While reading this article over at SailorCurt’s, it hit me.
We don’t see many “low powered rifles” … not many “medium powered rifles”. How about “extra-high powered”? “medium-high powered”? “medium-low”? “extreme high powered”?
Of course, would the main-stream-media and hoplophobes know the difference?
Stuff From Hsoi 
No, the Liberals and other enemies of American freedoms couldn’t tell the difference on the best day of their lives.
In the long run – especially the way things look like they’re going – that will be a blessing that we should all be grateful for. 😉
Hm. That means it is up to us to determine the classificatoin layers…. .22 certainly counts as “low-powered”… And I think a 20mm Lahti rifle would count in the “holy-shit-uber-massive-extreme high-powered” category.
Is that a technical term? 🙂
But it’s the news reporting… that it’s always “high-powered assault baby-killing poor-grammar wearing-white-shoes-after-Labor-Day rifle”. I mean, if you look here:
https://hsoiblog.wordpress.com/2009/05/24/why-does-anyone-need-one-of-those/
you see how that technically low-powered Ruger 10/22 can fool the masses.
Anything to further the agenda I guess.
Someday they just might look up the facts and find out that .22 Long Rifle is the caliber with the most kills throughout American history.
But does it look scary?
I suppose that depends on the distance and the angle one is viewing it from. A 10/22 still looks fairly scary when you’re looking down its barrel 😉
Otherwise, not so much without a lot of rather useless add-on pieces and “trim kits.”
I get your point though. Most of the idiots trying to pass regulations on firearms seem to base them on what the weapon looks like.
They’d freak out over my Dragunov but wouldn’t be bothered much by my Sharps .45-110. LOL
Yeah true, all about angle. 🙂
I wonder then… since they mostly care about looks, why isn’t a Hello Kitty AR considered acceptable? 😉
Anyway, we agree. In the end, it’s all ignorance.
Damn, Linoge, I thought I was last familiar with the Norsupyssy.