301–310 of 346 posts
Most comment seem to agree that Remington stopped making quality guns, with the obvious effects on profitability. When did this happen? Is it a cause or an effect of the mentioned private equity funds? Is it an Intel-like bad period on the product design and R&D front?
What is the larger significance here? Does this mean the gun industry is struggling? Sounds unlikely given the spike in purchases. Maybe it's just another old company that once had a good reputation but has lost its way. PE probably involved. Or maybe there is some market shift. Like, fewer hunters purchasing lever actions and more urbanites buying semi-auto pistols.
I wonder about the process here. If they filed for bankruptcy in 2018, and have to file again today in the middle of the hottest gun market in years... doesn't that mean they screwed up the first restructuring? (I guess I don't know how many of the people rushing to the store are actually buying the kind of expensive guns Remington sells, though. I'd believe a story where it's few to none.)
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Having neither coyote nor rifles where I live, I'm curious: what is the practical range for shooting a coyote approaching a farm? If accuracy and stopping power "at long range" make a difference, wouldn't a larger caliber hunting rifle be equally suitable?
The fun of an affected machismo and showing up your friends at the target range notwithstanding, there is such a thing as overkill, and there comes a point where it is economically silly to address varmint problems with higher-power, longer-range cartridges. A cartridge that will humanely drop an elk at 300 meters will, without question, ruin a coyote's day just as thoroughly. But why spend $2-$3 per shot when $0.50-…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Why do most developed nations don't let citizens own guns then?
Citation needed? I think hunting is allowed most places?
Also, carrying a gun all the time is extremely uncommon if not forbidden in most European countries if you don't have the proper permits. For example in France, IIRC, you can only get such permit if your professional activity justifies it (Police, Security Guards, etc).
Even for recreational/hunting uses you need to be registered, and maybe have a permit, depending on the type of gun. And that's just for ownership, it doesn't grant you the right to carry the weapon loaded and ready to fire.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
For a similarly opposite perspective as someone who's currently in a rural area: I can go out back, set up target(s) and plink away basically anytime I want. Might even do it this evening if the ammo I ordered finally gets delivered today. There's a safe direction to aim in and the distant neighbors don't mind, they do the same! For longer range, there's various outdoor ranges around, both formal and informal (you ma…
What part of the country do you live in? Even on a few acres, I'm not confident that a stray bullet couldn't cause quite a bit of harm.
For most practical shooting, at a target that's roughly chest level, ranges aren't going to exceed ~500 yards, and are often a moot point with a decent backstop.
From wikipedia: "The acre is related to the square mile, with 640 acres making up one square mile. One mile is 5280 feet (1760 yards)"
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The fun of an affected machismo and showing up your friends at the target range notwithstanding, there is such a thing as overkill, and there comes a point where it is economically silly to address varmint problems with higher-power, longer-range cartridges. A cartridge that will humanely drop an elk at 300 meters will, without question, ruin a coyote's day just as thoroughly. But why spend $2-$3 per shot when $0.50-…
So there is a significant market segment of people who buy an AR-15 or a similar intermediate caliber rifle for genuine animal defense purposes, because they aren't interested in a more expensive hunting rifle for actual hunting use? Or coyote and bears are a convenient excuse for a gun that is very suitable to kill people?
- The AR-15 is semiautomatic, compared to hunting rifles which are often bolt-action, and thus less convenient/ergonomic to operate
- Plethora of aftermarket parts and accessories. Extreme customizability.
- Cheap ammo
- AR barrels are usually shorter than what would come with a hunting rifle, resulting in a gun that is less cumbersome and requires less space
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The protestors were not attacked. They have a well established process of “peaceful” used as a shield for provocateurs, as though individuals are not responsible for the whole mob. The peaceful have recourse to identify and expel the violent, but don’t. I have major issues with burning a courthouse - the nexus of polite functioning society, the recourse of civilian peace. Burn that, and the recourse for civilian prop…
> The protesters were not attacked. All of the protests started peacefully, including Portland. It was police violence that escalated things in the beginning. I recognize that they were not attacked _at that site_, but they were definitely attacked. > They have a well established process of “peaceful” used as a shield for provocateurs If you are breaking laws you will get hit with the laws. I'm not denying that. No o…
If you’re part of a violent siege, you’re part if a violent siege. Retreat or be targeted.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> The protesters were not attacked. All of the protests started peacefully, including Portland. It was police violence that escalated things in the beginning. I recognize that they were not attacked _at that site_, but they were definitely attacked. > They have a well established process of “peaceful” used as a shield for provocateurs If you are breaking laws you will get hit with the laws. I'm not denying that. No o…
The protestors and rioters are largely indistinguishable. The former do not renounce & expel the latter. The former provide cover for the latter. Legally, each individual is culpable for the act of the mob, the mob is culpable for each individual. If you’re part of a violent siege, you’re part if a violent siege. Retreat or be targeted.
Exactly! ACAB :)
A law professor, Heidi Feldman, points out that >With bankruptcy, Remington means to halt the Sandy Hook litigation from continuing in Connecticut state court.Notable timing, it comes after a series of decisions by the trial judge refusing to let Remington dodge discovery.
The mom -- not the shooter -- bought the guns, so the advertising aspect is dumb in that regard let alone that the reputation of the weapon isn't set by Remington in any significant way.
Next, Remington sells to dealers. If anyone was "selling" someone on a Remington, it was the gun dealer (if you're already going to the store, you've already been sold on the idea of a gun and are just negotiating the details).
There has to be better ways to use a judges time (even better cases involving guns and gun manufacturers).