Firearm Enthusiast Thread

[Rugeley Villa]

49 minutes ago, Jarpie said:

Mind if I ask where you guys live in? It's easy to speak when you don't know the realities of, for example remote places where people need firearms for self-defense from wilderness, for example.

What about hunting? They mostly do it for pass-time. Hunters keeps the population of some species in check, such as wolves or bears who otherwise could pose danger to the people, or would cause a lot of damage and lost earnings for a lot of people in northern Finland where people gets their living by reindeer herding. Another great example are invasious species such as minks or wild boards in southern Finland where they are not native in. They are not paid, and the state would have to spend fortune to pay people to hunt those species.

AFAIK same goes for many places in the US, where some species would pose a threat for people unless their numbers are kept in check. Also Skeet shooting is popular olympic sport, and many people starts it as a hobby and not a profession, same goes for biathlon which is huge sport in Germany, France, Norway etc.

In Finland reservist volunteering and training is considered as a very valuable pass-time by our defense force, and the volunteers trains on their own time with their own guns, partly by target shooting with semi-auto firearms. I know it probably sounds silly to your ears, but Finland has border with Russia, one of the major powers with whom we had war(s) during WW2 and more or less contentious time during Cold War. They are stable for now, but you never know what future brings.

I understand the hunting thing, but what I was getting at was any joe bloggs in America being able to purchase one. Thing with keeping certain animals in check is that we have probably spread into their territory more than they have with us. It's like when a shark kills someone and then they go and hunt the shark, duh! The town I live in borders a forest so I know a few people who like to go shooting.

Edited October 23, 2016 by Rugeley Villa

[NurembergVillan]

Most things can be used to kill.

Few things serve no purpose other than killing.

[Dom_Wren]

jpg images

The collection as it stands, want to add a .308 S and W M and P 10, well because it goes boom rather loudly.

Edited October 24, 2016 by Dom_Wren

[Davkaus]

How many do you need? Are you forming your own militia?  

[Dom_Wren]

7 minutes ago, Davkaus said:

How many do you need? Are you forming your own militia?  

I never thought id own this many to be fair mate!

I am missing the following, that id like to add before i reign myself in....

 

Smith and Wesson 500

 

Smith and Wesson M and P 10 .308

 

 

Only problem is the handgun is about $1000-1200 and the .308 $1400-1600 and that stock, add another $300-500 in basic necessities accessories

[Davkaus]

See, people say that the self defence argument is nonsense, but there's no **** way I'm breaking in to that house.

I can't say I'd ever want one in my house, but I definitely want a go if I'm ever in the US. Do they let tourists in the shooting ranges or do you have to be a US citizen?

Edited October 24, 2016 by Davkaus

[Xela]

If they don't let you use then in the US, then just go to SE Asia. I used a Glock 9mm, Beretta handgun and an AK47 while in Thailand and Vietnam

[limpid]

@Davkaus you don't need to go to the states. My local range: http://www.stourportonsevernpistolnrifleclub.co.uk/

Quote

Welcome to the Homepage of Stourport -On-Severn Pistol & Rifle Club

 

[Dom_Wren]

4 hours ago, Davkaus said:

See, people say that the self defence argument is nonsense, but there's no **** way I'm breaking in to that house.

I can't say I'd ever want one in my house, but I definitely want a go if I'm ever in the US. Do they let tourists in the shooting ranges or do you have to be a US citizen?

You could go here no problems with a valid picture ID, Ive brought family and friends to my local range, the outdoor range i go to is public so anyone can go no problem at all!

[Jarpie]

On 23.10.2016 at 20:03, Chindie said:

The car comparison is a complete red herring.

How many of those motor vehicle deaths result from someone intentionally running someone down? Compare that to the number resulting from someone intentionally firing a gun at someone.

It's also fairly difficult to make an argument that a gun is as useful as a car. cars are absolutely dangerous, it's why you require training and a licence to use one and the roads are heavily legislated. But you do a lot with a car and most deaths result from accidents or negligence. The world can't exist as it does now without fast reliable modes of transportation. Guns? It's sole purpose is to injure and kill. That can have its uses as a civilian. You might hunt. But today hunting for the developed world is a pastime, very few people need to hunt. You might live somewhere with firearms and feel the need to defend yourself. Chances are you'll never need to do that and if you do is unlikely you'll ever do so effectively. So yes, cars are dangerous. But they have a multitude of uses. Guns? Nah. A small number of civilian professions may have then as a tool occasionally needed, but the general populous doesn't need one. Cars? Most people might need one.

It's a red herring.

The same can be said of knives and the like. Whilst a knife can stab someone, you use them every day at home, and some physical jobs will use them day to day. It's also a common argument, but with merit, that stabbing someone is a much more difficult action than pulling a trigger. You have to be close, if the victim is aware potentially you're in a physical tussle, and the actual act of stabbing someone is mentally more challenging for most people than pulling a trigger where you are removed from the action (of course you can't account for the disturbed but that is true for anything).

The issue also arises that gun deaths aren't done solely by 'idiots and lunatics'. They're done by normal people who are angry, people who make an honest mistake, and people who are tired, depressed, upset... If you have the mother of all fights with your wife and you know there's a gun in the drawer for 'when a burglar turns up' its very easy to reach over and do something you'll never take back. If you come home and find your partner in bed with your best mate that pistol in the garage for target practice with the lads is suddenly a great tool for taking out your rage. If you wake up on the middle of the night to noises downstairs and the fear kicks in the revolver under the bed is the first thing you grab and your sleep addled brain you fire at the burglar in the kitchen only to find with the lights on its your son having a snack. If life starts to turn on you and everything is going wrong and you feel like you can't keep on, that shotgun is the solution to all your pain. Or maybe it's the device to show the world just how pissed off you are. We live in a stressful world, people snap. It's easier to attack en masse with a gun. Finland might be different, Canada famously has more guns per capita than the US but less gun violence, so environment matters, but that danger is always there and any gun violence that could be prevented by them being gone is a good thing.

The general population doesn't need guns. There is a dishonesty to the arguments that they do imo. People might enjoy having them, their hobby might involve it, but someone's hobby being off the table is a small price to pay to remove that danger from homes. I live in the UK, we have some gun violence from illegal firearms and occasional incidents from legally owned ones (given how strict our laws are on owning any its exceptionally low), but I've never felt the need to own one, and I've never felt in danger of needing one. I find it absolutely astonishing that the likes of the US allow civilians to own a version of a gun most associated with jungle combat.

To be jackass for a bit, does it really matter how people causes harm or kills other people, if you want to prevent deaths? If you want to protect people from stupidity or crazy people, why aren't you ready to sacrifice a bit of your convinience by banning most people from driving cars or motorbikes, and instead force them to use public transport? Most bigger cities have great public transport system, so it would be only minor inconvinience for most people to save potentially hundreds if not thousands of people from harm.

One could easily argue, do people really need fast sport cars? Why not ban them? People can drive with them really really fast and cause crashes. Everyone should be happy with the car which goes just 80km per hour, who needs to drive 140 kmh? but someone's hobby being off the table is small price to pay to remove that danger from the roads. Also do you think people who gets hit by a car care if the driver did it intentionally, due drunk driving or just being reckless or careless?

I just don't think gun control works. Last spring there was a case where customer with concealed carry permit saved at least couple lives in the USA by shooting axe-wielding lunatic, and I bet those couple people are happy that there was someone to save them, and this is not solitary case. If someone comes at me with somekind of weapon, be it knife, axe or firearm, you can bet your ass I'd like to be armed so I can defend myself but they've made it impossible in Finland. Even if it's just a very very remote possibility, but you never know what might happen, also I'll side with the individual (rights) in vast majority cases as long as I think they're reasonable - and yes, me (and anyone) being able to be self-reliant and able to protect themselves is reasonable for me.

When it comes to hunting, there are 300,000 people in Finland who has hunting license, and vast majority of them are probably at least semi-active, as I probably mentioned, for example, they do a lot of important work to keep number of wolves, lynxes, bears etc in check in northern Finland so the herds of the reindeer herders are kept safe from the predators. If the predators would be free to spread and grow into too large numbers, it could easily ruin the livelihood of the people who relies on reindeers, which is a very traditional livelyhood in there and with the sami people. I imagine it's similar with the sheep herders in UK.

When it comes to fully automatic weapons like machine guns, assault rifles, submachine guns etc, I think firearm enthusiast should be able to own them, but due nature of those weapons, only after having passed somekind of training and test that they know how to operate them, and storing them properly, such as very secure safes etc.

I don't think we'll ever agree on this, and I don't think any of us will change our opinions so it's probably moot trying to even argue this.

 

On 23.10.2016 at 19:57, Michelsen said:

Gun control isn't, and has never been, about banning all guns for everyone. Just make sure machine guns are kept away from people who have, y'know, no practical need or reason to kill tens of people in a matter of seconds, and perhaps generally make guns less accessible to the general public than cans of Dr Pepper. 

Yeah, that's why some people in the EU are trying to ban law-abiding citizens owning semi-automatic weapons, not machine guns or fully automatic weapons, but semi-auto weapons, such as rifles or shotguns.

Edited October 24, 2016 by Jarpie

[Chindie]

59 minutes ago, Jarpie said:

To be jackass for a bit, does it really matter how people causes harm or kills other people, if you want to prevent deaths? If you want to protect people from stupidity or crazy people, why aren't you ready to sacrifice a bit of your convinience by banning most people from driving cars or motorbikes, and instead force them to use public transport? Most bigger cities have great public transport system, so it would be only minor inconvinience for most people to save potentially hundreds if not thousands of people from harm.

One could easily argue, do people really need fast sport cars? Why not ban them? People can drive with them really really fast and cause crashes. Everyone should be happy with the car which goes just 80km per hour, who needs to drive 140 kmh? but someone's hobby being off the table is small price to pay to remove that danger from the roads. Also do you think people who gets hit by a car care if the driver did it intentionally, due drunk driving or just being reckless or careless?

I just don't think gun control works. Last spring there was a case where customer with concealed carry permit saved at least couple lives in the USA by shooting axe-wielding lunatic, and I bet those couple people are happy that there was someone to save them, and this is not solitary case. If someone comes at me with somekind of weapon, be it knife, axe or firearm, you can bet your ass I'd like to be armed so I can defend myself but they've made it impossible in Finland. Even if it's just a very very remote possibility, but you never know what might happen, also I'll side with the individual (rights) in vast majority cases as long as I think they're reasonable - and yes, me (and anyone) being able to be self-reliant and able to protect themselves is reasonable for me.

When it comes to hunting, there are 300,000 people in Finland who has hunting license, and vast majority of them are probably at least semi-active, as I probably mentioned, for example, they do a lot of important work to keep number of wolves, lynxes, bears etc in check in northern Finland so the herds of the reindeer herders are kept safe from the predators. If the predators would be free to spread and grow into too large numbers, it could easily ruin the livelihood of the people who relies on reindeers, which is a very traditional livelyhood in there and with the sami people. I imagine it's similar with the sheep herders in UK.

When it comes to fully automatic weapons like machine guns, assault rifles, submachine guns etc, I think firearm enthusiast should be able to own them, but due nature of those weapons, only after having passed somekind of training and test that they know how to operate them, and storing them properly, such as very secure safes etc.

I don't think we'll ever agree on this, and I don't think any of us will change our opinions so it's probably moot trying to even argue this.

The transport is still a red herring. I'd be repeating myself to go into it further. Cars, fast cars, motorbikes... They aren't comparable to guns.

The example of the concealed carry hero is near meaningless. The stats show that is an extreme outlier. Most incidents featuring a civilian carrying a firearm makes no difference, the incidents only coming into control or a close when professionals arrive. Doesn't mean it doesn't happen but it's so rare as to be of little use in an argument.

Hunting predators and nuisance species. Sounds like something a professional could be paid to do.

Exceptionally few people have any justifiable personal use for a gun. Absolutely nobody has any personal use for a fully automatic weapon, ever. It's absolutely mad to think otherwise, libertarian outlook or not. 

I daresay we never will agree. I'm certainly never changing my position because I'm yet to see anything like a decent argument for having a gun personally that extends beyond 'I really like owning one' thinly veiled in faux utilitarian arguments.

[villakram]

2 hours ago, Jarpie said:

To be jackass for a bit, does it really matter how people causes harm or kills other people, if you want to prevent deaths? If you want to protect people from stupidity or crazy people, why aren't you ready to sacrifice a bit of your convinience by banning most people from driving cars or motorbikes, and instead force them to use public transport? Most bigger cities have great public transport system, so it would be only minor inconvinience for most people to save potentially hundreds if not thousands of people from harm.

One could easily argue, do people really need fast sport cars? Why not ban them? People can drive with them really really fast and cause crashes. Everyone should be happy with the car which goes just 80km per hour, who needs to drive 140 kmh? but someone's hobby being off the table is small price to pay to remove that danger from the roads. Also do you think people who gets hit by a car care if the driver did it intentionally, due drunk driving or just being reckless or careless?

I just don't think gun control works. Last spring there was a case where customer with concealed carry permit saved at least couple lives in the USA by shooting axe-wielding lunatic, and I bet those couple people are happy that there was someone to save them, and this is not solitary case. If someone comes at me with somekind of weapon, be it knife, axe or firearm, you can bet your ass I'd like to be armed so I can defend myself but they've made it impossible in Finland. Even if it's just a very very remote possibility, but you never know what might happen, also I'll side with the individual (rights) in vast majority cases as long as I think they're reasonable - and yes, me (and anyone) being able to be self-reliant and able to protect themselves is reasonable for me.

When it comes to hunting, there are 300,000 people in Finland who has hunting license, and vast majority of them are probably at least semi-active, as I probably mentioned, for example, they do a lot of important work to keep number of wolves, lynxes, bears etc in check in northern Finland so the herds of the reindeer herders are kept safe from the predators. If the predators would be free to spread and grow into too large numbers, it could easily ruin the livelihood of the people who relies on reindeers, which is a very traditional livelyhood in there and with the sami people. I imagine it's similar with the sheep herders in UK.

When it comes to fully automatic weapons like machine guns, assault rifles, submachine guns etc, I think firearm enthusiast should be able to own them, but due nature of those weapons, only after having passed somekind of training and test that they know how to operate them, and storing them properly, such as very secure safes etc.

I don't think we'll ever agree on this, and I don't think any of us will change our opinions so it's probably moot trying to even argue this.

 

Yeah, that's why some people in the EU are trying to ban law-abiding citizens owning semi-automatic weapons, not machine guns or fully automatic weapons, but semi-auto weapons, such as rifles or shotguns.

There's a reason why people are referred to as gun nuts. I'm sorry @Jarpie, but some of your arguments are hilariously NRA 101-esque strawman nonsense, and more importantly to say outright that you don't think you could ever change your opinion... sigh, that's really sad to read.

For example, in relation to the bolded statements:

Should a chemist be allowed to have access to smallpox or anthrax for their amusement?

Should a physicist be allowed to have Plutonium in his basement in order to blow off some steam.

See how easy this silly little game is.

Edited October 24, 2016 by villakram
edit: all the silly whitespace

[Dom_Wren]

Carried for the first time in a while at dinner in Charlotte the other night. After everything that had happened, I just wanted to see the vibe of the place.also parking in a dark parking garage and being me and the missus, just wanted to make sure.

[Davkaus]

It's a bit tiresome constantly going on about the rights and wrongs of American gun policy, tbh.

19 hours ago, limpid said:

@Davkaus you don't need to go to the states. My local range: http://www.stourportonsevernpistolnrifleclub.co.uk/

 

 

Heh, I had no idea we had such places in the UK, and there's one ten minutes down the road from me.

It's either rifles/handguns on a range, or a big **** off shotgun and some clay pigeons, I might have to try both 

Edited October 25, 2016 by Davkaus

[Jarpie]

Get ready to get triggered, haters!

Finally got my rifle from the repairs, and took it to the range to adjust the scope. Will get to hunt within couple of weeks or so when my parents have settled down on their new place.

Tikka T3 Forest, .222rem, for hunting small game and birds.

 

[Chindie]

5 hours ago, Jarpie said:

Get ready to get triggered, haters!

Very mature.

I watched the Channel 4 doc the other night, the Gun Shop.

That showed a different world. There was a complete disconnect between the idea that everyone's running around with guns legally and therefore there's more gun and gun related violence. It opened with a woman looking to buy a gun because a man with a legally owned gun flashed it at her in a road rage incident. There was a feeling everyone is a threat, the world is out to destroy them one way or another. They're introducing this world view to children. 

I think these people were all reasonable, generally, they didn't really show any proper gun nuts in the hour really, and I can't really criticise the guys running the shop, at the end of the day they are salesmen who are going to tap into the feeling of their customers to make a sale, and they seemed fairly responsible in offering training and classes. But they're blind to the idea that normal people take guns they legally own and kill, not in defence, but anger. Their answer is more guns for the good guys. Ignoring that that guy was a good guy until he wasn't. Or the answer is the flail at absolutes - if you give me a world with no guns i won't have one, until then criminals have one so I need one.

Utter madness.

[Dom_Wren]

Finally got out to range due to spring break, shot the longest i ever had with my AR-15, 160 yards

Also shot my shotgun, .357 and .45 

Going out to a different range tomorrow am with a buddy who was a marine so see what he can teach me.

[maqroll]

I believe in gun ownership with massive restrictions in place, including basic competency exams every five years. I had a permit for a while, but never bought a firearm. Maine is much more gun friendly than Massachusetts, so if I wanted to, I could go to the gun store tomorrow and load up, no permit required. I've decided not to buy a firearm until I think things have gotten too bad here. When things go south and the National Guard order mandatory curfews, I'm stocking up.

[maqroll]

1 hour ago, Dom_Wren said:

Finally got out to range due to spring break, shot the longest i ever had with my AR-15, 160 yards

Also shot my shotgun, .357 and .45 

Going out to a different range tomorrow am with a buddy who was a marine so see what he can teach me.

You shot him in the back, you bloodthirsty coward

[NurembergVillan]

On 05/11/2016 at 08:29, Jarpie said:

Get ready to get triggered, haters!

Finally got my rifle from the repairs, and took it to the range to adjust the scope. Will get to hunt within couple of weeks or so when my parents have settled down on their new place.

Tikka T3 Forest, .222rem, for hunting small game and birds.