I was a spotty teenager when i was granted a licence, this is my point, removing a single kind of weapon makes no difference. The reason the law was changed was because of a madman who owned his guns LEGALLY, not a criminal.
Yet hundreds of thousands of people in uk do, and noome does this, should we ban kitchen knives too seeing as they have always been used for more murders? Or cars because they kill more pedestrians? No amount of bannng will stop criminals getting hold of them.
And yet i never had any intention of using them for adverse reasons. It seems the police often disregard warnings from gun clubs ect sadly.
This thread makes me lol when I see people blindly stating that: a) not allowing private handgun ownership will in any way stop or reduce handguns getting into the hands of criminals b) because America has rife gun crime then we by default would have it if we allowed legal handgun ownership c) anyone who wants to own a handgun must be a) a nutter who wants to shoot children, b) wanting to use it for home/self defence, c) compensating for a small dick Soooooooo much ill-informed waffle and baseless assumptions being used by people who have little or no experience of the issue. It's like listening to a Labour party conference. Makes me chuckle.
Tbh im playing devils advocate. But heres a serious question. Lets say im in charge of the laws on guns. Shotguns are ok. Rifles ok with a firearms licence. Ill let you have handguns back too. Same conditions as rifles. What about the real fun stuff? What about assault rifles? What about smg's? Can I allow them?
Spot on, I think the main point is comparing us to the USA, there's a massive gun culture difference between the USA and Europe, I've done a fair bit of skiing in Sweden and there are always hunters getting on the skilifts with uncovered rifles, it's a normal thing there and no-one even blinks at the sight. Too many people believe what they read in the press about guns and join in the hysterical response to everything firearms.
Fully automatic weapons are a very different animal to single shot and semi-automatic (single shot but self-reloading) and have no place in competitive target shooting. Anyone who's ever actually fired a gun of any type will tell you that you can aim all you like for the first shot but an subsequent shots without the opportunity to rebalance and re-aim will not be anywhere near as accurate. So single shot and semi-auto are justified for target shooting. Full auto is only justifiable for self-defence or assault - neither of which are or will be a legal basis for firearm ownership.
22. Isnt actually just air rifle or anything, you can kill with a 22. Rimfire. Personally i dont have personal interests about the pistol issue as such, ive only ever fired one in the TA, but at the same time i dont see the uk as being the same as the us where gangs do drive bys every night followed by shootings the next day, were a bit more....civilised...mostly...haha
It's a good job we didn't try to ban dangerous dogs cause that turned out fine. Only the most sensible people near me have pit bulls..... oh hold on. Sent from my GT-I9300 using Tapatalk
Would that mean only certain handguns would also be allowed? Can I have my colt 45 or desert eagle? Im just genuinley interested as to where the line is drawn.
There is an American town, (sorry forgot the name,) where you are strongly encouraged to keep a weapon in the house. The local judge also makes it known that if there is an incident the criminal gets the punishment and the victim gets support. Unsurprisingly it has one of the lowest crime rates in the 'States.
I'd of thought itd only be certain kinds ect, seeing as shotguns rifles ect all have to meet certain requirements.
Depends how many people the government deem it to be acceptable for you to off before the cops turn up to spoil your fun Sent from my GT-I9300 using Tapatalk
We're all screwed then! Just dont go sticking a couple of 10 bore on the front of your bike, the old polizia tend to frown upon it still....:thumbsdown:
