Kerry wants to ban all shotguns!

[RadicalDreamer]

[quote="Nekra";p="394188"]its the pistols you should be banning, a pistol has only one use the killing of human beings.[/quote]

Ignoring the grammarical errors, your logic is greatly flawed. Plenty of pistols are used for hunting. How many police officers have you seen wielding a Raging Bull chambered for .454 Casull rounds?

[Blaze]

Pistols are range weapons, and are also great use in hunting small game and should always be carried when hunting large game in case you need to "put it out of it's misery" if you put it down but it isn't dead.

Also the most useful for self defense.

[Teranfirbt]

[quote="Imperator Severn";p="394307"]

guns are perfectly safe.

Bullshit. Guns are made for killing, and that's just what they'll do.[/quote]
Thanks for not quoting the whole sentence, jackass.
I said:

when used responsibly (ie: not swinging it around or point it at people) guns are perfectly safe.

Responsible gun handling makes them safe. When I go out shooting with my grandfather and father, I'm in far more danger of having my head caved in by a falling tree branch than getting shot.

[Martin Blank]

Switzerland is the nation that issues firearms to all militia-age members, and last I say, they were G-36 rifles. Norway also does something similar, and has a phenominally low murder rate. Sweden and Finland may do something similar, but they issue rifles, not pistols, IIRC.

I've fired a wide variety of weapons before, at ranges and in the wild. They include various pistols from .22 through .50AE, shotguns from 20ga to 12ga, a fully-automatic Uzi, and rifles from .22 through .50cal sniping rifle. An AK is both far more accurate and far less deadly than many people realize. Prone with a scoped AR-15, I was able to keep my rounds in about a three-foot-diameter at 400m. Standing with iron sights, a friend (and the owner of the guns) was able to keep his AK in a two-foot diameter circle at the same range. (Bastard.) That said, the rounds at short range tend to penetrate cleanly instead of lodging and deflecting, which they do at longer ranges. They're far more deadly out beyond normal urban engagement ranges.

At this point, I don't own any firearms (something I hope to change in the next couple of months). If I do have a gun, and you're in my home uninvited (read: breaking in), you'd best be prepared to hear a click of a hammer or a racking of a shotgun behind you and to not move except to do exactly that which I tell you to do, which will include calling the police for me, or you're going to find two rounds as close to the center of mass as I can get, and if you're still moving, one more to the head. I have a girlfriend I'd defend right now, and in the future I hope to have have a wife and children. You may not have any intentions of harm towards me or them, but I'm not taking any chances. I've faced down someone pointing a gun at me before -- more than once in a single night, in fact -- and kept a clear head about me. I have confidence the same thing would happen in another stressful situation, particularly if I have the upper edge.

Same goes for the government. They have their place, and it's to serve my interests as part of the nation. When they are no longer serving my interests, they can expect my voice to be shouted to them, and should they respond with force, they will be met with appropriate force. I have no reason to believe at this point that there is any real chance that I would see the nation turn on itself, but I cannot see what will come about 20, 50, or 100 years from now, and I would rather preserve the right and ability of the populace to defend itself against such than to simply figure that the status quo will continue.

Thomas Jefferson carried on an active correspondence with William Smith. In November 1787, he wrote the following words in a letter discussing the outcome of the relatively recent Shay's Rebellion:

We have had 13. states independent 11. years. There has been one rebellion. That comes to one rebellion in a century & a half for each state. What country before ever existed a century & half without a rebellion? & what country can preserve it's liberties if their rulers are not warned from time to time that their people preserve the spirit of resistance? Let them take arms. The remedy is to set them right as to facts, pardon & pacify them. What signify a few lives lost in a century or two? The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots & tyrants.

[tankkisankari]

[quote="Martin Blank";p="394395"]Switzerland is the nation that issues firearms to all militia-age members, and last I say, they were G-36 rifles. Norway also does something similar, and has a phenominally low murder rate. Sweden and Finland may do something similar, but they issue rifles, not pistols, IIRC.[/quote]
Not sure about Norway, but in Sweden about 15000 conscripts serve in the military yearly, they dont get to keep their weapons.
In Finland, some 30000 conscripts serve, about 90% of men have military training. We dont get to keep our weapons after getting back to civillian life. I'd sure like to have my BMP-1 around especially when it's cold and rainy outside.
I dont't that it's a good idea to keep the Military guns at home, atleast not here, we Finns sometimes have a bad habit of getting cranky when drunk.Most violent crime here is between people who know each other beforehand.

I'm curious, are there statistics about break-ins, don't they mostly occur when houses are empty? It might be that that i live in such a peaceful country, but i very rarely hear about burglars getting into ahouse where they know peole are at home.

[Teranfirbt]

On the topic of home defense...
I believe the pump action shot gun is one of the best out there.. The near universal sound of the action itself is enough to send a would be robber/attacker running for the door...
I plan to own at least one, for sport and for home defense...

[Deacon]

Speaking of which, does the fedearl ban on "assault weapons" that will be falling victim to its sunset clause in a few days have anything to do with the restrictions on shotgun barrel length? I'd like to keep what basically amounts to a sawed-off shotgun in my closet, but I'd prefer it be totally legal to do so. I have no plans for hunting with it. It'd be purely for home defense.

[Martin Blank]

[quote="tankkisankari";p="394403"]I'm curious, are there statistics about break-ins, don't they mostly occur when houses are empty? It might be that that i live in such a peaceful country, but i very rarely hear about burglars getting into ahouse where they know peole are at home.[/quote]
You refer to hot burglaries, which happen when people are in the home. I'll see if I can find more exact numbers, but the most recent numbers of which I'm aware have the hot burglary rate in the US at about 15%, while in Europe it's around 50%. The reason for the lower rate in the US, according to felons interviewed about it, is that they "don't want to get shot." Says a lot, actually.

[Calus]

Martin, are you a master of Chu-chuk?

[Nodbugger]

[quote="Deacon";p="394407"]Speaking of which, does the fedearl ban on "assault weapons" that will be falling victim to its sunset clause in a few days have anything to do with the restrictions on shotgun barrel length? I'd like to keep what basically amounts to a sawed-off shotgun in my closet, but I'd prefer it be totally legal to do so. I have no plans for hunting with it. It'd be purely for home defense.[/quote]

Wouldn't it be grandfather in?

[adamjaskie]

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.c ... DT0710.DTL

Expiring.

An AK-47 may be a very deadly weapon, but it is not exactly small. I don't think many people would be running around holding up convenience stores with them. It is a bit easier to conceal a 9mm handgun than an "assult" rifle. Besides, a law passed in 193- bans fully automatic weapons, so any real AK-47 is already banned under that. All you can have is a semi-automatic replica. Kerry's ban would outlaw anything that LOOKS like an AK-47, no matter what is inside it.

And, as to the "never be able to stand up to the military" thing, I don't really care. I would rather die fighting for my country against its own government than die in my sleep at the age of 90 in a country where the United States of America lives on in name alone.

[Nekra]

since were going to go into statisitics, care to bring up the murder rates, specifically the murder rates involving fire arms, a european might try to find another solution where as an american reaches straight for the gun. people quote the need to hunt as a good reason to own a weapon, what reason does anyone these days have to hunt, understandly a farmer might use one to keep vermin from his/her land, the same could apply for someone with a similar style of home, but a person living in suburbia and within a city should have no need for a gun. not even to protect themselves.

[adamjaskie]

Murder rates have nothing to do with guns. If someone wants to kill their wife, they are going to kill them whether or not they have a gun. A knife can kill someone just as quickly as a gun, and is probably much deadlier in a close quarters situation. I think you need to look at our society's fascination with violence before you look at guns. And no, violent video games and bloody movies are NOT the problem, they are a symptom.

As for hunting, many people hunt for sport. They enjoy the outdoors aspect of stalking prey, bringing it down, cleaning it, cutting it up, cooking the meat, and eating it. Some people LIKE venison. Try finding it in your local supermarket. Also, if nobody hunted, deer would become a huge problem. They would be everywhere, eating people's lawns and gardens, etc. Even where I live, a few miles outside of a decent size city, there are deer everywhere. People hit them on the road, and our neighbor's vegetable garden got pretty much cropped clean to the ground by deer. It would be even worse if nobody hunted them. A nearby park actually hired professional hunters to thin the herd, taking out older, weaker deer, because there was a disease problem.

Then there is the sport of target shooting. Some people actually find it fun and challenging to hit circles drawn on a sheet of paper a few hundred feet away, or to shoot clay frisbees out of the sky with a shotgun.

Besides which, most people that use a gun for home defense probably will not shoot first and ask questions later. I know I wouldn't. They would have the gun pointed at them, and be ordered to lay on the ground with their hands behind them, tied up, and hauled off by the police.

[peter-griffin]

Nothing causes wet pants more than the sound of a slide action on a Barretta 92FS behind you.

[Imperator Severn]

Imperator Severn, criminals that that have given someone a reason to shoot them, 99% of the time have given up their right to be called a human. I feel nothing when a law abiding citizen kills a criminal. I applaud someone for protecting themselves.

Did I say they didn't have it coming? No, I simply pointed out that killing a criminal is homicide.