What Is It With Americans & Guns

[nugent]

i was under the assumption 12 miles out you could set up auto traps on your bow, and have a whale of a time from your boat.

do not think sea gull bashing is legal tho even if they are vermin

[Poly]

Originally Posted by codprawn

In Northern Ireland they had a ban on ALL guns - didn't seem to stop the IRA did it?

Are you sure?

NI's legislation is different from the rest of the UK (e.g. no ban on handguns). But firearms are certainly permitted (with the appropriate license) under the current (2004) legislation. And I think it has been generally acceptable to own most weapons in all previous legislation enacted in the 20th century.

[codprawn]

Originally Posted by Polwart

Are you sure?

NI's legislation is different from the rest of the UK (e.g. no ban on handguns). But firearms are certainly permitted (with the appropriate license) under the current (2004) legislation. And I think it has been generally acceptable to own most weapons in all previous legislation enacted in the 20th century.

My memory is definitely rusty - you must be right as I remember seeing that airguns had to have a firearms certificate many years ago - therefore guns can't have been banned or there would have been no certificate!!!

[Poly]

Originally Posted by Andy Stevens

If you beat someone with a cricket bat, you going to ban them?

Well that would effectively ban cricket - which can surely only be a good thing... ...I wonder if the government publishes the statistics for number of cricket related deaths (presumably mostly through boredom!).

[Poly]

Originally Posted by codprawn

My memory is definitely rusty - you must be right as I remember seeing that airguns had to have a firearms certificate many years ago - therefore guns can't have been banned or there would have been no certificate!!!

Yeah, I think there airguns regulations are more restrictive (but not a ban) compared to rest of UK.

[Nick Thompson]

Originally Posted by Nate

I remember the wholly justified public furore that followed the arming of plod at Heathrow several years ago.

Not only public, a very good friend (my best man) was one of the first 6 Police Officers stationed at Gatwick who were armed in the early/mid 70's. He and at least one of the others resigned from the Police because of it.

[codprawn]

Originally Posted by Nick Thompson

Not only public, a very good friend (my best man) was one of the first 6 Police Officers stationed at Gatwick who were armed in the early/mid 70's. He and at least one of the others resigned from the Police because of it.

A copper with principles - good for them!!!

[pathalla]

Originally Posted by Jono

I hold a FAC and have done so for many years. “Pre Dunblane” I owned handguns, rifles and shotguns. I used to reload all my own ammunition and would happily spend hours tinkering with ballistics to try and match the perfect load for a particular gun. I can understand that people don’t like the idea of “civilians” owning guns, based on what they see on television. However there is a world of difference between guns used for target shooting, be it paper targets at 25 metre for a pistol or 1,000 yds for a bench rest rifle and those that used to be used for disciplines like practical pistol, where the pistols were developments (very expensive developments ) of standard police or services issue. Now, in the “Post Dunblane” era, I may not own a single shot .22 target pistol. Bearing in mind that these have the muzzle energy of not much more than a pea shooter, yet I can still possess a .44 calibre carbine, a 12 gauge shotgun or a military calibre rifle, all of which have massive muzzle energy capacity. Do those people who clamour “pistols are only made for killing people” have any understanding of this at all? I think not.
The “gun culture” that undoubtedly exists and is growing in this country, despite what statistics have been quoted here, fuelled by popular culture. How many of the young (or even not-so-young )kids, who find guns cool, because a music idol sings about them or is seen to carry them, or in the case of that arsewipe, 50-cents, has even been shot, actually have any comprehension of the damage that a bullet can do?
The man beaten about the head, who doesn’t get up as in the films, but spends the rest of his life having to wear nappies because he is incontinent. The youngster who is shot in the leg with a cheap eastern block pistol who doesn’t just suffer a slight limp, but who has to have his leg amputated and remains dependant on his parents for the rest of his life. What about showing the operation to replace a man’s face and scalp after he’s been hit with a broken glass?

Get rid of the glamorisation, the myths and the “coolness” of violence in any form and replace it with education about the real effects.

Don’t get sucked into the argument that banning the possession of handguns, especially those specifically built for target shooting, has had any effect on gun crime.

As an aside…

I do feel that “Pre Dunblane” the licensing authorities were getting a little lax. I had, at one time, four large calibre hand guns in my safe. Now that was an awful lot of “fire power”. At the time I was shooting .22 target league, full bore pistol league, practical pistol and had just started to shoot handgun out to 100 metres. Now that’s a discipline that required an awful lot of skill (No, I wasn’t very good ). If the powers that be had restricted FAC holders to one small bore and one full bore I don’t think there would have ever been an issue. However the draconian ban (Knee jerk.. call it what you will) has caused an awful lot of ill feeling, especially in light of the report and enquiries which revealed that Hamilton should never have been “renewed” under existing Police worries about him.

Have I wandered off topic?.....again?

<edit> I confess I didn't bother watching the video clip until now, having seen that sort of thing before, on film and live. However, I can see what some might think..... it is rather "Gung-ho" isn't it ? What I want to know from our ‘Merkin cousins, is the legality of converting pistols to full auto? I thought that was banned, pretty much everywhere. There is a small bit in the clip with a bloke firing two pistols with extended magazines. Are they available or have they been converted from semi auto to full auto (modified sear?). Legal or not?

I believe the law as it currently stands in the U.S. is no further manufacture of full auto weapons as of 1986. Consequently there are only so many available. You must have a license to own (tax stamp) for a full auto gun and you cannot "convert" a semi auto, you must buy a registered weapon and the BATF has record of you as the owner. Any non registered gun is breaking the law, which will cause you to lose your right to own firearms in the U.S. as any convicted felon cannot legally posess a firearm. Hi capacity magazines are legal, and available.
I must comment that the vast majority of firearms owners in the U.S. do not own full auto weapons, as a guess it may be equivalent to amount of people who own their own planes, a small, small percentage of society.
Society does not have to fear firearms ownership by citizen's, it needs to fear destruction of the moral fabric our civilization is based on, maintaining that is the key. If you have the values.... all is good.

[Scary Des]

Originally Posted by Andy Moore

........Look, I don't want to insult anyone, but the reason blokes are into guns is that it makes them feel 'big in the pants'. It gives them kicks. ......

But to be honest this is true of a lot of things just because it isn’t your ‘ego massager’ does it make it any less valid Des

[Jimmy_Beam]

Well,
I own a few guns, and I don't mind others owning them. In fact, I own a .45 semi-automatic hand gun, yes, it was a round designed for killing people. Do I kill people with it? No! I pack it while hunting and hiking so that I can either finalize a kill or defend myself or others against a bear attack. People will kill people, it doesn't matter what they use, it's going to happen. It's been happening long before god was invented, it just got worse at that point. I should be able to own guns just as you should be able to own a car, it's my right. Don't tell people how to live, don't let people tell you how to live. Mind your own business and don't negatively affect others around you, that's my ideal life. If someone robs me, I hope I have my gun at hand so that they cannot rob another. If someone comes into my house while I am not home, I hope my wife can use my gun to defend herself from rape, and prevent another from the same fate. If you don't like my ideals that's fine by me, we can agree to disagree. Just don't tell me how I should live, I wouldn't tell you that it's wrong for you not to own a gun, why should you tell me it's wrong to own one?
Jimmy

[roycruse]

Thankyou Judge, Jury and Executioner...

Im so glad I dont live in the USA

[Hugh Jardon]

Originally Posted by roycruse

Thankyou Judge, Jury and Executioner...

Im so glad I dont live in the USA

Not a burgler then are we Roy?!!!

i understand our USA friends views and they have a very different approach to some things than we do in the UK which is absolutely fine by me and i wish them good luck.

I think many of us have a nice little "Surprise" for any would be burglers, and if we dont then we should have a little plan in case confronted with just such an incident. Better to be prepared than a dear in the headlights i say.

[roycruse]

I agree you should clout any intruders a few times - with a big iron bar if necessary - even make sure they remember the incident for the rest of their lives with some permanent damage - but f**k me I dont think anybody has the right to just terminate someone at the drop of a hat. Especially for robbery. How many people on this forum have never stolen anything. - now ask yourself the same question and include any pirated software or music that you have !!!

does that give the producer of such software or music the right to come and shoot you !!!

[Hugh Jardon]

Originally Posted by roycruse

I agree you should clout any intruders a few times - with a big iron bar if necessary - even make sure they remember the incident for the rest of their lives with some permanent damage - but f**k me I dont think anybody has the right to just terminate someone at the drop of a hat. Especially for robbery. How many people on this forum have never stolen anything. - now ask yourself the same question and include any pirated software or music that you have !!!

does that give the producer of such software or music the right to come and shoot you !!!

Quick everyone.....grab your tin hats.....inbound!!

[Jono]

Originally Posted by roycruse

....... but f**k me I dont think anybody has the right to just terminate someone at the drop of a hat. Especially for robbery. How many people on this forum have never stolen anything. - now ask yourself the same question and include any pirated software or music that you have !!!

does that give the producer of such software or music the right to come and shoot you !!!

…….. there is a big difference between "Robbery" and "Theft" .The example you quoted is copyright "theft" so your analogy doesn't hold up.

Theft is the taking or the appropriating of property without consent of the rightful owner or other lawful authority and robbery involves violence or the threat of violence and something being stolen.



I say “shoot ‘em all and let God sought it out”… seen on a bumper sticker in Texas

[pathalla]

You might find that if you hit them over the head with an iron bar that might kill them just as well as a bullet. I think the point Jimmy Beam was trying to make was that it would take a pretty audacious individual to break into another's home. You cannot know that person's intent. What you do know is that this individual whoever they may be has ill will for you, your family and society as well, demonstrated by their total lack of regard for the laws which our societies are based on. I have never had my house broken into. I have a seven year old daughter who sleeps in this home. I think it would be very alarming if in the middle of the night I awoke to someone breaking into my house. I think most if not all people would be frightened by this. No normal person would venture to do such a thing. If someone came up the stairs in my house in the middle of the night I would not ask questions. I would be in fear of my daughter's life and my own and would shoot first and answer questions later. Understand that I hope I will never be confronted with a situation such as that. I own guns...(sigh) I do not own guns to shoot people, It doesn't make my "pants bigger"! When you pick up a loaded firearm you hold the power of life or death in your hands. The question is, what do you value more?
Herein lies the key. My boat is named "War Machine" I am a "gun nut". SCARY!!! However, if you are ever in the western basin of Lake Erie on a nice summer day cruise by the beach at West Harbor... look for a big yellow inflatable, stop on over, we'll be playing some reggae music... give you a beer or a margarita... the girls will be wearing bikinis... and we will both say... shoot me! I think I've died and went to heaven!

[Andy Moore]

Originally Posted by roycruse

I agree you should clout any intruders a few times - with a big iron bar if necessary - even make sure they remember the incident for the rest of their lives with some permanent damage - but f**k me I dont think anybody has the right to just terminate someone at the drop of a hat. Especially for robbery. How many people on this forum have never stolen anything. - now ask yourself the same question and include any pirated software or music that you have !!!

does that give the producer of such software or music the right to come and shoot you !!!

I tend to agree. If the Tony Martin case brought about a change in the law, you would get people shooting 'intruders' for scrumping apples, retrieving lost footballs etc.

[Jono]

Originally Posted by Andy Moore

I tend to agree. If the Tony Martin case brought about a change in the law, you would get people shooting 'intruders' for scrumping apples, retrieving lost footballs etc.

Didn't Ted Martin shoot the "intruder" in the back as he was running away?... with an illegally held pump-action shotgun?. I'm all for having the freedom to defend yourself or your loved ones in the event that you are frightened for your/their safety, but I don't think the "Martin Case" could be used as a test for a Law change, based on the above...

[Andy Moore]

Originally Posted by Jono

I'm all for having the freedom to defend yourself or your loved ones in the event that you are frightened for your/their safety, but I don't think the "Martin Case" could be used as a test for a Law change, based on the above...

I agree, but at the time that's what many people were clamoring for. Folk were saying he *was* justified in his actions because the little toerags came into his house.

I don't want to live in a country where such summary justice is meated out.

[Jono]

Originally Posted by Andy Moore

......Folk were saying he *was* justified in his actions because the little toerags came into his house...

If they'd been entering his house when he shot them, in my opinion, he would have been justified as he could reasonably have been in fear of his safety. To shoot them when he was no longer in fear.... In that they were leaving and no longer posed a physical threat is another matter.

I'm all for exterminating the feckas who repeatedly intimidate "ordinary, law abiding" folk and get away with it because society is too lilly livered to punish them properly. The two involved were “n’er-do-wells” who were used to thumbing their noses at society and, if society had dealt with them properly before, the situation with Martin would never have arisen….....all IMHO of course.....