Proposed weapons ban

[-=DoW=- resqman]

Looks like they want to take away the assault weapons again. Only this time to include more. Like semi auto shotguns

http://www.nraila.org/Legislation/Read.aspx?ID=2668

Would be wise of them to study the mistake of gun writer/outdoorsman Jim Zumbo

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/17307316/

[CrazySnyper]

There is a problem inherent with gun bans. Who do you send to take away people's guns?

Guy without gun: Hello, I'm here to take your gun.

Guy with gun: Um, you wanna bet?

You can guess how that ones going to play out. So next time they send a guy with a gun to take away the other guys gun.

Guy with gun (from government): I'm here to take away your gun.

Regular Joe with gun: Why?

Guy with gun (from government): Because guns kill people.

Regular Joe with gun: So why do you have a gun?

I'm not even going to bother to write my congresspeople considering all three are republicans strongly endorsed by the NRA. But for those of you living in somewhat more "progressive" areas I would love it if you would write yours.

[-=DoW=- Body Piercer]

How absolutely pointless. All that does is take them away from people that would be using them for recreation anyway. Gun restrictions don't work for what they're intended. Just look at any major city's gangs for proof.

[-=DoW=- resqman]

I've done better than talked to my congressman, I've talked to my sherrif. He said there is no way he, nor any of his deputies, are going to attempt to participate in gun confiscation.

Can you imagine trying to take the guns of 30,000 rednecks :lol:

[CrazySnyper]

Especially because the sherrif and his deputies probably all own guns themselves.

Of course these damned gun bans always try to get around that problem by not actually confiscating guns people currently own, just not allowing them to get new ones. How stupid.

Its illegal to kill someone with a gun, it seems to me like someone who is going to break that law they probably won't have any moral qualms with breaking the law prohibiting them from buying a gun.

[Schwatd]

I think if memory serves me correctly, the last jerk (had something a little more paint peeling till I realized this is the public side) that tried gun control was named Hitler.

[-=DoW=- Hean]

Can you imagine trying to take the guns of 30,000 rednecks :lol:
It's called civilwar.....:lol:

After the WWII, there were about 50.000 men and women from the danish resistant, still under arms. The danish government wanted them to lay down there arms. None of them did. Then the Danish National Guard were founded, and funny, with 50.000 members. Today there are about 75.000 members. I was one of them, and a had a G3A3 rifle in my home, with 100 rounds of ammo. My neighbor has a MG3 with 500 rounds, and his wife a Carl Gustaf Kpist M/45 also 100 rounds.

We live in a quit neighborhood!!!!!!!!!!!!

[-=DoW=- Furious32]

Hells teeth Henning an interesting arsenal on your own doorstep!!!
I would be arrested, handcuffed and thrown in jail forever for owning just an Elastic band gun in the UK.
Still we in the UK have proved that gun laws have removed thousands of weapons from the streets. You only have to look at the crime statistics that involve firearms to prove this!!!!! Hang on, I will just get my coat!!! LOL
Many of my friends all belonging to reputable gun clubs all handed thier weapons to the police to be melted down. It was just harder for the police to get the hundreds/ thousands of idiots with illegally held firearms to comply with the law!!! Hence, and I have no accurate figures, offences involving firearms are now probably higher. Certainly from what I see of the news gun crime is rife in the UK.
You really need to stand up and let yourselves be heard on this issue. I sure if you researched what happened in the UK and other countries that followed suit. You will find that gun laws have made little or no difference to the rate of gun crimes.

[CrazySnyper]

I never knew that, but it seems to be quite true:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/2656875.stm

[-=DoW=- Furious32]

Thank you for the find to back me up CrazySnyper!!! I knew without doubt there would be something in the US or UK press to back that up. I apologise for not finding it myself!!!
We had lost the ability for free speech back around the time of the 1st World War for individuals to carry firearms. This was followed by years of threats (scenes from the gangster mobs in America put a stop to that) The final boot was put in around the 50's which made the carraige of arms illegal (bearing in mind 99% of these men were hunters out for a weekend sport (as you enjoy now). We were then restricted to Gun club only weapons on a range along with the obvious Gentry shoots for pheasents, grouse and game. It seems there are no more gun clubs (to which I visited many times) and the shoots are invite only on large country estates. Please Uk citizens feel free to chastise me, if I am wrong!!
However, whilst you Americans read the link, so kindly placed by CrazySnyper, remember the arguments have been made after 50 - 80 years without the right to publicly carry a firearms.As the statistics say violent crime involving firearms is on the increase. As a European home owner I would love the opportunity to defend myself or my home. I do as it happens have a lovely Aluminium Baseball bat and dog. It I were to use the Bat, I would end up in jail, more likely. The dog, well they would have to prove it in a court of law!!! LOL

[Schwatd]

I think if criminals actually thought about things they wouldn't be criminals, but since they are, generally stupid, I have an ASP Colt .45, and hand guns are for NOTHING else but to kill another human being. So owning a handgun means you should be willing to use it if you say you have to protect your family and home. I have a 45 to do two things, one since I'm such a crapy shot, I hope the sheer defenning roar will make them think twice about staying in my house, and second if I should happen to hit one, even in the pinky finger, a nearly half inch bullet will make them wish they were dead from the pain. Anyway, I believe that our (US) right provided in the Bill of Rights and Constitution was originally ment to fortify the local malitias but given the change in time, having a weapon to protect your home and family falls under the same meaning, just a different threat. Anyway my two cents.

[-=DoW=- Furious32]

Its good (and should remain so) the right anywhere to defend your house and home. In England or so the saying goes "An Englishmans home is his castle" however, we in the UK suffer terribly from foolish PC members of Parliament. These MP's feel that should a homeowner defend himself and injure another party, he is as guilty as the perpetrator. There is a case in question of a farmer who after many raids on his home, opened fire during a break-in. He got the bugger, but ended up with a prison sentence for attempted manslaughter. Another involved a person giving the perpetrator a seeing to and was charged with Actual Bodily Harm with the thief getting away with the crime of breaking and entering!!
The sound of your .45 (BOOM!!!) certainly would have the idiot running for cover, although I would feel happier if you accuracy improved somewhat!! Even if you nicked his finger with that 1/2 inch slug (OOHH OUCH!!) there is now even more of a chance he will be carrying a firearm and you want to be a better shot if it came to it!!!!