Anyone into Guns?

[Joey_H]

I've noticed a lot of folks that are into cars like guns too.

[MrQuick]

I'm a law abiding, responsible gun owner. My father and uncles are hunters. I am not...tried it, no interest but I have to say tracking/stalking animals is the fun part...and the part I still enjoy.

Survival mode is a different story but still I'd rather eat grub and tree bark.

Being a gun owner and a home owner I have to disagree that I own my guns for personal (HOME) defense. Who am I to determine a thief or vandal is to die for breaking into my home. I do not believe in it and am disconcerned by people stating it is the only reason why this law change is important to them. A thief breaking into my home is more likely to get a frying pan or broom stick to the face than a .40 caliber hole or 00 buck shot in the butt. Why cause more gun ownership grief.

There is too much sense less gun violence as is so I choose not to add to it. Recently a father and his two sons shot to death for driving too slow and a dirty look from the victim sitting in the back seat.

A few years back a man was going after 2 youths breaking into a neighbors home then shooting them both in the backs as they fled. No damage or property stolen at the residence. Where do we draw the line?

Someone breaks into your home call the police and go to your safe room. My safe room just happens to house my gun safe.


EDIT: These are my ideas and beliefs and no way do I say/think this is the way it should be. My comments are in no way there to alienate or insult any fellow board member ideas a beliefs and/or start a piissin match.
I do respect all comments and do keep an open mind to situations that deadly force may be necessary...armed premeditated home invasion, foreign ransom kidnapping, rebellion against a small scout invasion force, and your average biological chemical induced zombie invasion. just my .02 cents

[Damn True]

There are myriad stories of gun accidents, and cases where guns were used to horrific end and an equal number of stories in which an innocent uses a gun to defend his/her self, family or property from those who would do them grave harm.

This is why I described this topic as one of the hottest of hot buttons. Both sides see their sides story as having value and the other as a rare case or improbability. A case, in both cases, of alternate realities in which people elect to dismiss information which does not support their world view.

[MrQuick]

thanks True. added. Im being civil.

Im jealous ATAK...I'd love to own a kalish. The NDM-86...get out of town. I love the long range stuff too.

thread hyjack....Union shoot out soon in Los Altos True. Care to join us?

[ATAK, Inc.]

thanks True. added. Im being civil.

Im jealous ATAK...I'd love to own a kalish. The NDM-86...get out of town. I love the long range stuff too.

thread hyjack....Union shoot out soon in Los Altos True. Care to join us?

I hope to get a Semi- PKM, the Russian GPMG. But I will pick up a couple of AK's, a Mosin Nagant PU sniper rifle (same as used in "Enemy at the Gates") and a AR-15 here in the next month.

Mr Quick, I couldn't agree more with your statement above. But for me, waiting for the sheriff could take up to 30 minutes. And only if presented with a life or death situation would I use any firearm against another. I was taught at an early age to be very responsible with guns.

Damn True, In a world of shades of grey this topic has become so polarized to black and white. I am all for sensible laws and responsible ownership.

[69Pony]

I am all for sensible laws and responsible ownership.

I think this is something we can all agree on. Makes so much sense...

You guys should try an Armalite AR10 .308/7.62. A real hammer of a gun. Hit any target and it hits hard.

MrQuick - your comments are right on. Even though I have a FL CCW I rarely carry. 1st it's hard to pack in shorts and a tee plus I just didn't feel comfortable about it at times. Mostly I carry when out hiking / camping. Tracking was always the best, killing not so much.

[MrQuick]

I'd love an AR10 but a bit out of my price range. .308's are my line. My M1a is real smooth and accurate. Friend just picked up a Bushmaster Carbon 15 and so far he loves it. No mag (CA law) is a bit strange to me.

There was a feature on the Mosin Nagant PU on a gun tv show. Very nice weapon.

I too carry when out woodsing. Them mountain Lions don't scare easy.

[megaladon6]

There is too much sense less gun violence as is so I choose not to add to it. Recently a father and his two sons shot to death for driving too slow and a dirty look from the victim sitting in the back seat.

as a gun supporter who doesn't own a gun (yet) i have to ask; why do we only focus on events like these. how many senless/stupid acts of violence are performed with non-firearms? knives, bats, frying pans , cars (especially cars) and other things? even stupid people with BB and paintball guns shooting their friend in the face.
i'm curious, has anyone compiled statistics on gun violence in states where legal ownwership is easy vs. difficult? i know that in a lot of the midwestern states it's pretty easy to get a pistol and in NY it's pretty difficult (especially a carry permit in NYC) but NY obviously has more problems.
or if gun restrictions in an area like D.C. made a difference in the level or type of violence?
personally i think gun ownership should be like driving a car (rather, like driving a car should be). you should have to prove that you can handle it properly and safely. and if you're stupid you lose that right.

[MrQuick]

as a gun supporter who doesn't own a gun (yet) i have to ask; why do we only focus on events like these. how many senless/stupid acts of violence are performed with non-firearms? knives, bats, frying pans , cars (especially cars) and other things? even stupid people with BB and paintball guns shooting their friend in the face.
i'm curious, has anyone compiled statistics on gun violence in states where legal ownwership is easy vs. difficult? i know that in a lot of the midwestern states it's pretty easy to get a pistol and in NY it's pretty difficult (especially a carry permit in NYC) but NY obviously has more problems.
or if gun restrictions in an area like D.C. made a difference in the level or type of violence?
personally i think gun ownership should be like driving a car (rather, like driving a car should be). you should have to prove that you can handle it properly and safely. and if you're stupid you lose that right.

I don't know Meg, there are some real stupid drivers out there so its not an equal comparison...well ok. I've seen some equally stupid people that can own guns too. But a better solution would be to stop the issue before it happens not after.

Its funny, i've been wondering when the gun ban hoopla would start up again. The law expired what? 6 months ago? There was no heads up then.

There should be some psychological test that one would have to pass before being able to own one. Sort of like the one the military gives you to see what side of the morality fence you stand on.

With so much exposure some think the easiest way to express ones feelings is to pull out a gun and start blazing away. Everytime it happens it gets reported. That would be an answer to your other comment. Society only focuses on the negatives. You will never hear about the positives on incedents involving guns. Sort of like you never hear on the news, "no US casualties in Iraq today, 250 insurgent fatalities in Mosul during fierce battle".

I happen to like shooting my friends with paint balls and 6mm plastic bb's. Its fun you should try it. Safely of course.

[megaladon6]

like i said "like driving a car SHOULD be" leave the smart people alone and punish the idiots, and remove them from the streets.
i understand why we don't hear about the good side of gun ownership. but why is gun violence worse than knife violence and which is more prevalent? and what percentage of gun violence is performed by legal owners?
i enjoy paintball too, but not shooting them in the face with no mask.

[Young Gun]

Im moving to Illinois in September, can I carry a concealed there?

[bigvegan]

Owning a gun is a right that needs to be defended.

(I mean, without a written constitution and a self-reliant and outspoken citizenry, you end up with nonsense like this - http://www.nytimes.com/2008/06/27/wo...0A&oref=slogin)


All the same, I'm sure glad to be able to have lived in areas that are safe enough for me never to have needed to own one.

[Turbo67camaro]

I read that after the breakup of the Soviet Union, some of the Soviet generals were interviewed about the cold war and why they didn't go to war with the US. One of their primary reasons was that even if they defeated the US military, that there were too many US citizens who owned firearms, and that it would be too difficult to control the US population. As a result, it would be too difficult to reap enough benefit from harvesting US resources to justify the effort. If you think of it like the Soviet war with Afghanistan on a larger scale, it makes total sense.

[MrQuick]

barely in control as we are now....lol just kidding. Im very happy to posess the right to be able to print that. oooohh thats close.

http://current.com/items/87302871_machine_gun_shootout

[bwhinnen]

The dreaded 'Firearms debate'

Not being a US citizen or even resident I can't comment too much on how things go over there. But at least you have a right to carry arms. We don't really have many rights that aren't changed or enforced by minority groups over here in Australia, specifically those relating to firearms.

It was deemed several years ago after a tragic shooting event that all military based rifles and any self loading high powered rifle be banned to the general populace, at a great cost to the tax payer. The same happened a few years ago when handguns were restricted to .38 and below, 10 round magazine restrictions and of course a minimum barrel length requirement. Shotguns weren't exempt either, meaning that the only semi-auto variants allowed were to have a maximum of 2 rounds loaded (hmm considering most are 5 round min that makes life hard).

I gave up a Para Ordnance P14-45, a beloved P12-45 (with some extra work done to it), and most recently had to sell my Remington 1100 12gauge trap gun. I do still own my Caspian based 9x23 Open class IPSC handgun.

I would love to be able to teach my boy correct and safe gun handling, but the government has made it very difficult to do so over here, although now my wife is becoming interested in pistol shooting I may get the chance to start it back up again...

As to the stupid people with firearms, it is sad (very sad) but some people just shouldn't be allowed the responsibility of ownership, the same can be said for anything though. After being a certified range officer, safety officer and trainer for a pistol club, I've seen several people who should never be allowed to use let alone own a firearm.

But I digress, I too love my shooting, I prefer the targets to be of cardboard and steel though.

EDIT: Oh there are some exemptions to the rules above, dependant on the occupation, or sport the firearm owner has or does, and any self loading rifle had to be restricted to a maximum number of rounds in the magazine, with the general person off the street only allowed to own a .22 and then it is either 5 or 10 rounds maximum, and they had to be a member of a sporting organisation who used such a firearm... But you get my point.

[EFI69Cam]

The dreaded 'Firearms debate'

Not being a US citizen or even resident I can't comment too much on how things go over there. But at least you have a right to carry arms. We don't really have many rights that aren't changed or enforced by minority groups over here in Australia, specifically those relating to firearms.

It was deemed several years ago after a tragic shooting event that all military based rifles and any self loading high powered rifle be banned to the general populace, at a great cost to the tax payer. The same happened a few years ago when handguns were restricted to .38 and below, 10 round magazine restrictions and of course a minimum barrel length requirement. Shotguns weren't exempt either, meaning that the only semi-auto variants allowed were to have a maximum of 2 rounds loaded (hmm considering most are 5 round min that makes life hard).

I gave up a Para Ordnance P14-45, a beloved P12-45 (with some extra work done to it), and most recently had to sell my Remington 1100 12gauge trap gun. I do still own my Caspian based 9x23 Open class IPSC handgun.

I would love to be able to teach my boy correct and safe gun handling, but the government has made it very difficult to do so over here, although now my wife is becoming interested in pistol shooting I may get the chance to start it back up again...

As to the stupid people with firearms, it is sad (very sad) but some people just shouldn't be allowed the responsibility of ownership, the same can be said for anything though. After being a certified range officer, safety officer and trainer for a pistol club, I've seen several people who should never be allowed to use let alone own a firearm.

But I digress, I too love my shooting, I prefer the targets to be of cardboard and steel though.

EDIT: Oh there are some exemptions to the rules above, dependant on the occupation, or sport the firearm owner has or does, and any self loading rifle had to be restricted to a maximum number of rounds in the magazine, with the general person off the street only allowed to own a .22 and then it is either 5 or 10 rounds maximum, and they had to be a member of a sporting organisation who used such a firearm... But you get my point.

There was a very sad story I read of an Austrailian (or maybe British) military veteran who had won a FAL in a competition. The gun was never used, and was a trophy. He was forced to decide to turn it in for destruction or have it rendered inoperable through welding at his own expense. Sad choice really.

[navyflyer72]

I own a few firearms and I rely on them at work. In general I believe that our fore-fathers were correct when they drafted the second amendment regarding our right as citizens to own and bare arms. This right is there for our personal protection and also to protect us should our government or military become too strong, corrupt, etc... just as they had experienced with England prior to the Revolutionary War. This right was not nearly as hotly contested then as it is now, but they were a hardy people back then, most of whom in this fledgling country had been born into hunting and living off the land. Times have changed, governments have not. Rest assured I have seen the results of corrupt governments around the globe in my job related travels. It is not pretty when the population has no means by which to resist the military/govt (btw, for those of you who don't kow, I am have been in the military for over 18 years so I am in no way criticizing our military, it is in other countries -mostly in Africa, but elsewhere also- that I have seen horrible corruption at all levels of government and military). Just my $.02

[ZoomieFoosh]

This is a little piece put together from a Marine, interesting read. Feel free to remove the post if you find it too "political". I own a .45 Sig P220 and a Remington 870. Both for personal/home defense.

The Gun is Civilization
by Maj. L. Caudill USMC (Ret)

Human beings only have two ways to deal with one another: reason and force. If you want me to do something for you, you have a choice of either convincing me via argument, or force me to do your bidding under threat of force. Every human interaction falls into one of those two categories, without exception. Reason or force, that's it.

In a truly moral and civilized society, people exclusively interact through persuasion. Force has no place as a valid method of social interaction, and the only thing that removes force from the menu is the personal firearm, as paradoxical as it may sound to some.

When I carry a gun, you cannot deal with me by force. You have to use reason and try to persuade me, because I have a way to negate your threat or employment of force.

The gun is the only personal weapon that puts a 100-pound woman on equal footing with a 220-pound mugger, a 75-year old retiree on equal footing with a 19-year old gang banger, and a single guy on equal footing with a carload of drunk guys with baseball bats. The gun removes the disparity in physical strength, size, or numbers between a potential attacker and a defender.
There are plenty of people who consider the gun as the source of bad force equations. These are the people who think that we'd be more civilized if all guns were removed from society, because a firearm makes it easier for a [armed] mugger to do his job. That, of course, is only true if the mugger's potential victims are mostly disarmed either by choice or by legislative fiat--it has no validity when most of a mugger's potential marks are armed.

People who argue for the banning of arms ask for automatic rule by the young, the strong, and the many, and that's the exact opposite of a civilized society. A mugger, even an armed one, can only make a successful living in a society where the state has granted him a force monopoly.

Then there's the argument that the gun makes confrontations lethal that otherwise would only result in injury. This argument is fallacious in several ways. Without guns involved, confrontations are won by the physically superior party inflicting overwhelming injury on the loser.

People who think that fists, bats, sticks, or stones don't constitute lethal force watch too much TV, where people take beatings and come out of it with a bloody lip at worst. The fact that the gun makes lethal force easier works solely in favor of the weaker defender, not the stronger attacker. If both are armed, the field is level.

The gun is the only weapon that's as lethal in the hands of an octogenarian as it is in the hands of a weight lifter. It simply wouldn't work as well as a force equalizer if it wasn't both lethal and easily employable.

When I carry a gun, I don't do so because I am looking for a fight, but because I'm looking to be left alone. The gun at my side means that I cannot be forced, only persuaded. I don't carry it because I'm afraid, but because it enables me to be unafraid. It doesn't limit the actions of those who would interact with me through reason, only the actions of those who would do so by force. It removes force from the equation...and that's why carrying a gun is a civilized act.

By Maj. L. Caudill USMC (Ret)

[RaceMan]

This has been a great thread !!! I'm waiting on my LTC (in mass. thats licsence to carry)its suposed to be in this week. I've always liked shooting but never had the time . I own a 24 hour gas station (never been robed Yet) and I think its getting time to have one !! I've read this thread from start to finish and I'm still not sure what to get and in mass we can only by a small percent of the guns most of you can get. I'm thinking of a sig or S.& W. in a 9mm or 40 , I want to shoot it alot and maybe try some target competion if I as good as I think LOL. Thank you guys for all the great info !!!!!!

[navyflyer72]

Don't want to hijack this thread, but since it is about guns; I am selling two pistols I have if anyone is interested.

I have a S&W Model 908 compact 9mm w/ 2 mags, and a Sig Saeur P228 9mm w/2 mags. Both come with hard plastic carry cases. I am located in MD but I travel around PA, DE, NJ, VA, DC frequently. I can ship to FFL's in other states. Can meet to exchange the pistol at an FFL to make sure the yellow sheet is filled out if you live in MD (state law).


The proceeds are going towards finishing my Camaro so this is for a good cause!

Regards,
George