Firearms Possession discussion (in response to yet another US shooting)

[Capt Frogman]

But as long as you are going to let people own a weapon for hunting then what does it matter if they are allowed 1 or 100 as they already have the only item they need to shoot multiple people, the problem is not the number of guns people own but the mentality of those that own them.

But this approach works in the UK? Unless you can prove very good reason for a firearm then you don't get a firearms licence. Also, the licence must be renewed every five years. The whole process is very strict such as references are required, a full criminal records check and a full inspection of where the firearms will be stored. Any criminal conviction can harm your application.

I am still convinced that the key to this problem is in changing American attitudes rather than removing firearms, there is very clearly a social problem where people seem to think they should be afraid of their government and neighbours to the point that they need to be armed, in fact in most countries that level of paranoia alone would be enough to get your firearms license revoked.

I agree. But it'll take at least 100 years for attitudes to be changed. If they can be changed at all.

 

[George]

There's no "some" about it.

High-capacity magazines have been used in virtually every high-profile shooting in recent history. There is no viable civilian use for large-round magazines as it's rare that anyone has to fire more than 10 rounds in "self-defence". High-capacity magazines are not commonly used by hunters, as most states ban them from hunting reserves so why would civilians need them? High-capacity magazines pose a daily threat to police officers, who commonly carry 10 to 12 rounds in their handguns.

If you need a large mag to defend yourself, then I think you need to work on your aim a little bit more.

There is a trend of armed groups invading homes, & businesses, where having high cap mag guns would be nice to have if you were the victim.

Some further statistics:

- LA Police used 90 shots to kill a 19 year old after a high speed chase

Seems to be a bit more wide spread. Don't know if it's a result of movies or what, but a lot of "spray & pray you hit the guy" is going on. Cops in NYC fired something like 150 rounds at a rape suspect trapped in a stairwell a while back. The Cops were exempt from the 90s high cap mag ban.

But this approach works in the UK? Unless you can prove very good reason for a firearm then you don't get a firearms licence. Also, the licence must be renewed every five years. The whole process is very strict such as references are required, a full criminal records check and a full inspection of where the firearms will be stored. Any criminal conviction can harm your application.
I agree. But it'll take at least 100 years for attitudes to be changed. If they can be changed at all.

Goes back to Colonial days. As has already been said, the higher the gun control the higher the crime rate here. You're not going to find a majority of Americans that think they shouild have to ask the Govt to own guns. No guns isn't an option unless Obama goes Dictator & sends the Army door to door siezing arms nation wide. That did happen illegally after Katrina in New Orleans.

 

[senojekips]

It appears that the mother of this last loony was a member of the "Doomsday Preppers" movement. A movement convinced the "the End" is coming for any number of reasons, including such things as, economic collapse, transposition of the North and south poles, and China taking over the world. Yeah,... riiiiiight???

I think that this fact in itself should be a good warning to officials as to a persons probable lack of mental stability and suitability to own a firearm,... or even perhaps a sharp stick for that matter.

This movement is by and large an American phenomenon???

 

[Rowan]

@George YOU and your attitude is the #1 PROBLEM.. (or people like you). I can't believe you can really believe all that? It just means continued massacres and more babies sacrificed on the alter of you idiotic 2nd Amendment. I just wonder whether you actually own a passport an have travelled to countries outside the US that don't have this problem and are civilised and have the rule of law!

 

[lolwhassup]

Just my opinion, but that's hardly a "legitimate" reason. That's just my personal opinion of course. :thumb:

But I am a reservist, how else am I supposed to stay a skilled and trained soldier when it comes to one of the biggest fundamentals of being a soldier, BRM?
We don't have unit practice sessions, only quals every 6 months. Speaking of quals I have one in February. :sniper:

 

[George]

@George YOU and your attitude is the #1 PROBLEM.. (or people like you). I can't believe you can really believe all that? It just means continued massacres and more babies sacrificed on the alter of you idiotic 2nd Amendment. I just wonder whether you actually own a passport an have travelled to countries outside the US that don't have this problem and are civilised and have the rule of law!

Up here it's people like you who advocate unilateral disarmament in the War on crime that's the problem. Our criminals should not be faced with empty hands. Nope haven't been to Au, would like to unless all of you have this silly attitude, maybe I should send your cars back.
Well...must be nice living where you don't have to worry about some bloke coming through your window, but here isn't there.

I have no issue with legitimate reasons for a firearm such as hunting etc. Each to their own and all that. I fully understand that and don't have a problem with that approach.

But how many US firearms owners actually go hunting? I'll guess not many, especially when the weapons they have aren't suitable for hunting.

The 2nd Admendment isn't about hunting.

 

[Tankboy]

It's about the ability to shoot people!.

 

[Rowan]

@lolwhassup

Civilians DON'T need assault rifles and should not be allowed to have them. I was a weapons instructor in the Australian Army and qualified annually on the L1A1 and Austeyr... (2 cm group at 50 metres etc). We got sufficient training while wearing the uniform. The breathing and discipline etc. can be as easily achieved with a bolt-action rifle when NOT on duty.

 

[Tankboy]

@lolwhassup

Civilians DON'T need assault rifles and should not be allowed to have them. I was a weapons instructor in the Australian Army and qualified annually on the L1A1 and Austeyr... (2 cm group at 50 metres etc). We got sufficient training while wearing the uniform. The breathing and disciple etc. can be as easily achieved with a bolt-action rifle when NOT on duty.

I have to agree.
Having a real gun at home to practice on!.
I only qualified on my personal weapon, once a year, we didn't get to practice first
Total Tosh!.

 

[George]

It's about the ability to shoot people!.

If they're trying to harm me, my family, or my Country. How do we call England "Civilized" when criminals apparently have legal protection from being harmed while robbing your castle?

 

[senojekips]

But I am a reservist, how else am I supposed to stay a skilled and trained soldier when it comes to one of the biggest fundamentals of being a soldier, BRM?
We don't have unit practice sessions, only quals every 6 months. Speaking of quals I have one in February. :sniper:

In my experience, using a firearm is like riding a bike, once learned, your skills really don't diminish.

This was bought home to me when i called into our local gun range to speak to mate who was shooting trap about 18 months ago. They had finished the shoot and my mate always ready for a bit of fun asked one of the young "hot shot" shooters there, "how do you reckon you'd go against Spike"? Having never seen me shoot before he was non commital, and to cut a long story short we had a 10 bird shootoff,... Although I had not picked up a shotgun since about 1985 I shot ten birds on the first barrel with a borrowed gun, which surprised even me. I didn't push my luck and go on as I was without my glasses that I need for distant vision and although there was an element of 'luck' involved no amount of skill can overcome the inability to see your target.

I have no doubt that I could do as well with a rifle.

 

[Rowan]

@senojekips is totally correct. Last Christmas I visitted Vietnam and fired an AK47 on a 50 metre range achieving a 2 cm group. I haven't been an active soldier for ten years, but if you've got it, you never lose it! As for @George and his home invasion scenario. Doesn't he have a police force where he lives in Dodge City or whatever sick joint that is? Where I live outside Melbourne, we don't even lock our back door and often leave our key in the front door. Someone broke someone's letter box in the street once several years ago. That was the crime-wave here! Meanwhile, in Dodge City (or wherever), a private security guard in a gated estate shoots some black guy going for a walk because he doesn't like the look of him.

 

[George]

In my experience, using a firearm is like riding a bike, once learned, your skills really don't diminish.

This was bought home to me when i called into our local gun range to speak to mate who was shooting trap about 18 months ago. They had finished the shoot and my mate always ready for a bit of fun asked one of the young "hot shot" shooters there, "how do you reckon you'd go against Spike"? Having never seen me shoot before he was non commital, and to cut a long story short we had a 10 bird shootoff,... Although I had not picked up a shotgun since about 1985 I shot ten birds on the first barrel with a borrowed gun, which surprised even me. I didn't push my luck and go on as I was without my glasses that I need for distant vision and although there was an element of 'luck' involved no amount of skill can overcome the inability to see your target.

I have no doubt that I could do as well with a rifle.

Shooting Trap with a rifle sounds like a challenge...

As for @George and his home invasion scenario. Doesn't he have a police force where he lives in Dodge City or whatever sick joint that is? Where I live outside Melbourne, we don't even lock our back door and often leave our key in the front door. Someone broke someone's letter box in the street once several years ago. That was the crime-wave here! Meanwhile, in Dodge City (or wherever), a private security guard in a gated estate shoots some black guy going for a walk because he doesn't like the look of him.

Sounds like the US in the 50s before society went down hill. Police: Courts, including The Supreme Court, has ruled ruled that the individual is responcible for their own defence. The Police are for protection of "the masses" not any specific individual. If you call & they don't show up, you can't sue them. Police by nature are a responce after the fact group, not a preventative force, except for the "threat in being". Not saying they have a general policy of not responding, but they don't have to. As far as your "security Guard" comment, assuming you're telling it "straight" as reported by the Media, that's the problem being dependent on the Main Stream Media. 1st off the guy was a neighborhood watch, not a security guard. Trayvon wasn't the angelic 12 year old in the photo, but a tattooed up punk in his late teens who'd been in trouble at school & with the cops. It turns out that NBC News heavily edited/rearrainged to tape that waas widely heard, the undoctored original tells a different story. On the tape he said the guy was acting suspiciously, not like a guy just walking home in the rain. He said he was following @ a distance. When told he should return to his car he said that he was heading back to the car. After that you can hear the altercation beginning. There's no Video documenting what happened, If Trayvon turned on George after he turned back, or if George turned back at all. There are photos taken at the Police station after George had been arrsted shortly after it happened, showing damage to his face & back of his head, seems consistant with what he said. Maybe the trial will shed some light on it. The cartoon seems typical of stuff put out by the anri gun groups & is of dubious accuracy.

 

[senojekips]

Shooting Trap with a rifle sounds like a challenge...

???? Gun, George,...gun,":smile: Although I had not picked up a shotgun since about 1985,...."

I also have no doubt that with my glasses on, my rifle shooting skills would be little different from what they were 30 years ago. As I said, these are skills that once acquired are not really ever lost.

The cartoon seems typical of stuff put out by the anri gun groups & is of dubious accuracy.

Maybe, maybe not,... can you provide a credible link to show that any of the figures are wrong?

In about ten seconds I found this site that seems to back the figures at least to some degree. The figures don't agree, but they still show that firearms in the home actually raise the chance of you or your loved one's being killed.

To address these limitations, previous researchers have used case-control study methodology to evaluate the relation between gun ownership and risk of a violent death in the home. For example, Kellermann et al. (13, 14) examined the relation between gun ownership and injury outcomes. After they controlled for a number of potentially confounding factors, the presence of a gun in the home was associated with a nearly fivefold risk of suicide (adjusted odds ratio = 4.8) (13) and an almost threefold risk of homicide (adjusted odds ratio = 2.7) (14). Other case-control studies have also found an increased risk of suicide for those with firearms in the home, with relative risks ranging from 2.1 to 4.4 (15–19). Source: http://aje.oxfordjournals.org/content/160/10/929.full

 

[MontyB]

???? Gun, George,...gun, " Although I had not picked up a shotgun since about 1985,...."

I also have no doubt that with my glasses on, my rifle shooting skills would be little different from what they were 30 years ago. As I said, these are skills that once acquired are not really ever lost.

Not so sure about that, I used to use solid shot to hunt goats years ago and have recently purchased a couple of shotguns thinking I could repeat the feat but to date I have killed more trees than goats.

What I have found is that I have become so accustomed to the L1A1 I have been using until recently that I haven't adapted to the change as well as I had thought I would.

 

[senojekips]

Not so sure about that, I used to use solid shot to hunt goats years ago and have recently purchased a couple of shotguns thinking I could repeat the feat but to date I have killed more trees than goats.

What I have found is that I have become so accustomed to the L1A1 I have been using until recently that I haven't adapted to the change as well as I had thought I would.

I would say that trap or clay pigeon shooting would benefit from practice more than rifle shooting, as it relies more on your reflexes, you don't really have time to think what you are doing as in say, full bore target shooting.

 

[BritinBritain]

@lolwhassup

Civilians DON'T need assault rifles and should not be allowed to have them. I was a weapons instructor in the Australian Army and qualified annually on the L1A1 and Austeyr... (2 cm group at 50 metres etc). We got sufficient training while wearing the uniform. The breathing and discipline etc. can be as easily achieved with a bolt-action rifle when NOT on duty.

I couldn't disagree more. Like millions of others I was also trained on the L1A1, as well as the 303 Bren and later the 7.62 version, I was also trained on the GPMG and the Sterling. I loved firing all of the above, it was fun! I would have loved to have owned all of them simply to have fun on the range.

In the US there is a meeting every year where people get together with all manner of selective fire machine guns blasting the crap out of old cars and such like and having a crap load of fun at the same time. What's wrong with that? Also in the US owners of small field guns get together firing muzzle loaders, again it was a lot of fun, even beating a Canadian gun team with their 105 (I think it was a 105) in the process.

I knew a couple of chaps in the UK who had a physical disability who couldn't operate the bolt on a bolt action, they needed a semi automatic, but thanks to Michael Ryan in Hungerford they lost their sport.

Using your example, why should people be allowed to own cars that are capable of clocking 150mph + when the speed limit (in UK ) is 70 MPH? Why should civilians be allowed to own sports cars with wacking great V8's when a small 4 cylinder gets them from A to B just as effectively? Its about choice.

Gun Free South Africa were forever spouting off propaganda with sound bites as in the cartoon. One of their favourites was "With a gun in the home you are sevens times more at risk of being shot with it." Seven times more then what? Another of theirs is "Young children are being shot with guns in Cape Town." What they don't tell you is that those children are 17 to 19 year old gang bangers shooting the crap out of each other with illegal guns over turf wars. Where did the gang bangers get those guns? The freaking police NOT from legal owners. Affirmative Action cops have a habit of selling or losing their issue firearms, and no I'm not kidding.

Gun Free South Africa had a campaign of putting "Gun Free Zone" notices in peoples homes, cars and offices. In South Africa that's inviting trouble, so I sent them an email with a totally fictitious story, "Dear Gun Free South Africa, thank you for the wonderful idea of putting "Gun Free Zone" signs in my home. Within 24 hours of the signs being displayed my home was broken into by an armed robber, I was able to shoot him dead with my Colt 45, thanks to your wonderful idea that's one less criminal in South Africa." I never did get a reply.

I have used a firearm twice, thankfully I didn't have to fire it. The first time was to stop an assault on myself from a bloke twice my size, and secondly when two yobo's broke into my next door neighbours house. To cut a long story short I had them face down in the grass until the cops arrived.

A mall in Cape Town is a Gun Free Zone, it was robbed by armed gangs six times in six weeks.

Quite rightly when someone goes bonkers using a firearm its reported, but how many cases where a firearm has saved lives are reported by the media? Very rarely. Not long ago armed robbers attacked a restaurant and began shooting, one of the patrons armed with a revolver shot one of the attackers dead, the rest of the attackers ran for their lives. Also in the restaurant was an editor of a local woman's magazine, she reported the incident in her next issue of the magazine, but didn't make any mention of the fact that a legal firearm owner had saved her life! And the firearm recovered from the dead robber at the scene? It was a police issue R5 (South African built copy of the Israeli Galil).

Banning anything can have an unforeseen effect, for example the 18th Amendment in the USA, prohibition. In my information is correct alcoholism actually increased by something like 30% and caused more problems that the amendment was supposed to address, it also gave rise to the Mafia which still causes problems in the US.

 

[Capt Frogman]

How do we call England "Civilized" when criminals apparently have legal protection from being harmed while robbing your castle?

The UK consists of more than just England.

Criminals have "legal protection from being harmed while robbing your castle"? That's news to me (as a police officer)...

 

[Capt Frogman]

The 2nd Admendment isn't about hunting.

No, it's about running around like cowboys in the wild west.

The Second Amendment says "The right to keep and bear arms...". It doesn't say for what purpose though, does it? :roll:

 

[Capt Frogman]

If they're trying to harm me, my family, or my Country.

and for killing innocent women and children in massacres.