Quoting richierich:

Quote:
For all those who feel 'safer' having a gun in their house for 'self-defence', I find that a sad reflection of todays society and the violence within it, I would dread ever feeling such a thing was necessary in UK. Perhaps I am naive or ill-informed, but I don't feel threatened in my home.

Hunting, whether I like the idea of killing a living thing for sport is irrelevant, I support the freedom of individuals to choose how they live. We have had similar ongoing hunting issues in the UK (fox hunting etc) where the PC brigade have made a mockery of many traditional sports and pastimes.

Richie, I do not believe in hunting for sport and I am pretty sure most of the folks on here do not either.  As Max said, he eats what he shoots.  When I used to hunt I did the same.  As I said before when you work for a meal it just seems to taste better.  And before you start with the how is using a gun to kill a defenseless animal work, I used a bow.  Try tracking an elk sometime after a bad shot and you'll see what work is.

Quoting Daddy DVD:

Quote:
I understand you have the right to defend yourself, but what I do not understand why you should use a weapon with which it is most likely to kill someone. In my point of view you are not any better if you kill someone who wanted to kill you.

The difference is I will still be alive to enjoy your descent...

Quoting Berak:

Quote:
Quoting rorymatt:

Quote:
@Berak,
The Glock 17 is a fine weapon, the MP5 has a very good reputation in the special OPs community, the G3 to which I handled while TDY in Germany, I found to an excellent military weapon. I am a retired U.S. Army SFC (sergeant first class).

Rory

We're on the same page there, mate...   

The AG-3 has long been the envy of other countries armed forces. It's 7.62 mm ammo and long range accuracy makes it a perfect (albeit overpowerful) weapon compared to similar 5.56 mm weapons.
It's currently being replaced here in Norway with the Heckler & Koch HK416, except for certain divisions in our Home Guard. Seems like the 7.62 mm was a bit 'over-the-top' after all... Still - a great weapon!

For PR reasons you are correct.  In New Orleans they purchased a few some years back and they were the rifle of their sharpshooters.  Well one day a news crew caught it being used on tape.  The wound was horrific.  The PD sold them soon after as control advocates scream it was very cruel.  Personally I like the round and have rifle that fires it.  Targets that get more than clipped never get up again.

Quoting Daddy DVD:

Quote:
Quoting hal9g:

Quote:
Quoting Daddy DVD:

Quote:
I understand you have the right to defend yourself, but what I do not understand why you should use a weapon with which it is most likely to kill someone. In my point of view you are not any better if you kill someone who wanted to kill you.

Yes. You're absolutely right.

The next time some violent criminal breaks in to rape or murder my family or steal my possessions while brandishing a weapon (not necessarily a gun), I'll just ask him nicely to leave and go harass someone else.

Why didn't I think of that before? 

Yes, you could try that or do you think the answer to possible violence is aggression? Although I wouldn't advise him to go harass someone else, but I would ask him why he's unlawfully breaking into people's houses. After he leaves I would file a complaint at the police and tell them how he looks like. If he however chooses to attack me or my family I would use my own bare hands or every legal object (not necessarily some sort of weapon) in my home to stop him, but I wouldn't try to kill him. Aren't we the good example or resolving conflicts with reason or would you rather be able to electrocute users instead of using red arrows?

In the US you are very likely to be harmed or killed in a home invasion.  For one the criminal knows they have time to do as they please because it is likely anyone who is going to be home, will be during a late night home invasion.  So to put it in perspective you attempt to use a lamp you are now shot, bleeding on the floor.  You are no longer the defense.  Your wife is brutalized before your very eyes and as you begin to loose consciousness the perpetrator is going after your children.  You failed to protect them and yourself the worst case they live to relive that night for the rest of their lives if they are lucky they are killed before the person leaves the house taking whatever they came in for in the first place.  Say as you will I'll keep my SIG.

Quoting Lord Of The Sith:

Quote:
Quoting Daddy DVD:

Quote:
Quoting hal9g:

Quote:
Quoting Daddy DVD:

Quote:
I understand you have the right to defend yourself, but what I do not understand why you should use a weapon with which it is most likely to kill someone. In my point of view you are not any better if you kill someone who wanted to kill you.

Yes. You're absolutely right.

The next time some violent criminal breaks in to rape or murder my family or steal my possessions while brandishing a weapon (not necessarily a gun), I'll just ask him nicely to leave and go harass someone else.

Why didn't I think of that before? 

Yes, you could try that or do you think the answer to possible violence is aggression? Although I wouldn't advise him to go harass someone else, but I would ask him why he's unlawfully breaking into people's houses. After he leaves I would file a complaint at the police and tell them how he looks like. If he however chooses to attack me or my family I would use my own bare hands or every legal object (not necessarily some sort of weapon) in my home to stop him, but I wouldn't try to kill him. Aren't we the good example or resolving conflicts with reason or would you rather be able to electrocute users instead of using red arrows?

In the US you are very likely to be harmed or killed in a home invasion.  For one the criminal knows they have time to do as they please because it is likely anyone who is going to be home, will be during a late night home invasion.  So to put it in perspective you attempt to use a lamp you are now shot, bleeding on the floor.  You are no longer the defense.  Your wife is brutalized before your very eyes and as you begin to loose consciousness the perpetrator is going after your children.  You failed to protect them and yourself the worst case they live to relive that night for the rest of their lives if they are lucky they are killed before the person leaves the house taking whatever they came in for in the first place.  Say as you will I'll keep my SIG.

Why is it every burgler is also a rapist, pedophile and a murderer? 

Quoting mdnitoil:

Quote:

Why is it every burgler is also a rapist, pedophile and a murderer? 

I have neither the time nor the inclination to inquire of the fellow who has illegally entered my house exactly what  his full intent is.

If he wasn't invited and appears to be intent on a criminal endeavor, then I will without hesitation blow his a$$ away and ask questions later.

Unlike Daddy DVD, I would not "ask him why he's unlawfully breaking into people's houses" because frankly, I don't give a rat's a$$ why he's doing it.

Quoting mdnitoil:

Quote:
Quoting 8ballMax:

Quote:
Quoting mdnitoil:

Quote:
Why is it every burgler is also a rapist, pedophile and a murderer? 

Don't know...perhaps the next time your home is invaded you should pause and ask them that .

Strangely, its never happened.  Nor has it happened to anyone I'm related to.  Now that I think about it, nobody I'm aquainted with either.  Haven't checked the statistics but I might have a better chance of winning the lottery.  Of course I guess I could sit around the rest of my life and make plans on how I'll spend the money.  You know, just in case. 

Really? Well...consider yourself lucky because it's happened to me twice. Once 30 years ago and again 11 years ago. Perhaps you need to get out of your bubble and try living in the real world .

Quoting eagle61397:

Quote:
As an Eagle Scout (hence my screen name) I was trained in the scouts on how to take care of fire arms and how to clean them and I've done my share of target practice, but no hunting. I also can't stand groups like the NRA. I believe that people do have the right of protecting themselves in anyway they can, including the use of fire arms, but the thing that gets me about the NRA is that they are against any legislation on banning any type of assault weapons. I don't have a problem owning shotguns, pistols, etc... I can only see the people using assault weapons to commit crimes and not for hunting. I do know that with a ban that people would find a way to get the guns, but that is always going to happen, just the way it is with drugs.  I just think the NRA needs to get its act together and possibly work with the government and find a solution that works for the both of them, while keeping the streets safe.

Give me a break. What is an assault weapon? The anti-gunner based their definition on looks.
It doesn't make a hoot what it looks like, all fire arms are assault weapons. The anti-gunners just wanted a place to start, with their ultimate goal to ban all fire arms. So they started with the ugly guns. A shotgun can do a hell of alot more damage than most any so called 'Assault Weapon' single quote indicate bold. 

Jim