing the other day that A2 was specifically about militia.

The same part of the Constitution that protects other natural rights,  such as the right to privacy.  That natural right, btw, is the right to defense of home and property.  Facially, the 2A doesn't address the natural right; it's about the citizens' militia.  Heller confirms that the RKBA for purposes of individual self defense is protected by the Constitution.  Just as the right to abortion (derivative of the right of privacy)  is.  You can't be denied your right to own guns to protect your home, but that has nothing to do with whether the peoples' elected representatives can decide to require for reasons of public safety that you register your guns (or, in the case of abortion, to require the dirty deed be done prior to the 20th week of pregnancy).  Registration isn't denial of the right.  Nor does reasonable regulation constitute denial of the abortion right. 

All rights are not absolute, and can be regulated as to time, place and manner of exercise.   Heller confirms as much with respect to the gun right.     

[WingNot]

I think ole Jazz is just shining us rubes on.  He's really not a gun grabbing liberal asshat.  He just want's us to think he is one.

Damn fine job Jazz.

[Jazzhead]

His life and reasoning revolves around the infallible decrees judges in black robes have to rule about what they think the parchment means and says.

The "parchment" says the RKBA is in connection with the maintenance of the citizens' militia.   The Constitution's protection of the natural right to individual self defense is the product of those judges in black robes.   Yes, it is protected because of the "living Constitution".   The "parchment" doesn't say squat.   

[RoosGirl]

The same part of the Constitution that protects other natural rights,  such as the right to privacy.  That natural right, btw, is the right to defense of home and property.  Facially, the 2A doesn't address the natural right; it's about the citizens' militia.  Heller confirms that the RKBA for purposes of individual self defense is protected by the Constitution.  Just as the right to abortion (derivative of the right of privacy)  is.  You can't be denied your right to own guns to protect your home, but that has nothing to do with whether the peoples' elected representatives can decide to require for reasons of public safety that you register your guns (or, in the case of abortion, to require the dirty deed be done prior to the 20th week of pregnancy).  Registration isn't denial of the right.  Nor does reasonable regulation constitute denial of the abortion right. 

All rights are not absolute, and can be regulated as to time, place and manner of exercise.   Heller confirms as much with respect to the gun right.   

And what is the point of registration?

[Cyber Liberty]

And what is the point of registration?

You and I know, but I want to hear what he thinks it is...

[RoosGirl]

The "parchment" says the RKBA is in connection with the maintenance of the citizens' militia.   The Constitution's protection of the natural right to individual self defense is the product of those judges in black robes.   Yes, it is protected because of the "living Constitution".   The "parchment" doesn't say squat.

Oh, you're the Bill Clinton type of democrat.  That explains a whole lot.

If the Constitution says nothing about an individual right to owning firearms then Fed Gov has no business regulating them.  It would be left to the States.

[Jazzhead]

And what is the point of registration?

Public safety.

[jpsb]

And what is the point of registration?

@RoosGirl @Jazzhead

The point of registration now is to make it easy to confiscate later. Anyone that supporters
registration now will support confiscation later. It is the old Marxist bait a switch.

[Cyber Liberty]

Public safety.

How does registration of my firearms make the public safe? 

[Cyber Liberty]

@RoosGirl @Jazzhead

The point of registration now is to make it easy to confiscate later. Anyone that supporters
registration now will support confiscation later. It is the old Marxist bait a switch.

That's the only reason.  What he will differ on is how reasonable will that confiscation be?  There are people in HI and CA who have been notified to turn their weapons in because they had Medical Marijuana cards.  The only way the states knew to send those notices (and cops to the door if you refuse to comply) is because they previously ordered the registration of the weapons.

[RoosGirl]

Public safety.

The public is no safer from a registered gun than from an unregistered one.  You know how I know this?  None of my guns are registered and the only thing they've shot are paper targets, quail and cats. 

Now, I"ll tell you how the public will be safer.  Registration and tracking of people who think they can get people to believe that the public will be safer is guns are registered.

[driftdiver]

Public safety.

@Jazzhead
How does registration improve public safety?

DC has registration.  So does Chicago.  Also, Baltimore.

Has it made those cities safer?

[INVAR]

The "parchment" says the RKBA is in connection with the maintenance of the citizens' militia.   The Constitution's protection of the natural right to individual self defense is the product of those judges in black robes.   Yes, it is protected because of the "living Constitution".   The "parchment" doesn't say squat.

Because the Parchment as ratified ONLY applies to GOVERNMENT and it's permissions and limits and and NOT individuals, a free state without a standing army required it's citizens to be armed and proficient in the use of their arms, their maintenance and supply of arms and ammunition (well regulated).  The Government DOES NOT MAINTAIN the militia - it maintains itself OUTSIDE OF and INDEPENDENT OF the government, until calle dup for the defense of the state.  As such - the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall NOT be infringed.  Meaning, all your schemes and regulations are unConstitutional and illegal in conjunction with the thousands already on the books.

I do not believe in a "living Constitution" like you liberal marxist asshats do, and you just handed us just one more reason why being able to coexist peaceably with you meddlesome tyrants is coming to an end.

[Cyber Liberty]

@Jazzhead
How does registration improve public safety?

DC has registration.  So does Chicago.  Also, Baltimore.

Has it made those cities safer?

It's told States where dangerous people who have Medical Marijuana cards are that have guns.  IOW, confiscation.

[RoosGirl]

@Jazzhead
How does registration improve public safety?

DC has registration.  So does Chicago.  Also, Baltimore.

Has it made those cities safer?

I say we drop him off in the middle of Baltimore at 10 Friday night and see how he fares.  He gets a bottle of water and a body cam.  This could be a whole new reality show.