American Gun Laws

[Paddy O Fernature]

Ah yes, because the only dangerous thing wer might need to protect ourselves from in America is the government; not wildlife or criminals, no sirree, bears just want a hug and muggers are trying to brighten up your day.

Are there some statistics how many criminals were eliminated, when they encountered decent, armed citizens?

I could be wrong here, but AFAIK, nobody keeps hard statistics on that for whatever reason. I've seen some studies in the past that give broad spectrum estimates on the subject, but nothing definitive.

[Imperializt Russia]

I'm pretty certain that is a "justifiable homicide" and IIRC that number is usually quoted at about 200 a year.

[Big Jim P]

How is the recoil, relative to a .223 AR15? (I am assuming the AR10 was a .308).

It was.

The recoil was actually slightly less then my Rem700 in the same cal, and certainly kicks more then my Riverman LLC 5.56. However, it's not uncontrollable even when firing in rapid succession.

Cool. My next rifle will be a semi-auto .308.

[Big Jim P]

Are there some statistics how many criminals were eliminated, when they encountered decent, armed citizens?

I could be wrong here, but AFAIK, nobody keeps hard statistics on that for whatever reason. I've seen some studies in the past that give broad spectrum estimates on the subject, but nothing definitive.

We really need a reporting system for DGUs. Relying on estimates instead of hard numbers does weaken our argument.

[Big Jim P]

I'm pretty certain that is a "justifiable homicide" and IIRC that number is usually quoted at about 200 a year.

The problem here is that not all DGUs are reported (and thus enumerated), and even those that do result in an assailants death are not always ruled a "justifiable homicide". In many cases, no charges are brought against the defensive shooter at all.

[Shan Yue]

We really need a reporting system for DGUs. Relying on estimates instead of hard numbers does weaken our argument.

As if that isnt the point.

[Big Jim P]

That is fucking stupid. Any potentially lethal attack, or attack that may potentially result in severe bodily harm, armed or unarmed, is a legitimate justification for the defensive use of lethal force, including shooting.

Tell that to our judges. It's reality there and part of the reason, why I always rather practised with blades.

Even a cop can't shoot a person armed 'only' with, let's say, stones. Well, he can, but he will have a problems with 'human rights' junkies.
These 'human rights' groups in every corner are real bane of Europe, and I am saying that as a leftist.

One of the reasons I am glad I am an American. In most reasonable jurisdictions, our right to self defense is legally recognized.

[Geilinor]

Tell that to our judges. It's reality there and part of the reason, why I always rather practised with blades.

Even a cop can't shoot a person armed 'only' with, let's say, stones. Well, he can, but he will have a problems with 'human rights' junkies.
These 'human rights' groups in every corner are real bane of Europe, and I am saying that as a leftist.

One of the reasons I am glad I am an American. In most reasonable jurisdictions, our right to self defense is legally recognized.

You can defend yourself, but the use of force should (of course) be proportional and reasonable.

[Big Jim P]

One of the reasons I am glad I am an American. In most reasonable jurisdictions, our right to self defense is legally recognized.

You can defend yourself, but the use of force should (of course) be proportional and reasonable.

Indeed. My earlier post covered that:

Any potentially lethal attack, or attack that may potentially result in severe bodily harm, armed or unarmed, is a legitimate justification for the defensive use of lethal force, including shooting.

[Esternial]

I can personally see that there's some value of a handgun as a self-defensive measure, depending on how fearful you are and where you live. I can also see the value in buying a weapon for its aesthetics (I'd like to own a C96 if I could) or for collecting.

But I don't really see the allure in taking a gun to a shooting range. Don't see the point in purchasing a rifle if you're not a hunter. Don't see the point in purchasing something like an AR-15.

I occasionally have an airsoft skirmish with my mates and I feel that it's way more fun than shooting a target at a shooting range.

[Imperializt Russia]

But I don't really see the allure in taking a gun to a shooting range. Don't see the point in purchasing a rifle if you're not a hunter. Don't see the point in purchasing something like an AR-15.

Going to a shooting range gives you the satisfaction of becoming a better shooter.
I see no difference between that, and what I do at an archery club. Not to mention, socialising.

[Big Jim P]

I can personally see that there's some value of a handgun as a self-defensive measure, depending on how fearful you are and where you live. I can also see the value in buying a weapon for its aesthetics (I'd like to own a C96 if I could) or for collecting.

But I don't really see the allure in taking a gun to a shooting range. Don't see the point in purchasing a rifle if you're not a hunter. Don't see the point in purchasing something like an AR-15.

I occasionally have an airsoft skirmish with my mates and I feel that it's way more fun than shooting a target at a shooting range.

Someone not seeing the point to owning or using a given class of firearm is no reason to restrict them. I like going to the range. I like shooting rifles even though I am not a hunter. The AR15is nothing more than a semi-auto rifle, and is useful for such things as hunting, recreational shooting, and home defense.

I agree with the desire for a C96. I want one cosmetically altered to look like Hans blaster.

The airsoft fighting looks like fun.

[Geilinor]

You can defend yourself, but the use of force should (of course) be proportional and reasonable.

Indeed. My earlier post covered that:

Any potentially lethal attack, or attack that may potentially result in severe bodily harm, armed or unarmed, is a legitimate justification for the defensive use of lethal force, including shooting.

Given some of your past posts on police shooting threads, I'm not sure you understand that line well.

[Socialist Czechia]

One of the reasons I am glad I am an American. In most reasonable jurisdictions, our right to self defense is legally recognized.

You can defend yourself, but the use of force should (of course) be proportional and reasonable.

What would think about guy who slit throat of rapist when he raped some underaged girl?

I would call this action 'proportional and reasonable' myself.

When someone is able to do something horrific to another human being, using of lethal force of any form is justified for me and would rather go to jail than admit 'error' in such case.

[Big Jim P]

But I don't really see the allure in taking a gun to a shooting range. Don't see the point in purchasing a rifle if you're not a hunter. Don't see the point in purchasing something like an AR-15.

Going to a shooting range gives you the satisfaction of becoming a better shooter.
I see no difference between that, and what I do at an archery club. Not to mention, socialising.

I want to try my hand at extreme long-range (1000+ meters) shooting. I will likely have to buy the land and build my own range however as there are not may public ranges that can accommodate this style of shooting.

[Paddy O Fernature]

I can personally see that there's some value of a handgun as a self-defensive measure, depending on how fearful you are and where you live. I can also see the value in buying a weapon for its aesthetics (I'd like to own a C96 if I could) or for collecting.

Someone not seeing the point to owning or using a given class of firearm is no reason to restrict them. I like going to the range. I like shooting rifles even though I am not a hunter. The AR15is nothing more than a semi-auto rifle, and is useful for such things as hunting, recreational shooting, and home defense.

I agree with the desire for a C96. I want one cosmetically altered to look like Hans blaster.

They are fun to shoot. Though finding ammo is a pricey bitch. Best to reload.

[Big Jim P]

Indeed. My earlier post covered that:

Given some of your past posts on police shooting threads, I'm not sure you understand that line well.

Really? What's not to understand? I made a plain, simple statement.

[Big Jim P]

Someone not seeing the point to owning or using a given class of firearm is no reason to restrict them. I like going to the range. I like shooting rifles even though I am not a hunter. The AR15is nothing more than a semi-auto rifle, and is useful for such things as hunting, recreational shooting, and home defense.

I agree with the desire for a C96. I want one cosmetically altered to look like Hans blaster.

They are fun to shoot. Though finding ammo is a pricey bitch. Best to reload.

Or have it rechambered for a more common round.

[Esternial]

I can personally see that there's some value of a handgun as a self-defensive measure, depending on how fearful you are and where you live. I can also see the value in buying a weapon for its aesthetics (I'd like to own a C96 if I could) or for collecting.

But I don't really see the allure in taking a gun to a shooting range. Don't see the point in purchasing a rifle if you're not a hunter. Don't see the point in purchasing something like an AR-15.

I occasionally have an airsoft skirmish with my mates and I feel that it's way more fun than shooting a target at a shooting range.

Someone not seeing the point to owning or using a given class of firearm is no reason to restrict them. I like going to the range. I like shooting rifles even though I am not a hunter. The AR15is nothing more than a semi-auto rifle, and is useful for such things as hunting, recreational shooting, and home defense.

I agree with the desire for a C96. I want one cosmetically altered to look like Hans blaster.

The airsoft fighting looks like fun.

I did say "personally". I'm very aware of that.

There are conversion kits out there that allow you to alter it. I've looked it up :p

[Patridam]

I'm willing to wager "drug deal gone wrong" may be a significant contribution to the "escalation of argument" category, in which case, the legality of guns likely has little to no impact on that violence. In any case, the lack of respect for firearms is something more to do with a lack of proper training and stupidity on the part of the owner than it does "gun culture".

And please do not misspell freedom.

Why should I not have the freedurm to intentionally misspell words for emphasis?

The availability of guns does have an impact on that violence because in Britain, most people aren't shot dead.
If you entirely subtract firearm homicides, homicides in the US and UK are actually comparable.

Just that in the UK, firearm homicides make up 10% of homicides, not 75%

I can't stop you, but such purposeful errors decrease any semblence of legitimacy you might have had in their intentional disrespect of a foundational aspect of America, freedom.

Anyway, back on topic...
http://www.gunfacts.info/wp-content/upl ... r-1997.png
https://sierrafoothillcommentary.files. ... -large.jpg

[Socialist Czechia]

If will buy firearms one day, it will be certainly something from my homeland.

Like CZ-75 for defense purposes or CZ-805 for...other purposes.

hell, you must make a revolution somehow!

[Ammerinia]

Because you try telling a knife-wielding murderer hanging out in your living room to politely leave.

In all seriousness though, crime is a fairly serious issue in the US, and the only way for private citizens to stop themselves being murdered is to use reasonable force. The main problem is, during the other 98% of the time where you aren't being targeted by a serial killer, your gun is sitting there, easily accessible by anyone with any intentions. Just look at all the times children grabbed their parents firearms and ended up seriously injuring themselves.

It's really just a matter of putting guns in the hands of people who need it. Unfortunately, it's becoming more difficult to figure out everyone's intentions day by day.

[Esternial]

Why should I not have the freedurm to intentionally misspell words for emphasis?

The availability of guns does have an impact on that violence because in Britain, most people aren't shot dead.
If you entirely subtract firearm homicides, homicides in the US and UK are actually comparable.

Just that in the UK, firearm homicides make up 10% of homicides, not 75%

I can't stop you, but such purposeful errors decrease any semblence of legitimacy you might have had in their intentional disrespect of a foundational aspect of America, freedom.

Anyway, back on topic...
http://www.gunfacts.info/wp-content/upl ... r-1997.png
https://sierrafoothillcommentary.files. ... -large.jpg

Nice graphs, shame they're total poppycock.

https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Ga ... d3cf1c.pdf

Don't worry I won't expect you to read it all. Just read the abstract and the conclusion.

[Imperializt Russia]

Why should I not have the freedurm to intentionally misspell words for emphasis?

The availability of guns does have an impact on that violence because in Britain, most people aren't shot dead.
If you entirely subtract firearm homicides, homicides in the US and UK are actually comparable.

Just that in the UK, firearm homicides make up 10% of homicides, not 75%

I can't stop you, but such purposeful errors decrease any semblence of legitimacy you might have had in their intentional disrespect of a foundational aspect of America, freedom.

Anyway, back on topic...
http://www.gunfacts.info/wp-content/upl ... r-1997.png
https://sierrafoothillcommentary.files. ... -large.jpg

The UK has a very liberal definition of violent crime as of recent, ie, after 1997.

Both of those graphs are very misleadingly presented, I suspect the latter is intentional, less sure about the first. It's their use of scales. Especially the second one with its absurdly short x-axis to accentuate the y-axis. Generally, the y-axis values on each are absurdly arbitrary.

The first chart may be simply counting licences issued, rather than firearms. One licence can be sufficient for multiple firearms. In the UK, use of a fake firearm to commit a crime is considered "firearm crime". It was only in the 2000s that police powers for weapons like converted-live replicas were strengthened.
Also, breach of regulations introduced to firearms in 1997 is, spoiler warning, a firearm crime so no wonder it rises.

[Big Jim P]

Because you try telling a knife-wielding murderer hanging out in your living room to politely leave.

In all seriousness though, crime is a fairly serious issue in the US, and the only way for private citizens to stop themselves being murdered is to use reasonable force. The main problem is, during the other 98% of the time where you aren't being targeted by a serial killer, your gun is sitting there, easily accessible by anyone with any intentions. Just look at all the times children grabbed their parents firearms and ended up seriously injuring themselves.

It's really just a matter of putting guns in the hands of people who need it. Unfortunately, it's becoming more difficult to figure out everyone's intentions day by day.

Accidental gun deaths are extremely rare, regardless of the age of the victim, and properly trained kids are less likely to have accidents.