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

George said:
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?
Click to expand...

We have laws allowing us to protect ourselves, and our property.
Our laws are about the use of reasonable force, to achieve this.
We had a recent incident,where two burglars were shot, by the home owner, with a shotgun, he didn't have to go to court, as it was deemed reasonable.
And, he wasn't even in a castle. :D
 
lolwhassup said:
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:
Click to expand...

British reservists manage fine without a firearm at home, and I've never seen any issues with their BRM.

Perhaps the British reservists training is better!
 
I remember an elderly chap on the underground when a yobo began to choke him while other passengers looked away, he jabbed the little shite with a sword stick and he was the one who was prosecuted. Yes he was carrying an illegal sword stick, but if he hadn't he would be dead.
 
Capt Frogman said:
British reservists manage fine without a firearm at home, and I've never seen any issues with their BRM.

Perhaps the British reservists training is better!
Click to expand...

Ha, maybe so, as much as I'd hate to admit the US Army has gone soft, The only soldiers that are disciplined or well trained enough are combat arms. Combat support is a joke, along with the rest of the other MOS's in the army. :bang:

Perhaps I'm just squared away, and deem it necessary to stay proficient, no the better term would be progress in marksmanship? There are many reservists that shoot just fine without owning their own weapons, I'm just the sort that wants to go the extra mile and get better at things. :m16shoot:
 
BritinAfrica said:
I remember an elderly chap on the underground when a yobo began to choke him while other passengers looked away, he jabbed the little shite with a sword stick and he was the one who was prosecuted. Yes he was carrying an illegal sword stick, but if he hadn't he would be dead.
Click to expand...

Things are changing for the better. ;)
 
lolwhassup said:
Ha, maybe so, as much as I'd hate to admit the US Army has gone soft, The only soldiers that are disciplined or well trained enough are combat arms. Combat support is a joke, along with the rest of the other MOS's in the army. :bang:

Perhaps I'm just squared away, and deem it necessary to stay proficient, no the better term would be progress in marksmanship? There are many reservists that shoot just fine without owning their own weapons, I'm just the sort that wants to go the extra mile and get better at things. :m16shoot:
Click to expand...

Nothing at all wrong with anyone wanting to stay on top of their game!

Not considered joining full time and getting that additional training and practice? :)
 
lolwhassup said:
The Swiss manage fine with theirs. :camo:
Click to expand...

Probably because only 5 percent of military personnel are "professional" soldiers, with the rest being conscripts?

After 2007 they were banned from keeping their ammunition at home (I think).

Swiss males grow up expecting to undergo basic military training so their culture is very different to the US. To carry firearms in public or outdoors, you must have permit. To get the permit they must undergo examinations to prove weapon handling skills and knowledge regarding lawful use of the weapon. They also need a plausable reason for requiring one. Also, every firearm is marked with a serial number.

You can't really compare the US and Switzerland. ;)
 
Capt Frogman said:
:lol: :lol: :lol:

True, there's enough ND's when deployed. Hate to think of the damage when they're at home alone! :shock:
Click to expand...

I actually meant, they would be nicked or stolen.
But there would probably be some idiot. Who would steal some rounds as well.
The difference between Brits and yanks. Is,WE know we can't be trusted with guns.
 
How come Capt Frogman has a pretty green name on the board and I have a shitty brown one? Discrimination 'cos I'm Australian, or what? I WANT!!
 
In Australia, our Army Bases are "defended" by private contractors on the gate, armed with pagers and mobile phones. It's ****!
 
Rowan said:
In Australia, our Army Bases are "defended" by private contractors on the gate, armed with pagers and mobile phones. It's ****!
Click to expand...

I remember seeing MOD Police on guard at RAF Fairford during RIAT, and they were better armed than the military!
 
Rowan said:
How come Capt Frogman has a pretty green name on the board and I have a shitty brown one? Discrimination 'cos I'm Australian, or what? I WANT!!
Click to expand...

Because I'm important! :D

If you go into milstores, there's an option to change the colour etc. It'll cost you milbucks though. ;)
 
Tankboy said:
Can you imagine giving our forces a gun to take home! Never mind reservists!!!
Click to expand...

Are you saying our men are not responsible enough?

The South African Commando's (until the ANC came to power) took their rifles home with them as well as a quantity of ammunition and there was no problem whatsoever.

People are more responsible then you give them credit for.
 
BritinAfrica said:
Are you saying our men are not responsible enough?

The South African Commando's (until the ANC came to power) took their rifles home with them as well as a quantity of ammunition and there was no problem whatsoever.

People are more responsible then you give them credit for.
Click to expand...

The vast majority can be, but not all of them. Sadly.

Quite frankly, I've met marines/soldiers/officers that I wouldn't trust as far as I could throw them. In fact, I wouldn't trust them with a water pistol.
 
Last edited:
South African Commando's,may well have had a need for a weapon.
We Brits would rather go down the pub!.
 
BritinAfrica said:
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.
Click to expand...
Actually not just selective fire, but all the way up to belt fed heavy machine guns

Capt Frogman said:
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:
Click to expand...
Actuall says for a well drilled (regulated meant drilled) militia, with the 1790 Militia Act saying the Militia is males of military age, with some specific exemptions, & they must own the long arm of the US Army. The 2nd is directed at preserving the Right to military firearms. Sawed off shotguns are illegal, not because they are easily concieled or particularly deadly. They are banned because the Court, erroniously I believe, ruled that they have no military value. During the Revolution, from what I've read, the British confinscated military muskets & cannons but not civilian guns. May have been why the 2nd was worded the way it was, they didn't think civilian guns were in danger. At any rate the 2nd is about defence & military guns, not duck hunting.
The "Wild West" was a favorite prediction of the antis when easily obtained CCW permits first came up in Fla. Didn't happen, crime rates are down in Fla and in the States, now most States, that loosened up issuing Permits. The areas of high crime is in the inner citys by punks who carry illegally.

Tankboy said:
We have laws allowing us to protect ourselves, and our property.
Our laws are about the use of reasonable force, to achieve this.
We had a recent incident,where two burglars were shot, by the home owner, with a shotgun, he didn't have to go to court, as it was deemed reasonable.
And, he wasn't even in a castle. :D
Click to expand...
Great! Most of the time we here read of the homeowner being hauled off.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top