[Closed] The Gun Shop

the rented apartment where he lives and shares with two others, he has 17 handguns, 3 assault rifles (one fitted with a thermal scope) two combat shotguns and a hunting rifle. This collection is for home dee-fence apparently

What happens when someone breaks in and either steals them or worse lies in wait to attack him?

its a god given right - and no logic will overcome that

Now I'm not a militant atheist - but even I have a problem with that concept justifying anything.

amongst kids from less advantaged backgrounds, where there is a far greater sense of dog eat dog and the struggle for 'survival'.

When people feel they are competing for resources - conflict increases and compassion decreases, so that is easy to understand.

I'm extremely pro gun and have spent a lot of time in the states and like it there. I felt safer walking through the bronx than I sometimes do through Birmingham.

Now, I'm sorry dude but this is nuts! I live in far from the richest area in Brum and go through most of it very regularly to see friends etc... After over 30 years in the area, I've never been mugged or attacked on the street. I am glad you cannot own an automatic or handgun if this is how you think. The level of danger you are worried about is very, very unusual.

What scares me is the delusion some people have relating to weapon proficiency. The hours I have to put in on the range to remain proficient is ridiculous.

So when I hear the Americans talk about keeping them for home/self defence I cringe. We do specific under-stress serials to ensure that we respond swiftly and decisively to ensure maximum effective rounds on target.

It would genuinely scare me being surrounded by civilians packing heat thinking they're competent and drilled enough to draw a weapon under stress and to engage a target without hitting anyone else. Terrifying.

"I'm extremely pro gun and have spent a lot of time in the states and like it there. I felt safer walking through the bronx than I sometimes do through Birmingham."

Missed this. Really?

Maybe you mean we early hours of Sat morning in the centre?

I've been in Birmingham. Plus Manchester and London in the small hours, including Brixton etc years ago. I never felt scared but maybe that's because I grew up in such areas. This afternoon I was sat in a packed sauna in Moss side Manchester. Saying that doesn't explain Bronx.

why do people rant on so much about firearms yet happily condone millions more people, even in this country, owning a much more lethal weapon?
The private car.

Because guns' raison d'etre is to kill people whereas cars is to move people from place to place. Not really a difficult comparison.

Because guns' raison d'etre is to kill people whereas cars is to move people from place to place. Not really a difficult comparison.

Well, that's not true is it - an F-Class target rifles raison d'etre is shooting targets accurately and at a great distance, a deer rifles raison d'etre is killing deer, and a double barrel shotguns raison d'etre is shooting birds - I could also point out that in many countries, there are big animals that eat people, hence people regularly carry guns for anything BUT killing people.

If we go back to the car example, who [b]needs[/b] a 150mph speed demon car or motorbike to get from place to place? Do cars need to do 0-60 in five seconds? Of course not, whats wrong with the bus/bike/horse and cart? People buy them because they are [b]fun[/b] - bloody good fun at times, used sensibly and in in the appropriate place, and bloody dangerous when used irresponsibly or inappropriately

Just like guns

Unfortunately the weapon of choice in America is a handgun or assault rifle. Designed for...?

So Nifan ...what your saying is your happy for all the innocent dead kids and adults in America because having a gun is fun...so it's worth it...yeah love your argument...let's all get guns and make us happy!!!..

weapon of choice in America is a handgun or assault rifle.

Look how popular the Subaru WRX and Honda fireblade are.

So Nifan ...what your saying is your happy for all the innocent dead kids and adults in America because having a gun is fun.

Should all cars in the U.K. be limited to 40 MPH maximum, or are all the innocent dead kids and adults an acceptable price because getting somewhere a bit quicker is convenient?

If we go back to the car example, who needs a 150mph speed demon car or motorbike to get from place to place? Do cars need to do 0-60 in five seconds? Of course not, whats wrong with the bus/bike/horse and cart? People buy them because they are fun - bloody good fun at times, used sensibly and in in the appropriate place, and bloody dangerous when used irresponsibly or inappropriately

Just like guns

Yeah....

But,

Cars are designed to transport people & stuff..

Most guns (like nearly all) are designed to kill stuff that's alive..

I grant you that some guns have a specific intent in their design i.e. target shooting.....but I doubt a Desert Eagle or an M16 were ever designed to do anything else other than hurt someone.

A bit different from your Ford Mondeo or your T5 van I think you'll find, which as I understand it were never designed for close protection or combat..

Look how popular the Subaru WRX and Honda fireblade are.

Whats that got to do with ownership of an assault rifle??

Your getting your facts mixed up @nifan..... 😀

Most guns (like nearly all) are designed to kill stuff that's alive..

Ford Mondeo or your T5 van I think you'll find, which as I understand it were never designed for close protection or combat..

Mondeo 1.5 ecoboost top speed, 133 MPH -[b] why?[/b]
T5 102 HP top speed 98 MPH, 150HP top speed 112 MPH -[b] why?[/b]

Whats that got to do with ownership of an assault rifle??

They are to 'practical motoring' - (i.e. 'Transporting people and stuff' as you justify cars as being designed for) what the assault rifle is to civilian shooting

Totally unnecessary but bloody good fun

That poor kid & his girlfriend in the car..

That wasn't self-defence, that was murder, an execution almost..

4 times at point blank range at a target that was sat down.....FFS......

I heard the arguments of the gun shop owner, he was so blasé about it, so everyday yadda yadda yadda......

If that officer had been a little bit cooler headed that kid might still be alive (In all likelihood 1 shot at that range would probably have killed the boy).

Breaks my heart & makes me very grateful that I live in a country where the police aren't armed & we have good gun controls.

FYI I was in the Army for 10 years, I've held a firearm & shotgun licence both of which I'be given up as I just don't see the need, thankfully, for someone like myself to have access to such weaponry.

Mondeo 1.5 ecoboost top speed, 133 MPH - why?
T5 102 HP top speed 98 MPH, 150HP top speed 112 MPH - why?

what the assault rifle is to civilian shooting

Now you're just talking sh1te.

You're trying to argue that a Mondeo & an M16 are the same in terms of purpose.

Utter bollox.

If that officer had been a little bit cooler headed that kid might still be alive

I suppose the officer pulled the trigger out of fear..

The interesting thing about top speed is that it is related to the engine power that increases the 'driveability' of the vehicle at lower speeds and with heavier loads. A GPS limiter could reduce the available top speed and reduce misuse and some potential for lethality.

Could you do similar with guns to reduce their lethality [i][b]in designed use[/i][/b]?

jamj1974

The interesting thing about top speed is that it is related to the engine power

I would have thought it was related to gearing and aerodynamics.

A GPS limiter could reduce the available top speed and reduce misuse and some potential for lethality.

What is statistically more dangerous, driving over the limit in a 30mph / 40mph zone or on a motorway? I would have thought speeding in urban / built up areas is considerably more lethal for other road users. Just guessing mind you.

Guns can't really be power limited as their intended use (and therefore design) are governed by simple laws of physics as related to the projected range.

Cars, yes, can be tuned for better acceleration and power with a cap on top speed. Jimjam, yes, top speed is restricted by power. Otherwise you could just fit a silly top gear and set world land speed records in FIAT Pandas (silly comparison yes but same point).

AFAIK M16's are not permitted firearms since they are full auto. You'll be confusing them with AR15's (though we're really just arguing semantics, the outcome is little different or more likely worse with a controlled semi auto).

Guns can't really be power limited as their intended use (and therefore design) are governed by simple laws of physics as related to the projected range.

Indeed. My point entirely.

I would have thought it was related to gearing and aerodynamics.

Partly!

Breaks my heart & makes me very grateful that I live in a country where the police aren't armed & we have good gun controls

What country is that then? Some little island somewhere where they drive round on mobility scooters and everyone leaves their doors unlocked?

And as for guns being power limited well the licensing system in this country does have bearings on muzzle energy as each caliber is limited by how much it can take in CUP (units of pressure) and its muzzle velocity and kinetic energy, in fact you have minimum energy/bullet weight requirements for shooting deer (varies slightly in Scotland) to stop people trying to shoot them with .22 rim fire and to make sure there is enough energy to kill not maim. You can't simply get an FAC and buy a 30-06 to plink cans in your back garden.

If the car licensing system was run on similar principles then there would be less road deaths as speed would be taken out of the equation. Want a 300bhp car that's only for use at approved ranges (tracks) no problem. 40hp 60mph limited (20 in gps activated urban areas) you can have that too, but not the 180mph nob-motor.

If the car licensing system was run on similar principles then there would be less road deaths as speed would be taken out of the equation.

Blimey - just think if UK driving licences were really on the same principles as FAC 😯

Nicked for drunk and disorderly, well, you're clearly a potential drink-driving risk, bye bye driving licence (to put this in context, people done for drink driving have lost their gun licences on this principle)
Assault/violent behaviour - intemperate behaviour and road rage risk, lose your licence
Speeding offences? Five years mandatory sentence
Replacement licence with two witnesses as to your behaviour and attitude every five years

And all that on top of having to prove good reason to own a car in the first place!

As usual the best way to deflect criticism of gun ownership is to dive straight into road traffic. If you fixed road safety would you accept strict gun control? Probably not. It's all just to divert from the argument that guns and gun owners in the US are responsible for a serious amount of totally unnecessary death. Cars should be treated the same way at times with safety protocols etc. thankfully the world isn't binary and we can look at the 2 issues separately.

How about some simple common sense rules that allow for the ownership of certain weapons but they must be held in a range and not taken out of them (same as if you want to drive like a racing driver go to the track with your car on a trailer) have a transport system if you want your guns moved.

But back to simple things if you have such little trust in your democracy (the one that gets held up as the best in the world when suited) that you need to have a Plan B that involves an armed uprising then you have something wrong.
If you feel the need to arm yourself for self defence purposes then your law enforcement have got something wrong.

The stats speak for themselves, unfortunately the gun lobby's cash shouts loudly and some people can't work out what is actually sensible.
I think it was the point where Academics were considering leaving the Uni of Texas as it had been told it had to allow concealed carry - sounds like a recipe for disaster given the rollercoaster of emotions students tend to go through would you want to be failing a kid who could be armed?

back to simple things if you have such little trust in your democracy (the one that gets held up as the best in the world when suited) that you need to have a Plan B that involves an armed uprising then you have something wrong.

Maybe it's the best democracy precisely because they can have an armed uprising. Power remains vested in the people.

They got the idea from us remember.

Maybe it's the best democracy precisely because they can have an armed uprising. Power remains vested in the people.

Maybe it's the best democracy precisely because they can have an armed uprising

this argument doesn't work when one side has a massive standing army, drones and B52s...

How about some simple common sense rules that allow for the ownership of certain weapons but they must be held in a range and not taken out of them (same as if you want to drive like a racing driver go to the track with your car on a trailer) have a transport system if you want your guns moved.

The transport system is where your plan falls down tbh. At the moment it's hard enough to post an air gun never mind a (potentially) section 5. You can't even get a rifle properly insured through the post (if it's even allowed, seemingly it's fine to post a Fox Vanilla air can but woe betide you post a depressurised PCP or a divers bottle with the valve off).

What we do need is a proper cold-eye review of our entire firearms legislation and have it rewritten for common sense rather than mass hysteria. Section 1 and 2 (rifles and shotguns) would probably remain as is, ideally Firearms Amendment (No.2) (1997) is repealed allowing the use of .22 rimfire pistols (meaning competition shooters can practice anywhere other than Bisley) and a thorough review of equivalent applicability to air weapons is conducted (several types are a grey area that need clarified in law and the whole reason for the 12fpe limit was a trade infuenced one albeit probably not something that will change).

If you think, whoa wait a minute, bring back pistols?!? you should bear in mind that there are plenty of people in the country that still hold section 1 licences (with special dispensation) to hold pistols for humane dispatch, to say nothing for the ridiculous long pistols still allowed (essentially a pistol with a stock on the butt and extra long barrel).

Ninfans point about licence equivalencies is a good one though. He also missed the part where depending what brand of fuel you put in you could end up with a car that requires a different licence to what you have (or don't have) or could be illegal altogether.

Anyway, that's here, and the argument was about over there.

I have relatives in America, New Hampshire, so not the busiest/scariest place in terms of crime and nutjobs on the rampage, it's pretty sparsely populated and sedate.

They have several hundred acres of land, mostly forest, and my one relative hunts, most things that are legal. Perversely though, the sporting seasons are highly regulated, with certain species only being able to be hunted for short periods, with certain weapons, certainly it seems more restrictive (in NH at least) in terms of shooting live quarry than in the UK.

So he has a range of hunting rifles with iron and telescopic sights, everything from a little .22 (that they would view similarly to how we see air rifles in the UK) that is always out/in the truck/to hand, to something that can take down coyotes, bears and big deer/moose. He also has some shotguns, for shooting birds and small 'critters', then handguns and semi automatic assault type rifles, which only go to the range, for fun.

One rifle was won in a raffle to give you an idea of how normal guns are perceived.

We were talking about self/home defence and my relative said he'd never use a rifle or handgun (which is in reality a stubby barrelled rifle) in the house, purely because they're so dangerous and unpredictable (not to mention hard to aim), the bullets could go anywhere and through anything, potentially killing your own family. He said if he was going to shoot in the house, it would have to be with a shotgun, the logic of which is sound, as the pellets loose energy quite quickly and don't penetrate like rifle bullets - also the range is more than enough.

It's all a bit scary that they think they need guns for protection, but I guess I might too if I lived there. I'm used to guns and we have several shotguns in our house, as well as shooting rifles with friends and family, so it's not a big deal, but I know most people in the UK have probably never seen a gun up close, let alone held or used one.

If I lived in the US, I'd have guns anyway, for sport, and on the basis that I had them already, I'd probably use one for home defence. Not keen on carrying a handgun though. I do like all sorts of guns however, just from a history/engineering/development point of view, they're interesting things to me, so I'd probably own loads, but never use most of them.

Gun laws do vary quite a lot from state to state though, and you have to be careful when travelling over borders that you don't fall foul of local law.

All in all, I think they should just stop handgun and any assault type weapon sales, including semi-automatic rifles. You should also have to be vetted and a genuine need/use identified.

It's all a bit scary that they think they need guns for protection, but I guess I might too if I lived there. I'm used to guns and we have several shotguns in our house, as well as shooting rifles with friends and family, so it's not a big deal, but I know most people in the UK have probably never seen a gun up close, let alone held or used one.

If I lived in the US, I'd have guns anyway, for sport, and on the basis that i had them already, I'd probably use one for home defence. Not keen on carrying a handgun though. I do like all sorts of guns however, just from a history/engineering/development point of view, they're interesting things to me, so I'd probably own loads, but never use most of them.

Growin up in the country I saw and handled a fair few shotguns, air etc. and spent 10 years on and off surrounded by a very heavily armed police force who waved their very loaded machine guns around a lot at times. They were needed given what they were protecting.

What country is that then?

That'll be the UK.

Be a pessimistic sod if you like, but I like living in a place where you can't buy an assault rifle from a high street store, not worrying that someone is carrying a concealed weapon in the local pub & where the Old Bill aren't habitually tooled up with semi-automatic weapons - just a can of pepper spray & a truncheon.

Try living in the States for a few years where that's a daily occurrence - you'll soon appreciate the little things..

🙄

core

It's all a bit scary that they think they need guns for protection, but I guess I might too if I lived there.

My neighbour in Donegal is a farmer, a bachelor in his 60s and he keeps a shotgun handy at night for home / self defense. Obviously that's not why he has it legally speaking. From speaking to him and other farmers it's not that uncommon.

If I lived in the US, I'd have guns anyway, for sport, and on the basis that I had them already, I'd probably use one for home defence. Not keen on carrying a handgun though. I do like all sorts of guns however, just from a history/engineering/development point of view, they're interesting things to me, so I'd probably own loads, but never use most of them.

Same as that. Although the idea of prowling through my own home at night with a loaded weapon just seems like a recipe for disaster.

where the Old Bill aren't habitually tooled up with semi-automatic weapons

Where do you live? Armed police are so common these days it's almost surpising not seeing at least one in a group of them.

Where do you live? Armed police are so common these days it's almost surpising not seeing at least one in a group of them.

Z3 London & I can 100% guarantee you that there are less armed police on the street than you think so dont go getting carried away.

There are about 30k officers in the Met of which 2.8k are trained to carry arms..

[url= http://content.met.police.uk/Site/about ]Met numbers[/url]

[url= http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-35308467 ]Armed officers[/url]

It's not abut guns, it's not about method of killing (gun/car/van/bare hands) It's simply about responsibility and fear.

Pump people full of enough fear, there's a peado on every corner, the governments coming to get you, white hates black and vice versa and sprinkle on a big helping of machismo and you have a recipe for disaster.

The police have guns, so the criminals get guns, so the police get bigger guns, so the criminals strike first. The people caught in the middle so they go and buy something with no training in how to be responsible and then the kids start shooting each other/themselves. Middle class people stop listening to their kids because they both have to work, self hate and mental instability kicks in because they think they're different or bullied or whatever, so they take an AR-15 to lunch.

I was a responsible shooter for 15 years, a responsible gun owner for 5, I never shot anyone. I never flouted the law. I've probably broken more laws driving and had 100% more near misses that could have ended up in someone being injured. Most of these because people won't even take the responsibility to use indicators or I haven't taken responsibility to think they might not be turning after all.

Blame the guns......that's easy
Blame the gun shops or the laws, that's really easy
Blame the criminals, blame the police, blame the nutters, the Trumps or whoever.
At the end of the day, everyone else is to blame and that's how it will always be

That'll be the UK.

Be a pessimistic sod if you like, but I like living in a place where you can't buy an assault rifle from a high street store, not worrying that someone is carrying a concealed weapon in the local pub & where the Old Bill aren't habitually tooled up with semi-automatic weapons - just a can of pepper spray & a truncheon.

Try living in the States for a few years where that's a daily occurrence - you'll soon appreciate the little things..

and i was going to point out how despite having highly regulated gun laws with no fully auto or pistols allowed there is a healthy illegal trade in these items and you could argue illegal firearms are more easily available than legal. you can evidently rent them!

Blame the guns......that's easy
Blame the gun shops or the laws, that's really easy
Blame the criminals, blame the police, blame the nutters, the Trumps or whoever.
At the end of the day, everyone else is to blame and that's how it will always be

So 9.3% of MET officers are armed response, getting on to 1 in 10 officers. That's quite a lot really isn't it?

Checked PS figures, we're running at just over 2% although it's likely I'm seeing more of them given I stray within the Ayrshire and Glasgow divisions.

But yes, less than I thought but still a fair amount in your neck of the woods.

[quote=mattsccm ]Thing is.... why do people rant on so much about firearms yet happily condone millions more people, even in this country, owning a much more lethal weapon?
The private car. Same thing applies but many times over.

Stop having a go at the private car. Smoking kills far more people than cars do, until we've put a stop to that then we should let drivers do whatever they like.

Agree with chubstr...

@aracer standard deflection and whataboutry. No need to answer the difficult questions that way. Same as the I love Donald and eu threads. If you can't answer the questions blame something else and vanish into a cloud of theatrical smoke.

So 9.3% of MET officers are armed response, getting on to 1 in 10 officers. That's quite a lot really isn't it?

??

The way you made it sound:

Armed police are so common these days it's almost surpising not seeing at least one in a group of them.

"So common...." sounds a little bit more than 10%!

It does seem a bit like arguing with Pro Gun heathens is not too dissimilar to arguing with those who are Pro Brexit....

Ninfan - just to clarify, are you anti-EU? You know, just so I can add to my venn diagram...

"So common...." sounds a little bit more than 10%!

Seeing as you never bothered reading the rest of my post I'll say it again.

[b]Checked PS figures, we're running at just over 2% although it's likely I'm seeing more of them given I stray within the Ayrshire and Glasgow divisions.

But yes, less than I thought but still a fair amount in your neck of the woods.[/b]

mrlebowski - Member

Met numbers etc.

Armed officers etc.

I was on the 5-45 pm from Waterloo to somewhere in Surrey on Friday night and sat down at random in an empty seat only to see a mate of some 47 years acquaintance sitting opposite me.

After the usual catching up etc. I asked after his mum as she has been ill and in hospital and commented on when how [i]my[/i] mum had gone visiting his mum he had been there too.

Oh hi, my mum says, I hope you haven't got your gun on you she said in her totally unaware kind of way. Well actually... he said, I dare not leave it in the car and opened his bag to display his VIP protection squad tools of the trade.

We laughed at this and he lifted the side of the rather large jacket he was wearing to indicate that he was tooled up on the aforementioned packed commuter train too. Useful jackets these he said.

(don't worry, we spoke in a sort of code/intimation way so that we both knew what we were talking about without alarming the rest of the train).

Anyroad up, that's slightly off the point. I'm not an America-hater, I've had many happy holidays there and have many relatives there too but as I heard many years ago, America (and it's society) is the only country to go from rise to fall without an intervening period of civilisation...