| What is you opinion on guns? |
| Like em' |
|
33% |
[ 7 ] |
| Have shot a gun but that is all. |
|
19% |
[ 4 ] |
| Never shot a gun in my life... |
|
28% |
[ 6 ] |
| Guns are the devils tools! You are a evil, evil man! |
|
4% |
[ 1 ] |
| Guns?! Aw man, have you seen the new Rk-96? *ranting about guns and the love* |
|
14% |
[ 3 ] |
|
| Total Votes : 21 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 Posted: Thu Jan 26, 2006 11:11 pm
I am asking this here because I have asked it outside and got flamed...
Do you think a person should be allowed to own a high Cal. (.50 and up) or assualt (civilian issue no rambo stuff) weaponry?
As some of the people here know I am a weapon fanatic. I love the study of war what gives a side an advantage, what weapons they used, how weapons have evolved, and how they can and will affect our lives.
I also train with weaponry... I am not a nut but I do believe that fighting is a very real thing and you need to be ready for anything if it happens to come to a life or death situation.
Some people call this scarey but it is true and I practice these things for the defense of myself, my family, my friends, and anyone around me who might need my protection.
-I can shoot from the hip accuratly up to aprox. 40 yards
-I can use a scope to hit targets up to 300 yards away within a 3 inch grouping
-I can shoot my 1897 12ga. with one hand and use the pump action with my foot for if I am disabled
-I have experience with shotgun/rifle + pistol and dual pistol shooting
I currently own:
(firearms)
-A ruger .22
-A 1897 12ga.
-A .223 Rifle
(hand to hand)
-Battle axe (24 inch)
-Double headed Flail (1 lbs. heads)
-Spring steel Nan Dao (two shaku)
-Nunchaku (10 inch)
-Tonfa set(12 inch)
-Tactical CQC razor (4 inch folding/locking)
I have had some people call me a freak and I have had some people say that a christian shouldn't know such things, but I think it is natural for a person to want to protect.
I also plan to expand my expertise into the carbine area once I hit 21 (soon!) I have already selected the Carbine... It is a Barret M468 Civ with a tactical light and suppressor.
With the AR ban gone a person can now own folding stock and assualt weaponry. It also allows for high caliber models to be open for purchase. Such as my pistol selection Magnum Researches' Desert Eagle (.50 AE) I can drop the engine out a F-150 from 100 yards with that pistol.
I came from deep in the country and grew up shooting guns so I have a deep respect as well as an amazed awe for them. I would like your opinions as good people on this subject. I know this has little to do with the Lord but I think it is important for me to understand most peoples feelings on this matter. (I can't even say gun around my boss without him flipping out)
Once again no flaming please. xd
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Jan 27, 2006 10:44 am
Guns are as dangerous as the one that uses it. They should be kept away from those who would hurt themselves and others. This includes keeping them out of reach of children and disabling them so that they could not do any harm if they did get a hold of a gun. Also, in the case of children, they need to be taught gun safety at an early enough age in order to prevent accidents in the future. As far as crimials go... there really isn't a whole lot you can do, figuring they will allways find away to smuggle weapons no matter how strict you are on gun laws. My opinion is that guns are good for self-defense just in case something happens in war/terrorist times as long as the ones with the guns are trained in gun safety.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Jan 27, 2006 10:55 am
Lithanus Guns are as dangerous as the one that uses it. They should be kept away from those who would hurt themselves and others. This includes keeping them out of reach of children and disabling them so that they could not do any harm if they did get a hold of a gun. Also, in the case of children, they need to be taught gun safety at an early enough age in order to prevent accidents in the future. As far as crimials go... there really isn't a whole lot you can do, figuring they will allways find away to smuggle weapons no matter how strict you are on gun laws. My opinion is that guns are good for self-defense just in case something happens in war/terrorist times as long as the ones with the guns are trained in gun safety. I agree with you on the fact that unfortunatly the crimal mind can always find a way to harm others... and they have ways of getting weapons they can use. If the US were to take all the guns and melt them into scrap I am sure someone would still find a way to get at least one or two in for the local "Ill Will." I am also open to training others... you buy the ammo. xd
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat Jan 28, 2006 3:26 pm
I don't know much about what gun is what and nevered fired one other then BB, paintball and laser. I do know this much, the bad guys will use what ever gun they can get their hands on, it doesn't matter if the gun is legal.
The best thing to do is not limit who can get the guns, the bad guy will get it if he wants it, but provide police with better protection. Two me, after seeing some guns in action, the sawed off Shot Gun is a true weapon of mass distruction. No need to aim, just point and shoot.
Now Shot Guns and Rifle are originally for hunt game only but the hand gun was design to kill humans.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat Jan 28, 2006 10:11 pm
rockmanx I don't know much about what gun is what and nevered fired one other then BB, paintball and laser. I do know this much, the bad guys will use what ever gun they can get their hands on, it doesn't matter if the gun is legal.
The best thing to do is not limit who can get the guns, the bad guy will get it if he wants it, but provide police with better protection. Two me, after seeing some guns in action, the sawed off Shot Gun is a true weapon of mass distruction. No need to aim, just point and shoot.
Now Shot Guns and Rifle are originally for hunt game only but the hand gun was design to kill humans. It is true that is side arm is basicly a man killer... It's short legth and rapid fire capabilities are almost un comparable to a rifle. Also a sawed off is truely a "hall clearer" but my family has one and to prove his point of its useless-ness my uncle walked out 50 yards and had my dad shot at his back with squirrel shot... only two shot managed to hit his back and they had lost so much velocity that they didn't even leave a bruise just what looked like ant bites... For a good look at the desert eagle go here... http://www.magnumresearch.com/Expand.asp?ProductCode=DE50 It is my favorite hand gun... it couldn't even be considered a side arm at .50 cal. It is more powerful than most modern military rifles!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Jan 30, 2006 12:58 pm
True, sawed offs are for close range only. A Rifle is for long range, and I believe the pump rifle is the most fear becuase of the shound it makes.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed Feb 01, 2006 12:51 pm
rockmanx True, sawed offs are for close range only. A Rifle is for long range, and I believe the pump rifle is the most fear becuase of the shound it makes. A pump weapon truely has a presence added to it... It isn't very efficient but a pump or bolt action weapon is generally more powerful and more accurate because none of the power is wasted on the feed or action of the next shell. They can be a problem if you get disabled. So many special forces are trying to switch to gas powered (semi auto in a rifle sense) or practice different reloading methods. Such as off the shoe, in the arm pit, and between the legs (the last of those being the most clumsy and often failed method.)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed Feb 01, 2006 3:27 pm
I saw the new weapons they use to shoot around corners now.
|
|
|
|
|
|
rockmanx
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Feb 02, 2006 4:59 pm
rockmanx I saw the new weapons they use to shoot around corners now. I have seen them also. They are amazing but the Jeneva convention is trying to get them banned from service saying that they give our boys an unfair advantage. This isn't a freaking sport! *begins to rant on about the idea of troops with "Just do it" painted on their backs and "This raid braught to you by Pepsi!"*
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Feb 03, 2006 5:31 pm
Caterham_Paladin rockmanx I saw the new weapons they use to shoot around corners now. I have seen them also. They are amazing but the Jeneva convention is trying to get them banned from service saying that they give our boys an unfair advantage. This isn't a freaking sport! *begins to rant on about the idea of troops with "Just do it" painted on their backs and "This raid braught to you by Pepsi!"*
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Feb 03, 2006 10:13 pm
The curved barrels did have one major deffect... the bullet lost alot of velocity and the gun could only be used for that purpose... they were good for laying down a layer of lead in a tight spot... but that was about it. I read somewhere that most troops hit by thise guns survived if hit in the torso region. The bullets just moved to slow to peirce deeply.
Didn't Hitler's troops begin to try and use mirror to up the guns effectiveness around corners?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat Feb 04, 2006 2:51 pm
The did have a mirror on it for the gun men to see around the corners. WW2, everybody was making weird weapons. There was even a votex cannon.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat Feb 04, 2006 9:32 pm
Votex? I do know they were even trying to use sound.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Feb 06, 2006 2:45 pm
I leave out a "r'. It is a vortex cannon that was suppose to create a tornado like current to knock the planes out of the air. They did try to make a sound weapon.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Feb 06, 2006 3:34 pm
That sounds heavy duty... but I wouldn't doubt it. During the Cold War people were trying everything they could think of. Germany was working on a tank, for a short period of time, that could be used to move ICBMs and fire them if necissary...
That amy not be special, but the interesting part was that the ICBMs could be loaded into the barrel and a special shell loaded behind them. The tank would fire the missle out and then a chip would sense the wind speed. When the windspeed began to fall the missle would acivate it's internal rockets to keep itself in the air. Hence the missle could go farther because no fuel was wasted on the inital launching.
They had also prepared nukes in this same manner.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reply
