Do YOU like guns?

[Barry]

YouTube - I Like Guns - Steve Lee

This is posted with Tantal in mind, but anyone might appreciate it.

Personally I don't really like guns, but they are necessary, unfortunately.

[Midas]

As someone who owns 3 shotguns (a pair of Holland & Holland 'Royal Brevis' 12-bores and a Browning 'Prestige' 12-bore) and two rifles (a Steyr Mannlicher 'Pro Hunter' .308 and a Ruger 10/22 semi-automatic), the answer is most emphatically "yes"; in fact I've been out shooting this afternoon. But I would qualify that liking to point out that it's not in relation to the guns themselves, but to the enjoyment I get out of their use, for target and clay pigeon shooting as well as for hunting, mainly rabbits, pigeons etc., with the occasional seasonal pheasant and deer hunt thrown in, the former being a very necessary pest removal operation in the countryside, as well as providing good food for the pot, the latter exclusively for food.

[Don]

Depends on what you mean by 'like guns'. I own guns, some of them custom built, intended for different uses. In that regard, I consider them tools and like any good craftsman, I like fine tools and take care of them. That said, my guns are working tools. I own more of these tools than I 'need' but that's one good thing about the states, I don't have to demonstrate need. All I have to do is be able to afford.

I don't have 'guns' for the sake of collecting. I only have one rifle that could be considered collectible, a Winchester 94 that's over 100 years old, and it was a gift.

[Barry]

Depends on what you mean by 'like guns'. I own guns, some of them custom built, intended for different uses. In that regard, I consider them tools and like any good craftsman, I like fine tools and take care of them. That said, my guns are working tools. I own more of these tools than I 'need' but that's one good thing about the states, I don't have to demonstrate need. All I have to do is be able to afford.

I don't have 'guns' for the sake of collecting. I only have one rifle that could be considered collectible, a Winchester 94 that's over 100 years old, and it was a gift.

I'd take that as a "yes" Don!

[Streetwalker]

I think they are the tools of cowards. Pre gun ownership arguments were settled by ( after careful consideration ) putting yourself on the line .Its just too easy with the use of a gun to react over the top.Having said that if the other blokes got one.........??

They have a place in sport and the rural pursuits of pest control though I have myself found a couple of hungry ferrets do a better job than a Purdy

[DTE]

I think they are the tools of cowards. Pre gun ownership arguments were settled by ( after careful consideration ) putting yourself on the line .Its just too easy with the use of a gun to react over the top.Having said that if the other blokes got one.........??

They have a place in sport and the rural pursuits of pest control though I have myself found a couple of hungry ferrets do a better job than a Purdy

I'm anti-gun myself. But if it was legal here, or if I lived in the States I'd have one...or 9.

Over here we just think of them as rich people toys, country-wallah tools or thug weapons, but thats because our government has indoctrinated us into that belief. Still, we have less gun deaths than the US per person and maybe keeping a tool which offers certain death by the mere pull of a trigger out of the hands of the general populace is a good idea.

[Don]

... maybe keeping a tool which offers certain death by the mere pull of a trigger out of the hands of the general populace is a good idea.

Certainly that's what we all need, cradle to the grave protection from all harm by a nanny state that knows best, depending on who's in power this week. No thanks, I'll take my rights; 'Granted by my Creator', and guaranteed by my Constitution as a protection against the whims and capriciouness of political power.

[DTE]

Certainly that's what we all need, cradle to the grave protection from all harm by a nanny state that knows best, depending on who's in power this week. No thanks, I'll take my rights; 'Granted by my Creator', and guaranteed by my Constitution as a protection against the whims and capriciouness of political power.

I thought that might provoke such a response. It always astounds me that whilst most Americans are so patriotic, they are ALSO inherently distrustful of government, to the point that they feel the need to be armed in order to hold a potentially corrupt government to task. Like one man, or even a few organised men, could go up against the largest superpower in the world...armed or not! It would make little difference.

[Don]

I think they are the tools of cowards.

So, please explain to me how Midas is a coward by enjoying a round of clays? How am I a coward by laying on the 1K yard line and shooting in a F class rifle match? How am I a coward by participating in a steel match? How are either of us cowards if we go hunting?

Do I carry a firearm? Usually. I also realize that with that right comes a duty to be a responsible citizen. Part of said responsibility is to do everything possible to avoid situations that might require it's use and to know the laws regulating it's proper employment, such as the difference in self defense and the vigilantism involved in chasing down a fleeing felon and shooting him or bashing in his head which seems to be in vouge with many of you lately.

Possibily the reason you think us cowardly is because you don't have the self confidence to trust yourself if carrying a firearm. Possibily you lack the self control required?

[Don]

I thought that might provoke such a response. It always astounds me that whilst most Americans are so patriotic, they are ALSO inherently distrustful of government, to the point that they feel the need to be armed in order to hold a potentially corrupt government to task. Like one man, or even a few organised men, could go up against the largest superpower in the world...armed or not! It would make little difference.

Please excuse me Doc but I don't recall writing a single word that indicated I ' feel the need to be armed in order to hold a potentially corrupt government to task.' You misunderstood what I wrote. I said I'll take my "rights" that's all of them, not right as in just one of them. Why would any person, though, trust any government completely. I trust our Constitution, our laws, not mere mortals who make up "the Government". At any point in time, nearly half the people don't trust the people in power. They, at least in civilized countries, try to remedy the situation at the ballot box, not with the gun.

[Tete123]

Why would any person, though, trust any government completely. I trust our Constitution, our laws, not mere mortals who make up "the Government". .

Your Constitution and Laws are all conceived and written by men who went on to form Government; why trust in them?

I do agree though, all Governments and Institutions deserve mistrust.

[DTE]

Please excuse me Doc but I don't recall writing a single word that indicated I ' feel the need to be armed in order to hold a potentially corrupt government to task.' You misunderstood what I wrote. I said I'll take my "rights" that's all of them, not right as in just one of them. Why would any person, though, trust any government completely. I trust our Constitution, our laws, not mere mortals who make up "the Government". At any point in time, nearly half the people don't trust the people in power. They, at least in civilized countries, try to remedy the situation at the ballot box, not with the gun.

But isn't the point of the 2nd ammendment to arm the people against a corrupt government? I mean after the right to protect one's property, isn't that the 2nd most important reason for the right to bear arms?

You did say

and guaranteed by my Constitution as a protection against the whims and capriciouness of political power.

which to me at least implies a link. Sorry for misrepresenting your opinion though. And I agree that no government deserves complete trust, its just with other Americans on similar subjects the right to defend yourself against a possible tyrannical government is often used as a justification for the 2nd Ammendment. If that is not your opinion then I apologise for jumping the gun, so to speak.

[Don]

Your Constitution and Laws are all conceived and written by men who went on to form Government; why trust in them?

I do agree though, all Governments and Institutions deserve mistrust.

Ah, but our Constitution is the guide for all legislated law in the US. It is the supreme law of the land and our founding fathers saw wisdom in making it very difficult to change, as a safeguard against the capriciousness of men. We all signed on, at least our ancestors did to that founding document as fair and just and agreed that all subsequent law had to conform to it as decided by our Supreme Court, the arbiter between Constitution and legislated law. It has worked surprisingly well over time, not perfectly at all times, but better than most.

[Streetwalker]

So, please explain to me how Midas is a coward by enjoying a round of clays? How am I a coward by laying on the 1K yard line and shooting in a F class rifle match? How am I a coward by participating in a steel match? How are either of us cowards if we go hunting?

Do I carry a firearm? Usually. I also realize that with that right comes a duty to be a responsible citizen. Part of said responsibility is to do everything possible to avoid situations that might require it's use and to know the laws regulating it's proper employment, such as the difference in self defense and the vigilantism involved in chasing down a fleeing felon and shooting him or bashing in his head which seems to be in vouge with many of you lately.

Possibily the reason you think us cowardly is because you don't have the self confidence to trust yourself if carrying a firearm. Possibily you lack the self control required?

You realy should read the whole post Don ,I did quite clearly state Guns have a place in sport,I myself was a bit of an expert with the .22 in my yonger days having an average of 96.4 at 25 yards so yes I know how a rifle works.
Living in London you see every week kids shooting each other,I guess its the same in most major cities around the world.They have an argument in most cases a wrong look ,a mistaken comment something petty that would have been settled years back with a few punches and a roll around on the pavement. But no they dont fancy a smack in the chops these days ,they dont want to take the risk of losing face so they pull out a gun ,or a knife ,they are cowards.
The best way to avoid any situation where you may feel the need to use a gun is to not have one in the first place.All its doing is giving you a false sense of bravardo

[Don]

You realy should read the whole post Don ,I did quite clearly state Guns have a place in sport,I myself was a bit of an expert with the .22 in my yonger days having an average of 96.4 at 25 yards so yes I know how a rifle works.

I did get in a hurry and missed that part. I owe you an apology, please accept it for that part.

Living in London you see every week kids shooting each other,I guess its the same in most major cities around the world.They have an argument in most cases a wrong look ,a mistaken comment something petty that would have been settled years back with a few punches and a roll around on the pavement. But no they dont fancy a smack in the chops these days ,they dont want to take the risk of losing face so they pull out a gun ,or a knife ,they are cowards.
The best way to avoid any situation where you may feel the need to use a gun is to not have one in the first place.All its doing is giving you a false sense of bravardo

Such people are indeed cowards but I resent, as a law abiding gun owner, being lumped into that group. I said my firearms are tools and you said they are the tools of cowards thereby including me, intentionally or not. If you said so to my face, you'd get the dustup you spoke of them we could go have a beer and get over it.

Even though I generally avoid such places, in this day and age it can and does happen anywhere. I live by the philosophy of 'better to have and not need than need and not have'. I also have the need of carrying one for the part time job and I am well trained in it's employment and train constantly.

My point is that having guns and considering them tools does not a coward make, necessarily. Those 'kids' you speak of I would consider punks that don't even rise to the level of your average 'coward'. That said, they are very dangerous.

BTW, given what you have said of it happening every week, what does that say for the UK firearms ban? Doesn't sound like it works all that well. All the good guys are disarmed while the bad guys apparently are not. Guess they just forgot to turn theirs in. I am baiting you, by the way

[Major Sinic]

As a shooting man I have a strong liking for traditional, preferably English, shotguns. I am the proud owner of a W Evans sidelock circa 1920, along with a Spanish sidelock AYA Number 4, and a modern Beretta, all 12 bore side by sides. I use them variously for driven game shooting, rough shooting and local farmers clay busting competitions. I hanker after a Thomas Boss but they are are few and far between at the right price.

My fondness for these guns is because they are without exception beautifully engineered pieces of machinery which, with the possible exception of the Beretta, are also magnificent works of art from the superbly grained, figured and carved stock, to the intricately engraved barrels. The Evans is almost a century old but performs as well as it did on the day it was first finished.

There is no evil or danger in a gun, only in those who use it. My fondness for and interest in my guns is related solely to their sporting use and as objects of beauty.

It would be an outrageous restriction of my, and others, freedom to own and use these these guns, if some deluded government 'think tank' or opportunist took it into their heads to ban sporting guns in the misguided interests of public safety.

[pauli007001]

I'm anti-gun myself. But if it was legal here, or if I lived in the States I'd have one...or 9.

Over here we just think of them as rich people toys, country-wallah tools or thug weapons, but thats because our government has indoctrinated us into that belief. Still, we have less gun deaths than the US per person and maybe keeping a tool which offers certain death by the mere pull of a trigger out of the hands of the general populace is a good idea.

Did the figures drop dramatically when Hitler.....Sorry i meen Blair pushed through his gun controll legislation?

Or did they increase gradually through the years?

Do the Govnt figures match the privatly compliled figures?

[pauli007001]

Personally I detest guns, they remind me of work( i also detest work but it is a nessesary evil) i feel the same way about shovels.I have been impressed by the latest shovel by Rigid almost unbreakable!!

I have a few guns but even more shovels, both are tools that serve a purpose.

My prefered Gun is my FN PS90 but it is kind of on par with my Rigby .416(that dosnt work and Rigby costs a fortune to repair their stuff, especially one this old, It was My Grandfathers, I have heard of a Rigby specialist in Zimbabwe who is supposed to be less expensive but i dont think i would ever fire the weapon, its just an interesting talking point).I dont carry side arms, I dont see the point, its far more fun taking a weapon from a crim and seeing his reaction whenhe looks down the barrel of his own weapon when a second ago he was using it to mug you.If you tried to pull a weapon on a crim he would have the upper hand, take his from him and you have the upper hand.

I have a Mate who ownes a Barret 50 cal snipers rifle, he uses it for deer????Which is a bit odd, the deer would be sausage meat after a hit from that howizer!!!

[Midas]

As a shooting man I have a strong liking for traditional, preferably English, shotguns. I am the proud owner of a W Evans sidelock circa 1920, along with a Spanish sidelock AYA Number 4, and a modern Beretta, all 12 bore side by sides. I use them variously for driven game shooting, rough shooting and local farmers clay busting competitions. I hanker after a Thomas Boss but they are are few and far between at the right price.

My fondness for these guns is because they are without exception beautifully engineered pieces of machinery which, with the possible exception of the Beretta, are also magnificent works of art from the superbly grained, figured and carved stock, to the intricately engraved barrels. The Evans is almost a century old but performs as well as it did on the day it was first finished.

There is no evil or danger in a gun, only in those who use it. My fondness for and interest in my guns is related solely to their sporting use and as objects of beauty.

I would entirely agree that for many people, including me, the beautiful craftsmanship on some guns is a major factor in liking them. The pair of Holland and Holland "Royal Bevis" 12-bore shotguns I have are a wonderful example of this, dating back to the early 1930s they have beautiful carvings and engravings on them, and although both have been re-barrelled by the factory, they are virtually indistinguishable from new. Even the case they're contain in is beautifully hand crafted.

It would be an outrageous restriction of my, and others, freedom to own and use these these guns, if some deluded government 'think tank' or opportunist took it into their heads to ban sporting guns in the misguided interests of public safety.

Absolutely. It was nothing more than a politically inspired knee jerk reaction when hand guns were banned after the Dunblane school shooting. All that achieved was to deprive an estimated 750,000 responsible gun club members of their hobby/sport and did nothing whatsoever to curb the illegal use of handguns. It would indeed be a travesty if some future government decided to extend that ban even further on some spurious 'public safety' grounds.

[Tete123]

I've never fired a gun. Culturally I've never experienced a society in which guns are prevalent and for that reason I do not understand their appeal but, should the British Government reverse decades of anti-gun rhetoric and remove the legislation preventing gun ownership I would be inclined to train, own and carry a weapon for personal protection. It would be necessary to place stringent conditions on gun ownership - I'd even go so far as to say a hefty premium of say between £5,000 and £10,000 as an insurance against improper use. I strongly feel there is a case for a large increase in the numbers of Police Officers certified to carry firearms, and use if necessary. In modern society, with it's many inherent dangers; sending unarmed Officers to scenes of crime without prior knowledge of whether the assailant is armed or not is completely devoid of responsibility and it is only by good fortune that we have not seen more Officers seriously injured or killed in the line of duty: plan for the worst, hope for the best is the motto as I see it!

It's unfortunate but many in British society must remain unarmed. They neither have the required emotional stability nor responsibility to legally be authorised to own let alone discharge their weapons. Our society seem completely devoid of any understanding of consequence. It's for this reason I cannot see any change to the status quo in regards firearm ownership.

[Don]

I would entirely agree that for many people, including me, the beautiful craftsmanship on some guns is a major factor in liking them. The pair of Holland and Holland "Royal Bevis" 12-bore shotguns I have are a wonderful example of this, dating back to the early 1930s they have beautiful carvings and engravings on them, and although both have been re-barrelled by the factory, they are virtually indistinguishable from new. Even the case they're contain in is beautifully hand crafted.

I agree. While perhaps not being as aesthetically pleasing to the eye, my custom target and tactical rifles are great examples of precision metal working.

Absolutely. It was nothing more than a politically inspired knee jerk reaction when hand guns were banned after the Dunblane school shooting. All that achieved was to deprive an estimated 750,000 responsible gun club members of their hobby/sport and did nothing whatsoever to curb the illegal use of handguns. It would indeed be a travesty if some future government decided to extend that ban even further on some spurious 'public safety' grounds.

Hasn't it always been so? Honest, law abiding citizens when faced with such a law, turn in their firearms, criminals, by definition, being law breakers do not. The result being the only thing that changes is that the bad guys have all the guns. The banner's never seem to learn this simple fact.

[Streetwalker]

I did get in a hurry and missed that part. I owe you an apology, please accept it for that part.



Such people are indeed cowards but I resent, as a law abiding gun owner, being lumped into that group. I said my firearms are tools and you said they are the tools of cowards thereby including me, intentionally or not. If you said so to my face, you'd get the dustup you spoke of them we could go have a beer and get over it.

Even though I generally avoid such places, in this day and age it can and does happen anywhere. I live by the philosophy of 'better to have and not need than need and not have'. I also have the need of carrying one for the part time job and I am well trained in it's employment and train constantly.

My point is that having guns and considering them tools does not a coward make, necessarily. Those 'kids' you speak of I would consider punks that don't even rise to the level of your average 'coward'. That said, they are very dangerous.

BTW, given what you have said of it happening every week, what does that say for the UK firearms ban? Doesn't sound like it works all that well. All the good guys are disarmed while the bad guys apparently are not. Guess they just forgot to turn theirs in. I am baiting you, by the way

You will need a bigger hook than that Don. I guess we are looking at this from different angles. No the firearms regulations dont work particually well ,the criminals will always try and get an advantage.Give everyone a handgun and they will bring Automatics,give everyone automatics and they will bring Klashnikovs .Where does it end ? We dont have the same laws as you Don,we shoot someone in self defence or someone breaking into our house and we get put in Jail

[Opinionated]

OK as no-one seems willing to take the opposing view and I'm always willing to show myself up for the laughing stock I am, here goes . I thought there was a social group for gun enthusiasts but it seems to have gone missing?
Anyway, I HATE them, in fact I hate them so much I will not allow my child to have a water pistol (OK don't all rush to report me to social services for child abuse!), he of course makes them out of lego (bought with the purpose of hoping he'd construct utopian villages populated by pacifist lego storm troopers). The reason I hate them? An encounter with a particularly angry young farmer and having been shot in the back of the head with an air rifle whilst on the school run.
Yes I know it's incredibly naíve, but bottom line no guns = no gun death!

[Don]

OK as no-one seems willing to take the opposing view and I'm always willing to show myself up for the laughing stock I am, here goes . I thought there was a social group for gun enthusiasts but it seems to have gone missing?
Anyway, I HATE them, in fact I hate them so much I will not allow my child to have a water pistol (OK don't all rush to report me to social services for child abuse!), he of course makes them out of lego (bought with the purpose of hoping he'd construct utopian villages populated by pacifist lego storm troopers). The reason I hate them? An encounter with a particularly angry young farmer and having been shot in the back of the head with an air rifle whilst on the school run.
Yes I know it's incredibly naíve, but bottom line no guns = no gun death!

I find it irrational to 'love' or 'hate' any inanimate object. Ops, do you hate the angry young farmer and whomever shot you in the back of the head with the air rifle? They took action, not the gun. Would you hate automobiles if someone intentionally used one to hit you or would you rightly reserve your anger and hate for the driver. I know it's trite and overused, but no less true; "Guns don't kill people, people kill people" and they use anything and everything under the sun to do it. Believe me, I know.

Doesn't make you a laughingstock, Lucy although I did laugh at the use of "pacifist" and "storm trooper" together. A bit of a Freudian slip perhaps?

[Midas]

OK as no-one seems willing to take the opposing view and I'm always willing to show myself up for the laughing stock I am, here goes . I thought there was a social group for gun enthusiasts but it seems to have gone missing?
Anyway, I HATE them, in fact I hate them so much I will not allow my child to have a water pistol (OK don't all rush to report me to social services for child abuse!), he of course makes them out of lego (bought with the purpose of hoping he'd construct utopian villages populated by pacifist lego storm troopers). The reason I hate them? An encounter with a particularly angry young farmer and having been shot in the back of the head with an air rifle whilst on the school run.
Yes I know it's incredibly naíve, but bottom line no guns = no gun death!

I quite appreciate the point of view, and whilst I wouldn't try to change your mind (I know what would happen if I did ), I have to agree with you that your conclusion is indeed naive. Whilst it's true that no guns = no gun deaths, you could equally say that no cars = no car deaths; no knives = no knife deaths; no power tools = no power tool deaths.......... It's not the gun itself that's the problem, it's its misuse, as indeed it is with any other single object that can kill. I have to also add that I disagree with 'shielding' children from guns; they're going to grow up in a society where, like it or not, they're everyday objects, and to deny them knowledge or experience, even through play, could well be doing them a major disservice.

[Opinionated]

I find it irrational to 'love' or 'hate' any inanimate object. Ops, do you hate the angry young farmer and whomever shot you in the back of the head with the air rifle? They took action, not the gun. Would you hate automobiles if someone intentionally used one to hit you or would you rightly reserve your anger and hate for the driver. I know it's trite and overused, but no less true; "Guns don't kill people, people kill people" and they use anything and everything under the sun to do it. Believe me, I know.

Do I hate the young farmer? No he's OK really, I deserved the anger just didn't appreciate having a gun pointed at me. Never did find out who shot me in the head so if I do ever find out I'll let you know how they fair. Don't even get me started on the necessary evil that is cars! But of course you and Midas have a point if it wasn't guns it would be some other weapon of choice, but the main purpose of guns is to harm or kill (although be it for food or pest control etc) which distinguishes them from cars, knives, axes etc.

Doesn't make you a laughing stock, Lucy although I did laugh at the use of "pacifist" and "storm trooper" together. A bit of a Freudian slip perhaps?

No, purposely to show I realised the futility of the empty gesture!

[Don]

... but the main purpose of guns is to harm or kill (although be it for food or pest control etc) which distinguishes them from cars, knives, axes etc.

Axes and knives were used to take life long before guns came into existence. Those same cars, knives and axes, in the hands of the ill intentioned are no less lethal.

[Marxist Nutter]

Guns are for 3 types of people

1. Those that only beat (HUNT) an animal with a huge advantage and are worried if they gave a rabbit a sporting chance it would out smart them!1
2. People who want to kill people

The last two are really the different aspects of the same type of person

3. People who are scared and weak, afraid to use their fists and not skillful enough to use a knife in self defence
4. MEN with very small genitals

[Barry]

Guns are for 3 types of people

1. Those that only beat (HUNT) an animal with a huge advantage and are worried if they gave a rabbit a sporting chance it would out smart them!1
2. People who want to kill people

The last two are really the different aspects of the same type of person

3. People who are scared and weak, afraid to use their fists and not skillful enough to use a knife in self defence
4. MEN with very small genitals

I have trouble counting sometimes, too, MN.

As in all generalisations, yours are generally wrong.

[Opinionated]

Axes and knives were used to take life long before guns came into existence. Those same cars, knives and axes, in the hands of the ill intentioned are no less lethal.

I of course agree, man will use his bare hands to kill if necessary; the difference is I suppose that guns were designed and are manufactured exclusively to ingure and/or kill - they have no other purpose, whereas knives can be used to peel veg and carve sculptures, axes to clear paths and build! That is what makes them iconic and also disliked, why is it irrational to hate something inanimate btw, the fact Midas used the words "beautiful craftmanship" implies he has an emotional response to guns!

I have to also add that I disagree with 'shielding' children from guns; they're going to grow up in a society where, like it or not, they're everyday objects, and to deny them knowledge or experience, even through play, could well be doing them a major disservice.

Thankfully I do not believe that guns are an everyday object and I would be very happy if my child's first encounter with one (and hopefully that time will happen never) inspired fear in him. I'll let you into a little secret though, Dr Who figures quite often come with guns and I pretend not to know this and he lets me live in blissful ignorance thus allowing him to explore the more violent impulses of a seven year old boy whilst I get to continue feeling like a smug hippy because the Dr. made a screwdriver out of a sonic device rather than a gun!

[Marxist Nutter]

I have trouble counting sometimes, too, MN.

I can see that. Looks to me like I can count just fine

As in all generalisations, yours are generally wrong.

Good stuff, I love paradox

[Barry]

Good stuff, I love paradox

Touché !

[Don]

Guns are for 3 types of people

1. Those that only beat (HUNT) an animal with a huge advantage and are worried if they gave a rabbit a sporting chance it would out smart them!

Don't hunt any longer and never have hunted driven animals and it's obvious from this ill informed statement that you have never attempted to 'HUNT' in any manner.

2. People who want to kill people

Don't 'want' to kill people. Again obviously you've never had to.

The last two are really the different aspects of the same type of person

3. People who are scared and weak, afraid to use their fists and not skillful enough to use a knife in self defence

Your ignorance of the so called "fighting arts" is apparent. A good friend who is an experienced trauma Doc in a big city hospital tells me that in a serious knife fight it most often happens that one goes to the ER and the other to the morgue. No thank you, I defer to his superior knowledge. Why would you find it necessary to use your fists or a knife? Are you some kind of coward that has to fight at every insult, intended or not or places himself in situations where physical conflict often results? Could going through life with a chip, constantly, on your shoulder be part of your problem? No insult intended, merely an observation. Most people I know who carry a 'gun' go to inordinate lengths to avoid physical confrontation but then they are all honest law abiding citizens who have the common sense to realize that (being secular here) 'Bad things sometimes happen to good people' and that, to quote Nationwide Insurance, sometimes 'life comes at you fast'.

4. MEN with very small genitals

Been peeking have we? What does that say about you?

[Don]

I of course agree, man will use his bare hands to kill if necessary; the difference is I suppose that guns were designed and are manufactured exclusively to ingure and/or kill - they have no other purpose,

Your logic is faulty, stemming from a faulty premise. The faulty premise being; "guns were designed and are manufactured exclusively to ingure and/or kill - they have no other purpose". It would be just as faulty for me to conclude that all knives are intended to kill because they can be used to kill. All guns are not intended to kill. I have target rifles that are purpose designed and built for target shooting and on the rare occasions that I do my part, they are very good at it. Could they be used to kill? Most assuredly they could but that IS NOT their intended purpose nor have they been employed to. It all boils down to the intent of the person.

why is it irrational to hate something inanimate btw, the fact Midas used the words "beautiful craftmanship" implies he has an emotional response to guns!

IMO, it is illogical to attach a strong sentiment, such as 'love' or 'hate' to an object that is incapable of returning that sentiment. I can love some people and I most certainly do. I can love some animals, they can return it on some level. I find it impossible to love a piece of steel and wood. To me Midas' use of the words "beautiful craftmanship" indicates an appreciation of the craftsman's art but not necessarily "love". Maybe it's just semantics.

[Marxist Nutter]

Your ignorance of the so called "fighting arts" is apparent. A good friend who is an experienced trauma Doc in a big city hospital tells me that in a serious knife fight it most often happens that one goes to the ER and the other to the morgue. No thank you, I defer to his superior knowledge. Why would you find it necessary to use your fists or a knife? Are you some kind of coward that has to fight at every insult, intended or not or places himself in situations where physical conflict often results? Could going through life with a chip, constantly, on your shoulder be part of your problem? No insult intended, merely an observation. Most people I know who carry a 'gun' go to inordinate lengths to avoid physical confrontation but then they are all honest law abiding citizens who have the common sense to realize that (being secular here) 'Bad things sometimes happen to good people' and that, to quote Nationwide Insurance, sometimes 'life comes at you fast'.

How is this argument for gun ownership. My experience of this is as follows 1. first time stabbed in the dark never saw my attcker. 2. second time used my 'ignorance' of te fighting arts to block blows with my knuckles and then disarmed the attacker. 3 third time used physcology to get the guy to give me the knife. So only three times is not so bad - 3RD one was a result of working the 3rd most dangerous profession after (WARTIME) solider and mental health nurse - hardly cowardly.. POT meet KETTLE - he called u black! i notice gun owners fill up ERs due to 'accidents' with their own guns as well

so anyway I guess u fall into the last category and I touched a nerve (AND THAT'S ALL I'M GONNA TOUCH!)

[Major Sinic]

I of course agree, man will use his bare hands to kill if necessary; the difference is I suppose that guns were designed and are manufactured exclusively to ingure and/or kill - they have no other purpose, whereas knives can be used to peel veg and carve sculptures, axes to clear paths and build! That is what makes them iconic and also disliked, why is it irrational to hate something inanimate btw, the fact Midas used the words "beautiful craftmanship" implies he has an emotional response to guns!

Guns do have a purpose other than injuring and killing. Shotguns are widely used for clay pigeon shooting, and where permitted hand guns and rifles are often used for target shooting. Indeed the latter activity is an Olympic sport.

I can't speak for Midas, but I would hardly describe my feelings for my shotguns as 'emotional', unless the interplay of a fine object with one's senses (touch, sight, smell) can be defined as such, in which case guilty as charged. However in this case the emotional response would apply to any fine object, not because it is a gun but because of the quality of the materials and beauty of craftmanship.

Thankfully I do not believe that guns are an everyday object and I would be very happy if my child's first encounter with one (and hopefully that time will happen never) inspired fear in him. I'll let you into a little secret though, Dr Who figures quite often come with guns and I pretend not to know this and he lets me live in blissful ignorance thus allowing him to explore the more violent impulses of a seven year old boy whilst I get to continue feeling like a smug hippy because the Dr. made a screwdriver out of a sonic device rather than a gun!

In our society they are not an everyday object. Nevertheless it is rare for a young boy, deprived of a toy gun, not to find a small appropriately shaped branch, and use it as a substitute. I accept of course that this is conditioned through TV, comics and peer pressure, but only the tiniest minority of such youngsters ever become involved in gun crime. I think you in reality accept the inevitability of a young boys response. Personally I would prefer that a young boy's first encounter with a gun inspired respect rather than fear. A potentially lethal tool, and I do fully accept that any firearm is such, is far safer in the hands of someone who respects its potential rather than fears it.

[Barry]

I also tried to prevent/delay my children having guns.
It was a waste of time.
Two of them are now experts at shooting people on the Internet playing online wargames such as Counter Strike.
Left4dead etc.

[Midas]

IMO, it is illogical to attach a strong sentiment, such as 'love' or 'hate' to an object that is incapable of returning that sentiment. I can love some people and I most certainly do. I can love some animals, they can return it on some level. I find it impossible to love a piece of steel and wood. To me Midas' use of the words "beautiful craftmanship" indicates an appreciation of the craftsman's art but not necessarily "love". Maybe it's just semantics.

Exactly Don, it's appreciation of the art of fine craftsmanship; it's no more of an emotional attachment to the gun itself than anyone has to any object where its craftsmanship can be admired.

[pauli007001]

Guns are for 3 types of people

1. Those that only beat (HUNT) an animal with a huge advantage and are worried if they gave a rabbit a sporting chance it would out smart them!1
2. People who want to kill people

The last two are really the different aspects of the same type of person

3. People who are scared and weak, afraid to use their fists and not skillful enough to use a knife in self defence
4. MEN with very small genitals

Fists are not much use against a firearm, why do you lot always forget the victim of the criminal or his right to self defense?
You would prefer that every honest law abiding person bend over and get ****ed in the arse by criminals rather than one of your beloved crims gets hurt, even in his feelings!!!

[Kiwi 1691]

Guns are for 3 types of people

1. Those that only beat (HUNT) an animal with a huge advantage and are worried if they gave a rabbit a sporting chance it would out smart them!1
2. People who want to kill people

The last two are really the different aspects of the same type of person

3. People who are scared and weak, afraid to use their fists and not skillful enough to use a knife in self defence
4. MEN with very small genitals

Very accurate, as usual MN

[Scooby]

Kiwi and MN, you did actually forget one group, those of us who use guns in a rural setting,

1) Protection of livestock from predators.
2) Population control of an animal population, here where i am, deer because we kindly interrupted the food chain by removing the wolf so someone has to do it manually now.

Do i like guns, i'm ambivalent to me a gun is no differant to hammer or a spade or a toaster, it is a tool to do a job.

[Midas]

Kiwi and MN, you did actually forget one group, those of us who use guns in a rural setting,

1) Protection of livestock from predators.
2) Population control of an animal population, here where i am, deer because we kindly interrupted the food chain by removing the wolf so someone has to do it manually now.

Do i like guns, i'm ambivalent to me a gun is no differant to hammer or a spade or a toaster, it is a tool to do a job.

Thanks for emphasising that major use of guns, certainly within the UK. As a matter of interest, according to DEFRA, rabbits and wood pigeons each cause approximately £100 million worth of lost production to UK farmers, and shooting them is a highly effective and humane way of tackling this problem given that we're not allowed to use poison or most trapping methods employed by many other countries. As a personal observation, it's a great shame that the British public doesn't eat far more of these two exceedingly tasty, and very cheap, sources of meat; by far the majority of birds and animals shot are either buried or incinerated because no-one wants them, and you can only eat so much yourself.

[Tantal]

Guns are for 3 types of people

1. Those that only beat (HUNT) an animal with a huge advantage and are worried if they gave a rabbit a sporting chance it would out smart them!1

I hunt deer. I use a gun because God made them faster than me. Humans, OTOH, were given superior intellect and opposable thumbs so that we could overcome our shortcomings in the velocity department.

2. People who want to kill people

I have literally lost count of how many guns I own., yet, have never killed anyone. I got my first shotgun at age 8, my first rifle at 11. I carried a concealed handgun under my Texas CHL for 2 years before becoming a policeman (13 years ago). If my math is correct, I've been using guns for 28 years and have carried one every time I left the house for 15 years, yet have never shot anyone. How could that be?

3. People who are scared and weak, afraid to use their fists and not skillful enough to use a knife in self defence

I've seen you. I could midget-toss you in front of a bus without elevating my heart rate, if necessary. Secondly, I'm a trained wrestler (collegiate, freestyle, Greco-Roman......not that TV ****), so I can defend myself reasonably well against an unarmed attacker. As for knives.....yes, I can use one. I carry a Kershaw assisted-opening knife clipped into the pocket of my pants. Our criminals train each other in prison on techniques to take officers' sidearms away. If someone reaches for mine, I cover it, fall on it, then reach for the Kershaw. Flick it open, then start stabbing through the rib cage until they let go.

4. MEN with very small genitals

So how did you acquire the skill of matching mens' behavioural patterns with their genitals? Nevermind, I'd rather not know. It matters not if your equipment looks like a summer sausage, it is absolutely worthless in a fight. A Glock OTOH.............

[Jim Franklin]

I own Guns in Canada, but I do not own them in the UK, not least because all the Guns I have in Canada would be illegal here. However I do not see there is a need here as we do not have a society that has guns as part of it's culture, like the USA does. When I travelled around the US many many years ago I always had a Sig Saur in the glove box, perfectly legally with a permit. It was not that I was a coward as many here would posit, but because it was in recognition that there was a very small and outside chance that I could find myself on the wrong side of someone else who had a weapon, firearm, knife or whatever, and that perhaps having the firearm could prevent a situation from escalating into one where serious harm or worse was done either to me, or by me in self-defence.

Unlike many here, although I know some have served their respective nations, I have had to use a firearm in anger, and I have seen, first hand, the devastating effect that can have on the human body, especially at close range with the "right weapon". I have never had a desire to use a firearm against any human being and I most certainly never wish to do it again, but owning and knowing how to use a weapon is absolute key to knowing when to and when not to use it.

Remember, it is not the Gun that kills, it is the person who pulls the trigger, do not make the mistake of separating that important issue. I was trained by the Army how to kill in various ways, a firearm was simply the most efficient and expedient method. Do we ban everything that can kill? In that case we best ban pencils, pens, rulers, scissors, forks, knives, spoons bla bla bla bla...the list is endless.

Proper Gun control is paramount, but simply banning them does not solve the problems associated with their criminal use, criminals tend not to apply for permits, register their firearms or have any desire to abide by society's rules, so strict Gun control is largely a moot point. Effective Gun Control is all one can hope for as the Criminals will always be able to buy them under the counter.

[pauli007001]

I own Guns in Canada, but I do not own them in the UK, not least because all the Guns I have in Canada would be illegal here. However I do not see there is a need here as we do not have a society that has guns as part of it's culture, like the USA does. When I travelled around the US many many years ago I always had a Sig Saur in the glove box, perfectly legally with a permit. It was not that I was a coward as many here would posit, but because it was in recognition that there was a very small and outside chance that I could find myself on the wrong side of someone else who had a weapon, firearm, knife or whatever, and that perhaps having the firearm could prevent a situation from escalating into one where serious harm or worse was done either to me, or by me in self-defence.

Unlike many here, although I know some have served their respective nations, I have had to use a firearm in anger, and I have seen, first hand, the devastating effect that can have on the human body, especially at close range with the "right weapon". I have never had a desire to use a firearm against any human being and I most certainly never wish to do it again, but owning and knowing how to use a weapon is absolute key to knowing when to and when not to use it.

Remember, it is not the Gun that kills, it is the person who pulls the trigger, do not make the mistake of separating that important issue. I was trained by the Army how to kill in various ways, a firearm was simply the most efficient and expedient method. Do we ban everything that can kill? In that case we best ban pencils, pens, rulers, scissors, forks, knives, spoons bla bla bla bla...the list is endless.

Proper Gun control is paramount, but simply banning them does not solve the problems associated with their criminal use, criminals tend not to apply for permits, register their firearms or have any desire to abide by society's rules, so strict Gun control is largely a moot point. Effective Gun Control is all one can hope for as the Criminals will always be able to buy them under the counter.

As a visitor to the USA how do you manage to obtain an FID card?
It has been virtually impossible for a tourist (on a six or three month Visa) to get an FID card since the 1970s.

It is extremely difficult to obtain an FID card for a permanent resident(almost but not quite impossible, about the same as getting a shotgun cirtificate in the UK if you are a divorced Male) how did you manage that as a visitor??

Even in the time i was stationed here in the USA i was not allowed to obtain an LTC in MA, NY or DC.My right(as a visitor) only existed as a part of my official duties.

I had difficulty when I have a huge family here in the USA some in positions of power and influence, most however are regular working types like me good self!!I have family from the lakes in Chicago to the swamps of Florida to MA, NY and god knows where else.My granny had a list of relatives from whenever to my generation and their progeny, the count 4 years ago had reached over 1500 relatives in the USA, i could name senior state police officers, judges, polititians and all manner of whoever in between, yet i couldnt as a visitor achieve a LTC in any state untill i moved here permanently and even then it was difficult.

[Midas]

As a visitor to the USA how do you manage to obtain an FID card?

I know the USA has always had it's eye on the country Pauli, but when did Canada suddenly become part of the USA?

[Don]

. When I travelled around the US many many years ago I always had a Sig Saur in the glove box, perfectly legally with a permit.

Hate to tell you Jim, but in the US there is no nationwide permit system. Some states have carry/concealed permits, some do not. Some states, that issue permits, have reciprocity agreements with other states and some do not. Some states will issue a permit to a foreign citizen, some will not. If you were traveling around different states and A.) had a permit in one state or B.) actually had no permit, there is a good chance you were traveling around my country illegally armed.

[Don]

I know the USA has always had it's eye on the country Pauli, but when did Canada suddenly become part of the USA?

Midas, re read what Jim wrote. He stated that he traveled the US with a Sig in his glove compartment. He broke the law in most states he traveled in because most states won't issue to a foreign national and even if they did, it's not a national carry permit, they are only for that state. Some states do have reciprocity agreements with others, but not all. I guarantee you if he had been in almost any state and got stopped and searched, his next stop would have been jail. Most Europeans have, this false picture, in their minds, that we run around here like a bunch of cowboys, but we do have laws and just as you do in the UK, we expect them to be obeyed. Ignorance is no excuse.

As for Canada being part of the US, we just neglected to tell them

[Jim Franklin]

Hate to tell you Jim, but in the US there is no nationwide permit system. Some states have carry/concealed permits, some do not. Some states, that issue permits, have reciprocity agreements with other states and some do not. Some states will issue a permit to a foreign citizen, some will not. If you were traveling around different states and A.) had a permit in one state or B.) actually had no permit, there is a good chance you were traveling around my country illegally armed.

Spot on...It was only four states that actually allowed the carrying of the weapon, and of the rest I travelled to there was either no actual need, or they simply laughed (metaphorically speaking of course)

The reason I was allowed to carry was due to the work I did and the fact that I collected bankers drafts and Bearer Bonds that had values up to about US$5 million. The Glove box of the car was actually a Gun safe and it was always locked.

I was NEVER permitted to carry the weapon on my person unless transporting it from/to the vehicle, and I would not have wanted this as I did not feel it necessary.

[JacquesMagique]

Spot on...It was only four states that actually allowed the carrying of the weapon, and of the rest I travelled to there was either no actual need, or they simply laughed (metaphorically speaking of course)

The reason I was allowed to carry was due to the work I did and the fact that I collected bankers drafts and Bearer Bonds that had values up to about US$5 million. The Glove box of the car was actually a Gun safe and it was always locked.

I was NEVER permitted to carry the weapon on my person unless transporting it from/to the vehicle, and I would not have wanted this as I did not feel it necessary.

Whilst 'travelling' in the United States, you were transporting $5Million worth of bearer bonds and had a gun safe in your glovebox? This gets more and more far-fetched.