[Closed] Private ownership of firearms

TJ - I reiterate my comment, you're full of shite

+1

I don't see any reference to (or relevance of) guns not having a use which is of benefit in:

guns are almost unique in their ability to kill easily from a distance

You could just admit you're wrong on this one small point, but I doubt you will.

I've just watched that film about Iris Murdoch, and then read this thread.

It's a dementia overload.

I'm pretty sure I could outrun one...

not when he is in you bedroom you cant, a big hole in is head is sure fire way to make him stop.

@jumpupanddown - The advice I remember the MET giving out many years ago was, cheap perfume or body spray in a handbag! Used as a mace substitute.

The problem with guns as self defence is that it escalates. House owner has totally legal shotguns, so assailant will buy an illegal pump action. House owner gets an illegal semi-auto, just in case. Assailant buys an AK from somewhere, etc. etc. etc.

Not good. Guns aren't for self defence.

I think we've also established quite clearly that there is a benefit to guns, even if that spoils your point.

aracer sorry I have lost your point here.

Waht else has the ability to kill easily from a distance?

The advice I remember the MET giving out many years ago was, cheap perfume or body spray in a handbag! Used as a mace substitute.

The problem with guns as self defence is that it escalates. House owner has totally legal shotguns, so assailant will buy an illegal pump action. House owner gets an illegal semi-auto, just in case. Assailant buys an AK from somewhere, etc. etc. etc.

Not good. Guns aren't for self defence.

thats not what has happened in Texas.. burglary rates have got very low.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Castle_doctrine

not when he is in you bedroom you cant, a big hole in is head is sure fire way to make him stop.

[b]TJ[/b]

Why do you do this?

You have clearly articulated your view.
You have refused to provide any evidence to back your statements up other than ex cathedral bombast.
You have insulted someone and refused to back your allegation with evidence.
You selectively answer questions

What does this give you? Do you think you have won converts? Or any of your comments past page 2 have any utility at all?

Neal - are you trying to say that no one gets killed in the UK by legally held guns? Cos that is bunkum

No, I didn't say that, and you know I didn't. stop trying to weasel out of it by inventing stuff.

You said that increased Private Gun ownership meant more deaths as a result.

I posted official home office statistics that proved you wrong.

You have subsequently ignored them, and then made something up that I didn't say.

It is amusing tho to watch people trying to justify the unjustifiable.

Trust me on this

It's not half as funny as watching someone [b]avoid[/b] justifying anything they claim, despite constantly being asked to. 🙄

true jumpupadown, very true, but I think that's unlikely, don't you.

thanks Flashy, that sounds like good advice.

god made all men, but colt made them all equal.

The risk could be [b]almost eliminated[/b] with the banning of private ownerships of guns without good cause. The cost to society would be minimal as there is no utility in owning guns - they serve no purpose ( bar the few rural workers who use them to kill vermin).

The ethical dwarf, posturing on the moral high-ground, presents a ludicrous spectacle

Gawd knows stoatsbrother.

If on the insult you mean Zulu I have asked the person who outed him for their recollections

TandemJeremy - Member

It is amusing tho to watch people trying to justify the unjustifiable.

..but bad form for a comic to laugh at his own jokes 😉

Emsz, the thinking was that you had a reasonable, legitimate reason to be carrying your can of Eau de Superdrug. That way, if there was a legal challenge, you simply grabbed the closest thing to hand.

Not sure if it would stand up in court, though, but I don't see why not. Seemed very good advice to me.

If there's a mentalist with a gun ...it's only going to end one way really

Waht else has the ability to kill easily from a distance?

Well we seem to have agreed that the significant issues with "from a distance" are inability to directly defend, and emotional detachment through lack of direct contact. Are you really so dense that you can't think of something else which kills a lot more people than guns and meets both those criteria?

people are regularly killed by legally held guns.
Numbers? Your assertion is fundamentally untrue.

Really?

[img] [/img]

"The level of gun ownership world-wide is directly related to murder and suicide rates and specifically to the level of death by gunfire."

"Homicide rates tend to be related to firearm ownership levels. Everything else being equal, a reduction in the percentage of households owning firearms should occasion a drop in the homicide rate".

Evidence to the Cullen Inquiry 1996: Thomas Gabor, Professor of Criminology - University of Ottawa

aracer, the evidence shows your assertion is fundamentally untrue.

nealglover

You said that increased Private Gun ownership meant more deaths as a result.

did I?

You said that increased Private Gun ownership meant more deaths as a result.

I posted official home office statistics that proved you wrong.

You have subsequently ignored them, and then made something up that I didn't say.

C'Mon, TJ.

true jumpupadown, very true, but I think that's unlikely, don't you.

but still possible, so every one should have the right to bare arms. Also getting raped is more common than you think..not just rape either..

http://www.metro.co.uk/news/886213-mother-kirsty-treloar-begged-for-life-with-killer-after-being-kidnapped now if she had a gun to hand she could well still be alive.

aracer - sorry - I really don't get it

Those who would sacrifice liberty for security deserve neither

Those who would sacrifice liberty for security deserve neither

yes some american president said it so it must be true, true liberty is the right to own a gun.. any thing else is not liberty

make TJ even more smug and self-satisfied than he already is.

and that would be a much bigger threat to society as a whole, i mean his ego might get so big his head could explode and take out a small town

[quote> http://www.metro.co.uk/news/886213-mother-kirsty-treloar-begged-for-life-with-killer-after-being-kidnapped now if she had a gun to hand she could well still be alive.
Or, rather than stabbing three and killing one, the kidnapper would also have taken a gun and killed three (or possibly 5).

My guns will never be used in self defence.

The large Park pedal spanner left in a convenient, easy to find location however......

(Legitimate reason to own it, etc...! 🙂 )

CaptainFlashheart - Member

The problem with guns as self defence is that it escalates. House owner has totally legal shotguns, so assailant will buy an illegal pump action. House owner gets an illegal semi-auto, just in case. Assailant buys an AK from somewhere, etc. etc. etc.

Naahhh ... be economical just get a Glock 31 and Benelli M4 for household use. The rest are just a waste.

yes some american president said it so it must be true

How very contrary. I quoted it because I think it sums up the situation here perfectly. If you are spouting off, actively trying to impose your beliefs and desires on your peers, personally, I think you are far more dangerous than the average gun owner.

Gor, I would ban all them folks. 😉

Sweet Jesus of Nazareth....

Thing is though, TJ has made a couple of really good points that no-one has bin able to answer or contest effectively.

One of those was why can't target shooting 'weapons' fire only laser light or something? Ultimately, such sporting equipment really does not need to be a firearm capable of being used as a weapon.

I think that's a really fair and well-considered point. I'd really like to see any argument for the continued use of projectiles fired from such weapons for sporting use.

Another, and praps more important point, was that killing for 'pleasure' has to be something that raises alarm bells. Sure, there's the excuse of 'hunting', but tbh, stuff like game birds could be caught very easily, and deer could be killed using other methods such as captive bolt gun, so there is not actually any genuine 'need' to go shooting stuff, not in the UK anyway. This reduces the 'need' for firearms drastically, to farmers protecting livestock, and those needing to cull deer numbers in places where rounding them up is not practically possible.

But the killing purely for pleasure bit, well, what's the difference between some fantasist thinking he's in Deerhunter, and a kid with a catapult shooting small birds? Or a gang of disaffected feral yutes throwing bricks at swans? Or stabbing a kid at a bus stop in South East London?

Interesting to note the attempts at justification from certain individuals; funnily enough the ones who seem to be shouting loudest about their 'rights' to have a 'choice' and other such crap. He who shouts loudest...

As I've said, I can understand the thrill of shooting stuff. But that makes me question why I want to do so, and to examine my own desires and urges. As someone who has a greater understanding of real violence than many on here, I am only too aware that I need to constantly be aware of such desires and my potential to harm and destroy.

I understand the thrill of target shooting, and find that it helps me really focus my mind, and is a great form of mental yoga, if you like. Really satisfying, and I'd love to do it as a sport.

But knowing I am only a step away from being the next Michael Ryan, as indeed we all are potentially, I also understand the need for proper control over the use of weapons.

Funny, how I can take a step back from what is mainly a ridiculous argument, and see things more objectively.

I suggest some of you lot do the same. And possibly find other outlets for your inner energies...

Or, rather than stabbing three and killing one, the kidnapper would also have taken a gun and killed three (or possibly 5).

or she could have blown him away on her drive, and he would not have got with in 100 feet of her....

and that would be a much bigger threat to society as a whole, i mean his ego might get so big his head could explode and take out a small town

Not if he was wearing a helmet

or she could have blown him away on her drive, and he would not got with in 100 feet of her....

If there's a mentalist with a gun ...it's only going to end one way really

Perhaps two ways---shot by either an armed law enforcement officer or the private person they happen to assault who legally owns a gun and how/when to use it

SD-253 - Member
Elfinsafety - Member
I prefer the greater and far more macho thrill of fighting in pubs, rather than shooting something what can't fight back.
Go get a broken bottle, you don't know what you're missing.

You can prove yourself to be much more of a 'mayn' if you do so. Shooting animals is for pansies

[b]I assume this is irony because I doubt you have the back bone to do anything of the sort[/b]

SD-253 - Member
Junkyard - Member
Have i got this right I should not call someone a tosser but it ok to attack somone with a bottle?

NO

you said /implied it took back bone to attack someone

[b]I said nothing of the sort. I think you are making a mistake there I said if your wife had been attacked on the way home from the pub (an actual incident) that the husband would have had the backbone to give the attacker a kicking but didn't becasue he had a gun licsense. Are you sure you are not mixing me up with someone else?[/b]

Yep you are not reading my post correctly or you have mixed me up with someone else. At no time did I say it took back bone to hit someone with a glass.

One of those was why can't target shooting 'weapons' fire only laser light or something? Ultimately, such sporting equipment really does not need to be a firearm capable of being used as a weapon.

I think that's a really fair and well-considered point. I'd really like to see any argument for the continued use of projectiles fired from such weapons for sporting use.

[quote=TJ]Did I?

You said:

[quote=TJ][b] preventing gun ownereship without good cause[/b] would reduce the numbers of murders -

And :

[quote=TJ]There is a direct correlation between the numbers of legally held guns and the numbers of gun murders in any society.

The Official Home Office statistics say that ls not true.

There was a 1500% rise in gun crime in the UK over a 35 year period, despite Gun Laws and control getting increasingly strict over that time.

Please Justify your statement(s)

stuff like game birds could be caught very easily, and deer could be killed using other methods such as captive bolt gun

Go to the countryside. You might get a little muddy, but you'll soon learn why that's utter tosh.

Trapping wild deer and wild game birds before killing them? Seriously?

stuff like game birds could be caught very easily, and deer could be killed using other methods such as captive bolt gun, so there is not actually any genuine 'need' to go shooting stuff, not in the UK anyway.

I love you, you're f'in brilliant 🙂

lol, townees make them selves look like tards... 🙂

Regarding target shooting using lasers...

Lasers are perfectly straight, have no real distance limitations, anent knocked about by wind etc.

It's a shite idea.

And it's also totally unnecessary.

Gawd. I really wish someone would get that thread bolt gun I requested on page 4.

Mod's - coup de grace s'il vous plait.

Derek, you started it...! 🙂

Lasers are perfectly straight, have no real distance limitations, anent knocked about by wind etc.

but with a bit of development they could be amazing [img] [/img]

Ha ha ha, this is still going.....never ceases to amaze me how much time people have on their hands

anyway......i'm looking to borrow one of these:

[img] [/img]

I think that if you're a violent fantasist or realky shit at a huntin' and a trappin' and a shootin', a laser isn't really going to give you the wood that a proper killing machine can.

Looks like this going to continue on well into the late night/early morning there in the UK---I haven't managed to get any work done all afternoon reading the posts in this thread, so have to sign off----I'll check in the morning to see if this is still going and if anyone was finally worn down.

Elf - I am afraid they are right on the deer - shooting is the only way to cull them.

No need to ever shoot birds tho - most of the birds that are shot have been raised in cages and release shortly before they are shot.

No need to ever shoot birds tho - most of the birds that are shot have been raised in cages and release shortly before they are shot.

but TJ thats just crap mate.

I don't know much about guns, but wouldn't wind be a factor to consider when aiming and firing real bullets?

That would be a fair and valid point, certainly on an open range. Yep. I'll accept that as a valid argument for the continued use of bullets. Fair enough.

I think this would be limited to a small number of event types though. And would it really be all that great a loss to the sport to use laser light instead?

Just trying to think of how to make a sport 'safer' and more accessible, is all.

Go to the countryside. You might get a little muddy, but you'll soon learn why that's utter tosh.

My family own half of Cornwall and a sizeable chunk of Devon. My father owns a farm. So be quite, you pleb.

Seriously though, pheasants are shit at hiding and getting away, they're just fancy chickens really. They're not hard to catch.

And did you see this bit?

and those needing to cull deer numbers in places where rounding them up is not practically possible.

Now, there are plenty of places where other methods of rounding up deer could be employed. Observe:

but TJ thats just crap mate.

It's not actually but you carry on beleiving it if it suits your own agenda, eh? 🙄

Nealglover - so I did not say what you claimed I did as you now admit, and your stats do not disprove what I actually said.

Nealglover - so I did not say what you claimed I did as you now admit, and your stats do not disprove what I actually said.

no one cares what you said TJ.. no one...

Jumpupanddown - nope - its the truth. I have seen it with my own eyes. Most birds shot are cage reared and released just before the shoots.

I think this would be limited to a small number of event types though. And would it really be all that great a loss to the sport to use laser light instead?

Nealglover - so I did not say what you claimed I did as you now admit,

Yeah, you did, but on a thread I can't remember, several years ago before 'the event' 😉

Jumpupanddown - nope - its the truth. I have seen it with my own eyes. Most birds shot are cage reared and released just before the shoots.

Jumpupanddown - nope - its the truth. I have seen it with my own eyes. Most birds shot are cage reared and released just before the shoots.

funny that spent years rough shooting with my dad... not many cages did i see. Do you eat meat?,,,, if so STFU

your stats do not disprove what I actually said.

TJ. Yes they do. They disprove it completely

And yet you've still not posted any evidence to back up your stupid claims.

Don't weasel out of it. Its pathetic.

And also :

most of the birds that are shot have been raised in cages and release shortly before they are shot.

That's just total bollx.

You really are just making this stuff up as you go along aren't you ?

I live in the middle of an area that's widely used for shoots, and there are thousands of game birds all over the place.
You can't walk down the footpath at the back of our house without them flying out of the bushes.

My friend runs hunts about 5 miles away, and we were walking there on new years day, same thing exactly.

Not a cage to be seen anywhere, and thousands of birds.

TJ, I have in the past twelve months, shot pheasant, duck, partridge, pigeon woodcock and snipe (The latter two with minimal success!). Some of the pheasant were farmed Not in cages from my knowledge, but other than that none were cage reared. You're talking rubbish again, I'm afraid.

jumpupanddown - Member

No need to ever shoot birds tho - most of the birds that are shot have been raised in cages and release shortly before they are shot.

but TJ thats just crap mate.

That is ^

http://www.animalaid.org.uk/h/n/CAMPAIGNS/pheasant/ALL///

Its not a real sport though, is it?
Not like snooker or darts.

Around here for sure don simon. No question at all. Its a huge industry rearing birds to be shot. You see them in their cages when out and about and you see the empty cages at shooting season.

That is ^

http://www.animalaid.org.uk/h/n/CAMPAIGNS/pheasant/ALL///

yes that web site is totally neutral, i mean its on the net so it MUST be true, i doth my cap to you're superior townee ways.... not..

CFH round here the only thing not cage reared will be black grouse I think - everything else is cage reared and I am sure most of the birds you shot would have been as well.

Good lord, why do we keep arguing with him? It's like a slightly addictive but no more productive version of banging your head against a brick wall. Leaves you with a nasty headache, too.

Around here for sure don simon. No question at all. Its a huge industry rearing birds to be shot. You see them in their cages when out and about and you see the empty cages at shooting season.

Some of the pheasant were farmed Not in cages [b]from my knowledge[/b], but other than that none were cage reared. You're talking rubbish again, I'm afraid.

Then, right:

http://www.animalaid.org.uk/h/n/CAMPAIGNS/pheasant/ALL///
/p>

Oof.

😆

Always a pleasure to watch....

I am sure most of the birds you shot would have been as well.

You may be sure, but you are wrong.

Wild red legged partridge on a rough shoot at the edge of the village. Pheasant on a few driven bird shoots, mostly around Swindon and Salisbury. Snipe and woodcock on a very rough shoot in South Pembrokeshire. Pigeon in any number of local woods. Duck in West Wilts, also wild. Etc. Etc. Etc.

CFH round here the only thing not cage reared will be black grouse I think - everything else is cage reared and I am sure most of the birds you shot would have been as well.

TJ, you live in a town and have never killed and eaten some thing in whole life.. i suggest you try it.. its party of what it is to be human.

Beaten to it again Elf.

"comefollowsomeonelse"

yes that web site is totally neutral, i mean its on the net so it MUST be true, i doth my cap to you're superior townee ways.... not..

CFH round here the only thing not cage reared will be black grouse I think - everything else is cage reared and I am sure most of the birds you shot would have been as well.

So, the red grouse are cage reared round your way are they TJ 😆

Keep on digging... bound to reach daylight soon

Junkyard - Member

SD-253 - Member
Elfinsafety - Member
I prefer the greater and far more macho thrill of fighting in pubs, rather than shooting something what can't fight back.
Go get a broken bottle, you don't know what you're missing.

You can prove yourself to be much more of a 'mayn' if you do so. Shooting animals is for pansies

I assume this is irony because I doubt you have the back bone to do anything of the sort

jumpupanddown - Member

That is ^

> http://www.animalaid.org.uk/h/n/CAMPAIGNS/pheasant/ALL///
/p>

yes that web site is totally neutral, i mean its on the net so it MUST be true, i doth my cap to you're superior townee ways.... not..

Makes more sense than your internet contribution this evening

Anyway here's another load of tosh from the internet
[img] [/img]

That's the way to raise your kids...

have you ever been in a abattoir??? make that look very pleasant mate...

Are you that naive CFH? Of course they are captive bred birds on the whole. the pheasant will have been for sure.