The U.S.A. Mass Shootings Thread
Discussion
Well the UK has a pretty decent set-up for firearms control.
https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/firearm...
154,958 firearm certificates
https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/firearm...
154,958 firearm certificates
croyde said:
Semi auto .22 AR15s are available in the UK to anyone with a firearms licence, as are the NATO round .226 versions but in single fire mode only ie you have to cock it each time you want to shoot.
Thankfully, as far as I know, no one has run amok with one here in the UK.
Yep. And .22 rimfire is more than capable of killing someone, especially at short ranges. The 'guns r baaaad' lobby are no different from those idiots over at BRAKE who want everyone driving a mobile pillow at 20mph.Thankfully, as far as I know, no one has run amok with one here in the UK.
dvs_dave said:
DurianIceCream said:
They are only cosmetically similar to military firearms. The are not functionally similar. Military firearms which look cosmetically similar to the NZ massacre firearms are either fully automatic or capable of burst fire. Civilian firearms are not.
There are plenty of legitimate target shooting reasons (or even hunting reasons) to own a firearm which look cosmetically similar to a military rifle. You just think there is no legitimate reason, because chances are you don't shoot and don't know much about recreational shooters.
Since we are on a UK website and we are talking firearms which are cosmetically similar but functionally different to military firearms, then you can quite legally buy in the UK a rifle which looks just like the NZ massacre rifle.
The AR-15 with high capacity magazines strikes again. Burst/full auto versions of which are common place with military and law enforcement. Civilian market semi-auto versions of which can (albeit not that easily) be modified to full auto. But readily available (for now) bump stocks handily get around that particular problem by giving civilian semi-auto versions similar performance to full auto military version. Is it really that hard to understand why the obvious “military style” moniker has come about?There are plenty of legitimate target shooting reasons (or even hunting reasons) to own a firearm which look cosmetically similar to a military rifle. You just think there is no legitimate reason, because chances are you don't shoot and don't know much about recreational shooters.
Since we are on a UK website and we are talking firearms which are cosmetically similar but functionally different to military firearms, then you can quite legally buy in the UK a rifle which looks just like the NZ massacre rifle.
Anyway, even a semi auto can rapid fire.....basically as quick as you can physically pull the trigger, until your magazine is empty. There is no legitimate need for a “sportsman” shooter to need this functionality given the devastation misuse can so easily cause. It’s this rapid sustained fire “military style” functionality coupled with high capacity magazines that’s the issue.
A sensible move would be to restrict civilian semi-auto firearms to a maximum of 6 shots before needing to be reloaded, and/or an automatic delay (say 10s) with manual reset requiring both hands to perform is imposed before being able to fire the next 6 rounds. This will not appreciably affect the functionality for the legitimate sportsman shooter, but it’ll make it a hell of a lot harder to successfully carry out a mass murder with one.
Edited by dvs_dave on Friday 22 March 05:08
The best solution, which isn't practical i know, is to limit civilian ownership to those firearms with the capability to only hold one or two rounds irrespective of modification.
My shotgun holds two rounds, no matter what i do that is all it could hold, rifles I don't really know much about but like the old rolling block / Zulu style Martinis? 1 shot requires reloading.
Obviously this ruins it for 99.9% of Sportsmen who have a requirement for a weapon and opens up questions about humane hunting (reloading if an animal is injured, etc), but i honestly can't think of any other way.
I genuinely don't see, in civilian life, a need for any firearm with a capability to hold more than 2 or 3 shots.
Lord.Vader said:
The problem is both high capacity magazines and "bump stocks" is no matter what you do people will still be able to purchase them, any modification to delay the firing mechanism could all be reversed or modified to enable the "normal" rate of fire.
The best solution, which isn't practical i know, is to limit civilian ownership to those firearms with the capability to only hold one or two rounds irrespective of modification.
My shotgun holds two rounds, no matter what i do that is all it could hold, rifles I don't really know much about but like the old rolling block / Zulu style Martinis? 1 shot requires reloading.
Obviously this ruins it for 99.9% of Sportsmen who have a requirement for a weapon and opens up questions about humane hunting (reloading if an animal is injured, etc), but i honestly can't think of any other way.
I genuinely don't see, in civilian life, a need for any firearm with a capability to hold more than 2 or 3 shots.
Well that's pretty much the sensible situation that the UK has isn't it?The best solution, which isn't practical i know, is to limit civilian ownership to those firearms with the capability to only hold one or two rounds irrespective of modification.
My shotgun holds two rounds, no matter what i do that is all it could hold, rifles I don't really know much about but like the old rolling block / Zulu style Martinis? 1 shot requires reloading.
Obviously this ruins it for 99.9% of Sportsmen who have a requirement for a weapon and opens up questions about humane hunting (reloading if an animal is injured, etc), but i honestly can't think of any other way.
I genuinely don't see, in civilian life, a need for any firearm with a capability to hold more than 2 or 3 shots.
Halb said:
Well that's pretty much the sensible situation that the UK has isn't it?
Not really. On an FAC you can have semi-automatic firearms in select types of ammunition (.22 and shotguns only, though I believe that excludes slugs), anything else is only single shot and there's no real restriction on magazine size.j_4m said:
Halb said:
Well that's pretty much the sensible situation that the UK has isn't it?
Not really. On an FAC you can have semi-automatic firearms in select types of ammunition (.22 and shotguns only, though I believe that excludes slugs), anything else is only single shot and there's no real restriction on magazine size.Here's one for £750 secondhand.
https://www.guntrader.uk/guns/rifles/colt/semi-aut...
I would think that the general UK population has no idea that these 'military' style rifles are available over here. Other non military style semi autos are also available.
Edited by croyde on Friday 22 March 11:04
croyde said:
Plus, weirdly, one is allowed 30 round capacity magazines for your semi auto rimfire .22 over here but they are outlawed in many US states.
Here's one for £750 secondhand.
https://www.guntrader.uk/guns/rifles/colt/semi-aut...
I would think that the general UK population has no idea that these 'military' style rifles are available over here. Other non military style semi autos are also available.
Includes 45 degree iron sights (someone's been watching too many movies!)Here's one for £750 secondhand.
https://www.guntrader.uk/guns/rifles/colt/semi-aut...
I would think that the general UK population has no idea that these 'military' style rifles are available over here. Other non military style semi autos are also available.
Edited by croyde on Friday 22 March 11:04
And I say this as someone who enjoys shooting and would like to be able to shoot more.
croyde said:
Plus, weirdly, one is allowed 30 round capacity magazines for your semi auto rimfire .22 over here but they are outlawed in many US states.
Here's one for £750 secondhand.
https://www.guntrader.uk/guns/rifles/colt/semi-aut...
I would think that the general UK population has no idea that these 'military' style rifles are available over here. Other non military style semi autos are also available.
That is going to ruin a heard of dear. Here's one for £750 secondhand.
https://www.guntrader.uk/guns/rifles/colt/semi-aut...
I would think that the general UK population has no idea that these 'military' style rifles are available over here. Other non military style semi autos are also available.
Edited by croyde on Friday 22 March 11:04
Noodle1982 said:
The folks that use the firearm bingo terms such as 'fully automic' and 'military style' are the same folk that think the 'AR' in AR-15 stands for automatic rifle.
Clueless the lot of them.
And folks such as yourself don’t have the capacity to see the bigger picture so instead just prove yourself to be the myopic clueless simpleton that you are by spouting unconstructive purile statements like that.Clueless the lot of them.
j_4m said:
And what bigger picture is that?
Ok I’ll let you lure me in. But firstly, what terminology would you rather be used instead of “military style”? Plenty of objections from gun nuts on the phrase, but no suggestions ever for an alternative?Bigger picture is that banning guns is not the answer as it won’t stop mass murders from happening, and there’s simply too many out there to manage.
However there is no legitimate reason for any civilian in a civilized country to need a semi-auto that is able to continue rapidly firing until it’s out of rounds. There is no legitimate sportsman situation where such functionality is needed either.
As I’ve mentioned, a sensible approach would be to introduce civilian versions having a mechanical limit on how many shots (say 6) can be fired between having to perform some sort of manual reset procedure. Such a feature would not detract from sportsman usage, but would all of a sudden make any semi-auto capable of holding more than 6 rounds much less of an effective tool for mass murders, which is the point.
No one truly has an issue with legitimate and sensible semi-auto sportsman gun ownership. It only becomes a problem when all too often, these weapons get deliberately misused as they are so devastatingly effective in their current form. Limit their effectiveness in that area, limit their lethality when being misused.
dvs_dave said:
Noodle1982 said:
The folks that use the firearm bingo terms such as 'fully automic' and 'military style' are the same folk that think the 'AR' in AR-15 stands for automatic rifle.
Clueless the lot of them.
And folks such as yourself don’t have the capacity to see the bigger picture so instead just prove yourself to be the myopic clueless simpleton that you are by spouting unconstructive purile statements like that.Clueless the lot of them.
That's another gun bingo term...'high capacity'. Most of the people that spout that haven't got a clue what is even classed as high capacity.
dvs_dave said:
Ok I’ll let you lure me in. But firstly, what terminology would you rather be used instead of “military style”? Plenty of objections from gun nuts on the phrase, but no suggestions ever for an alternative?
There is no alternative, it's a nonsense term coined by people who want to paint said weapons in a bad light. Describe the thing you are actually talking about in the correct language, you want to ban all semi-automatic rifles.dvs_dave said:
Bigger picture is that banning guns is not the answer as it won’t stop mass murders from happening, and there’s simply too many out there to manage.
However there is no legitimate reason for any civilian in a civilized country to need a semi-auto that is able to continue rapidly firing until it’s out of rounds. There is no legitimate sportsman situation where such functionality is needed either.
The Americans have a very legitimate reason, it's a constitutionally protected right. For countries that aren't America sporting interest should be legitimate reason enough; you don't need to do sport at all. To argue that you should only do the bare minimum of what's required for an activity to be a sport defeats the whole purpose of sport.However there is no legitimate reason for any civilian in a civilized country to need a semi-auto that is able to continue rapidly firing until it’s out of rounds. There is no legitimate sportsman situation where such functionality is needed either.
dvs_dave said:
As I’ve mentioned, a sensible approach would be to introduce civilian versions having a mechanical limit on how many shots (say 6) can be fired between having to perform some sort of manual reset procedure. Such a feature would not detract from sportsman usage, but would all of a sudden make any semi-auto capable of holding more than 6 rounds much less of an effective tool for mass murders, which is the point.
No one truly has an issue with legitimate and sensible semi-auto sportsman gun ownership. It only becomes a problem when all too often, these weapons get deliberately misused as they are so devastatingly effective in their current form. Limit their effectiveness in that area, limit their lethality when being misused.
They already are civilian versions, no military in the world uses an AR-15, and I'm glad we agree that it's the people and not the weapons that are at fault. Tighten up the controls on the people, not the object itself.No one truly has an issue with legitimate and sensible semi-auto sportsman gun ownership. It only becomes a problem when all too often, these weapons get deliberately misused as they are so devastatingly effective in their current form. Limit their effectiveness in that area, limit their lethality when being misused.
dvs_dave said:
Ok I’ll let you lure me in. But firstly, what terminology would you rather be used instead of “military style”? Plenty of objections from gun nuts on the phrase, but no suggestions ever for an alternative?
Bigger picture is that banning guns is not the answer as it won’t stop mass murders from happening, and there’s simply too many out there to manage.
However there is no legitimate reason for any civilian in a civilized country to need a semi-auto that is able to continue rapidly firing until it’s out of rounds. There is no legitimate sportsman situation where such functionality is needed either.
As I’ve mentioned, a sensible approach would be to introduce civilian versions having a mechanical limit on how many shots (say 6) can be fired between having to perform some sort of manual reset procedure. Such a feature would not detract from sportsman usage, but would all of a sudden make any semi-auto capable of holding more than 6 rounds much less of an effective tool for mass murders, which is the point.
No one truly has an issue with legitimate and sensible semi-auto sportsman gun ownership. It only becomes a problem when all too often, these weapons get deliberately misused as they are so devastatingly effective in their current form. Limit their effectiveness in that area, limit their lethality when being misused.
Like I said, clueless. Absolutely clueless.Bigger picture is that banning guns is not the answer as it won’t stop mass murders from happening, and there’s simply too many out there to manage.
However there is no legitimate reason for any civilian in a civilized country to need a semi-auto that is able to continue rapidly firing until it’s out of rounds. There is no legitimate sportsman situation where such functionality is needed either.
As I’ve mentioned, a sensible approach would be to introduce civilian versions having a mechanical limit on how many shots (say 6) can be fired between having to perform some sort of manual reset procedure. Such a feature would not detract from sportsman usage, but would all of a sudden make any semi-auto capable of holding more than 6 rounds much less of an effective tool for mass murders, which is the point.
No one truly has an issue with legitimate and sensible semi-auto sportsman gun ownership. It only becomes a problem when all too often, these weapons get deliberately misused as they are so devastatingly effective in their current form. Limit their effectiveness in that area, limit their lethality when being misused.
Why do you get so bogged down on AR-15 semantics and the needless chicanery it introduces into the discussion? It’s simple. A Colt AR-15 is the semi-auto civilian version of what’s commonly known as the M-16 rifle (and others) which is the fully auto military version. It’s the same gun, just slightly different internals to allow full auto mode.
With regards “high capacity” (or large capacity) magazines, again why the face ache over that terminology? It’s a real definition. In the US for example, the official definition of “high capacity” is a magazine able hold more than 10 rounds.
With regards “high capacity” (or large capacity) magazines, again why the face ache over that terminology? It’s a real definition. In the US for example, the official definition of “high capacity” is a magazine able hold more than 10 rounds.
How about you contribute something useful, you simpleton.Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff