Don't buy more gun than you can safely handle, learn how to use it and don't point it my way and we'll get along great.

I'm a member of the NRA, a handgun owner and regular target shooter but only for the lack of a burglar or home invasion robber.

Crime goes up consistantly when criminals know gun ownership is banned or hampered by the Government.

Arm everyone, let's shoot it out!

  Even though I believe atheists, demographically speaking, primarily lean to the left I was pleasantly surprised to discover that quite a few of us on this forum are gun owners/collectors.  My tastes run toward socially unacceptable military-style firearms and magnum revolvers. (  and I'm not a hunter though I have a couple of bolt action rifles, too )

  Never seen one in the "flesh".  Is that an XM214 ?  ( chambers 5.56 x 45mm )  ....but you are correct, I'd love to own it.

  ( edit: my second guess is it's an M134 / GAU-2B  )

You guys are a bit funny with guns. My brother and I have a place in the country and we have a .22 for shooting snakes (a remington 850 would be better).

But I think we're out of ammo and have been for years. Anyway, we'd both happily just herd the bloody snakes out the door with a broom.

Living in a country without lots of guns is better in my opinion but I have to quantify this by confessing that in Oz we have a lot of knife crime and a lot of

death by getting your fucken head kicked in by a gang of drunk dudes. So it's swings and roundabouts.

There's also the fact guns are metallic, shiny and oily. That's appealing to me in a boy sort of way. Mercury outboards. V-twin motorbikes. Bent 8s. Guns. I get it, but...

I was in Vegas last year for a security conference and went to a casino with a massive gunstore in it. They were lined up 3 deep at the counter. There was a toddler on

the counter and young kids under ten looking at rifles. A family picked their new guns and went through to the range and blazed away together as a family. In 2008.

It was all so matter of fact. You have to not live with that frontier gun culture to understand how it looks to us on the outside.

I can dig long guns because they're beautiful but buying a Mossberg Persuader just because it's the ultimate in home security?

Maybe if I lived in Jo'burg... If I needed a Mossberg for home security in the USA I'd become a Canadian...

The belligerence is directed at those trying to ban firearms or otherwise restrict access to them. When I see a politician lying on TV about guns in order to scare people into supporting a new assault weapons ban, I get a little angry. I am pretty fed up with politicians telling outright lies in order to fool people into supporting new bans.

Sounds good. So long as you don't oppose me using my firearms for their primary function, self defense, then I really like your veiws on this matter.

  So, the US is going to go nuclear to put down a rebellion ?  Wow, that'll really further the cause of democracy around the world.

  But seriously, the size of the US military is seriously dwarfed by the sheer number of armed civilians who also normally possess multiple firearms for those citizens who don't.  In Viet Nam the technologically superior US military was defeated on the ground ( in a war of attrition ) by guerrilla fighters ( the Viet Cong ) who frequently employed only small arms and sometimes even crudely manufactured home-made firearms. And more recently if superior technology is a trump card why haven't we defeated the Taliban ?  Look how our Army Rangers got mauled in Mogadishu, Somolia...by a bunch of half-starved fanatics armed with shoulder-fired weapons.

  Our battlefield weaponry, although greatly feared, does not in itself ensure victory. This is not World War 2. 

 Also the number of civilians who are re ex-military is enormous and knowledge is also a weapon.  That means all military technology that falls into civilian hands immediately functions against it's previous owners.  What about the effects of military personell who are sympathetic to a rebellion ? Remember the scores of Soviet military personell who refused to follow orders to fire during the former Soviet Union's final dissolution ?  And unlike the Soviet Union our US culture already instills the political concept of civilian ascendancy so to say that there might be hesitancy to fire on their fellow citizens would be an understatement.

(still, I hate war..I just want to target shoot  an be left the hell alone. )

:I

I had a friend that used that avatar 6-7 years ago. There are like 3-4 dif music bobbing cats he would alternate between.

As for guns, if they were banned in the states it would eliminate a lot of the crime, because the physical violence that happens in the UK would have trouble getting off the ground here.

There are too many FAT FAT FATTIES. It'd be like a slow motion action movie, with people waddling after eachother drunkenly with intent of violence, but then too out of breath to actually do it.

Actually, that sounds rather entertaining to watch...

I don't know much about warfare to be honest, and I'm not american so I don't know much about it's army, but, while I agree with you for the most part, I was just talking about the people wining an armed rebelion.

"What are your thoughts on private ownership of firearms?"

Complicated.

"1)  They are the most effective, technologically advanced, usable, readily available means for self-defense.  They serve to even the odds for those who are outnumbered, elderly, and/or unskilled in fighting relative to the assailant."

I disagree. An armed populace equals an armed criminal. It becomes easy for the weak, old or young, and unskilled aggressor to accomplish that which they could not accomplish on their own. In the case of an armed aggressor and victim, you get wounded bystanders. One right is outweighed by two wrongs.

And yet, I fully agree with #2. The populace should have access to tools capable of removing an oppressor. I also think #3 is understated. Practice increases skill of use and confidence to use an item for the defence of oneself and others, simultaneously reducing risk to bystanders.

I may have more to say later, but time just cut me off.

These are all valid points.
 

I think that it is necessary in urban environments to restrict or even outlaw private (working) gun carrying permits..because the consequences of one misfire are much much higher than they would be in a rural area.

I don't think that owning a gun should be illegal, but carrying them into a crowded place where any number of things could happen I disagree with. In the same manner, I disagree with people carrying guns inside a bar to drink in public.

I think that there need to be restrictions agreed on by everyone for the safety of everyone. Some things are obvious. Drinking and guns often don't work. Some guy was just shot a few days ago because he got in an argument drunk with another drunk, and in the bar the guy pulled a gun and shot him dead. 

But yes, I do agree that it is "out of the box" already in the country, and while it may be possible to confiscate many of the firearms it would be an impossible and costly task to eliminate them, especially as new ones would be smuggled into the country.

Then you might be pleased to be assured, I was directing that argument at both sides of the issue, as equally at those who are hostile and fear campaigning against gun ownership as anyone else, no good can really come of that either.

Well I don't oppose firearms as a means of self defense, no. But nor would I recommend them to all for the purpose either, untrained use of weapons of any kind is notoriously unreliable and thus a stupid way to try to defend yourself in my opinion, we should always stick to what we know and are good at when confronted with a dangerous situation rather than escalating things beyond our control. For most of the world population, that rules out guns from the start.

Lol!

I'm not entirely sure, as I don't drink at all and therefore don't need a comprehensive understanding of the laws, but I'm fairly certain that, at least round these here parts, having even a Single drink, we're talking like Blood Alcohol Level of .001 or so, and carrying a Firearm, much less a concealed one, is a felony that carries extremely harsh penalties.  I know that in my circle of friends, the one who is closest to being an Alcoholic (He's not he's just German) won't even touch a bottle if he has his gun, and he's the less responsible of him and his brother.

Although it is generally portrayed as otherwise, most gun owners take firearms VERY Seriously. Its just every now and then there is some retard who doesn't.

I will say I am in favor of Gun Control Reform on the condition that the Federal or State Governments do not receive full control over who gets a gun.  I think there needs to be a system of checks and balances, and I would suggest a joint venture by the Government and the NRA and/or other Gun Owner's Associations to come to a suitable agreement.  I think this would be the best way as, at least in my experience, just as with Jormungander, most NRA members and Gun Owners in general only get really militant when people try to take away all gun rights.  If the olive branch was extended for both sides to come together and work this out I think most would jump at the opportunity.  The problem is the few radical extremists on both sides.  That being said if they try to implement NY,NY or Sweden Like Gun control you can expect it to be shot down.*

Personally for instance, I think the laws regarding CCWs need to be looked at and made much stricter, on the condition that an independenty entity such as the NRA could issue federally recognized CCWs to prevent the Federal Government from arbitrarily removing the rights of a group of people to obtain CCWs.

Also, on the whole 'Civil War' Scenario, I will state that trying to ban guns would be the quickest route to a Civil War and, given the current breakdown of the population, the Pro-Gun side would probably win, given that they would likely enjoy considerable support from the Military, what with a large portion of the Military and Police Force belonging to the NRA, and the Civilians on the Anti-Gun side would obviously be completely useless, as they obviously don't have any guns.

That being said, I always considered the 'Guns to Prevent Fascism' idea as being similar to M.A.D. So long as there are enough guns in Civilian Hands, the Guvernment won't try to become truly Fascist in the first place because they realize that no one would win, as even if they managed to quell a Civilian Uprising the instability and infighting in addition to the massive loss of manpower would weaken them enough that a coalition of foreign powers would be able to invade.

*Yes I went there.

  How foolishly idealistic of pro-gun advocates to continue harping upon the possibility of having to defend against serious political oppression, violent persecution, etc.     Besides, all sane people should realize that in this enlightened era of the 21'st century world governments have evolved beyond the desire to corner and crush civilian dissent.  

 Totalitarianism is extinct...gone forever...it's all good...they'll never hurt us again.  It's just not possible.  Really.

I have one question should I be able to buy one of these? After all my semi automatic rifle will be useless against a tank should the government turn fascist?

hmmm but that isn't a gun so how about this then....

not very practical for self defense.... a hand gun would be better tbh

I cannot see the need for them to be legal though... if the threat of a fascist government was really a reason for this gun stuff why isn't the javlin missle launcher legal (im assuming they are illegal..infact im praying they are illegal)? you can do more harm to the general public with this rifle than with a javlin.

We all know the reason guns are so "free" in America is because people love guns... everything else is just making up reasons for what you want.

  Hunh ?  I'm pretty sure that in the event of an armed revolution the insurgents really won't give much thought to whether their possession of any particular weapon is within the bounds of the "law".   After all, trying to violently overthrow the government is against the law, too. Right ?

  Besides, I've repeatedly stressed that the collective possession of small arms among a population is a sufficient stepping stone to the acquisition of more powerful devices.  A victorious scenario could only exist if their were a united effort put forth to topple a government. You're right, one individual rifle ( or even one individual Javelin ) against government might is virtually useless, that's why throughout history most successful revolutions have always required the participation of vast numbers of people working together over an extended period.

 If you hate the civilian ownership of firearms that's your prerogative.  Nevertheless your opinion does nothing to invalidate their proven utility in the hands of civilians against those political entities that pursue such goals as ethnic cleansing, and other forms of extreme oppression. There's a reason most nation's with gross human rights violations don't allow their population to be armed.

  Anyway, I'm done here.

  Sorry.  Apparently someone has intervened on your behalf.  I have no idea why an edit would keep bumping a thread.  Why does the software read it as a new post ?  Weird.

Shit, I didn't know what you meant by this at the time, so I passed it over, but it just struck me that it was me. Some of the forums don't allow you to edit your posts after someone has responded. I'm sorry. I didn't think in my haste to make an attempt at humour.

Do you have evidence to support your claims?

Less going across the street here. The law enforcement is usually pretty on the ball, and breakins get the cops called. 

But gun collectors are still targets for burglary. Especially the ones that like to put guns on display and brag about it. They might as well be hanging wads of cash on the wall.

hehe I was more thinking a day or 2 later not directly after even though from one house to the next has been known to happen aswell. As an example 6 months ago there was 5 breakins in 7 days in the 9 closest houses to me. Luckly they didn't hit us but my car was broken into. All by the same people, they stole guns from the first house and used those guns to rob the rest. Im aware it can go the otherway and the robbers could be shot  but it really does paint a target on your back.

In 2005 55% of gun related deaths in the U.S. were suicide.

40% were murder.

2% were legal manslaughter.

3% were accident.

So. Yeah. Gun owners are more likely to kill themselves than anyone else with them.

It can be, but it really isn't that bad we haven't had a serious breakin since then, but we did invest in a 24 hour guard (my complex). I personally have only been a victim of crime once in my life and that was with them breaking into my car. I won't speak for others though . Complaining is a national pass time here so it appears worse than it actually is. I live quiet close to a squatter camp with a km of forest right next to the fence that is the reason for the high crime in my area but it has quietened down since we got the guard and a permanant private security car parked in the complex not to mention regular police patrols of the roads near us ooo and we got a 1.2 million rand fence put up to replace the old one. We are quite safe now. It was just a short crime spree. It has been fixed now. 

P.S. anywhere a tourist goes is safe... well unless it is a tourist with no common sense.

 Thanks.