ITT: Firearms & the use thereof [Not Policy]

siliconenhanced

electricitylikesme wrote:

So, somewhat side issue. Australia - rather hefty gun laws. Me - doesn't want to own a gun. But I have made it a task to learn how to handle and shoot one accurately at some stage.

Where would I go about finding this sort of activity?

?

I'm not being a smart ass, its where I started to get heavily into guns. (that and being up in Alaska.)

mcdermott

siliconenhanced wrote:

electricitylikesme wrote:

So, somewhat side issue. Australia - rather hefty gun laws. Me - doesn't want to own a gun. But I have made it a task to learn how to handle and shoot one accurately at some stage.

Where would I go about finding this sort of activity?

?

I'm not being a smart ass, its where I started to get heavily into guns. (that and being up in Alaska.)

Same here. mcdermott at 18 had never fired a gun before, and believed the damn things should probably just be banned. Few years in the Army later, and I actually go and shoot just for fun.

I also got to drive tanks. Big fun.

Saevar

Evander wrote:

Saevar wrote:

A loaded firearm isn't any more dangerous than any other object. Load one sometime, put it on your table and leave it. It won't go off. I've got a 9mm thats been loaded many a time. Never once has it, or I, killed any animal, human or otherwise. There's not a paper target in the area that'll mess with me though.

Its the human element that can make a firearm lethal.

I know you're being a little overly defensive because you feel like your way of life is being attacked, but seriously, come on. I have a large knife that I keep in my desk drawer, and I recognize that it is dangerous. Dangerous doesn't equal bad or evil. The fact is, pretending that guns are harmless hurts the side of guns more than anything, because the dangers of guns are OBVIOUS. When anti-gun people see pro-gun people saying that guns are harmless, what they think is "wow, those gun folks are insane, we REALLY need to getthose guns out of their hands."

OF COURSE a loaded gun is less dangerous without the human element, but regulating the human element is not exactly a solution to anything. I may be personally against the use of firearms, but I'm in favor of other people doing what they want, as long as public safety is ensured, which is why it seems to me that, difficult though it may be, looking into some kind of way to regulate bullets might be more effective than regulating guns further, since while the gun regulations may or may not save lives, once a gun is in the hands of a criminal, those regulations don't do anything to protect anyone anymore. Find an actual way to regulate bullets, and every time a criminal wants to shoot some one, no matter how long they've had the gun, they have roadblocks.

I am not being 'overly defensive.' I did not, at any point, say "guns are not dangerous." I did say that they are not any more dangerous than any other object. Like the knife in your drawer, or the car in my driveway. Neither the knife or the car (or the firearm) are going to stab, run over, or shoot anybody on their own. Even on accident. Its human behavior that is dangerous, and that makes tools dangerous.

You cannot ensure public safety with legislation. Really, you just can't ensure it, no matter what you do. You can coax it with legislation. But you can't ensure it. Here's the thing though.. its already illegal to murder or otherwise assault another person. Still happens, though. Throwing more legislation around, especially that which is focused on the inanimate, isn't going to halt or mitigate the violence. Regulating guns, or ammunition, would only be useful if they caused crime directly or provoked those who possessed them into committing crimes. Which isn't the case.

Juergen Hubert

I've shot with a pistol, assault rifle, machine gun, and an RPG (once, in the last case). It was fun, but nothing that I am interested in pursuing further at this stage.

electricitylikesme

Saevar wrote:

Evander wrote:

Saevar wrote:

A loaded firearm isn't any more dangerous than any other object. Load one sometime, put it on your table and leave it. It won't go off. I've got a 9mm thats been loaded many a time. Never once has it, or I, killed any animal, human or otherwise. There's not a paper target in the area that'll mess with me though.

Its the human element that can make a firearm lethal.

I know you're being a little overly defensive because you feel like your way of life is being attacked, but seriously, come on. I have a large knife that I keep in my desk drawer, and I recognize that it is dangerous. Dangerous doesn't equal bad or evil. The fact is, pretending that guns are harmless hurts the side of guns more than anything, because the dangers of guns are OBVIOUS. When anti-gun people see pro-gun people saying that guns are harmless, what they think is "wow, those gun folks are insane, we REALLY need to getthose guns out of their hands."

OF COURSE a loaded gun is less dangerous without the human element, but regulating the human element is not exactly a solution to anything. I may be personally against the use of firearms, but I'm in favor of other people doing what they want, as long as public safety is ensured, which is why it seems to me that, difficult though it may be, looking into some kind of way to regulate bullets might be more effective than regulating guns further, since while the gun regulations may or may not save lives, once a gun is in the hands of a criminal, those regulations don't do anything to protect anyone anymore. Find an actual way to regulate bullets, and every time a criminal wants to shoot some one, no matter how long they've had the gun, they have roadblocks.

I am not being 'overly defensive.' I did not, at any point, say "guns are not dangerous." I did say that they are not any more dangerous than any other object. Like the knife in your drawer, or the car in my driveway. Neither the knife or the car (or the firearm) are going to stab, run over, or shoot anybody on their own. Even on accident. Its human behavior that is dangerous, and that makes tools dangerous.

You cannot ensure public safety with legislation. Really, you just can't ensure it, no matter what you do. You can coax it with legislation. But you can't ensure it. Here's the thing though.. its already illegal to murder or otherwise assault another person. Still happens, though. Throwing more legislation around, especially that which is focused on the inanimate, isn't going to halt or mitigate the violence. Regulating guns, or ammunition, would only be useful if they caused crime directly or provoked those who possessed them into committing crimes. Which isn't the case.

An accidentally fired round, even from a handgun, can travel upto or over 1000m and still be dangerous.

I'd like to see the knife which can do the same thing.

Danger is hardly what we're concerned about here, we're concerned about the total amount of danger if an accident occurs. TNT is perfectly safe when properly stored, but we sure as hell don't let people in residential areas stockpile it in their garages.

Saevar

electricitylikesme wrote:

An accidentally fired round, even from a handgun, can travel upto or over 1000m and still be dangerous.

I'd like to see the knife which can do the same thing.

Danger is hardly what we're concerned about here, we're concerned about the total amount of danger if an accident occurs. TNT is perfectly safe when properly stored, but we sure as hell don't let people in residential areas stockpile it in their garages.

I'm not quite sure how you figure such legislation is around to protect us from accidents. Neither gun control nor any sort of proposed ammunition control is going to make anybody any safer from an accidental, or negligent, discharge. Background checks look for certain criminal acts that you have been convicted of. Stupidity, unfortunately, isn't a criminal act yet. So here's why you won't be protected:

Rules of Firearms Safety:
-Only point a firearm at something you don't mind seeing destroyed.
-Treat every firearm like a loaded one. Even if you know it isn't, treat it like doing something stupid with it will kill somebody.
-Booger hooks off the bang switch until ready to fire (Fingers off the trigger!)
-Know your target and know whats backstopping it.

Harm to persons or property are going to, nearly always, violate at least 2 of those rules. An accidental discharge is one where you were doing everything right and still the gun fired. Further, because you were pointing safely (at something you were willing to see destroyed) and you knew the backstop was safe, the shot doesn't do much, if any, harm. These are really, really rare. Having a gun go off because somebody was showing off their fancy holstering maneuver is a negligent discharge. How'd he get his ammo? Simple. He passed the background check at the point of sale. He's stupid or careless. Either of which is dangerous. Neither of which is criminal. Thus nothing stopped him from buying a gun or ammo, except for any waiting periods and fees that may be imposed.

Glaeal

Saevar wrote:

electricitylikesme wrote:

An accidentally fired round, even from a handgun, can travel upto or over 1000m and still be dangerous.

I'd like to see the knife which can do the same thing.

Danger is hardly what we're concerned about here, we're concerned about the total amount of danger if an accident occurs. TNT is perfectly safe when properly stored, but we sure as hell don't let people in residential areas stockpile it in their garages.

I'm not quite sure how you figure such legislation is around to protect us from accidents. Neither gun control nor any sort of proposed ammunition control is going to make anybody any safer from an accidental, or negligent, discharge. Background checks look for certain criminal acts that you have been convicted of. Stupidity, unfortunately, isn't a criminal act yet. So here's why you won't be protected:

Rules of Firearms Safety:
-Only point a firearm at something you don't mind seeing destroyed.
-Treat every firearm like a loaded one. Even if you know it isn't, treat it like doing something stupid with it will kill somebody.
-Booger hooks off the bang switch until ready to fire (Fingers off the trigger!)
-Know your target and know whats backstopping it.

Harm to persons or property are going to, nearly always, violate at least 2 of those rules. An accidental discharge is one where you were doing everything right and still the gun fired. Further, because you were pointing safely (at something you were willing to see destroyed) and you knew the backstop was safe, the shot doesn't do much, if any, harm. These are really, really rare. Having a gun go off because somebody was showing off their fancy holstering maneuver is a negligent discharge. How'd he get his ammo? Simple. He passed the background check at the point of sale. He's stupid or careless. Either of which is dangerous. Neither of which is criminal. Thus nothing stopped him from buying a gun or ammo, except for any waiting periods and fees that may be imposed.

Get out.

X5

Does anyone here own a Sig sauer Sig pro series pistol?

I've been doing some research on many different handguns that I am interested in and just want feedback on this particular pistola.

P.S. Doc: you won't be upset with an 870, they are lovely guns

Doc

X5 wrote:

P.S. Doc: you won't be upset with an 870, they are lovely guns

I picked one up today. It feels much more solid than a Mossberg; I'm glad I went with it.

I'm going to be using it for pheasant and quail hunting. I'll let you guys know how it goes once I actually get around to going out.

Whiniest Man On Earth

Debate: Do I buy a HK P2000 now or do I wait until spring/summer when the P30 is released?

TDM

What would you guys recommend for a first time gun buyer who has some experience using them and wants one for general home defense for around $300?

People seem to think shotguns are great for home defense but it seems to me they are heavy and long which would be a disadvantage in close quarters.

Capt Howdy

TDM wrote:

What would you guys recommend for a first time gun buyer who has some experience using them and wants one for general home defense for around $300?

People seem to think shotguns are great for home defense but it seems to me they are heavy and long which would be a disadvantage in close quarters.

Remington 870 magnum express 12 gauge.

You can buy a short, light weight, shotgun pretty easily. The real beauty of a pump shotgun is that you simply have to pump it to make a burgular shit himself. Everyone knows what that sound means, and most people will make a hasty exit upon hearing it.

Theres that, and the fact that pistols require more accuracy. You would think that it's as simple as point and shoot, but if the target is more than 10ft, it is a little more difficult than that. Add darkness to the equation and things just get more dangerous.