YT2095 Posted March 8, 2004 Share Posted March 8, 2004 Sayonara³ said in post # :I mean, ffs, how does "because Olympic shooters need to use them" answer the poll in the thread? ok, this is more back on topic again. reason, becuase competition shooters need to own their own guns, they are the same as used in the competitions and the only advantage a contestant may have is their shooting ability, not how good their sights are or barrel length, no-one with a .38 snub nose is gunna be put against a .223 Bush Master for instance. it`s all standardised. but of course in order to win that trophy or medal, one must practice regularly, and needs to know thier gun is top shape at all times (some employ specialist to take care of ther weapons) but at a normal gun club for a competition, we can`t all afford that it`s all about getting that hole in that tiny dot in the middle of concentric circles, nothing else comes into it, you want that certificate or trophy! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sayonara Posted March 8, 2004 Share Posted March 8, 2004 YT2095 said in post # :EeEeEeEeWWWW, take the pictures down, Sayos going up the wall! LOL (was it something I said?). Oooh if only I had my handbag with me. Then I could look super-indignant. 1`st of all, what is "Strawmanning"? enlighten US.Impressing anyone? I certainly wished to impess upon my point if that`s what you mean. Well you should know seeing as you've chucked that phrase about yourself http://www.scienceforums.net/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=2778 keep your hair on old chap It merely indicates your bias and or ignorance for not including it, that`s all nothing to PROVE other than that. Sorry, I am getting frustrated because I have taken the time to build up a consistent, structured argument through this immense debate, and it's being attacked because people don't understand it and it's obviously within their power to just read the thread again. ANYHOOOOO - it does not neccessarily indicate bias or ignorance. It could also indicate that I was drunk, very tired, rushing to get off home, etc. LOL, a Rose by any other name would smell as sweet If you like. well if you care to refer back to where you originaly said that, you`ll see that I took my hat off to the lady as a ordinary user of sfn and not as a moderator either True, but that wasn't the actual "calling out", was it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
YT2095 Posted March 8, 2004 Share Posted March 8, 2004 having gotten all that out the way, are we back on track/topic again? LOL, I may just give up my guns and take this up as a Sport instead Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sayonara Posted March 8, 2004 Share Posted March 8, 2004 YT2095 said in post # :reason, becuase competition shooters need to own their own guns, they are the same as used in the competitions and the only advantage a contestant may have is their shooting ability, not how good their sights are or barrel length, no-one with a .38 snub nose is gunna be put against a .223 Bush Master for instance. it`s all standardised. but of course in order to win that trophy or medal, one must practice regularly, and needs to know thier gun is top shape at all times (some employ specialist to take care of ther weapons) but at a normal gun club for a competition, we can`t all afford that it`s all about getting that hole in that tiny dot in the middle of concentric circles, nothing else comes into it, you want that certificate or trophy! Agreed, but with a few points: That falls under practice, both as a function and as an objective (I think you're arguing it as an objective, which I agree with completely). Also, if you're the winner of such an event it could be argued that it falls under posturing Also, since such weapons are not illegal for that particular use they don't really fall into the "guns category" we're supposed to be discussing, so there's very little point arguing over it. Keep in mind that the original 'parent object' I am discussing comprises the firearms owned illegally by the average gun owner. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sayonara Posted March 8, 2004 Share Posted March 8, 2004 YT2095 said in post # :having gotten all that out the way, are we back on track/topic again? LOL, I may just give up my guns and take this up as a Sport instead Have we done 100 posts yet? My fingers are sore. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sayonara Posted March 8, 2004 Share Posted March 8, 2004 atinymonkey said in post # :This has less and less to do with the thread. Did you intend to quote yourself then? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
YT2095 Posted March 8, 2004 Share Posted March 8, 2004 many of my competition shooter friends have had to give up their guns though (as in for destruction), I think that`s wrong!. ok maybe let them not keep the stuff at home but in the club, THAT would be fair, but no, not even there was allowed going WAAAAY back to a post I made about mine (guns) and that I`m allowed to keep them, are that they are all either CO2 gas or Air (spring powered). the 9mm Sig Saur is identical in everyway including the ballance and functions (the Police use them to train with), it`s only different INSIDE them I also bought the barrel extension for more power that = greater accuracy over distance as well as a laser sight (cheating I know) not featured in those pics. I have a good selection of judged and signed targets to my credit, including some guns I`de never even tried before (powered weapons). I also made it to the quarter finals county Darts playoffs. It`s all just good fun with never a sinister thought, I keep my darts and I keep my guns, and if they become ilegal, I will give them up WHEN I get full cash price back for them. that`s my stance [edit] re 100 posts: 53 total 23/30 to you at last count Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sayonara Posted March 8, 2004 Share Posted March 8, 2004 http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/derbyshire/3543887.stm Apparently weapons sold by those two blokes have been found at the scene of several serious crimes, including 8 murders. This could be a good example of how a ban makes it easier to trace otherwise-unrelated incidents back to the source. It's not 100% on-topic, but I found this case interesting. Actually having said that, it was on topic about 100 replies ago. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
YT2095 Posted March 8, 2004 Share Posted March 8, 2004 these 2 men (Father and son IIRC) are the sort of money hungry, couldn`t care less MUST DIE and goto hell type of Idiots that we in the shooting sport despise! it`s THOSE that give us or at least tarnish our sport with a bad name, I hope they both get a life sentence each for all 8 that died as a result (and there`s no way of knowing how many more will occur latter as a result of these pair) ( do NOT amke the mistake of associating MY SORT of shootist to these sorts of criminals, beleive me, we hate them probably more than the general public do! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sayonara Posted March 8, 2004 Share Posted March 8, 2004 I didn't mean to suggest any connection (hence "Just to go off on a slight tangent all of a sudden..."). I think the judge's comments summed their actions up quite nicely, although I bet he secretly wanted to swear a lot more. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
YT2095 Posted March 8, 2004 Share Posted March 8, 2004 I havenet` actualy read the url yet, I saw it on SKY News this morning that they`de been caught, as a legitimate gun user, I for one am pleased they`ve been aprehended, and now it would seem sentenced (I`ll have a read in a sec). I do sinscerely hope that your posting that here is not a ploy to gain any credibility however, and no, I`de not be surprised if it was! regardless of what idiots like that do, I have not changed my perspective with regard to my support for the legitimate ownership of guns for use in the correct manor and purpose Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sayonara Posted March 8, 2004 Share Posted March 8, 2004 I don't oppose such ownership. That stance is not anything to do with what I'm talking about. The URL is relevant to the part of the thread where I was discussing with someone (I think it was Demosthenes, might have been Cap'n or someone, or even you actually) that the ban on firearms makes it easier to track down miscreants like the ones in the article. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
YT2095 Posted March 8, 2004 Share Posted March 8, 2004 here`s the bit I find rellevent, and I Quote "She ordered both to pay £20,000 costs and made separate confiscation orders of £12,000 on each man." <taken from the url in post# 334> now if she`de have changed each pound note into a day in Prison, then we`de be talking Justice! instead they get a telling off, an order to pay probably a fraction of the money they`ve made selling the stuff in the 1`st place!!!! I ask ya, is that fair!??? HELL NO! lemme see here and do the maths, that`s 32k each x2 total =64k now then, 8 ppl dead, that works out to roughly 8k a life. cor just think how many people you could legaly kill if you won 8 million on the lottery !!! banning guns is NOT the answer, tougher laws are! or God help the next town that has the next lottery winner in it Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
quantumpunk23 Posted March 21, 2004 Share Posted March 21, 2004 Tell you what, if the US banned firearms, I would pack my things and move too a country where they are legal. I think that I have a right to protect myself from the scumbags in my community that don't choose to follow the law. If some crackhead breaks into my apartment, he better be ready to deal with my 12 gauge, my Glock 9mm or my FN/FAL .308, whichever happens to be nearby. In my oppinion the best deterrent to burglary is knowing that a high percentage of the local populace has the ability to end the offenders life. As far as no reason to own automatic weapons thats ludicrous as well. In the US it is still legal to purchase certain fully auto weapons. As a matter of fact I am currently looking into purchasing a H&K MP-5, and I don't see whats wrong with that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Misodoctakleidi Posted March 21, 2004 Share Posted March 21, 2004 quantumpunk23 said in post # :If some crackhead breaks into my apartment, he better be ready to deal with my 12 gauge, my Glock 9mm or my FN/FAL .308, whichever happens to be nearby. I think that sums up your intelligence. Why did you say 'some crackhead'? What made you choose those words? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cap'n Refsmmat Posted March 21, 2004 Share Posted March 21, 2004 It IS legal to have a full automatics? Now I REALLY want body armor! I mean, that's overkill, being able to fire 30 rounds in 10 seconds. Only the military really needs that. Or, (of course), criminals. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
quantumpunk23 Posted March 21, 2004 Share Posted March 21, 2004 Geez, if I choose to refer to a criminal breaking into my home, endangering my life as a crackhead or anything else for that matter who cares. I guess I should offer up an apology to those of you looking into robbing homes for a living. I am very sorry to have offended you. Unless of course you are upset by my reference to "crackheads." Most of them are upstanding citizens who should be praised for their community service right? Man, get real. Great rebuttal by the way. Attacking my intelligence, well done! Do you actually have anything to add to this topic or do you just wish to flame away at individual posters? What is your take on the issue? Answering Cap'n Refsmmat's question, yes. However, one must obtain a Class-III FFL in order to purchase one and most are quite expensive (MP-5 I am looking at cost $10K+ USD) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sayonara Posted March 22, 2004 Share Posted March 22, 2004 quantumpunk23 said in post # :Tell you what, if the US banned firearms, I would pack my things and move too a country where they are legal. I think that I have a right to protect myself from the scumbags in my community that don't choose to follow the law. If some crackhead breaks into my apartment, he better be ready to deal with my 12 gauge, my Glock 9mm or my FN/FAL .308, whichever happens to be nearby. What makes you think a good smack in the face or a swift introduction to a baseball bat won't be just as effective? It'll certainly mean less trouble. In my oppinion the best deterrent to burglary is knowing that a high percentage of the local populace has the ability to end the offenders life. I take it burglary is not a problem where you live then. ANYBODY has the potential to end an intruder's life, not just people with guns. I'm guessing there are few burglars who don't imagine they'll ever face mortal danger. As far as no reason to own automatic weapons thats ludicrous as well. In the US it is still legal to purchase certain fully auto weapons. Would you mind stating why that's ludicrous? Bearing in mind that something being legal doesn't mean it's all super and great. As a matter of fact I am currently looking into purchasing a H&K MP-5, and I don't see whats wrong with that. Strawman. Nobody said there was anything wrong with it, the question is "why do you need something so dangerous as an automatic weapon". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sayonara Posted March 22, 2004 Share Posted March 22, 2004 quantumpunk23 said in post # :Man, get real. Great rebuttal by the way. Attacking my intelligence, well done! Do you actually have anything to add to this topic or do you just wish to flame away at individual posters? What is your take on the issue? I notice you didn't get around to answering his question. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Skye Posted March 22, 2004 Share Posted March 22, 2004 All I have to add is, as I believe the right to life should be followed by the right to die, the right to bear arms should also be followed by the right to arm bears. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
quantumpunk23 Posted March 22, 2004 Share Posted March 22, 2004 Sayonara, I never said I NEEDED an automatic weapon, I would just like to own one. Take a look around you and tell me if you really need all the sh*t you have. I doubt it. Also, I would think my stance on the issue of the private citizen owning firearms would be pretty clear..... I'm through with this discussion, because regardless of what any pro-gun people say, those of you who think I should defend myself with a freaking baseball bat with never understand. Oh yeah, and a "swift smack in the face?" That is absoulte hilarity. "Oh, excuse me mister robber, don't shoot me with that shotgun, I need to run up to you and slap you now." Get real genius. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sayonara Posted March 22, 2004 Share Posted March 22, 2004 quantumpunk23 said in post # :Sayonara, I never said I NEEDED an automatic weapon, I would just like to own one. Take a look around you and tell me if you really need all the sh*t you have. I doubt it. Also, I would think my stance on the issue of the private citizen owning firearms would be pretty clear..... I'm through with this discussion, because regardless of what any pro-gun people say, those of you who think I should defend myself with a freaking baseball bat with never understand. Oh yeah, and a "swift smack in the face?" That is absoulte hilarity. "Oh, excuse me mister robber, don't shoot me with that shotgun, I need to run up to you and slap you now." Get real genius. So you don't actually have any arguments or reasoning then? Just a burning, inexplicable desire to let us all know what you think you should be entitled to? I suggest you read the thread. Most of what you are... proposing has already come up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
quantumpunk23 Posted March 22, 2004 Share Posted March 22, 2004 Whatever Sayonara, you give me a logical reason why I should not be entitled to firearms and I would argue against it. However, you didn't do that. I understand that you like to argue and thats great, but I don't like arguing for the sake of it. And again, I'm quite sure it will do no good... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sayonara Posted March 22, 2004 Share Posted March 22, 2004 Then stop flaming the members who want to use the site for its intended purpose. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
YT2095 Posted March 22, 2004 Share Posted March 22, 2004 as an advocate of gun ownership, I personaly would not with to own a fully automatic weapon, Sure I`de love to have a go with one and try and spray as many bullets as possible at a target and get a score in KAZILLIONS (or not), yeah it would be great fun!, that I cannot deny, but I`de insist that someone else pay for the ammo! ) a fully auto weapons is probably "great" in a war (and all war sux!) but for practicality in civilian usage, stick to your Glock 9mm, and if you feel you need to keep it loaded then fill it with Blanks and keep the last round live. personaly, I`de never store a loaded weapon in the house, but each to his own ya need only 2 guns, a good side arm and well callibrated long riffle, anything else is just excess really. that`s my 2 pence worth (again) LOL ) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts