Thread: Whats your opinion on automatic weapons?

Originally Posted by straightrazorheaven

The 5x increase is per 100,000, so it is a crime RATE not absolute crime. It accounts for differing population.

I figured the study had probably taken that in to account but I will admit to not having read it due to watching Netflix while I'm poking about tapatalk.

Any idea on how many firearms are privately owned in the UK?

Originally Posted by parkerskouson

3 kilos is bare feet! Your son has some determination!!!!

Yeah, he has. He wants to beat all my PBs (Personal Bests). He was rather awed by me when young, maybe a little scared of me. I think it's good he has a goal. I think some of the PBs will stand, though. There's not a lot of guys who can do 25 army standard chin ups. Plus he's gotta do an 80k walk. He hasn't even beaten the 20:59 time for a 5k run, which isn't that fast...

I guess the point is though that we all want to protect, ourselves but mainly our families. It's what men [should] do. I honestly don't need an automatic weapon to do it though. Give me an SLR or an AK47 and I'm pretty comfortable. I'm a qualified (Army)small arms coach. Like Mick said, double tap's the way to go. I learnt that at the jungle warfare centre. So what I'm saying is I'm understanding the arming oneself scenario. See, I told you debates can work to have me change my mind :-)

Originally Posted by carlmaloschneider

Yeah, he has. He wants to beat all my PBs (Personal Bests). He was rather awed by me when young, maybe a little scared of me. I think it's good he has a goal. I think some of the PBs will stand, though. There's not a lot of guys who can do 25 army standard chin ups. Plus he's gotta do an 80k walk. He hasn't even beaten the 20:59 time for a 5k run, which isn't that fast...

I guess the point is though that we all want to protect, ourselves but mainly our families. It's what men [should] do. I honestly don't need an automatic weapon to do it though. Give me an SLR or an AK47 and I'm pretty comfortable. I'm a qualified (Army)small arms coach. Like Mick said, double tap's the way to go. I learnt that at the jungle warfare centre. So what I'm saying is I'm understanding the arming oneself scenario. See, I told you debates can work to have me change my mind :-)

Well at least you have the bar set high!! And what are military pull ups? Not familiar

Originally Posted by parkerskouson

Well at least you have the bar set high!! And what are military pull ups? Not familiar

Hang from the beam, arms straight, pull up until your chin touches to TOP of the beam, lower until arms are straight. That's one chin up. You can change grips, but you can't get off the bar. I always started overhand, then went one over one under, other over other under, both under. You can't swing or 'flick' the body.

The other good 'benchmark' exercise I like doing lately is three sets of GOOD 25 pushups, as a warm up to the rest of the workout, a minute and a 1/2 between sets, touching your nose to the floor with each pushup. But I digress...

Oh thats what they are!! Reminds me of the last air show!! I think I did 30 overhand pull ups, no swinging or anything, you can see your knuckles.(so i guess they were millitary pull ups.) Hey, I got a navy tshirt out of it So i was happy!

Guns don't kill people. People with guns kill people. So let's keep the guns and just ban people with guns. Or better yet, stick all people who want to have guns in the one place and let them shoot it out. Oh wait....

James.

Originally Posted by carlmaloschneider

Now, see the term 'double tap' awakened the soldier in me. Me and my son went for a walk in a forest near here today. He wanted to walk through a forest bare foot. He's doing a fitness instructor course, is very fit, a full blown hippy and at least as weird as his father. He's adamant we should walk bare foot, and we should toughen up our feet. He walked 3 ks back to the car without shoes. He noted he was also silent. I told him when I became a partisan, I would make him my lead scout. I'm saying this because we all want to protect. I guess as a pacifist ex soldier there's a fair degree of conflict within the being named 'Carl'...

That's me as well Carl, but the protector (of familly and self) in me beats down the pacifist everytime.

Originally Posted by parkerskouson

3 kilos is bare feet! Your son has some determination!!!!

I used to go all day in bare feet as a young bloke. Growing up in the bush is a different life though. I couldn't go 100metres now, let alone 3Kms.

Originally Posted by Jimbo

Guns don't kill people. People with guns kill people. So let's keep the guns and just ban people with guns. Or better yet, stick all people who want to have guns in the one place and let them shoot it out. Oh wait....

James.

Hmmm. It reads like it's in a joling tone, but methinks there might be a serious side to this one James. However if you stick all the people who want guns in a room, they won't shoot it out, they'll sit around all day and all night and talk guns, make life long friends, form shooters associations and political parties, and have all the policies in place for when they finally get a chance to right the vermin, feral bunny(s) (and their) huggers wrongs in the country, and set it on the path to true freedom and true conservation of native flora and fauna... <---See! A smiley so you know I'm only half serious.


Mick

Originally Posted by parkerskouson

One of the safest countries in the world. Switzerland. What to know why? Because every adult over 18 has spent a mandatory tour of duty in the military. After their service, each goes on inactive reserve. Each is required to keep and maintain both a Fully Automatic rifle and a sidearm. Its hard to commit a crime when every one has the arms. The govt can mandate healthcare with a tax penalty. I believe it is time to mandate the second amendment and FORCE gun ownership. That will put people like a Mr. Holmes in his place.

Your aregument is rediculous and I will tell you why.

As a reservist in the swiss militia you are required to maintain a service rifle. However you don't get any ammo for it. In fact it is so restricted that there is a requirement that you use said gun at firing ranges where you purchase ammo that must be used there.

On top of this, unless you are a hunter or game keeper in order to carry a private firearm you require a permit and a bonafide reason for applying.

Almost full gun ownership is not the reason for low gun crime. Sensible restrictions and possibly lower social issues are the key.

I am not for the removal of guns from public. I am however fully in favour of who has what and what they have. Also violent crime has less to do woth availability of weapons and more to do with social issues, maybe you should look there.

Geek

Originally Posted by nun2sharp

The true shame in this fiasco is that Colorado is a right to carry state, so why did no one stop this madman, because the theater had a no guns allowed policy. They insured that their patrons would be victims, one armed citizen could have put quick end to the "Massacre" but instead of "an armed society being a polite society", many in our society insist on disarmament of the lawful citizen in favor of them being prey for the ruthless and insane. How many dead and how many wounded for the sake of someone elses whimsical view of a perfect world?

This is a strange logic.
If some of those attending that film that night were armed, do that really mean they had been trained to actually fight in a dark room, with tear gaz grenades flying around and someone shooting in to the darkness with a hunting rifle, and actually make a positive difference?

Or could one argue that out of fear,one would pull their own and add to the spectacle with a few blind rounds themselves?
Seeing as most of those obtaining a gun in the US today, can do so by going to the local mall and buy one in a matter of days, no training whatsoever required.
My money would be on the second option...

The murder rates in the US is staggering by most any standard.
Disarmament of the lawful citizen does in fact work, it has been proven time and time again in many nations.
For reference, do check out the murder rates of my Country, Norway.
For those who wont be bothered with that, the figure is well above 5 times(closer to 6) higher in the US..
( according to UN statistics for the period 2003-2008)

Until you actually try, how in the world will you ever know that it doesn't work in the US as well?

The biggest freedom, seems an imprtant word to a lot in these discussions, has already been lost years ago in the US.
Lots of people are afraid of going outside at night, in some areas even in broad daylight.
The right to move freely, without fear of being gunned down, robbed at gunpoint or other stuff happening on a daily basis, is basically lost to a great many Americans.
It has even gotten to a point where normal hard working members of society are afraid to even drive thru certain areas of cities across the US
Is that freedom? No, seriously, is it really?
It is time for the US as a nation to grow up, it's not a frontier anymore, the west is already won

Gun control isn't simply about removing the hardware from the wrong hands.
Much more important than that is the change of mindset of the citizens over time.

Originally Posted by TheGeek

...possibly lower social issues are the key...Geek

Exactly, what are the key issues here? Attack the reason you get the common cold; not the symptoms...