bmattock
Veteran
Mike Kovacs said:
That's a common misconception that is perpetuated by Hollywood movies. We don't know how many citizens have solved problems without resorting to the use of firearms that they owned - because they didn't use them. We only hear about the cases where wackjobs do reach for guns. And time and time again it is shown that most of these are not legal gun owners anyway - in other words, they were already breaking federal law by having the guns they used.
More laws don't make criminals obey them - and they don't make honest people more honest.
Forgive me, but rights in Canada are not the same as rights in the USA.
All I can say is I'm sorry things have worked out the way they have for Canada.
That has been the problem here as well. Each attempt to restrict some type of firearm ownership has been urged because it will make things better, reduce crime, whiten our teeth. When that fails to happen, well, all kinds of excuses and reasons why not - but hey, let's ban some more guns. Sure to fix things this time.
I don't think you'll find any rational gun owner in the USA who is not secretly in favor of some type of restrictions - such as keeping the crazies away from guns, for example. But the way the war against private gun ownership has been fought in the USA, giving in to 'common sense' solutions has been detrimental - because the other side refuses to honor their word and 'stop with this'. They always come back for more. So it does become all or nothing, but that was their doing.
Best Regards,
Bill Mattocks
Gabriel M.A.
My Red Dot Glows For You
I like ice cream on sugar cones. Don't you just like how as you're eating off the scoop of ice cream, the more it sinks into the cone, and by the time there isn't any more ice cream above the cone, you can start eating the cone, and chipping it away?
Mmmm, Rocky Road ice cream...
Mmmm, Rocky Road ice cream...
N
Nikon Bob
Guest
I thought I would steer clear of this pro/anti gun thing but I guess not. I have watched over the last 30 years the gun laws in Canada become progessively more restrictive as to who may own a firearm and what type can be owned. This last piece of gun legislation has been estimated to cost over one billion dollors to get up and running and the results have not justified it, in my opinion. Toronto has a very serious murder rate involving the use of guns. This would likely have happened with or without any new laws having been put in place. It will not be cured by further restrictive laws. As for registering anything, I wonder how many motor vehicle accidents were ever prevented by registering a car. It is a people problem and not a gun problem but the quick fix for politicians is to tighten up existing laws further. They can say they have done something about it and the general public has a nice pacifier to suck on. At the gun club we all howled at the fact that this last piece of legislation was written in such away, by so called experts, as to put the Walther GSP/OSP line of international target pistols on the prohibited list because of barrel length and caliber if I remeber correctly. It is a difficult problem generally not cured via registering inanimate objects.
Bob
Bob
bmattock
Veteran
fgianni said:
I didn't see your post until I had posted my most recent broadside - I have deleted it, as your advice is sound.
I'm happy to consider the matter closed.
Best Regards,
Bill Mattocks
fgianni
Trainee Amateur
bmattock said:
This must be the first time ever someone manages to successfully recall a broadside
Sorry for the bump but I thought it funny.
Cheers
djon
Well-known
This thread is so far off topic, and so driven by weirdness, that it belongs on AOL.
An American perspective.
An American perspective.
While enjoying AOL's hospitality in the Gun Talk forum, many post their displeasure at how anti-gun AOL is. That's weirdness.djon said:
But this thread is surely 'way off topic, and weirdly so. Unlikely to change any opinions on this issue. I have a theory that divisive OT topics like this undermine a forum's sense of community.
Mike Kovacs
Contax Connaisseur
OK Bill I've said all I'm going to say. I do enjoy firearms and marksmanship as well as photography.
Gabriel M.A.
My Red Dot Glows For You
I enjoy photography, and my views are mine, and everybody else's, theirs. Preaching left lots of scorching for centuries, centuries ago...
ampguy
Veteran
I've found the similarities between the M16 (and ar15s) and 50 year old RF's pretty interesting.
Both mechanical, but the ARs have about 30 companies, and the usage model is still evolving (check out the IBIZ zeroing techniques which are a pretty recent devlopment for a 50 year old gun).
For RF's, we have Leica, CV, Zeiss, and maybe a dozen aftermarket parts makers, while the AR parts makers are thriving.
Both mechanical, but the ARs have about 30 companies, and the usage model is still evolving (check out the IBIZ zeroing techniques which are a pretty recent devlopment for a 50 year old gun).
For RF's, we have Leica, CV, Zeiss, and maybe a dozen aftermarket parts makers, while the AR parts makers are thriving.
ampguy
Veteran
So on a Leica note, anyone use Elcan zoom red dots?
http://www.elcansightingsystems.com/products/specter_sights.php
http://www.elcansightingsystems.com/products/specter_sights.php
ampguy
Veteran
Fess up Bill...
Fess up Bill...
You're home alone for the evening, Black Hawk Down in Blu Ray is what' you're going to watch with 7.1 audio. What are you gonna fondle, the Leica or the AR??
Fess up Bill...
You're home alone for the evening, Black Hawk Down in Blu Ray is what' you're going to watch with 7.1 audio. What are you gonna fondle, the Leica or the AR??
TXForester
Well-known
I don't hunt much, but I go out behind the house and "kill" a lot of tin cans. I also shoot a recurve bow.
Field
Well-known
Oh boy! I love firearms.
I'd be fine with all them disappearing off the face of the earth, but never ok with taking them out of the hands of the common people.
The most confusing thing to me is that all the people that are afraid of inanimate objects (firearms) are the people I want to own them the most, typically. I prefer that every average level headed citizen that makes a point to be media literate, own some sort of firearm. I prefer my friends who are radical in the favor of people, unions, stuff like that, own them.
It is a fundamental position that the common person should have the potential to combat their government, or another. I wish my friends had better training with them, though. Unfortunately they can be way too uptight about advice on it, seeing it as a "I can learn on my own" thing... Which may be true but damn, if my life depends on them I'm screwed!
Seriously, I want my friends, family, and community supporters to own firearms. I don't want police to own them. I trust probably almost everyone on this forum a lot more than a cop.
I'm going to ignore most the arguing but state a few things.
1. A healthy safe state (country) has little to no fear of misuse of firearms because the incentive does not exist. Switzerland is a good example. Look at some real facts. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_violence You will notice the poorest - with the most civil unrest - countries have the highest gun violence. The happier the citizens the lower the gun violence without relation to gun ownership.
2. People die more frequently from other things constantly. Firearms are not a real threat in your daily life unless you live somewhere real bad, and know all the wrong people. You are more likely to die from just about anything you can think of, literally. They are no different that cars... It is amazing that millions of cars drive everyday and out of the millions the rate of accidents and deaths is not that high when you consider everyone driving must adhere to pretty close tolerances in order to survive (probably 3/4 of car travel is at lethal speeds). It is kind of amazing the synchronicity that happens around the world with them. You are, of course, way more likely to die in an automobile accident, but the point is frequency of potential danger doesn't equal deaths in an exponential way. See the first statement I made, if you want to find a reason behind gun violence. Consider how many millions of guns are owned in th U.S and how essential only a few heavy poverty crime areas exist. We literally refer to other places, other states or cities in the U.S. that we don't even live in to talk about them, a lot of the time. The frequency of violent use is just really low given the rotation of them in and out of our hands, and being carried daily by many individuals (including police).
3. I'm opposed to gun registration. What difference does it make? First you can't go check on anyone, ever, without a warrant. What good does it do to point out someone illegally owned a firearm after they used it? I disagree with convicted felons not being able to vote or own a firearm. They are essentially stateless at that point. It requires almost nothing to become a felon these days, as well. There just isn't any particular good reason for gun registration (safety wise). Anyone that wants a gun can get one, period. In fact the more illegal and harder to get a gun legally, the more likely someone with devious intentions will be able to acquire one. Why? Because if the market is better in selling illegal firearms than it is to go through the legal hassled-to-death route, people will sell more illegally. It is only a mark for a broken society when this is a big concern, if you want to refer to point 1.
4. I don't think anyone really needs a bunch of automatic weapons, or needs to spend the incredible amount of money they cost, on them, but I really don't care that all the legal ownership of class 3 weapons happens. Seriously rich dudes shoot automatic rifles. They don't need them for violence; and don't use them for it. Poor people can't afford class 3 weapons. If criminals can afford them then you have some kind of bigger societal issue where a gap between the state and people has been created, allowing serious crime.
5. Afghanistan is not run by the U.S. implemented state really. It is a war zone that hasn't been won because they are tactically super smart. They may not be well trained with rifles, but they often make our military look like fools. I know my friend has been ambushed by them and lost people he knew. Imagine if everyone rebelled to U.S. forces there, we wouldn't even try to invade.
On to the gun bits... Very few guns are up to the standard of a Leica M2, M3, or M4. Unfortunately most guns lack a "clockwork" quality. You might be surprised how simple they are. Most of it is just gaining a better understanding of physics, than anything else. I love gear, and firearms, but camera designers are closer to watch makers than firearm makers. That being said firearm makers could probably teach camera makers a few tricks of physics. The simplicity of some of the best firearms made, are what make them great. Doing an incredible amount with very little...
I'd be fine with all them disappearing off the face of the earth, but never ok with taking them out of the hands of the common people.
The most confusing thing to me is that all the people that are afraid of inanimate objects (firearms) are the people I want to own them the most, typically. I prefer that every average level headed citizen that makes a point to be media literate, own some sort of firearm. I prefer my friends who are radical in the favor of people, unions, stuff like that, own them.
It is a fundamental position that the common person should have the potential to combat their government, or another. I wish my friends had better training with them, though. Unfortunately they can be way too uptight about advice on it, seeing it as a "I can learn on my own" thing... Which may be true but damn, if my life depends on them I'm screwed!
Seriously, I want my friends, family, and community supporters to own firearms. I don't want police to own them. I trust probably almost everyone on this forum a lot more than a cop.
I'm going to ignore most the arguing but state a few things.
1. A healthy safe state (country) has little to no fear of misuse of firearms because the incentive does not exist. Switzerland is a good example. Look at some real facts. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_violence You will notice the poorest - with the most civil unrest - countries have the highest gun violence. The happier the citizens the lower the gun violence without relation to gun ownership.
2. People die more frequently from other things constantly. Firearms are not a real threat in your daily life unless you live somewhere real bad, and know all the wrong people. You are more likely to die from just about anything you can think of, literally. They are no different that cars... It is amazing that millions of cars drive everyday and out of the millions the rate of accidents and deaths is not that high when you consider everyone driving must adhere to pretty close tolerances in order to survive (probably 3/4 of car travel is at lethal speeds). It is kind of amazing the synchronicity that happens around the world with them. You are, of course, way more likely to die in an automobile accident, but the point is frequency of potential danger doesn't equal deaths in an exponential way. See the first statement I made, if you want to find a reason behind gun violence. Consider how many millions of guns are owned in th U.S and how essential only a few heavy poverty crime areas exist. We literally refer to other places, other states or cities in the U.S. that we don't even live in to talk about them, a lot of the time. The frequency of violent use is just really low given the rotation of them in and out of our hands, and being carried daily by many individuals (including police).
3. I'm opposed to gun registration. What difference does it make? First you can't go check on anyone, ever, without a warrant. What good does it do to point out someone illegally owned a firearm after they used it? I disagree with convicted felons not being able to vote or own a firearm. They are essentially stateless at that point. It requires almost nothing to become a felon these days, as well. There just isn't any particular good reason for gun registration (safety wise). Anyone that wants a gun can get one, period. In fact the more illegal and harder to get a gun legally, the more likely someone with devious intentions will be able to acquire one. Why? Because if the market is better in selling illegal firearms than it is to go through the legal hassled-to-death route, people will sell more illegally. It is only a mark for a broken society when this is a big concern, if you want to refer to point 1.
4. I don't think anyone really needs a bunch of automatic weapons, or needs to spend the incredible amount of money they cost, on them, but I really don't care that all the legal ownership of class 3 weapons happens. Seriously rich dudes shoot automatic rifles. They don't need them for violence; and don't use them for it. Poor people can't afford class 3 weapons. If criminals can afford them then you have some kind of bigger societal issue where a gap between the state and people has been created, allowing serious crime.
5. Afghanistan is not run by the U.S. implemented state really. It is a war zone that hasn't been won because they are tactically super smart. They may not be well trained with rifles, but they often make our military look like fools. I know my friend has been ambushed by them and lost people he knew. Imagine if everyone rebelled to U.S. forces there, we wouldn't even try to invade.
On to the gun bits... Very few guns are up to the standard of a Leica M2, M3, or M4. Unfortunately most guns lack a "clockwork" quality. You might be surprised how simple they are. Most of it is just gaining a better understanding of physics, than anything else. I love gear, and firearms, but camera designers are closer to watch makers than firearm makers. That being said firearm makers could probably teach camera makers a few tricks of physics. The simplicity of some of the best firearms made, are what make them great. Doing an incredible amount with very little...
Jobin
Established
Steinberg2010
Well-known
I voted yes, principally because I shot target rifles (both full-bore and small-bore) while at school. However, I'm also an aspiring musician and that takes up far more time these days!
~S
~S
taylan
Street Dog
I never touch a gun and I was very surprised when I saw the results. Also I never met a photographer who interested in guns.
rxmd
May contain traces of nut
Reading these vitriolic debates between a US gun nut and a UK gun control advocate seven years after the fact is quite interesting.
If there's one thing the last seven years have shown, it's that liberty erodes equally fast in the UK with gun control and in the US with its liberal gun ownership. The latter is usually explained by the defense of liberty, but it seems that when it comes to defending any liberties except that of gun ownership itself, gun ownership in practice doesn't help.
If there's one thing the last seven years have shown, it's that liberty erodes equally fast in the UK with gun control and in the US with its liberal gun ownership. The latter is usually explained by the defense of liberty, but it seems that when it comes to defending any liberties except that of gun ownership itself, gun ownership in practice doesn't help.
Kiev Ilegalac
Established
I think that any sane person should hate guns and that talk about love for fine mechanics is just a cover for some deeper issues. Photographers (not implying that I'm the merit one, I know I'm not) care about photographs and life they are trying to capture rather than tools. Tools are geeks' domain. Guns?!? OMG
thegman
Veteran
I do not love or hate guns. I've enjoyed target practice, and would consider owning a gun if I lived somewhere where it was legal to do so. However, it's undeniable that the world would be a better place without them, assuming something else more deadly was not invented to take the gun's place.