Originally Posted by: Cryptic ExcretionsFrom what I remember there was a .45 Ruger present, a few mausers, 2 additional .45 pistols, a Taurus pistol that I particularly disliked because the thing was so damn hard to hit the target with, an old fashioned lever action rifle, a swiss rifle, 2 sks rifles one of which was "sporterized" so to speak, and some other rifle that was as impressive to look at as it was to fire that I don't remember the name or anything. So much for that one. My shoulder sure was sore afterwards though. Here in a couple of months I'm probably gonna buy the Ruger. In a couple weeks one of the guys I went with is going to be acquiring a Desert Eagle. That one I'm looking forward to trying out.
Originally Posted by: PonyOnei miss target shooting; it was fun. there's nowhere around here to do it though, and ammo is more expensive than it used to be... so... a few rounds in the M21 or a half tank of gas... hmmm...
my family's collection includes:
generic M1911 .45 handgun
Mauser Kar-98
Springfield M21
M1 Garand
M1 Carbine
an old, menacing looking double barrel shotgun
Ruger revolver of some sort
WW2 Walther P38
WW2 Walther PPK
Hammerli .22 match pistol
Remington 12ga pump-action shotgun; it think it's an 808 or something?
a variety of random .22 and 30-06 rifles
Originally Posted by: PonyOneyeah, pretty much... i don't know if that was meant to bait me into a debate or not, but, yes, that's fairly close.
Originally Posted by: PonyOneyeah, pretty much... i don't know if that was meant to bait me into a debate or not, but, yes, that's fairly close.
more like: i don't think that guns are an inherently bad thing. i mean, i've held loaded guns, i've shot loaded guns, and i've never hurt anyone or anything with them. a lot of gun control advocates seem to make it sound like as soon as someone gets a .22LR, single-shot bolt action rifle in their hands, that it's only a matter of time before a kid dies. simply not true. no moreso than saying that as soon as a kid gets into a Volvo wageon so that his mom can drive to Whole Foods to get all natural coffee and fat free water that her falsified sense of security makes the child's death when the Volvo slams headlong into a semi imminent.
guns can be used in a horrible way, and yes, if there are no guns in the world, no one is going to be shot by them, but, that's an entirely unrealistic way to look at things. three generations of my family have grown up in the US with guns and ammo in the same closet and no one has died, because we were all raised to know that you can kill someone or yourself with them if you're being stupid. my parents never had anything against my showing them to my friends, but, i remember the one time my friend was looking at one and picked it up to point it at me and make a gun sound.... i yanked the thing away from him fast as i could; i knew that even though it had been cleaned and the odds were vast that there was no bullet in it, if for whatever reason there was, i could die.
i think that background checks should be part of the right to own a gun; yes, the second amendment gives us the right to bear arms but what if someone who's schizophrenic decides that he's fighting tyrrany by shooting the government robots at the local preschool? what if someone has been arrested and put in jail a dozen times for assault and battery and he wants to apply for a concealed carry permit and carry a USP? the only time he's gonig to use it in "self defense" is if a cop is trying to arrest him for beating his wife.
i don't think that speeding tickets, public disturbance, etc are good reasons to keep someone from owning a gun. but there are things that should prevent you from being able to own one. and in regards to liscencing... they make you get a liscence to prove you can opeate a car on the streets without endangering those around you, why should it be any different for a gun?
Originally Posted by: R. ShackleferdHey ya'll...I'm fairly ignorant about guns (except one side of my family hunts and have shot their rifles growing up), but did want to eventually get one for household protection and limited target fun. Any recommendations? Pistol or rifle? Under $500 would be a plus as well.
Originally Posted by: Jimmi431ah you know im kinda glad i live in almost gun free england! i cant believe that anyone actually thinks a gun is a good form of protection, i mean what kind of area do you live in? is it kill or be killed? i was working in a late shop (convieniance store) that got armed robbed about every 2 months and the only thing i could think of that would make the situation worse would be for those behind the till to have guns. just think of the carnage. its insane!
this idea of having a permit that allows you to carry around a concealed weapon also seems to me to be insane! what you guys think of it? you all seem to be pro-gun but does havin them make you feel safe?[/quote]
Well, if you run the numbers, private ownership of guns does seem to discourage crime, as do concealed carry laws.
Put yourself in this situation: You are considering (for whatever reason) attacking or robbing someone. Are you more likely to actually do it if you think you'll get shot or less likely? Would not higher odds of being shot discourage you more than lower odds?
Before you venture into this debate, you would do well to read this report assessing Canada's gun registration laws. The author compares gun policies and violent crime rates in Canada, the UK, Australia and the US and bases his conclusions off of that. It's pretty dry -- a lot of boring numbers -- but they prove a lot of your assumptions wrong.
For instance, "almost gun free England" has had higher violent crime rates than the US since 1996.
Sure, you have a higher chance of being shot here, but violent crimes as a whole are less common here (and have been declining for the past 20 years) while violent crime rates (including gun crimes as a burgeoning black market for firearms is developing) are climbing in the UK.
[quote=Jimmi431]i can understand it for recreation i guess as it does look quite fun to be able to shoot at stuff but couldn't it be that guns are left safely locked up at a gun club or something similar.
Originally Posted by: Jimmi431ah you know im kinda glad i live in almost gun free england! i cant believe that anyone actually thinks a gun is a good form of protection, i mean what kind of area do you live in? is it kill or be killed? i was working in a late shop (convieniance store) that got armed robbed about every 2 months and the only thing i could think of that would make the situation worse would be for those behind the till to have guns. just think of the carnage. its insane!
Originally Posted by: AkiraThis whole gun talk seems pretty alien to me, although to you guys in the USA, it seems like common talk.
Originally Posted by: AkiraThis whole gun talk seems pretty alien to me, although to you guys in the USA, it seems like common talk.
Let us dip into English traditional talk and discuss the weather!
Put yourself in this situation: You are considering (for whatever reason) attacking or robbing someone. Are you more likely to actually do it if you think you'll get shot or less likely? Would not higher odds of being shot discourage you more than lower odds?
And don't try to turn that situation for yer argument by saying if we had a law against weapons it would've prevented that...it wouldn't. Trying to end gun violence by outlawing them just seems like nonsense to me, criminals are by definition outlaws
Originally Posted by: Jimmi431yyeah somethin close to every couple of months, last time a screwdriver and a bin were used (the bin to hold all the fags) and was only 1 guy, but before that they come in with shotguns and machettes usually 2 or 3 of em and tasers. not to pleasent but is accepted as a risk in most shops like that.Put yourself in this situation: You are considering (for whatever reason) attacking or robbing someone. Are you more likely to actually do it if you think you'll get shot or less likely? Would not higher odds of being shot discourage you more than lower odds?
i can see the argument behind that however, i could also see it meaning that a thief would arm themselves to defend against the home owner so would go in armed. I know it is likely to discourage most sane people, but what i have found is that there are a lot of desperate people will take that risk.[/quote]
You've basicly said that people are already coming at you armed to the teeth knowing that you're unarmed -- what could they do short of stealing an APC from the British Army to leverage up the threat to you?
Here's the facts: The places in the US with the highest per capita gun ownership rates consistantly have the lowest crime rates while places with the lowest gun ownership rates and the most gun control have the highest crime rates; meanwhile, states who've introduced concealed carry laws have the fastest falling crime rates. Internationally, Canada and Switzerland have much more guns per capita than the US and much lower crime rates while Australia's new restrictions on gun ownership were immediately followed by a sharp increase in violent crime.
I don't think gun ownership is the only factor in this very complex equasion, but as the old Japanese proverb goes, "an armed society is a polite society."Originally Posted by: Jimmi431i do not dispute that the uk is getting worse problems with guns, however, we have not had inncidents such as the columbine shootings. this, i believe, is because disgruntled kids have almost no chance of getting hold of a gun (unless they are in some way connected to gangs and still the avalibility of ammo is laughable, and would cost the individaul hundreds of pounds). however, in America a child may well grow up surrounded by guns and could easily steal one from a neighbour or from their own home. thus the risk is massive.
And yet it almost never happens.
And speaking of Columbine; what if those two boys had spent less time focusing on firearms and more time on the explosive devices they had made? You do know that they had tried to build a propane bomb that, if it had detonated, would have taken a whole wing of the school out, right? Instead of tens dead, it would have meant HUNDREDS killed and injured.
I feel the whole problem with gun control legislation is that it does and can do nothing to take care of why people turn to crime in the first place. Even if Eric Harris and Dylan Klebold couldn't have gotten guns, they would still have the feelings of hatred and vengance that motivated them in the first place and they would still have the means to build explosives. The only difference is that now, that would be their only option and they'd have devoted a lot more time to it. Surely, you understand just how catastrophic the implications of this are.
[QUOTE=Jimmi431]my main point is that i don't believe owning a gun will actually protect you and your family, and that having a permit to carry a gun with you is just daft!!!
