valerie wrote: I didn't have a sign per se but 10-15 years ago, I did put up one of
those "human figure" targets that I had used at the local shooting range.
With only one missed shot out of 17. Make 'em sit up and take notice.
Hey, it was a bad part of town and I pretty regularly had scumbags
climbing the back fence...
That's unique and a good one! Must have been in the Canal Area of SR?
Gun Control II
Gun Control II
Please use the "contact us" button if you need to contact a ForumGarden admin.
Gun Control II
Got it in one, Tombstone!!
:yh_clap
:yh_clap
Gun Control II
Bullet wrote:
As for your teasers, what kind of batteries does yours take and what good will it do? It will definitely distract them for a second, while they laugh at you. My girlfriend has one, takes 2 AA batteries and has 6 speeds. Darn thing looks real too.
Bullett....I liked it so much I had to see it ONE more time for I like to be teasered too.........
LOL
As for your teasers, what kind of batteries does yours take and what good will it do? It will definitely distract them for a second, while they laugh at you. My girlfriend has one, takes 2 AA batteries and has 6 speeds. Darn thing looks real too.
Bullett....I liked it so much I had to see it ONE more time for I like to be teasered too.........
LOL
"If America Was A Tree, The Left Would Root For The Termites...Greg Gutfeld."
Gun Control II
perhaps in the light of today's shooting of 7 (I think) people we should reopen the debate.
I will start with this premise, if neither of the two persons involved in the last two mass killing had not had access to guns they would not have happened. I know everyone will jump on this citing deaths by automobile accident etc but neither of these two guys would probably have killed the number they did if they had been armed with a car or any weapon other than a gun.
Is the argument to arm everyone or disarm everyone?
I will start with this premise, if neither of the two persons involved in the last two mass killing had not had access to guns they would not have happened. I know everyone will jump on this citing deaths by automobile accident etc but neither of these two guys would probably have killed the number they did if they had been armed with a car or any weapon other than a gun.
Is the argument to arm everyone or disarm everyone?
"I have done my duty. I thank God for it!"
Gun Control II
Still arm everyone, Bothwell. If this kid had to think about the possibility of all his teachers being armed and being shot himself, it could have made him pause and think twice about doing this. Not to mention that if it DIDN'T make him pause and he went ahead anyway, if the teachers and security were armed, they could have taken him out before he killed so many. Possibly before he killed ANY.
[FONT=Arial Black]I hope you cherish this sweet way of life, and I hope you know that it comes with a price.
~Darrel Worley~
[/FONT]
Bullet's trial was a farce. Can I get an AMEN?????
We won't be punished for our sins, but BY them.
~Darrel Worley~
[/FONT]
Bullet's trial was a farce. Can I get an AMEN?????
We won't be punished for our sins, but BY them.
Gun Control II
Bothwell wrote: perhaps in the light of today's shooting of 7 (I think) people we should reopen the debate.
I will start with this premise, if neither of the two persons involved in the last two mass killing had not had access to guns they would not have happened. I know everyone will jump on this citing deaths by automobile accident etc but neither of these two guys would probably have killed the number they did if they had been armed with a car or any weapon other than a gun.
Is the argument to arm everyone or disarm everyone?
Good marnin Bothwell:
Well after reading this whole thread and seeing your open mindeness (sic?) I will point to your admitting the rise in crime after your country outlawed (banned) guns. I won't quote you your countries failure (%'s) nor will I do the same with Austrailias' (%'s) either. It is obvious........Rapes up, Armed attacks up, etc......
What I want to do is point out responsible citizens actions that saved lives using their personal weapons of choice. In most cases it was never used, just displayed.
Before I start cuttin an a pasteing, let me note that the shooting at school was done with his grandfathers weapons and he is a law enforcment officer on the reservation. I think we will find him to be a DISTURBED individual.
Should we take LadyCops weapons too? I think not.
These are FEW of many examples:
The Review Courier, Alva, OK
Things had turned ugly for Oklahoma Highway Patrol Officer Rick Wallace. He had found marijuana on a speeder, but was overpowered by the man before he could cuff him. Passerby Adolph Krejsek witnessed the altercation and came to the rescue, using his own firearm to help the trooper control the suspect. After helping subdue the assailant, Krejsek used the injured trooper's radio to call for help.
The Daily Facts, Redlands, CA
Redlands, California, sheriff's deputies credited an armed citizen with helping them capture four men and two juveniles who had just robbed a convenience store and pointed a gun at a plain clothes police officer as they made their initial getaway. Following a short chase all the suspects were captured. “One of the guys was detained at gunpoint by a resident who really helped us," Sheriff's Sgt. Bobby Phillips said. "He kept him there on the ground until we got there."
The Memphis Press-Scimitar, Memphis, TN
A Missouri state trooper had been shot three times by two armed robbery suspects when armed citizen Robert Riley of Tiptonville, Tenn., rushed to his aid. Riley fired a small caliber pistol at the assailants until they surrendered. The law officer was then rushed to a hospital.
The Times-Union, Rochester, NY
Dennis Koch was putting storm windows on his fiancee's house when he observed a youth run into nearby woods. He passed the information on to a police officer who stopped by minutes later and told Koch he was searching for a burglary suspect. He gave Koch permission to assist him. Carrying his pistol, for which he has a permit, Koch found the youth hiding and held him in custody until the officer could place him under arrest.
The Times-Tribune, Corbin, KY
Corbin, Ky., motel operator Ray Miracle came upon state trooper James Phelps attempting to subdue two drunken occupants of a stopped auto and, carrying his revolver, went to the officer's aid. At that point, another car stopped and one of two men inside levelled a gun on Trooper Phelps. Seeing Miracle's drawn gun, however, they hastily drove off. Kentucky State Police rewarded Miracle with their highest civilian honor.
The Morning News, Dallas, TX
A stolen car bearing three escaped convicts was stopped on a Kansas highway by a state trooper. When the officer ordered the men from the vehicle, they sped away. With the trooper in pursuit, the escapees crashed in the town of Gorham; two were captured as they crawled free of the wreckage. The third convict attempted to flee on foot, only to be collared by several onlookers who had secured rifles from their pickups at the trooper's call for assistance.
The Daily Oklahoman, Oklahoma City, OK
Miami, Okla., motel owner Oba Edwards witnessed two policemen struggling with a man they were attempting to arrest and saw the man wrest away one officer's revolver, shoot and kill him. Edwards armed himself and fired a shot that allowed the remaining officer to recover his partner's revolver and fatally wound the attacker. The dead man was on probation for assault of a Texas police officer.
The Chronicle, San Francisco, CA
Dave Storton, a San Jose, Calif., police officer, was doing off-duty security work at an apartment complex when two burglars knocked the officer down and attempted to grab his revolver. During the struggle, one of the assailants bit off part of Storton's ear, but the two attackers were run off by an apartment resident who came to the rescue, armed with a shotgun.
The Press-Herald, Minden, LA
During a drug arrest in Webster Parish, La., a sheriff's deputy and a state trooper found themselves struggling with their two suspects. But four citizens observed the battle and, armed with shotguns, they came to the officers' aid--enabling them to make the arrests.
The Star-Banner, Ocala, FL
When a drug-trafficking suspect fleeing a state police traffic stop ran through an Ocala, Fla., campground, he was spotted by the manager. Leonard Hicks armed himself and held the man at gunpoint for pursuing officers. An officer later commented, We wouldn't have caught the suspect if it hadn't been for him.
The Observer, Charlotte, NC
A North Myrtle Beach, N.C., citizen was credited by the city's public safety director with possibly saving the life of Police Officer Richard Jernick. Jernick had pulled over a suspected bank robber's car after a chase, when the suspect charged the cruiser and pointed a gun at the officer, who was still behind the wheel. At that point authorities said, the robbery suspect saw that James Beach, a semi-retired electrician who had joined the pursuit, had a pistol pointed at him. Startled, the robber ran for his car, and Officer Jernick was able to shoot and wound him.
The Daily Commercial, Leesburg, FL
Vincent McCarthy wasn't afraid to lend a hand when he noticed a police officer struggling with a man and woman at the side of the road. He tried to help subdue the man who was kicking the officer in the face. Despite McCarthy's warnings, when the man pressed his assault, the tour boat captain shot him once in the leg with a pistol he is licensed to carry and stopped the attack. Neither the officer nor McCarthy were seriously injured.
My point..............for every bad instance with a gun there are a100 positive ones.
Is the argument to arm everyone or disarm everyone?
My answer to your question:
Arm the ones that are willing and responsible enough and the ones that do not want to be armed, they have that choice. A few bad apples don't spoil the whole batch.......... I think that was said once but REALLY fits here.
I will start with this premise, if neither of the two persons involved in the last two mass killing had not had access to guns they would not have happened. I know everyone will jump on this citing deaths by automobile accident etc but neither of these two guys would probably have killed the number they did if they had been armed with a car or any weapon other than a gun.
Is the argument to arm everyone or disarm everyone?
Good marnin Bothwell:
Well after reading this whole thread and seeing your open mindeness (sic?) I will point to your admitting the rise in crime after your country outlawed (banned) guns. I won't quote you your countries failure (%'s) nor will I do the same with Austrailias' (%'s) either. It is obvious........Rapes up, Armed attacks up, etc......
What I want to do is point out responsible citizens actions that saved lives using their personal weapons of choice. In most cases it was never used, just displayed.
Before I start cuttin an a pasteing, let me note that the shooting at school was done with his grandfathers weapons and he is a law enforcment officer on the reservation. I think we will find him to be a DISTURBED individual.
Should we take LadyCops weapons too? I think not.
These are FEW of many examples:
The Review Courier, Alva, OK
Things had turned ugly for Oklahoma Highway Patrol Officer Rick Wallace. He had found marijuana on a speeder, but was overpowered by the man before he could cuff him. Passerby Adolph Krejsek witnessed the altercation and came to the rescue, using his own firearm to help the trooper control the suspect. After helping subdue the assailant, Krejsek used the injured trooper's radio to call for help.
The Daily Facts, Redlands, CA
Redlands, California, sheriff's deputies credited an armed citizen with helping them capture four men and two juveniles who had just robbed a convenience store and pointed a gun at a plain clothes police officer as they made their initial getaway. Following a short chase all the suspects were captured. “One of the guys was detained at gunpoint by a resident who really helped us," Sheriff's Sgt. Bobby Phillips said. "He kept him there on the ground until we got there."
The Memphis Press-Scimitar, Memphis, TN
A Missouri state trooper had been shot three times by two armed robbery suspects when armed citizen Robert Riley of Tiptonville, Tenn., rushed to his aid. Riley fired a small caliber pistol at the assailants until they surrendered. The law officer was then rushed to a hospital.
The Times-Union, Rochester, NY
Dennis Koch was putting storm windows on his fiancee's house when he observed a youth run into nearby woods. He passed the information on to a police officer who stopped by minutes later and told Koch he was searching for a burglary suspect. He gave Koch permission to assist him. Carrying his pistol, for which he has a permit, Koch found the youth hiding and held him in custody until the officer could place him under arrest.
The Times-Tribune, Corbin, KY
Corbin, Ky., motel operator Ray Miracle came upon state trooper James Phelps attempting to subdue two drunken occupants of a stopped auto and, carrying his revolver, went to the officer's aid. At that point, another car stopped and one of two men inside levelled a gun on Trooper Phelps. Seeing Miracle's drawn gun, however, they hastily drove off. Kentucky State Police rewarded Miracle with their highest civilian honor.
The Morning News, Dallas, TX
A stolen car bearing three escaped convicts was stopped on a Kansas highway by a state trooper. When the officer ordered the men from the vehicle, they sped away. With the trooper in pursuit, the escapees crashed in the town of Gorham; two were captured as they crawled free of the wreckage. The third convict attempted to flee on foot, only to be collared by several onlookers who had secured rifles from their pickups at the trooper's call for assistance.
The Daily Oklahoman, Oklahoma City, OK
Miami, Okla., motel owner Oba Edwards witnessed two policemen struggling with a man they were attempting to arrest and saw the man wrest away one officer's revolver, shoot and kill him. Edwards armed himself and fired a shot that allowed the remaining officer to recover his partner's revolver and fatally wound the attacker. The dead man was on probation for assault of a Texas police officer.
The Chronicle, San Francisco, CA
Dave Storton, a San Jose, Calif., police officer, was doing off-duty security work at an apartment complex when two burglars knocked the officer down and attempted to grab his revolver. During the struggle, one of the assailants bit off part of Storton's ear, but the two attackers were run off by an apartment resident who came to the rescue, armed with a shotgun.
The Press-Herald, Minden, LA
During a drug arrest in Webster Parish, La., a sheriff's deputy and a state trooper found themselves struggling with their two suspects. But four citizens observed the battle and, armed with shotguns, they came to the officers' aid--enabling them to make the arrests.
The Star-Banner, Ocala, FL
When a drug-trafficking suspect fleeing a state police traffic stop ran through an Ocala, Fla., campground, he was spotted by the manager. Leonard Hicks armed himself and held the man at gunpoint for pursuing officers. An officer later commented, We wouldn't have caught the suspect if it hadn't been for him.
The Observer, Charlotte, NC
A North Myrtle Beach, N.C., citizen was credited by the city's public safety director with possibly saving the life of Police Officer Richard Jernick. Jernick had pulled over a suspected bank robber's car after a chase, when the suspect charged the cruiser and pointed a gun at the officer, who was still behind the wheel. At that point authorities said, the robbery suspect saw that James Beach, a semi-retired electrician who had joined the pursuit, had a pistol pointed at him. Startled, the robber ran for his car, and Officer Jernick was able to shoot and wound him.
The Daily Commercial, Leesburg, FL
Vincent McCarthy wasn't afraid to lend a hand when he noticed a police officer struggling with a man and woman at the side of the road. He tried to help subdue the man who was kicking the officer in the face. Despite McCarthy's warnings, when the man pressed his assault, the tour boat captain shot him once in the leg with a pistol he is licensed to carry and stopped the attack. Neither the officer nor McCarthy were seriously injured.
My point..............for every bad instance with a gun there are a100 positive ones.
Is the argument to arm everyone or disarm everyone?
My answer to your question:
Arm the ones that are willing and responsible enough and the ones that do not want to be armed, they have that choice. A few bad apples don't spoil the whole batch.......... I think that was said once but REALLY fits here.
"If America Was A Tree, The Left Would Root For The Termites...Greg Gutfeld."
Gun Control II
posted by BTS
Well after reading this whole thread and seeing your open mindeness (sic?) I will point to your admitting the rise in crime after your country outlawed (banned) guns. I won't quote you your countries failure (%'s) nor will I do the same with Austrailias' (%'s) either. It is obvious........Rapes up, Armed attacks up, etc......
What I want to do is point out responsible citizens actions that saved lives using their personal weapons of choice. In most cases it was never used, just displayed.
No please don't because it's aload of rubbish, our whole attitude to guns is completely different and trying to relate it to the US is a waste of time. We were not disarmed by our nasty government to take away our freedoms we have never had the kind of gun culture that the US does any comparisons are totally meaningless. Yes we have a problem with gun crime, it is highly localised in the big cities the way to deal with it is not arming everybody just in case they might get shot by some nutter all that will do is escalate the violence. So please stop trying to extrapolate the US experience to everyone else we are very different.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/gun/0,2759,178412,00.html
posted by babyrider
Still arm everyone, Bothwell. If this kid had to think about the possibility of all his teachers being armed and being shot himself, it could have made him pause and think twice about doing this. Not to mention that if it DIDN'T make him pause and he went ahead anyway, if the teachers and security were armed, they could have taken him out before he killed so many. Possibly before he killed ANY
How about if the sad little git lived in a country where guns were not so readily available and the only way he could own one is illegally so even of he wanted to go on a shooting spree he would find it very difficult to get the means to do so.
I don't know what the answer is but I'm very sure arming everybody is not the answer. I want the peace of mind of knowing that some pillock cutting me up in traffic is unlikely in the extreme to get out the car and shoot me.
Same with knoves. I have Austrian nephews who carry knives as a matter of course, it took some explaining to get them to understand that in this country it is a criminal offence to carry an offensive weapon.
The guy had an interesting name I assume he is part german part native indian? Too bad he didn't get to the bit where Hitler was putting everyone not racially pure in to gas ovens.
Well after reading this whole thread and seeing your open mindeness (sic?) I will point to your admitting the rise in crime after your country outlawed (banned) guns. I won't quote you your countries failure (%'s) nor will I do the same with Austrailias' (%'s) either. It is obvious........Rapes up, Armed attacks up, etc......
What I want to do is point out responsible citizens actions that saved lives using their personal weapons of choice. In most cases it was never used, just displayed.
No please don't because it's aload of rubbish, our whole attitude to guns is completely different and trying to relate it to the US is a waste of time. We were not disarmed by our nasty government to take away our freedoms we have never had the kind of gun culture that the US does any comparisons are totally meaningless. Yes we have a problem with gun crime, it is highly localised in the big cities the way to deal with it is not arming everybody just in case they might get shot by some nutter all that will do is escalate the violence. So please stop trying to extrapolate the US experience to everyone else we are very different.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/gun/0,2759,178412,00.html
posted by babyrider
Still arm everyone, Bothwell. If this kid had to think about the possibility of all his teachers being armed and being shot himself, it could have made him pause and think twice about doing this. Not to mention that if it DIDN'T make him pause and he went ahead anyway, if the teachers and security were armed, they could have taken him out before he killed so many. Possibly before he killed ANY
How about if the sad little git lived in a country where guns were not so readily available and the only way he could own one is illegally so even of he wanted to go on a shooting spree he would find it very difficult to get the means to do so.
I don't know what the answer is but I'm very sure arming everybody is not the answer. I want the peace of mind of knowing that some pillock cutting me up in traffic is unlikely in the extreme to get out the car and shoot me.
Same with knoves. I have Austrian nephews who carry knives as a matter of course, it took some explaining to get them to understand that in this country it is a criminal offence to carry an offensive weapon.
The guy had an interesting name I assume he is part german part native indian? Too bad he didn't get to the bit where Hitler was putting everyone not racially pure in to gas ovens.
Gun Control II
gmc wrote: posted by BTS
How about if the sad little git lived in a country where guns were not so readily available and the only way he could own one is illegally so even of he wanted to go on a shooting spree he would find it very difficult to get the means to do so.
I agree as far as the point about not comparing the US to other parts of the world. But that's it.
"Difficult" does not mean impossible. Ban guns and only the criminals will have them. I've said it over and over. It's been shown to be the case, over and over. Responsible, armed citizens have been shown to prevent crime, it's been shown over and over. Gun crimes have dropped here, it's been proven over and over. Swimming pools, doctors and cars are responsible for more deaths annually than guns. That, too, has been proven, over and over.
How about if the sad little git lived in a country where guns were not so readily available and the only way he could own one is illegally so even of he wanted to go on a shooting spree he would find it very difficult to get the means to do so.
I agree as far as the point about not comparing the US to other parts of the world. But that's it.
"Difficult" does not mean impossible. Ban guns and only the criminals will have them. I've said it over and over. It's been shown to be the case, over and over. Responsible, armed citizens have been shown to prevent crime, it's been shown over and over. Gun crimes have dropped here, it's been proven over and over. Swimming pools, doctors and cars are responsible for more deaths annually than guns. That, too, has been proven, over and over.
[FONT=Arial Black]I hope you cherish this sweet way of life, and I hope you know that it comes with a price.
~Darrel Worley~
[/FONT]
Bullet's trial was a farce. Can I get an AMEN?????
We won't be punished for our sins, but BY them.
~Darrel Worley~
[/FONT]
Bullet's trial was a farce. Can I get an AMEN?????
We won't be punished for our sins, but BY them.
Gun Control II
BabyRider wrote: I agree as far as the point about not comparing the US to other parts of the world. But that's it.
Hey hon, ya gotta take it easy on ol gmc, it can't be a good feeling to know that your friends and neighbors think you are too irresponsible to carry a gun or knife.
Hey hon, ya gotta take it easy on ol gmc, it can't be a good feeling to know that your friends and neighbors think you are too irresponsible to carry a gun or knife.
Old age and treachery, is an acceptable response to overwelming youth and skill 
Gun Control II
Der Wulf wrote: Hey hon, ya gotta take it easy on ol gmc, it can't be a good feeling to know that your friends and neighbors think you are too irresponsible to carry a gun or knife. I'm grateful every day that I get to make that decision for myself.
I really do understand the whole, "It's different over here" attitude. It's what they know, it's how it has always been. But to decry OUR laws because they don't jibe with theirs is doing the same thing. It's what works for us, just like what they do seems to work for them. But to say taking away the guns will solve the problem has been PROVEN erroneous. I don't understand why folks don't see that. :yh_doh
I'm grateful every day that I get to make that decision for myself.I really do understand the whole, "It's different over here" attitude. It's what they know, it's how it has always been. But to decry OUR laws because they don't jibe with theirs is doing the same thing. It's what works for us, just like what they do seems to work for them. But to say taking away the guns will solve the problem has been PROVEN erroneous. I don't understand why folks don't see that. :yh_doh
[FONT=Arial Black]I hope you cherish this sweet way of life, and I hope you know that it comes with a price.
~Darrel Worley~
[/FONT]
Bullet's trial was a farce. Can I get an AMEN?????
We won't be punished for our sins, but BY them.
~Darrel Worley~
[/FONT]
Bullet's trial was a farce. Can I get an AMEN?????
We won't be punished for our sins, but BY them.
-
A Karenina
- Posts: 968
- Joined: Thu Oct 14, 2004 8:36 am
Gun Control II
Bothwell wrote: perhaps in the light of today's shooting of 7 (I think) people we should reopen the debate.
I will start with this premise, if neither of the two persons involved in the last two mass killing had not had access to guns they would not have happened. I know everyone will jump on this citing deaths by automobile accident etc but neither of these two guys would probably have killed the number they did if they had been armed with a car or any weapon other than a gun.
Is the argument to arm everyone or disarm everyone?
Is it legal for a minor to carry a weapon? I don't know, quite honestly. Let's assume it's not legal. Did it stop him from getting a gun and using it? No. And therein lies the problem.
I will start with this premise, if neither of the two persons involved in the last two mass killing had not had access to guns they would not have happened. I know everyone will jump on this citing deaths by automobile accident etc but neither of these two guys would probably have killed the number they did if they had been armed with a car or any weapon other than a gun.
Is the argument to arm everyone or disarm everyone?
Is it legal for a minor to carry a weapon? I don't know, quite honestly. Let's assume it's not legal. Did it stop him from getting a gun and using it? No. And therein lies the problem.
We are what we repeatedly do. Excellence, then, is not an act but a habit.
Aristotle
Aristotle
-
anastrophe
- Posts: 3135
- Joined: Tue Jul 27, 2004 12:00 pm
Gun Control II
Bothwell wrote: perhaps in the light of today's shooting of 7 (I think) people we should reopen the debate.
I will start with this premise, if neither of the two persons involved in the last two mass killing had not had access to guns they would not have happened. I know everyone will jump on this citing deaths by automobile accident etc but neither of these two guys would probably have killed the number they did if they had been armed with a car or any weapon other than a gun.
Is the argument to arm everyone or disarm everyone?
the worst mass murder committed by an individual was committed using a match.
I will start with this premise, if neither of the two persons involved in the last two mass killing had not had access to guns they would not have happened. I know everyone will jump on this citing deaths by automobile accident etc but neither of these two guys would probably have killed the number they did if they had been armed with a car or any weapon other than a gun.
Is the argument to arm everyone or disarm everyone?
the worst mass murder committed by an individual was committed using a match.
[FONT=Franklin Gothic Medium][/FONT]
Gun Control II
Anastrophe, I'm curious what the match disaster was. I think also the tragedies involving workers in early 20th century US factories that were killed by fires. Triangle Shirtwaist is a memorable one as the owners locked young slave girls in the top floors in deplorable conditions making clothes. Fire killed hundreds. Many dove out windows. Unions came onto the scene because of the heartless greed that took so many young lives.
"Should any political party attempt to abolish social security, unemployment insurance, and eliminate labor laws and farm programs, you would not hear of that party again in our political history. There is a tiny splinter group that believes you can do these things. Among them are a few Texas millionaires, or businessman from other areas. Their number is negligible and they are stupid." [font=Arial Narrow][/font]
President Dwight D. Eisenhower Nov. 08, 1954
President Dwight D. Eisenhower Nov. 08, 1954
-
anastrophe
- Posts: 3135
- Joined: Tue Jul 27, 2004 12:00 pm
Gun Control II
BabyRider wrote: I'm grateful every day that I get to make that decision for myself.
I really do understand the whole, "It's different over here" attitude. It's what they know, it's how it has always been.
actually though, that's not the case. at the turn of the last century, practically everyone was armed - every household had a gun/rifle/shotgun. homicide rates in england were about the same as here.
the difference is that the brits have willingly disarmed themselves (not been 'disarmed by the nasty govt' as gmc puts it). and that's their choice. but to ignore the facts regarding the relationship between reduced, legal gun ownership and increases in personal crimes that depend upon disarmed victims is what i have a problem with. englands homicide rates have skyrocketed. gmc counters that it may have doubled, but it's doubled from a tiny fraction of what it is in the US, to just a fraction of what it is in the US (urk! comparing the US to the UK!). that's small consolation to those who've been murdered however.
I really do understand the whole, "It's different over here" attitude. It's what they know, it's how it has always been.
actually though, that's not the case. at the turn of the last century, practically everyone was armed - every household had a gun/rifle/shotgun. homicide rates in england were about the same as here.
the difference is that the brits have willingly disarmed themselves (not been 'disarmed by the nasty govt' as gmc puts it). and that's their choice. but to ignore the facts regarding the relationship between reduced, legal gun ownership and increases in personal crimes that depend upon disarmed victims is what i have a problem with. englands homicide rates have skyrocketed. gmc counters that it may have doubled, but it's doubled from a tiny fraction of what it is in the US, to just a fraction of what it is in the US (urk! comparing the US to the UK!). that's small consolation to those who've been murdered however.
[FONT=Franklin Gothic Medium][/FONT]
-
anastrophe
- Posts: 3135
- Joined: Tue Jul 27, 2004 12:00 pm
Gun Control II
A Karenina wrote: Is it legal for a minor to carry a weapon? I don't know, quite honestly. Let's assume it's not legal. Did it stop him from getting a gun and using it? No. And therein lies the problem.
it's legal for a minor to carry a weapon, depending upon the circumstances. a minor can go hunting with mom or dad during deer season, no problem. schools used to have gun clubs where kids could carry a rifle to school and do target practice during club get togethers.
the laws differ state to state.
the question of legality turns on the intent. malum in se vs malum in prohibitum. any use of a gun, by anyone, to harm an innocent person, is implicitly and explicitly illegal. of course, any use of a frying pan, by anyone, to harm an innocent person, is implicitly and explicitly illegal.
it's legal for a minor to carry a weapon, depending upon the circumstances. a minor can go hunting with mom or dad during deer season, no problem. schools used to have gun clubs where kids could carry a rifle to school and do target practice during club get togethers.
the laws differ state to state.
the question of legality turns on the intent. malum in se vs malum in prohibitum. any use of a gun, by anyone, to harm an innocent person, is implicitly and explicitly illegal. of course, any use of a frying pan, by anyone, to harm an innocent person, is implicitly and explicitly illegal.
[FONT=Franklin Gothic Medium][/FONT]
-
anastrophe
- Posts: 3135
- Joined: Tue Jul 27, 2004 12:00 pm
Gun Control II
David813 wrote: Anastrophe, I'm curious what the match disaster was. I think also the tragedies involving workers in early 20th century US factories that were killed by fires. Triangle Shirtwaist is a memorable one as the owners locked young slave girls in the top floors in deplorable conditions making clothes. Fire killed hundreds. Many dove out windows. Unions came onto the scene because of the heartless greed that took so many young lives.
thanks for hijacking the thread to bring up your standard cant about evil america.
but to the point - and a correction - the worst mass murder committed by an individual *in the US* was the Happyland nightclub fire in 1990.
http://www.explore-history.com/history/ ... _Fire.html
thanks for hijacking the thread to bring up your standard cant about evil america.
but to the point - and a correction - the worst mass murder committed by an individual *in the US* was the Happyland nightclub fire in 1990.
http://www.explore-history.com/history/ ... _Fire.html
[FONT=Franklin Gothic Medium][/FONT]
Gun Control II
I apologize for my subject drifting from the thread. I'm new to the rules of the road here. Not trying to be a s***head!!!! Happyland! Wow. I thought it was theCoconut Grove but that was decades ago. Thanx for leaving the road and answering.
"Should any political party attempt to abolish social security, unemployment insurance, and eliminate labor laws and farm programs, you would not hear of that party again in our political history. There is a tiny splinter group that believes you can do these things. Among them are a few Texas millionaires, or businessman from other areas. Their number is negligible and they are stupid." [font=Arial Narrow][/font]
President Dwight D. Eisenhower Nov. 08, 1954
President Dwight D. Eisenhower Nov. 08, 1954
Gun Control II
posted by babyrider
I'm grateful every day that I get to make that decision for myself.
I really do understand the whole, "It's different over here" attitude. It's what they know, it's how it has always been. But to decry OUR laws because they don't jibe with theirs is doing the same thing. It's what works for us, just like what they do seems to work for them. But to say taking away the guns will solve the problem has been PROVEN erroneous. I don't understand why folks don't see that.
I'm not decrying your laws I just get pissed off with americans constantly telling me I'm oppressed because I don't carry a gun (shades of monty python, help help I'm being oppressed) . As you say it works for us, we don't have your sort of problem.
Posted by anastrophe
the difference is that the brits have willingly disarmed themselves (not been 'disarmed by the nasty govt' as gmc puts it). and that's their choice. but to ignore the facts regarding the relationship between reduced, legal gun ownership and increases in personal crimes that depend upon disarmed victims is what i have a problem with. englands homicide rates have skyrocketed. gmc counters that it may have doubled, but it's doubled from a tiny fraction of what it is in the US, to just a fraction of what it is in the US (urk! comparing the US to the UK!). that's small consolation to those who've been murdered however.
actually though, that's not the case. at the turn of the last century, practically everyone was armed - every household had a gun/rifle/shotgun. homicide rates in england were about the same as here.
source please
Ah statistics. The average man has less than two legs I would bet you are above average. The facts you quote are pieces of information in isolation they tell you little, you need to put them in context which you persistently don't want to. an increase from 1% to 2% may be a 50% increase but using it that way is selective reporting. Our press sensationalise the violence so that people miles away from these areas are convinced they are going to be shot.
Our situation is different you can't really compare the two in a sensible manner.
posted by der wulf
Hey hon, ya gotta take it easy on ol gmc, it can't be a good feeling to know that your friends and neighbors think you are too irresponsible to carry a gun or knife.
Depends why you have a gun, I do know gun owners who shoot grouse and the like, but if one of my neighbours has a hand gun unless he is an armed policeman in duty I want it taken off him because there is no good reasoin why he needs a weapon who sole purpose is to kill somebody. Why should you allow paranoid people access to weapons? I have met nutters that carry knives etc for self defence they usually have the kind iof attitude that proivokes conflict in the first place thereby fulfilling their sick fantasies.
Same with a knife, if you carry one for a night out it can only have one purpose and that is to stab someone with it. Scotland has always been fairly tough on knife crime, In Glasgow a spate of attacks by gangs with razors (the old open type) was curbed by the simple expedient of very long jail sentences, they are now beginning to use the same tactic again.
Your politicians seem to run scared of the pro gun lobby. In this country they run scared of public demand that the problem be addressed and the police deal with this sort of crime more effectively, not demands for the right to carry guns but sort it out.
What do you think america can do about it? You do have a problem just don't use spurious arguements based on the UK to try and pretend you don't.
I'm grateful every day that I get to make that decision for myself.
I really do understand the whole, "It's different over here" attitude. It's what they know, it's how it has always been. But to decry OUR laws because they don't jibe with theirs is doing the same thing. It's what works for us, just like what they do seems to work for them. But to say taking away the guns will solve the problem has been PROVEN erroneous. I don't understand why folks don't see that.
I'm not decrying your laws I just get pissed off with americans constantly telling me I'm oppressed because I don't carry a gun (shades of monty python, help help I'm being oppressed) . As you say it works for us, we don't have your sort of problem.
Posted by anastrophe
the difference is that the brits have willingly disarmed themselves (not been 'disarmed by the nasty govt' as gmc puts it). and that's their choice. but to ignore the facts regarding the relationship between reduced, legal gun ownership and increases in personal crimes that depend upon disarmed victims is what i have a problem with. englands homicide rates have skyrocketed. gmc counters that it may have doubled, but it's doubled from a tiny fraction of what it is in the US, to just a fraction of what it is in the US (urk! comparing the US to the UK!). that's small consolation to those who've been murdered however.
actually though, that's not the case. at the turn of the last century, practically everyone was armed - every household had a gun/rifle/shotgun. homicide rates in england were about the same as here.
source please
Ah statistics. The average man has less than two legs I would bet you are above average. The facts you quote are pieces of information in isolation they tell you little, you need to put them in context which you persistently don't want to. an increase from 1% to 2% may be a 50% increase but using it that way is selective reporting. Our press sensationalise the violence so that people miles away from these areas are convinced they are going to be shot.
Our situation is different you can't really compare the two in a sensible manner.
posted by der wulf
Hey hon, ya gotta take it easy on ol gmc, it can't be a good feeling to know that your friends and neighbors think you are too irresponsible to carry a gun or knife.
Depends why you have a gun, I do know gun owners who shoot grouse and the like, but if one of my neighbours has a hand gun unless he is an armed policeman in duty I want it taken off him because there is no good reasoin why he needs a weapon who sole purpose is to kill somebody. Why should you allow paranoid people access to weapons? I have met nutters that carry knives etc for self defence they usually have the kind iof attitude that proivokes conflict in the first place thereby fulfilling their sick fantasies.
Same with a knife, if you carry one for a night out it can only have one purpose and that is to stab someone with it. Scotland has always been fairly tough on knife crime, In Glasgow a spate of attacks by gangs with razors (the old open type) was curbed by the simple expedient of very long jail sentences, they are now beginning to use the same tactic again.
Your politicians seem to run scared of the pro gun lobby. In this country they run scared of public demand that the problem be addressed and the police deal with this sort of crime more effectively, not demands for the right to carry guns but sort it out.
What do you think america can do about it? You do have a problem just don't use spurious arguements based on the UK to try and pretend you don't.
Gun Control II
Interesting question GMC, one I would echo to our American friends as follows :
1) Do you believe there is a gun problem?
2) How should it be solved.
On the statistics front I agree entirely, you can prove any argument with them e.g.
Jesus was betrayed by 8.3% of his disciples, quite a big percentage until you realise it was one of twelve.
"There are lies, damn lies and statistics" Winston Churchill
1) Do you believe there is a gun problem?
2) How should it be solved.
On the statistics front I agree entirely, you can prove any argument with them e.g.
Jesus was betrayed by 8.3% of his disciples, quite a big percentage until you realise it was one of twelve.
"There are lies, damn lies and statistics" Winston Churchill
"I have done my duty. I thank God for it!"
Gun Control II
I have a follow up question, has anyone on this forum actually ever used a gun to shoot another individual, if yes how do you feel about it ?
"I have done my duty. I thank God for it!"
Gun Control II
Bothwell wrote: Interesting question GMC, one I would echo to our American friends as follows :
1) Do you believe there is a gun problem?
2) How should it be solved.
On the statistics front I agree entirely, you can prove any argument with them e.g.
Jesus was betrayed by 8.3% of his disciples, quite a big percentage until yuou realise it was one of twelve.
I have a follow up question, has anyone on this forum actually ever used a gun to shoot another individual, if yes how do you feel about it ?
G'Marnin Bothwell:
In regards to your first question, I should use BC's famous question here.
It depends on what the definition of "problem" is.
Is it the gun that is the problem? Or is the person using the gun the problem?
Let's say I am out in the woods hunting with my son, teaching him what I was taught from my father about nature, life, gun safety, right from wrong and just being with my son, no distractions from the artificial world, we hear a rustle in the bushes, three quail flutter up in our faces, my son raises his shotgun and takes his first shot at a live target, bang, bang, one falls. His first reward from nature, just the beginning of a life long respect for what it means to be able to harvest nature and the responsibilities that go along with hunting. He then has to retrieve, clean and prepare his bounty. I can not describe the feeling one gets from such an experience if you have never had it. It would be like me trying to show you what a color was if you were blind from birth. It is a real sacred feeling.
Do you believe there is a gun problem?
On the other hand, let's say my son is sitting on the front porch, doing his homework, minding his own business and Bang, Bang. He is shot graveyard dead where he sat by a random drive by shooting. The shooter gets his sick rush from killing something (could it be the same rush a responsible hunter gets? I dunno just wondering)
Do you believe there is a gun problem?
Or how about:
When did you cease beating your wife?
Same difference in regards to your question.
How should it be solved.
I think the answer might be, the gun was not the problem but the person using it was the problem. One boy was taught gun safety and respect for it. The other was not. I read in another posting here how schools use to have gun clubs (I was lucky to live in that time period) and I bet the stats in that era and time on youth gun murders were quite low. In this PC world we shun guns and youth being involved with them. What if they were taught to respect them from a young age?
We cram Sex Ed and other touchy feely crap down their throats but heaven forbid we mention guns..........
Would you let your 16 year old get behind the wheel of a vehicle with no training, no idea of how to drive and no respect in regards to the dangers and responsibilities? I think not!!!
Some states are raising the ante for teenagers to get their licenses, which is a good thing I think.
In my opinion I think we should drop some of the PC crap now taught in schools and start educating kids again on the proper use and respect of guns.
1) Do you believe there is a gun problem?
2) How should it be solved.
On the statistics front I agree entirely, you can prove any argument with them e.g.
Jesus was betrayed by 8.3% of his disciples, quite a big percentage until yuou realise it was one of twelve.
I have a follow up question, has anyone on this forum actually ever used a gun to shoot another individual, if yes how do you feel about it ?
G'Marnin Bothwell:
In regards to your first question, I should use BC's famous question here.
It depends on what the definition of "problem" is.
Is it the gun that is the problem? Or is the person using the gun the problem?
Let's say I am out in the woods hunting with my son, teaching him what I was taught from my father about nature, life, gun safety, right from wrong and just being with my son, no distractions from the artificial world, we hear a rustle in the bushes, three quail flutter up in our faces, my son raises his shotgun and takes his first shot at a live target, bang, bang, one falls. His first reward from nature, just the beginning of a life long respect for what it means to be able to harvest nature and the responsibilities that go along with hunting. He then has to retrieve, clean and prepare his bounty. I can not describe the feeling one gets from such an experience if you have never had it. It would be like me trying to show you what a color was if you were blind from birth. It is a real sacred feeling.
Do you believe there is a gun problem?
On the other hand, let's say my son is sitting on the front porch, doing his homework, minding his own business and Bang, Bang. He is shot graveyard dead where he sat by a random drive by shooting. The shooter gets his sick rush from killing something (could it be the same rush a responsible hunter gets? I dunno just wondering)
Do you believe there is a gun problem?
Or how about:
When did you cease beating your wife?
Same difference in regards to your question.
How should it be solved.
I think the answer might be, the gun was not the problem but the person using it was the problem. One boy was taught gun safety and respect for it. The other was not. I read in another posting here how schools use to have gun clubs (I was lucky to live in that time period) and I bet the stats in that era and time on youth gun murders were quite low. In this PC world we shun guns and youth being involved with them. What if they were taught to respect them from a young age?
We cram Sex Ed and other touchy feely crap down their throats but heaven forbid we mention guns..........
Would you let your 16 year old get behind the wheel of a vehicle with no training, no idea of how to drive and no respect in regards to the dangers and responsibilities? I think not!!!
Some states are raising the ante for teenagers to get their licenses, which is a good thing I think.
In my opinion I think we should drop some of the PC crap now taught in schools and start educating kids again on the proper use and respect of guns.
"If America Was A Tree, The Left Would Root For The Termites...Greg Gutfeld."
Gun Control II
gmc wrote: posted by babyrider
I'm not decrying your laws I just get pissed off with americans constantly telling me I'm oppressed because I don't carry a gun (shades of monty python, help help I'm being oppressed) . As you say it works for us, we don't have your sort of problem.
Posted by anastrophe
source please
Ah statistics. The average man has less than two legs I would bet you are above average. The facts you quote are pieces of information in isolation they tell you little, you need to put them in context which you persistently don't want to. an increase from 1% to 2% may be a 50% increase but using it that way is selective reporting. Our press sensationalise the violence so that people miles away from these areas are convinced they are going to be shot.
Our situation is different you can't really compare the two in a sensible manner.
posted by der wulf
Depends why you have a gun, I do know gun owners who shoot grouse and the like, but if one of my neighbours has a hand gun unless he is an armed policeman in duty I want it taken off him because there is no good reasoin why he needs a weapon who sole purpose is to kill somebody. Why should you allow paranoid people access to weapons? I have met nutters that carry knives etc for self defence they usually have the kind iof attitude that proivokes conflict in the first place thereby fulfilling their sick fantasies.
Same with a knife, if you carry one for a night out it can only have one purpose and that is to stab someone with it. Scotland has always been fairly tough on knife crime, In Glasgow a spate of attacks by gangs with razors (the old open type) was curbed by the simple expedient of very long jail sentences, they are now beginning to use the same tactic again.
Your politicians seem to run scared of the pro gun lobby. In this country they run scared of public demand that the problem be addressed and the police deal with this sort of crime more effectively, not demands for the right to carry guns but sort it out.
What do you think america can do about it? You do have a problem just don't use spurious arguements based on the UK to try and pretend you don't.
The biggest gun problem the US has, is that it's the people who ARENT supposed to have them, get them!
At least in America, they have enough police to respond to a crime, whereas the police in the UK are pretty much a non-existent joke. And god help anyone if they actually NEED one here!
BTW....Guns are permitted here as well. Same procedure to obtain one as in the US. You apply for a permit. Get a background check, then depending on what they see, you either get it or you dont.
I'm not decrying your laws I just get pissed off with americans constantly telling me I'm oppressed because I don't carry a gun (shades of monty python, help help I'm being oppressed) . As you say it works for us, we don't have your sort of problem.
Posted by anastrophe
source please
Ah statistics. The average man has less than two legs I would bet you are above average. The facts you quote are pieces of information in isolation they tell you little, you need to put them in context which you persistently don't want to. an increase from 1% to 2% may be a 50% increase but using it that way is selective reporting. Our press sensationalise the violence so that people miles away from these areas are convinced they are going to be shot.
Our situation is different you can't really compare the two in a sensible manner.
posted by der wulf
Depends why you have a gun, I do know gun owners who shoot grouse and the like, but if one of my neighbours has a hand gun unless he is an armed policeman in duty I want it taken off him because there is no good reasoin why he needs a weapon who sole purpose is to kill somebody. Why should you allow paranoid people access to weapons? I have met nutters that carry knives etc for self defence they usually have the kind iof attitude that proivokes conflict in the first place thereby fulfilling their sick fantasies.
Same with a knife, if you carry one for a night out it can only have one purpose and that is to stab someone with it. Scotland has always been fairly tough on knife crime, In Glasgow a spate of attacks by gangs with razors (the old open type) was curbed by the simple expedient of very long jail sentences, they are now beginning to use the same tactic again.
Your politicians seem to run scared of the pro gun lobby. In this country they run scared of public demand that the problem be addressed and the police deal with this sort of crime more effectively, not demands for the right to carry guns but sort it out.
What do you think america can do about it? You do have a problem just don't use spurious arguements based on the UK to try and pretend you don't.
The biggest gun problem the US has, is that it's the people who ARENT supposed to have them, get them!
At least in America, they have enough police to respond to a crime, whereas the police in the UK are pretty much a non-existent joke. And god help anyone if they actually NEED one here!
BTW....Guns are permitted here as well. Same procedure to obtain one as in the US. You apply for a permit. Get a background check, then depending on what they see, you either get it or you dont.
~Quoth the Raven, Nevermore!~
Gun Control II
Bothwell wrote: I have a follow up question, has anyone on this forum actually ever used a gun to shoot another individual, if yes how do you feel about it ?
I was in the US navy for four years. Issued standard colt revolver. Never used it on a human being. My sons have. Both in Iraq. I'm very torn over the issue. It's extremely hard for me to discuss.
Would I have used it if I had to? Yes. And it would have haunted me for the rest of my life. Very likely it will them too.
I've been firing weapons since I was a kid. What you fail to understand, is america is still very much a wilderness. All you see on tv and in the movies are the big cities. You never see the rest. Take for instance, florida. What would you suggest they do when an alligator turns up in the front yard? Talk it to death?
Beat it over the head with a pan? Or how about Montana? When a bear decides it likes whats on the stove? They have critters out there in them woods that will carry you off and EAT you! As far as handguns are concerned, what would you have our police do? You dont bring a stick to a gun fight. Pardner.
I was in the US navy for four years. Issued standard colt revolver. Never used it on a human being. My sons have. Both in Iraq. I'm very torn over the issue. It's extremely hard for me to discuss.
Would I have used it if I had to? Yes. And it would have haunted me for the rest of my life. Very likely it will them too.
I've been firing weapons since I was a kid. What you fail to understand, is america is still very much a wilderness. All you see on tv and in the movies are the big cities. You never see the rest. Take for instance, florida. What would you suggest they do when an alligator turns up in the front yard? Talk it to death?
Beat it over the head with a pan? Or how about Montana? When a bear decides it likes whats on the stove? They have critters out there in them woods that will carry you off and EAT you! As far as handguns are concerned, what would you have our police do? You dont bring a stick to a gun fight. Pardner.
~Quoth the Raven, Nevermore!~
Gun Control II
Raven wrote:
BTW....Guns are permitted here as well. Same procedure to obtain one as in the US. You apply for a permit. Get a background check, then depending on what they see, you either get it or you dont.
Raven I hate to disagree but this is what a Brit has to do first:
Section 27 of the Firearms Act of 1968 (as amended by the 1997 Act) requires a chief officer of the Police Firearms Licensing Department to be satisfied that the applicant is "fit to be entrusted with a firearm." (Emphasis added)
As the applicant, you must provide:
Your home address for the last three years.
Your occupation and business address.
Information about previous convictions, including traffic violations.
Information about any history of Epilepsy.
Information about past treatment for drug use, depression or nervous disorders.
The name of your doctor, and permission for the police to search your medical records to obtain "factual details" about your medical history.
A list of the firearms you already own, including caliber, type, maker's name and serial number.
A list of the ammunition you already own, including caliber and quantity.
A list of the firearms you wish to purchase, stating the reason for wanting to purchase them and where you plan on shooting or hunting with them.
A list of the maximum amount of ammunition you wish to possess at any one time, by caliber.
A list of the maximum amount of ammunition you plan to purchase at any one time, by caliber.
An address where the guns will be stored, for possible future inspection.
Information about whether you have previously held a firearms certificate, or a shotgun certificate.
A letter signed by the secretary of your shooting club or each landowner where you plan to hunt attesting to the fact that you have permission to shoot at those locations.
Four passport size photos of yourself.
A fee of L56 (approximately $90).
As applicant, you must also designate two "referees" who will fill out a reference form regarding your character. This form will never be shown to you even though it weighs heavily in the final decision to approve or deny the application. The "referees" must:
Have known you for at least the last two years.
Not be a member of your family, a firearms dealer, a police officer or a police employee.
Be of "good character."
Sign the application form declaring that it has been answered truthfully.
Sign and date the back of one of your passport photos attesting that it is an accurate representation of you at that time.
Explain in what capacity they have known you.
Indicate if they are members of a shooting club, and if so their license number and role in the club.
Provide their "opinion as to the applicant's suitability to possess firearms."
Provide information on your personal history, including any history of emotional problems, mental or physical disabilities and explain how knowledge of the information was gained.
Explain any difficulties you have with members of your family which "may give cause for concern given that a firearm or ammunition may be available in the household."
Explain their knowledge of your experience with firearms.
Explain their knowledge of your attitude toward firearms.
Be subjected to a background check and allow personal information to be held on a police computer.
These measures have put Draconian regulations on the law-abiding gun owners of Great Britain and done little to reduce crime. On Jan. 16, 2000, the London Times published an article about the increase in gun crimes, and bemoaning the fact that there are an estimated three million unregistered guns in the nation. Besides confirming the inescapable fact that criminals don't bother to license their guns, the article stated that fatal shootings in London more than doubled between 1998 and 1999, and overall armed crime rose 10%.
So, if licensing honest gun owners doesn't reduce crime--and how could it?--what is the real purpose? For British gun owners, the answer came too late, when the government that licensed them finally decreed that they were not "fit to be entrusted" to own handguns for any reason.
BTW....Guns are permitted here as well. Same procedure to obtain one as in the US. You apply for a permit. Get a background check, then depending on what they see, you either get it or you dont.
Raven I hate to disagree but this is what a Brit has to do first:
Section 27 of the Firearms Act of 1968 (as amended by the 1997 Act) requires a chief officer of the Police Firearms Licensing Department to be satisfied that the applicant is "fit to be entrusted with a firearm." (Emphasis added)
As the applicant, you must provide:
Your home address for the last three years.
Your occupation and business address.
Information about previous convictions, including traffic violations.
Information about any history of Epilepsy.
Information about past treatment for drug use, depression or nervous disorders.
The name of your doctor, and permission for the police to search your medical records to obtain "factual details" about your medical history.
A list of the firearms you already own, including caliber, type, maker's name and serial number.
A list of the ammunition you already own, including caliber and quantity.
A list of the firearms you wish to purchase, stating the reason for wanting to purchase them and where you plan on shooting or hunting with them.
A list of the maximum amount of ammunition you wish to possess at any one time, by caliber.
A list of the maximum amount of ammunition you plan to purchase at any one time, by caliber.
An address where the guns will be stored, for possible future inspection.
Information about whether you have previously held a firearms certificate, or a shotgun certificate.
A letter signed by the secretary of your shooting club or each landowner where you plan to hunt attesting to the fact that you have permission to shoot at those locations.
Four passport size photos of yourself.
A fee of L56 (approximately $90).
As applicant, you must also designate two "referees" who will fill out a reference form regarding your character. This form will never be shown to you even though it weighs heavily in the final decision to approve or deny the application. The "referees" must:
Have known you for at least the last two years.
Not be a member of your family, a firearms dealer, a police officer or a police employee.
Be of "good character."
Sign the application form declaring that it has been answered truthfully.
Sign and date the back of one of your passport photos attesting that it is an accurate representation of you at that time.
Explain in what capacity they have known you.
Indicate if they are members of a shooting club, and if so their license number and role in the club.
Provide their "opinion as to the applicant's suitability to possess firearms."
Provide information on your personal history, including any history of emotional problems, mental or physical disabilities and explain how knowledge of the information was gained.
Explain any difficulties you have with members of your family which "may give cause for concern given that a firearm or ammunition may be available in the household."
Explain their knowledge of your experience with firearms.
Explain their knowledge of your attitude toward firearms.
Be subjected to a background check and allow personal information to be held on a police computer.
These measures have put Draconian regulations on the law-abiding gun owners of Great Britain and done little to reduce crime. On Jan. 16, 2000, the London Times published an article about the increase in gun crimes, and bemoaning the fact that there are an estimated three million unregistered guns in the nation. Besides confirming the inescapable fact that criminals don't bother to license their guns, the article stated that fatal shootings in London more than doubled between 1998 and 1999, and overall armed crime rose 10%.
So, if licensing honest gun owners doesn't reduce crime--and how could it?--what is the real purpose? For British gun owners, the answer came too late, when the government that licensed them finally decreed that they were not "fit to be entrusted" to own handguns for any reason.
"If America Was A Tree, The Left Would Root For The Termites...Greg Gutfeld."
Gun Control II
Sounds like the same procedure I went through to get my visa! :wah:
Hunting, should be the only reason to have weapons. And self-defence against big knarley wild animals.
Gun permits in the US arent much easier to get, y'know.
The US is TRYING to get a handle on the situation, without impending the constitutional right to bear arms.
But like I said before, it's not the law-abiding folks commiting the crimes. We have to address the issue of containing the ability of criminals to obtain them.
Hunting, should be the only reason to have weapons. And self-defence against big knarley wild animals.
Gun permits in the US arent much easier to get, y'know.
The US is TRYING to get a handle on the situation, without impending the constitutional right to bear arms.
But like I said before, it's not the law-abiding folks commiting the crimes. We have to address the issue of containing the ability of criminals to obtain them.
~Quoth the Raven, Nevermore!~
Gun Control II
Brit Police - From my past wild youth I can tell you that i would rather be arrested by the police here than in at least 6 other countries I could name.
The British police do act in an more restrained way and like to appear as a benign "Presence" on the street. I would have to say on the few occasions that I have needed them they have been prompt and efficient, the real problem is the paperwork that takes officers off the street for hours on end.
The British police do act in an more restrained way and like to appear as a benign "Presence" on the street. I would have to say on the few occasions that I have needed them they have been prompt and efficient, the real problem is the paperwork that takes officers off the street for hours on end.
"I have done my duty. I thank God for it!"
Gun Control II
Without a doubt! I would rather be 'detained' to help with an 'inquiry' here, rather than in the states! My only experience with the police here, was when we thought our car had been stolen. They didnt do anything but send us a questionaire to fill out about the 'service' we received. Which was nothing. WE found the car ourselves.
The police here are more like the security guards in the states. But dont get me wrong, I wouldnt want to be on the business end of their whompy sticks! :yh_bigsmi
The police here are more like the security guards in the states. But dont get me wrong, I wouldnt want to be on the business end of their whompy sticks! :yh_bigsmi
~Quoth the Raven, Nevermore!~
Gun Control II
Raven wrote: Sounds like the same procedure I went through to get my visa! :wah:
Hunting, should be the only reason to have weapons. And self-defence against big knarley wild animals.
Gun permits in the US arent much easier to get, y'know.
The US is TRYING to get a handle on the situation, without impending the constitutional right to bear arms.
But like I said before, it's not the law-abiding folks commiting the crimes. We have to address the issue of containing the ability of criminals to obtain them.
That was not a permit to carry a concealed weapon I posted, that was JUST to purchase a gun
Most states have a waiting period, proof of identfication and a handgun safety course requirement (this course applies only to hangun).
Not all that garbage Great Britain requires.
This is from the California state website:
http://ag.ca.gov/firearms/pubfaqs.htm#7
What is the process for purchasing a firearm in California?
All firearms purchases and transfers, including private party transactions and sales at gun shows, must be made through a licensed dealer under the Dealer Record of Sale (DROS) process.
Registration (Record of Sale)
An official record of the transfer of a gun from one owner to another. There is no formal gun registration required under federal law, and the Brady Act prohibits use of background check records for the purpose of establishing a registration scheme.
California imposes a 10-day waiting period before a firearm can be released to a buyer or transferee. A person must be at least 18 years of age to purchase a rifle or shotgun. To buy a handgun, a person must be at least 21 years of age, and either 1) possess an HSC plus successfully complete a safety demonstration with the handgun being purchased or 2) qualify for an HSC exemption.
As part of the DROS process, the buyer must present "clear evidence of identity and age" which is defined as a valid, non-expired California Driver's License or Identification Card issued by the Department of Motor Vehicles. A military identification accompanied by permanent duty station orders indicating a posting in California is also acceptable.
If the buyer is not a U.S. Citizen, then he or she is required to demonstrate that he or she is legally within the United States by providing to the firearms dealer with documentation that contains his/her Alien Registration Number or I-94 Number.
Purchasers of handguns are also required to provide proof of California residency, such as a utility bill, residential lease, property deed, or government-issued identification (other than a drivers license or other DMV-issued identification).
(PC Section 12071)
Hunting, should be the only reason to have weapons. And self-defence against big knarley wild animals.
Gun permits in the US arent much easier to get, y'know.
The US is TRYING to get a handle on the situation, without impending the constitutional right to bear arms.
But like I said before, it's not the law-abiding folks commiting the crimes. We have to address the issue of containing the ability of criminals to obtain them.
That was not a permit to carry a concealed weapon I posted, that was JUST to purchase a gun
Most states have a waiting period, proof of identfication and a handgun safety course requirement (this course applies only to hangun).
Not all that garbage Great Britain requires.
This is from the California state website:
http://ag.ca.gov/firearms/pubfaqs.htm#7
What is the process for purchasing a firearm in California?
All firearms purchases and transfers, including private party transactions and sales at gun shows, must be made through a licensed dealer under the Dealer Record of Sale (DROS) process.
Registration (Record of Sale)
An official record of the transfer of a gun from one owner to another. There is no formal gun registration required under federal law, and the Brady Act prohibits use of background check records for the purpose of establishing a registration scheme.
California imposes a 10-day waiting period before a firearm can be released to a buyer or transferee. A person must be at least 18 years of age to purchase a rifle or shotgun. To buy a handgun, a person must be at least 21 years of age, and either 1) possess an HSC plus successfully complete a safety demonstration with the handgun being purchased or 2) qualify for an HSC exemption.
As part of the DROS process, the buyer must present "clear evidence of identity and age" which is defined as a valid, non-expired California Driver's License or Identification Card issued by the Department of Motor Vehicles. A military identification accompanied by permanent duty station orders indicating a posting in California is also acceptable.
If the buyer is not a U.S. Citizen, then he or she is required to demonstrate that he or she is legally within the United States by providing to the firearms dealer with documentation that contains his/her Alien Registration Number or I-94 Number.
Purchasers of handguns are also required to provide proof of California residency, such as a utility bill, residential lease, property deed, or government-issued identification (other than a drivers license or other DMV-issued identification).
(PC Section 12071)
"If America Was A Tree, The Left Would Root For The Termites...Greg Gutfeld."
Gun Control II
Raven wrote: Without a doubt! I would rather be 'detained' to help with an 'inquiry' here, rather than in the states! My only experience with the police here, was when we thought our car had been stolen. They didnt do anything but send us a questionaire to fill out about the 'service' we received. Which was nothing. WE found the car ourselves.
The police here are more like the security guards in the states. But dont get me wrong, I wouldnt want to be on the business end of their whompy sticks! :yh_bigsmi
Oh sticks?
They have more than just sticks over there now. Some of the Bobbies are paking heat now.........
Got tired of kids on bikes shooting at them
The police here are more like the security guards in the states. But dont get me wrong, I wouldnt want to be on the business end of their whompy sticks! :yh_bigsmi
Oh sticks?
They have more than just sticks over there now. Some of the Bobbies are paking heat now.........
Got tired of kids on bikes shooting at them
"If America Was A Tree, The Left Would Root For The Termites...Greg Gutfeld."
-
anastrophe
- Posts: 3135
- Joined: Tue Jul 27, 2004 12:00 pm
Gun Control II
gmc wrote: source please
Ah statistics. The average man has less than two legs I would bet you are above average. The facts you quote are pieces of information in isolation they tell you little, you need to put them in context which you persistently don't want to. an increase from 1% to 2% may be a 50% increase but using it that way is selective reporting. Our press sensationalise the violence so that people miles away from these areas are convinced they are going to be shot.
Our situation is different you can't really compare the two in a sensible manner.
you ask for a source for a statistic, then go on to repeat for about the eighteenth time your same ridiculous 'counter argument' about the average man having two legs. So which is it? do any statistics have any validity (such as the one i quoted, which you're welcome to visit google to find the details, why take my word for it) or are all statistics invalid and meaningless?
*you* love to ignore the fact that violent crime rates in great britain have increased at a faster after your total gun ban than before. i've never used the spurious deception you toss out, that an increase from 1% to 2% is a 50% increase - so stop putting words in my mouth and attacking me for them.
i'm not interested in comparing the UK to here. how about *you* stop comparing your perfect, violence-free little island with america? we're all nutters according to you, gun obsessed, gun crazy, living in fear, paranoid. oh really? and you've lived in the US how many years? stop projecting your fantasies about the US on us, and we'll stop decrying the futility of your gun laws.
Ah statistics. The average man has less than two legs I would bet you are above average. The facts you quote are pieces of information in isolation they tell you little, you need to put them in context which you persistently don't want to. an increase from 1% to 2% may be a 50% increase but using it that way is selective reporting. Our press sensationalise the violence so that people miles away from these areas are convinced they are going to be shot.
Our situation is different you can't really compare the two in a sensible manner.
you ask for a source for a statistic, then go on to repeat for about the eighteenth time your same ridiculous 'counter argument' about the average man having two legs. So which is it? do any statistics have any validity (such as the one i quoted, which you're welcome to visit google to find the details, why take my word for it) or are all statistics invalid and meaningless?
*you* love to ignore the fact that violent crime rates in great britain have increased at a faster after your total gun ban than before. i've never used the spurious deception you toss out, that an increase from 1% to 2% is a 50% increase - so stop putting words in my mouth and attacking me for them.
i'm not interested in comparing the UK to here. how about *you* stop comparing your perfect, violence-free little island with america? we're all nutters according to you, gun obsessed, gun crazy, living in fear, paranoid. oh really? and you've lived in the US how many years? stop projecting your fantasies about the US on us, and we'll stop decrying the futility of your gun laws.
[FONT=Franklin Gothic Medium][/FONT]
Gun Control II
i find this a worthwhile point, perhaps belongs in another thread, but it is a valid concern. Orange County Deputies Warn About Toy Guns
POSTED: 5:36 am EST March 22, 2005
UPDATED: 9:28 am EST March 22, 2005
Authorities in Orange County, Fla., are advising parents to be careful about what toy guns they allow their children to play with, because the fake guns can confuse officers and endanger kids.
Orange county deputies are getting more 911 calls about juveniles and guns, but when they respond they find the guns are actually toys.
New models are being made as exact replicas and some are even equipped with a magazine holder.
And, when deputies respond to a call of a person with a gun, they are going to act as if they're in a potentially dangerous situation until they feel the situation is safe, according to the report.
"We are going to respond believing they are real firearms, until we find out otherwise," Orange County sheriff's spokesman Paul Hopkins said. "It is not a badge of honor to shoot and kill someone."
Sheriff's deputies are also advising parents to only let their children play with the guns indoors to avoid any possible confusion.
POSTED: 5:36 am EST March 22, 2005
UPDATED: 9:28 am EST March 22, 2005
Authorities in Orange County, Fla., are advising parents to be careful about what toy guns they allow their children to play with, because the fake guns can confuse officers and endanger kids.
Orange county deputies are getting more 911 calls about juveniles and guns, but when they respond they find the guns are actually toys.
New models are being made as exact replicas and some are even equipped with a magazine holder.
And, when deputies respond to a call of a person with a gun, they are going to act as if they're in a potentially dangerous situation until they feel the situation is safe, according to the report.
"We are going to respond believing they are real firearms, until we find out otherwise," Orange County sheriff's spokesman Paul Hopkins said. "It is not a badge of honor to shoot and kill someone."
Sheriff's deputies are also advising parents to only let their children play with the guns indoors to avoid any possible confusion.
-
anastrophe
- Posts: 3135
- Joined: Tue Jul 27, 2004 12:00 pm
Gun Control II
lady cop wrote: i find this a worthwhile point, perhaps belongs in another thread, but it is a valid concern. Orange County Deputies Warn About Toy Guns
POSTED: 5:36 am EST March 22, 2005
UPDATED: 9:28 am EST March 22, 2005
Authorities in Orange County, Fla., are advising parents to be careful about what toy guns they allow their children to play with, because the fake guns can confuse officers and endanger kids.
Orange county deputies are getting more 911 calls about juveniles and guns, but when they respond they find the guns are actually toys.
New models are being made as exact replicas and some are even equipped with a magazine holder.
And, when deputies respond to a call of a person with a gun, they are going to act as if they're in a potentially dangerous situation until they feel the situation is safe, according to the report.
"We are going to respond believing they are real firearms, until we find out otherwise," Orange County sheriff's spokesman Paul Hopkins said. "It is not a badge of honor to shoot and kill someone."
Sheriff's deputies are also advising parents to only let their children play with the guns indoors to avoid any possible confusion.
i thought it was a matter of law that toy guns have fluorescent orange end-caps, to distinguish them from real guns. if these toy guns don't have the orange tip, that would tell me they've been modified after-market. in which case, well, who is to blame if a cop shoots someone weilding such a gun, toy or not?
POSTED: 5:36 am EST March 22, 2005
UPDATED: 9:28 am EST March 22, 2005
Authorities in Orange County, Fla., are advising parents to be careful about what toy guns they allow their children to play with, because the fake guns can confuse officers and endanger kids.
Orange county deputies are getting more 911 calls about juveniles and guns, but when they respond they find the guns are actually toys.
New models are being made as exact replicas and some are even equipped with a magazine holder.
And, when deputies respond to a call of a person with a gun, they are going to act as if they're in a potentially dangerous situation until they feel the situation is safe, according to the report.
"We are going to respond believing they are real firearms, until we find out otherwise," Orange County sheriff's spokesman Paul Hopkins said. "It is not a badge of honor to shoot and kill someone."
Sheriff's deputies are also advising parents to only let their children play with the guns indoors to avoid any possible confusion.
i thought it was a matter of law that toy guns have fluorescent orange end-caps, to distinguish them from real guns. if these toy guns don't have the orange tip, that would tell me they've been modified after-market. in which case, well, who is to blame if a cop shoots someone weilding such a gun, toy or not?
[FONT=Franklin Gothic Medium][/FONT]
-
anastrophe
- Posts: 3135
- Joined: Tue Jul 27, 2004 12:00 pm
Gun Control II
anastrophe wrote: i thought it was a matter of law that toy guns have fluorescent orange end-caps, to distinguish them from real guns. if these toy guns don't have the orange tip, that would tell me they've been modified after-market. in which case, well, who is to blame if a cop shoots someone weilding such a gun, toy or not?
just looked it up - federal law requires an orange end cap. however, on some toy guns they can easily be removed. i suppose it would be wise if it were a permanently molded-in part of the toy gun. but even then, you can't stop someone from using a black marker or spray paint to alter the color.
foolishness knows no bounds.
just looked it up - federal law requires an orange end cap. however, on some toy guns they can easily be removed. i suppose it would be wise if it were a permanently molded-in part of the toy gun. but even then, you can't stop someone from using a black marker or spray paint to alter the color.
foolishness knows no bounds.
[FONT=Franklin Gothic Medium][/FONT]
Gun Control II
Bothwell wrote: I have a follow up question, has anyone on this forum actually ever used a gun to shoot another individual, if yes how do you feel about it ?i have not had to shoot anyone yet, but i have pulled my weapon on people many times, and been fully prepared to do so. if we have to shoot someone we are required to be debriefed and off-duty a couple days. i would have no compunction about it if it was in the defense of another's life. or my own.
Gun Control II
anastrophe wrote:
foolishness knows no bounds. evidently, some jerkwad is manufacturing the damn things. someone's going to die.
foolishness knows no bounds. evidently, some jerkwad is manufacturing the damn things. someone's going to die.