• Fur Affinity Forums are governed by Fur Affinity's Rules and Policies. Links and additional information can be accessed in the Site Information Forum.
O

Okami_No_Heishi

Guest
Actually I was wondering about something. I've never been to a country where owning a firearm was legal for purposes other than hunting/collecting. First question, which is maybe a bit stupid: how do people talk/interact with firearms in the US? Is it like a casual interaction, or do people avoid the topic/avoid interacting with firearms?
Also, I understand the need to have a gun to defend yourself(especially if everyone has guns), but besides that, are there lot's of people who're just into collecting?
Lastly, besides for collection purposes, can people buy things like sniper rifles or automatic rifles?
Again, sorry if my questions seem dull. That's really something I don't know/understand.
Here in the USA you can buy justvabout anything if you have a Federal Firearms License. And plenty of people collect. My firearms serve a purpose, to protect and defend myself and my family. Responsible firearm owners don't go around being flashy with their guns. You won't ever know there is one in my pocket unless you are threatening me or someone near me with mortal harm(like holding a deadly weapon in your hand). There is a stereotype that gun owners are bloodthirsty killers who want to kill. That couldn't be farthest from the truth. I hope to God I never ever have to use it. But I am totally prepared to defend myself and my family if the need arises. I refuse to be just another victim. Sorry/not sorry.
 

Sarachaga

Definitely not a lizard
@Okami_No_Heishi : Thanks for your reply. As I said, I totally understand the need for a firearm, especially if you need it to defend your loved ones. I don't think you should feel sorry about owning one.
 

Jarren

You can't just quote yourself! -Me
Actually I was wondering about something. I've never been to a country where owning a firearm was legal for purposes other than hunting/collecting. First question, which is maybe a bit stupid: how do people talk/interact with firearms in the US? Is it like a casual interaction, or do people avoid the topic/avoid interacting with firearms?
Also, I understand the need to have a gun to defend yourself(especially if everyone has guns), but besides that, are there lot's of people who're just into collecting?
Lastly, besides for collection purposes, can people buy things like sniper rifles or automatic rifles?
Again, sorry if my questions seem dull. That's really something I don't know/understand.
Automatic firearms are heavily restricted (basically to the point of being unattainable in some places). Hell, some states are even trying to restrict semi auto rifles. Other than that and some odd restrictions imposing minimum barrel length, you can get your hands on most things.
As for interaction with gun owners, most of the time you'd never know someone was carrying if they've got their gun concealed (as many do). That said, not many people as you think carry a weapon in the U.S. and most gun owners are level headed enough that you wouldn't need to treat them differently from other folks. That said, "an armed society is a polite society." Or so the saying goes.
 
Last edited:

Sarachaga

Definitely not a lizard
@Jarren: Thanks for the insight! I actually thought gun possession was very widespread in the US.
It's a weird topic tho, because I know a lot of people who are passionately against guns(I'm myself completely neutral on the subject)
 

LycanTheory

Free to good home.
When the ruling elite regime of Maryland passed a bill in 2013, banning all military style semi-auto rifles and requiring anyone that wanted to purchase a handgun to first register like a criminal sex-offender, I packed my bags and left my home of 31 years after a grueling battle with the state, in which I was joined by over 4,000 others.

My right to defend myself and those I love is paramount above all else. It's a basic, natural right that should not be trifled with or obstructed in any way. I'm not a criminal, I'm not some gang member that's been in and out of the system all my life and I refuse to be treated as such.

Being able to defend oneself and one's loved ones is as important as being able to provide for them. It's just as essential and valid as any other human right on this planet and should not be extended to the government and political elite while being stripped from everyone else.

I'm not a second class citizen and I refuse to be treated as such by any one.

There are four boxes we can use to preserve liberty. The soap box, the ballot box, the jury box and the cartridge box... well, I was down to my last box so I decided to flee instead, something I think any responsible gun owner would do.

There may come a time, however, when there is nowhere else to run and that one last box may be the only last resort. I hope that day never comes but if it does, I am ready.

The thing is, it's not just my rights I'm so passionate and adamant about defending. The same rifht that applies to me applies to everyone, should they elect to exercise it or not. Regardless, that right must be defended, along with all the others.

The second amendment is not about owning guns, it's about preserving freedom. It's about preserving basic, essential rights and liberties for everyone. It's the last line in the sand that keeps us from total enslavement from the powers that be.

It's not s liberal or a conservative issue, it's a basic human right. To be free, to be safe, to be able to defend oneself and one's family against any threat that might present itself.

Sorry for the rant...

I'm an avid target shooter and I used to hunt when there was a need to do so.

Among my arsenal is a Century C39v2, a Molot VEPR in 7.62x54r, a Swiss K-31, Mossy 500 12gage, Winchester SX-3 12gage, S&W .38, Taurus Raging Bull .454 and a Taurus 809. I honestly don't get all the Taurus hate. They may have made some bad ones but mine have run flawlessly.

Saving up for a Colt Python.
 
S

Sagt

Guest
@Jarren: Thanks for the insight! I actually thought gun possession was very widespread in the US.
It's a weird topic tho, because I know a lot of people who are passionately against guns(I'm myself completely neutral on the subject)
It is very widespread, a bit over a third of Americans have guns (gun possession is at a record low right now). I think he meant that not so many Americans actually leave the house with their guns.
 

Kellan Meig'h

Kilted Luthier
@Jarren: Thanks for the insight! I actually thought gun possession was very widespread in the US.
It's a weird topic tho, because I know a lot of people who are passionately against guns(I'm myself completely neutral on the subject)
Firearms ownership also seems to go by area or region. Here in Kommiefornia, governor Moonbeam probably caused a huge run on firearms with his various bills he did or didn't pass. As an aside, former California district 8 Senator Leland Yee was always a proponent of gun control/confiscation. He was convicted of running illegal firearms, amongst other things. King Barack the First helped that run on guns, too. What a doof.

Some areas have low ownership ratios and others have high ownership ratios. It would seem the number of people that are passionately against ownership correlates with the number of firearms owners in a given area.

It surprises me that some people are such pacifists that they don't even have a baseball bat or cane behind the front door.

What people need to get through their skulls is the fact that the Police are not here to protect you. They are Law Enforcement Officers (LEO) and they do just that; enforce the law. They are not sitting down the street, waiting for you to call them. At night, if things are busy, they might be across town and let me tell you, there is nothing more nerve wracking than racing across town, hoping everyone see your lights and hears your siren.

That's one of the reasons I retired.
 
S

Sagt

Guest
Yes! The 2nd amendment FTW! Hoping to add a Mosin Nagant to my collection soon, those bad boys are fun as hell to shoot!

Have to say, not surprised to see that there are plenty of anti-gun arguments here.



Where have you gotten this knowledge, the movies? Robberies are not as black and white as that. There are many, many variables. Keep in mind two things: Robbers are not moral/ethical people, not anymore. Maybe at one point, but something happened that they are desperate enough to ditch their morals. The other thing is that robbers are desperate people. If they believed that they could money otherwise, they wouldn't risk going to jail robbing houses, especially not with a loaded weapon.

That being said, the vast majority of break-ins are committed by those that test positive for drugs (65% - 76%)

Drug addicts need to support their very expensive habit, and have no chance of getting an actual job as those typically require people to actually be functional. Have you ever met a hardcore drug addict? I have. It's terrifying. They are consumed by their addiction, and will stop at no expanse to feed it. Murder might not be their intention, but if pulling the trigger means they can get their next hit, you better believe they plan to pull the trigger. If you're strung out or going through serious withdrawal, you don't tend to think very well either. Having a weapon of you're own is more likely to scare them away and prevent them from attacking you first and if they really are that scared of making noise, the roar of your 12 ga is definitely going to scare them away.

The part about the alarm and the safe really makes me think that this is just Hollywood knowledge. Not all house alarms make noise, and the noise doesn't always scare away the robbers either. It takes time for police to respond, and robbers usually know this. Robbers want to get in and out as quickly as possible, so they usually go for valuables that are lying out (TV, computer, bikes, phones, jewellery, etc) and most likely won't go for the safe as it would take too much time to access, even if they can convince the owner, nor would they waste time trying to subdue the owner either.



You imagine wrong. Thieves are not interested in your stuff, they are interested in money. Like I said earlier, most thieves are drug addicts and money = the next hit. Some hardcore addicts are desperate enough to do anything to get it, even commit murder, whereas some are just easily spooked (addicts tend to be rather jumpy people) and might pull the trigger "accidentally". It's not about defending your stuff, its about defending your life. If you happen to be home when the break in occurs, do you really want to risk them shooting first?

And that last part is also another classical Hollywood statement. Contrary to popular belief, "professional killers" are little more than a myth. Most people that actively kill others, outside of serial killers, do it out of rage or lasting hatred. Hardly anyone has impeccable aim, especially in a moment as tense as committing such an atrocious crime, so there is a very good chance they will miss, and even if you do get shot, people don't usually die instantaneously. Having a weapon on your person would give you a better chance to fight back.



This is far from the truth, as stated throughout my above responses



Common sense reality. Common sense is only built on what you experience. Hollywood knowledge is not real world knowledge. Feel free to argue against using a firearm for protection AFTER you have real world experience.
How Japan has almost eradicated gun crime
"Japan has one of the lowest rates of gun crime in the world. In 2014 there were just six gun deaths, compared to 33,599 in the US. What is the secret?"

I understand that gun enthusiasts like having guns for sporting, worship as well as for machismo (to each his own I suppose) but the myth that having a gun protects lives is false.

If a robber, who has a gun, breaks into your house and then sees you reaching for your own, he will shoot first and you will be dead. If you are the one to get your gun out first (unlikely), he's the one dead. Either way, someone dies and it further demonstrates that guns are merely catalysts for death.

The statistics are interesting as well:
  • 68% of homicides involved the use of guns in 2014
  • 11,208 homicides using guns, 21,175 suicides using guns, 505 deaths from accidental use, 73,505 non-fatal firearm injuries and 281 undetermined intent killings in 2013
  • Approximately 1.2 million violent crimes defined as murder, forcible rape, robbery or aggravated assault in 2014
  • Private citizens justifiably killed 277 people in 2014
  • The murder rate in USA is 3.9 per 100,000 people in 2013 while as in comparable countries that have stricter gun control laws, such as the UK, Germany, Australia, Japan, Canada and France, it ranges between 0.3 to 1.5 per 100,000 people
So, in other words:
  • Guns are almost never used in self-defence in the USA
  • The USA has a far higher murder rate than the developed nation standard
  • Of 1.2 million instances that guns could have supposedly been used for self-defence, it was only recorded to be used 277 times
  • Guns are the most popular weapon of choice for homicide
All this being said, the stats do ignore the possibility that people used the gun to scare away foes without using it, however, there's no way to find a statistic for that. It's also extremely unlikely that it's number would justify the amount of crime that the poor gun laws in the USA enable. Also, with that last bullet point, it does not account for only 1/3rd of Americans owning guns, so realistically, they cannot be used in all situations. That aside, it is still approximately 400,000 instances they could be used compared to the 277 times they were recorded to be used.
 

Shane McNair

Ace Pilot
First question, which is maybe a bit stupid: how do people talk/interact with firearms in the US? Is it like a casual interaction, or do people avoid the topic/avoid interacting with firearms?

This is something that is largely situational. In general, it's not seen as a taboo subject, and you aren't likely to get a funny look from someone if you mention that you own a gun in casual conversation (unless you live in California or New York City). Remember, we are a nation of about 315 million people (last time I checked) and of that number, there are an estimated 80-100 million of us who own at least one firearm of some kind. There are also about 300 million plus firearms in private circulation here, and God knows how many hundreds of billions of rounds of ammo of all types. In most parts of the country, especially in more rural places, if you mention to any random person that you own or like guns, there's a very good chance that they do too. However, it's not well advised to go around announcing to everyone that you own firearms. If you make this known to the wrong person, word might spread, and you could end up with one of their deadbeat drug addict relatives or friends trying to break into your home and steal what you've got so they can sell it to some pawn shop to get money for their next fix. It's usually better to be discreet. On the other hand, I've also had water cooler talks with coworkers about firearms and hunting, and also with classmates and even strangers in bars on at least two occasions, but only because they started talking about it first. It all depends on the setting and circumstances, like anything else.

are there lot's of people who're just into collecting?

There are many people who just collect. And there are many different facets and areas of collecting as well, dictated by a person's individual tastes. There are also many people who collect and shoot competitively or hunt. It all depends on what they like.

(especially if everyone has guns)

That mindset is really pretty irrational. My home state (Wyoming) has the highest per capita rate of gun ownership in the union, with at least half the households here having at least one gun. We do have some social problems, but we still have the lowest crime rate of all the fifty states, and an even lower murder rate. There are other factors too, but the idea that more guns equals more violence is fallacious. It's not about the guns, it's about the CHARACTER of the people who possess them, and the culture of the society that they come from. In general, Wyomingites are decent, responsible, civic-minded people with genuine concern for their fellow man. Considering all this, it doesn't bother me that so many of my neighbors are well armed. I actually see it as a sort of collective community defense capability and deterrent to crime. Now, if I lived in Detroit or Chicago for example, it would be a different story. Most of the guns in those cities belong to violent and lawless thugs with no regard for human life, and their guns are usually obtained illegally anyway. Crime is rampant, and in that environment I would only want to be armed that much more, realizing the dire, omnipresent threat to my life. Not because of the guns, but because of the sorts people carrying them.

Lastly, besides for collection purposes, can people buy things like sniper rifles or automatic rifles?

"Sniper rifle" is a pretty generic and loosely defined term, which has more to do with a rifle's tactical use on the battlefield than the function/design of the weapon itself. There are some rifles that are designed and equipped specifically for sniping, but virtually any rifle could be used in that role within its technical limitations. A standard issue infantry rifle could be used for sniping, like Soviet sniper Vasiliy Zaitsev did during WWII. Just about any common hunting rifle you'd see in the hands of a deer hunter is basically the same thing as what many military snipers use. The US Army's M24 and the Marine Corp's M40 sniper rifles were both derived from the Remington Model 700, which is a civilian hunting rifle. They are basically all the same in terms of design and function.

If by "automatic rifles" you mean "machine guns", then the answer is yes. You can own a machine gun legally under federal law and in most states, but the federal laws regarding ownership of machine guns are very restrictive. Private ownership of machine guns has been regulated since 1934, when the National Firearms Act was signed into law. This law was basically a reaction by Congress to the Saint Valentine's Day Massacre in Chicago in 1929. It requires automatic weapons to be registered (not that any criminals ever bothered to do so, of course). There are also other federal laws which affect the private ownership of automatic weapons, namely the 1968 Gun Control Act and the "Hughes Amendment" to the 1986 Firearm Owners Protection Act. The Hughes Amendment outlawed the transfer of newly manufactured machine guns to civilians after May 19, 1986. However, any machine gun manufactured and registered prior to that date is still legally transferrable to civilians. There is a lengthy and pretty onerous process involved with legally obtaining a machine gun that I won't go into detail about here, but it involves registration and things like getting fingerprinted and photographed, paying for a $200 tax stamp from the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives, and having written approval from the chief law enforcement officer of the county you reside in. It can be done, but the main obstacle to owning a machine gun for most people who'd like to have one is cost. Since 1986, the availability of machine guns for sale to civilians has been more and more limited, so this means that the prices of machine guns have risen steadily as a result. Most types of automatic firearms sell nowadays for tens of thousands of dollars. There are people who have them, but they are definitely a minority among gun owners. In addition to the huge expense of buying a machine gun, most people don't want to invite the hassles and headaches of dealing with federal agencies anyway. We already have enough of that as it is, and fully-automatic guns just aren't very practical for anything, to wit, you spend enormous amounts of money burning up large amounts of ammo shooting them, for basically nothing more than entertainment. They're not practical for most realistic uses of a firearm, and imo, that would also include national defense as a member of the unorganized militia (American military doctrine has always emphasized precise, individual rifle marksmanship anyway, and this lies at the core of our shooting traditions. Riflemen have traditionally been the backbone of our national defense).

Now, with all of this being said, there is still a strong (and growing) machine gun sub-culture here. There are shooting ranges in the US where you can rent machine guns to shoot, and there are also machine gun shoots that are hosted throughout the country every year. Most of these guns are owned by businesses that have specific licenses to sell and manufacture them. These events, like all firearm events, are held under controlled and supervised conditions, and safety is always emphasized.

Again, sorry if my questions seem dull. That's really something I don't know/understand.
Not at all. I hope this explanation wasn't too dry or tl;dr for you.
 
Last edited:

reptile logic

An imposter among aliens.
How Japan has almost eradicated gun crime
"Japan has one of the lowest rates of gun crime in the world. In 2014 there were just six gun deaths, compared to 33,599 in the US. What is the secret?"

I understand that gun enthusiasts like having guns for sporting, worship as well as for machismo (to each his own I suppose) but the myth that having a gun protects lives is false.

If a robber, who has a gun, breaks into your house and then sees you reaching for your own, he will shoot first and you will be dead. If you are the one to get your gun out first (unlikely), he's the one dead. Either way, someone dies and it further demonstrates that guns are merely catalysts for death.

The statistics are interesting as well:
  • 68% of homicides involved the use of guns in 2014
  • 11,208 homicides using guns, 21,175 suicides using guns, 505 deaths from accidental use, 73,505 non-fatal firearm injuries and 281 undetermined intent killings in 2013
  • Approximately 1.2 million violent crimes defined as murder, forcible rape, robbery or aggravated assault in 2014
  • Private citizens justifiably killed 277 people in 2014
  • The murder rate in USA is 3.9 per 100,000 people in 2013 while as in comparable countries that have stricter gun control laws, such as the UK, Germany, Australia, Japan, Canada and France, it ranges between 0.3 to 1.5 per 100,000 people
So, in other words:
  • Guns are almost never used in self-defence in the USA
  • The USA has a far higher murder rate than the developed nation standard
  • Of 1.2 million instances that guns could have supposedly been used for self-defence, it was only recorded to be used 277 times
  • Guns are the most popular weapon of choice for homicide
All this being said, the stats do ignore the possibility that people used the gun to scare away foes without using it, however, there's no way to find a statistic for that. It's also extremely unlikely that it's number would justify the amount of crime that the poor gun laws in the USA enable. Also, with that last bullet point, it does not account for only 1/3rd of Americans owning guns, so realistically, they cannot be used in all situations. That aside, it is still approximately 400,000 instances they could be used compared to the 277 times they were recorded to be used.

I will not contest your statistics or your sources. Just think on this for a moment: If everyone in The States were suddenly without firearms; would there be fewer homicides overall or would the killers simply make use of other weapons?

If everyone in Japan suddenly found themselves to be gun owners; would the homicide rate increase, or would a larger percentage of those homicides involve firearm use?

I don't have the answers to these questions, and there is only one sure way to test the theory.

It is my understanding that in many other countries, firearm ownership is limited to the military, the police and the criminals. People who live in those countries understand this, and are more or less comfortable in that knowledge.

People here in The States have been brought up knowing that firearms exist here in great numbers, and practically anyone may own and use them; law abiding citizens and criminals alike. Though not all who live here are comfortable with this fact, we have existed as a firearm carrying culture for hundreds of years. Firearm ownership among its citizens cannot be changed overnight without creating a very large class of lawbreakers who would hide/hoard weapons as a matter of principle.

(Edit) As an aside. Japan hasn't truly almost eradicated crimes involving firearms. My opinion is that, historically, gun-related crimes have virtually been a non-issue there since firearms have existed.
 
Last edited:

reptile logic

An imposter among aliens.
At first I thought you'd confused the M9130 with the M1903 when you mentioned an American built Mosin. But a quick google search left me pleasantly surprised. I didn't know we'd produced the good 'ol garbage rod here in the US. That's neat!

Also, what kind of revolver is it? I might end up inheriting my grandfather's old S&W .38 special.

*smiles* I inherited my grandfather's .38 service revolver, a S&W. He was a law enforcement officer for many years. He bought it new in 1953; bought his own so he could have it tuned and customized to his personal tastes. It still has the sweetest trigger pull, both single action and double action, of any Smith revolver that I have fired.
 
Last edited:
S

Sagt

Guest
Just a few things:

You know the world doesn't exist in a vacuum right? Crime in general is based on several factors. Two major factors are drugs and poverty, aka the people that need money and are desperate enough to obtain it illegally.

The unemployment rate in the United States (8.1%) nearly doubles Japans (4.4%)

Poverty = higher crime rates, poor households have double the violent crime victimization rate of those in higher income households
Or how about the fact that the United States is the 26th highest opium-using country vs Japan being the 86th?
Of course unemployment and drugs have a place in violence but does a 3.7% higher unemployment rate result in a homicide rate that is 13 times higher than Japans? Practically speaking, I think not. Also, Japan has a higher percentage of its population under its relative poverty line--16.1% compared to the USA percentage of 14.8% in 2014.

So are you proposing that we take guns away from our police officers and soldiers?

Surely if guns don't protect lives, they must not need them.

Oh, and I'm fairly certain that gun worship is a myth. I mean, I only pray to my gun safe 5 times a day.
I misphrased that sentence, I should have said that the use of gun ownership by private citizens does not do much for self-defence. I would not suggest removing guns from police officers and soldiers though like you're implying. What I would like is more regulation, in-depth universal background checks and a heavy restriction on semi automatics as well as possibly handguns.

Japan is sort of the leader on gun control at the moment but even they haven't outlawed guns and they probably never will fully ban them for citizens. If you pass the written, practical and psychological assessments you can have a gun in Japan. While you see this as a hindrance of your liberties, I see this merely as sensible policies. In the UK, where I live, there are about 1.2mil gun owners and I don't have a problem with that because I know they have undergone background checks and that the primary use is for hunting.

The 277 killed doesn't account for every incident that involved legally using a firearm for self defense.
You're right it doesn't account for every time a gun is used to scare someone off, which is why I wrote that down as a criticism in my original post.

I will not contest your statistics or your sources. Just think on this for a moment: If everyone in The States were suddenly without firearms; would there be fewer homicides overall or would the killers simply make use of other weapons?

If everyone in Japan suddenly found themselves to be gun owners; would the homicide rate increase, or would a larger percentage of those homicides involve firearm use?

I don't have the answers to these questions, and there is only one sure way to test the theory.

It is my understanding that in many other countries, firearm ownership is limited to the military, the police and the criminals. People who live in those countries understand this, and are more or less comfortable in that knowledge.

People here in The States have been brought up knowing that firearms exist here in great numbers, and practically anyone may own and use them; law abiding citizens and criminals alike. Though not all who live here are comfortable with this fact, we have existed as a firearm carrying culture for hundreds of years. Firearm ownership among its citizens cannot be changed overnight without creating a very large class of lawbreakers who would hide/hoard weapons as a matter of principle.

(Edit) As an aside. Japan hasn't truly almost eradicated crimes involving firearms. My opinion is that, historically, gun-related crimes have virtually been a non-issue there since firearms have existed.
I think a lot of those arguments are fair. I just wanted to point out four things:

  1. The only country I can think of with a total ban on guns for citizens is North Korea. Also, most people who want gun control do not want guns to be fully banned, they just want restrictions.
  2. It's much easier to pull a trigger on a gun than it is to stab someone or use some other weapon.
  3. I agree that the American gun culture is a deterrent to gun restrictions but I think at some point the USA needs to sensibly tackle the issue.
  4. Japan has had heavy restrictions on guns since the 1600s so it's a given that gun-related crimes have been a non-issue in Japan. You do raise a good point though that perhaps there are other factors that affect the homicide rate in Japan, such as maybe the ethnic homogeneity. This aside, I would argue that Japan's culture of not needing guns and heavily restricting them has had the greater effect on its low homicide rate than outside factors.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

reptile logic

An imposter among aliens.
to @Lcs I appreciate your thoughtful responses. I'm also glad to learn where you reside. Speaking only for myself, I was raised in one of the most stubbornly independent gun cultures in the USA; Arizona. People there are still seen to carry weapons openly. Admittedly there are not many who do so these days, only partially due to the recent legislation allowing virtually any non-felon to legally carry a concealed weapon. I do not defend the gun culture, but I do understand why it exists here. Again for my part, from an early age I was trained to respect the deadly nature of firearms, tools specifically designed to kill, and was trained in both the safe handling and responsible ownership and use of the weapons. I used to collect them, as some people collect any number of things. Some years ago, I decided to sell off most of my collection. The primary reasons; no longer shooting them on a regular basis and, most importantly, no longer being comfortable with the notion that I could potentially be arming well over a dozen criminals if my collection were stolen. As you see, I am among those here in the middle ground; the least comfortable of any position on any subject. I've enjoyed corresponding with you. Thanks again for your input.
 

Kellan Meig'h

Kilted Luthier
A few things, from a former LEO's perspective.

People kill people. A firearm is just a tool, just like a knife, a night stick, a baseball bat, a golf club, etc. is a tool. You get the idea. If a person is going to kill another being, they will look for what is the best tool for them to use.

Of the firearms I personally removed from circulation, only one was purchased by the perp. For the most part, the others were stolen in some manner. From a gun shop, a pawn shop (most common), a black market or stolen from the military piece, a neighbor or a family member.

Japan and South Korea have some of the highest suicide rates, both being in the top 25 countries for suicides. The USA was nowhere in those top 25.

Australia has a booming black market for firearms, since they decided to blanket ban them. The also have a rising crime rate, too. That ban did no good at all for the fine residents of the Land Down Under.

I noticed that gun crime followed poverty, drugs and homelessness. Those are the things that are wrong with our country right now. The Gov't really needs to focus on creating good paying jobs to give those that want a hand up and out of the hole they have found themselves in. It really hurts to see women, battered by their Old Man, the dOOd cuffed up in the back of your cruiser. You look around and you see she doesn't have squat to feed her children while her husband (if you want to call him that) spends his time doing drugs and robbery to support that habit.

He's going to jail because he was holding a baggie of Rock and a 9mm with the serial number scratched off when he made you chase him around the neighborhood on foot. You know she's going to lose her place now because she can't work and at the same time take care of these three little hellions she calls her kids. I would find myself giving her some money for food for the kids or I would come by after shift and bring her a bag of food for the little ones.

Another reason I turned in my badge. The heartbreak was just too much and my wife would hold me sometimes while I cried, once I made it home in one piece and I could let down my guard.

Fuck gun control. Let's actually fix this country. Eradicate Homelessness. There's plenty of empty homes and buildings that could be used for this. Create jobs. Let's give people a reason to be proud again when they go cash their paycheck that will support them and their family. Eradicate this influx of drugs from south of the border. Put the boots to the Cartels. Let's make this country vibrant again.

And it has nothing to do with gun control. Nothing.

Just $0.02 USD worth of thoughts from a retired LEO and former soldier. YMMV.
 
O

Okami_No_Heishi

Guest
When the ruling elite regime of Maryland passed a bill in 2013, banning all military style semi-auto rifles and requiring anyone that wanted to purchase a handgun to first register like a criminal sex-offender, I packed my bags and left my home of 31 years after a grueling battle with the state, in which I was joined by over 4,000 others.

My right to defend myself and those I love is paramount above all else. It's a basic, natural right that should not be trifled with or obstructed in any way. I'm not a criminal, I'm not some gang member that's been in and out of the system all my life and I refuse to be treated as such.

Being able to defend oneself and one's loved ones is as important as being able to provide for them. It's just as essential and valid as any other human right on this planet and should not be extended to the government and political elite while being stripped from everyone else.

I'm not a second class citizen and I refuse to be treated as such by any one.

There are four boxes we can use to preserve liberty. The soap box, the ballot box, the jury box and the cartridge box... well, I was down to my last box so I decided to flee instead, something I think any responsible gun owner would do.

There may come a time, however, when there is nowhere else to run and that one last box may be the only last resort. I hope that day never comes but if it does, I am ready.

The thing is, it's not just my rights I'm so passionate and adamant about defending. The same rifht that applies to me applies to everyone, should they elect to exercise it or not. Regardless, that right must be defended, along with all the others.

The second amendment is not about owning guns, it's about preserving freedom. It's about preserving basic, essential rights and liberties for everyone. It's the last line in the sand that keeps us from total enslavement from the powers that be.

It's not s liberal or a conservative issue, it's a basic human right. To be free, to be safe, to be able to defend oneself and one's family against any threat that might present itself.

Sorry for the rant...

I'm an avid target shooter and I used to hunt when there was a need to do so.

Among my arsenal is a Century C39v2, a Molot VEPR in 7.62x54r, a Swiss K-31, Mossy 500 12gage, Winchester SX-3 12gage, S&W .38, Taurus Raging Bull .454 and a Taurus 809. I honestly don't get all the Taurus hate. They may have made some bad ones but mine have run flawlessly.

Saving up for a Colt Python.
God Bless You Lycan! I give a toast to you!! I agree with you completely.
 

Timber-Dawg

New Member
Most interesting is a Browning A5 from the last year they were made in Belgium (1939). Also a Mossberg 385kb, its a smoothbore, bolt action with rifle sights. I am trying to start making musket ball shells for it
 
S

Shane_McNair

Guest
I have an 1982 SPAS 12 it's one of my favorite guns.

I didn't know anybody actually owned one of those. I thought they were one of those guns that's so rare that you practically only see them in museums or something, sort of like the Pancor Jackhammer.
 

davydonovan

Executor
I didn't know anybody actually owned one of those. I thought they were one of those guns that's so rare that you practically only see them in museums or something, sort of like the Pancor Jackhammer.
I would be inclined to agree with you. I had to look actively for 2 years to find one in good enough shape to even buy. I can leave a drop box with pictures of it if you like. I am still looking for a street sweeper shotgun.
 
S

Shane_McNair

Guest
I would be inclined to agree with you. I had to look actively for 2 years to find one in good enough shape to even buy. I can leave a drop box with pictures of it if you like. I am still looking for a street sweeper shotgun.

I wouldn't mind taking a look, but I don't have a drop box and I'm too lazy to set up an account. :p

Or can you PM them?
 
Top