barman
Member
I can remember my uncle regularly shooting his sub-machine guns. He was an Indochina war veteran. He owned a Mat 49 and an MP-40.
That was all before 1995.
That was all before 1995.
Europeans are irrelevant to the discussion on RKBA here, or anywhere else for that matter
As far as safety goes, I am shocked that people feel so insecure on the streets in America. What kind of Mad Max society have you got going there? The worst 'bad guys' I encounter sometimes are people that openly laugh at me for wearing a cool hat. I've never in my entire life been confronted with a gun in a threatening way (i.e. as something other than a museum piece). Surely this is a much more relaxed organisation of a society than one where everyone has a cocked gun under his shirt, always on the look-out for some madcap aggressor?
My own government cannot use the army to disarm a bunch of Al Qaiada barbarians in Iraq ... so how can they possibly prevent me from being armed? EU governments cannot prevent criminals from getting firearms ... so don't even consider using your governments methods, as they have proven useless.
sterling180 said:Think about it very carefully:gun bans were brough in to protect people against psychos in their communities,who were not previously criminals.When they say criminals they mean would-be criminals.Most normal people can't blow away 30 or more people with an AK47,like Rambo Ryan did,now can they?
People who support anti-groups target everyone,irrespective of anything and these people are ordinary UK citizens too.No one really wants guns here anymore,because they don't want them and there is no plot to disarm us at all,it is that society is more liberal then before.
It was popular because the GCN used every trick in the book to discredit the shooting community
I didn't know about that. I heard about them beating up Mike Yardley, but not about the discrediting. Can you give some examples?
Im sure G36UK,that some of the stuff that you have probably read on the GCNs website,is recycled old-campaign stuff,from the birth of that annoying organization.
One guy joked about cutting-down the 1895,so that he could be Arnie,so that was translated into irresposible nutcases and these weapons use pistol ammo,because the rifles used .357 and 44 magnum ammo.
Yes it is. Some people need killing - particularly when someone is going to die, and the only deciding factor between whether that someone is the good person or the bad person is a good person with a gun.What is a fact though is that a gun is a tool for killing.
The interests of the collective and the individual are often starkly at odds.society hardly needs every person to own weapons.
<Insert blank "wow, that's a really ignorant comment" look here>you make it seem like it is the only thing that keeps a government from becoming a tyranny, but this is hardly what has happened in Europe, where no one carries guns.
We don't feel insecure.I am shocked that people feel so insecure on the streets in America. What kind of Mad Max society have you got going there?
Yup.gun owners will state that guns are necessary to rise up to their government if necessary.
On the whole, supporting the actions. We understand that sometimes violence is needed to prevent worse violence ... while we watch European countries kowtow to the demands of terrorists and oppressors.It occurs to me that it has never been more necessary than in the last eight years, going from the amount of damage the US has done to international relationships and wars. But where were all the gun-toting citizens?
Given at the time of Dunblane, we all thought Hamilton was a law-abiding gun owner, I can see why everyone felt guilty. However, given SAGBNI's