StarDestroyer.Net BBS

My first poll - let's see if I can get this to work properly.

Would you consider owning a gun? For any reason, whether you currently own one or not. If so, why? If not, why not?

I'm more interested in opinion here than an actual debate (not that I could stop one from happening)

I'd like a gun, more of a rifle, that I can take out and shoot to clear some stress. Also, I'm probably going to enjoy shooting at basic training.

I'd love to own a gun but the gun laws in the UK are very strict, perticularily here in Ulster.

I'd like to, and will probably, own one when I am older.

Not that this stops my friend, who got a .22 revolver for Christmas last year. She's not a bad shot, either.

I already have a Winchester 12 gauge pump action shotgun, and I'm currently waiting for the shop to get the Springfield XD 9mm I ordered. I'm definately going to get a rifle of some type in the near future, most likely a 1906 Springfield bolt action, or an M1 Garand.

I really don't like guns, and would only consider owning one if I had to due to living in an unsafe area, in which case I'd prefer to move out.
I don't like extra large/sharp kitchen knives, I don't even want to touch guns, closest I've ever gotten was a mace spray in the shape of a gun.

Still, I'm sure that a group of testosterone filled chumps that like blowing creatures brains out are well equipend to handle guns , so I'll let the gun lovers have their fun and vote for

I believe guns should be permitted for hunting, but no handguns.

When I was in the home guards I had a AK4 / H&K G3, and I had absolutly no use of it whatsoever.

But I am considering getting a hunters license so I can inherit my dads guns.

I do not own a gun and won't own one until I am able to pay for going to the practice range and getting a permit. I'm in New York and I'd have to commute a good distance to Long Island to find a range and that piles on the costs.

So basically, until I can afford to get one.

DEATH wrote:Still, I'm sure that a group of testosterone filled chumps that like blowing creatures brains out are well equipend to handle guns

Ha! You actually made me check my pants for testicles (still none - what a relief!)

I didn't say my preference up front so here it is: I don't own a gun at present because I don't really feel the need to have one. I do, however, like having the option of owning because circumstances might change in the future.

I'm most comfortable with low caliber firearms, like the .22 rifle a friend has loaned me for shooting. Which isn't surprising, being the size I am. When I tried the shotgun it damn near knocked me off my feet the first time I fired it (oh, so that's why I need a better stance...!) Not that pin point accuracy is really a required thing with a shotgun.

The three reasons I can see for me, personally, to own a gun would be self-defense, taking up target shooting as a hobby, and/or hunting. The weapons required for each of the above activities are all quite different.

I agree with DEATH on the I'd-rather-move-from-a-bad-neighborhood-than-arm-myself, though.

Neither have nor particularly want one (besides, everyone knows how Batman feels about guns ), but I have no quarrel with others having them.

I don't see why anybody should have a handgun, but I do see why people might want to have rifles or shotguns. On the "self defense" issue, I prefer the rule of law over anarchy, which is what the "arm ourselves" approach represents as social policy. However, if I did live in a terrible neighbourhood I would consider keeping a weapon around for self-defense, even though it probably wouldn't do me much good in the event of a home invasion (for safety's sake, I would have to keep the weapon and ammo stored separately and locked, so the self-defense idea requires that I'd be able to retrieve and load the weapon immediately).

I do not own a firearm and I can't see any realistic circumstances which would change that. However I feel it's nice to have the option there in case something really out of the ordinary happens to change my mind.

I don't have a gun yet but I plan to sometime soon. Since I plan to harden my home against burglars, I very much doubt I'll use it for self-defence, I'll just be using it to put holes through targets at the range. Putting holes in targets is pretty fun.

Not allowed to at the moment. Can't keep weapons in your room, and they don't take them at the armory (not that I'd trust them with one there anyway).

This might not be quite what you had in mind when you asked this question, but I currently own three firearms. Two are antiques (one I cannot identify, the other is a .58 tower Enfield rifled musket), and so are never fired. The third is the .577 Enfield rifled musket I use for reenacting.

Broomstick wrote:Would you consider owning a gun? For any reason, whether you currently own one or not.

Yes.

If so, why? If not, why not?

Got a shotgun as part of my "security package" after the apartment next to mine was broken in.
If I were in a better financial situation, I'd also take up sport shooting.

Darth Wong wrote:I don't see why anybody should have a handgun,...

Because they are nicely small and compact?
Easy to use in tight areas or even in a struggle?
Can be carried around in a holster without being much of a nuisance?

...but I do see why people might want to have rifles or shotguns. On the "self defense" issue, I prefer the rule of law over anarchy, which is what the "arm ourselves" approach represents as social policy.

False dilemma.
"Arm ourselves", as you call it, is meant to complement the rule of law - the weapon is already there when/if a crime happens, while police would first have to make their way there - which can take surprisingly long sometimes (I remember a couple cops taking almost a full hour to move three blocks, on a day with almost zero traffic; granted, it was no emergency, but they left the station immediately after me, and arrived 45 minutes later than me).
Would-be criminals should not be able to think "Gee, the cops need at least X minutes to get here, so nothing can go wrong if I just hurry up a bit".

However, if I did live in a terrible neighbourhood I would consider keeping a weapon around for self-defense, even though it probably wouldn't do me much good in the event of a home invasion (for safety's sake, I would have to keep the weapon and ammo stored separately and locked, so the self-defense idea requires that I'd be able to retrieve and load the weapon immediately).

No offence, but, are you drunk?
There's no reason in hell you'd want to store gun and ammo separately (except for retarded laws in some countries), provided they are locked up securely, or under direct control.

Pistols are just fun to shoot. Nice and compact compared to a rifle or shotgun. Takes skill to shoo them accurately.

I love guns, and I own several.

Three pistols (9mm, .40S&W, .45ACP)
One shotgun (12 gauge)
Three rifles (.22, 5.56mm, .270W)

AMX wrote:There's no reason in hell you'd want to store gun and ammo separately (except for retarded laws in some countries), provided they are locked up securely, or under direct control.

Small children.

I'm sure Mike does not want to experience what one of my police officer uncles did - waking up from an afternoon nap to find a four-year-old pointing a real handgun right between his eyes, giggling and saying "Bang! Bang!"

Fortunately, the kid hadn't figured out where the trigger was.

"Locked up securely" might, indeed, include storing gun and ammo separately. Some children are quite adept at getting into trouble. Locking up guns and ammo separately means that's two security systems they have to defeat, not just one. If someone feels storing guns and ammo separately increases security I wouldn't call the practice "retarded" regardless of whether I agreed with it or not.

Darth Wong wrote:I don't see why anybody should have a handgun

Various law enforcement people are required to carry handguns. That's why I included the "as part of my job" option. (Active duty military personnel might also be required to carry and use weapons, although that's usually rifle, not handgun)

On the "self defense" issue, I prefer the rule of law over anarchy, which is what the "arm ourselves" approach represents as social policy.

As I said, I much prefer to live in an area where I don't feel a need to arm myself.

There are some areas in the US - such as Alaska - where the "self-defense" option would also include defense against wild animals. I don't believe we have anyone here who falls into that category, but it is a possibility even in this day and age.

However, if I did live in a terrible neighbourhood I would consider keeping a weapon around for self-defense, even though it probably wouldn't do me much good in the event of a home invasion (for safety's sake, I would have to keep the weapon and ammo stored separately and locked, so the self-defense idea requires that I'd be able to retrieve and load the weapon immediately).

Not necessarilly - when my husband confronted the truck thief he had several minutes in which to select a weapon, load it, and strategize his approach. Home invasion does not alway require instant action.

If ever I did get a "home defense" firearm I'd pick a shotgun, one of those with the LOUD cocking sound - like a barking dog, the sound alone can be enough to make the Bad Guy go elsewhere, thereby avoiding the violent confrontation entirely. I've also known someone who used a laser pointer to make local thugs think they had a gun with a laser sight - seeing a dot of red light dead center on your chest or your buddy's forehead, thinking there's a high-power rifle attached to the other end of the beam, will make you hastily remember urgent business elsewhere.

A large part of effective self-defense is mind-games and intimidation - make yourself look like a dangerous and difficult target and the nasty people go elsewhere, looking for easier pickings.

I currently own a .177 caliber Chinese made single shot air riffle and that's it. Right now it's on loan to a buddy at work who is using it to eliminate some flying pests around his home.

Now, my father owns a not so small arsenal and I like to go shooting with him from time to time. He mostly owns various types of rifles, all of which would be legal for some sort of hunting. Collecting and shooting guns has become a pretty big hobby of his. He still goes hunting some but since I don't care for it, and the "game" around her is pretty limited he doesn't do it as much as he used to. Mostly he just goes target shooting. Does some ocassional clay pigeon shooting and does a lot of ammunition reloading.

I'm not even sure how many pistols he has anymore. He never was much of a pistol fan, although he has at least a couple that he ocassionally shoots. He's mostly into rifles and older style of guns including black powder of the various types (muzzle loader, cartridge etc..).

I think the only time that I remember my dad carrying one of his guns for protection was when he and my mother were camping in one of the federal parks near the Mexico border which had off and on reports of lots of illegal and drug trafficing.

Anyway, I checked the "I like having the option" choice. I don't really need or want a gun of my own. It's more fun to go shoot my dad's and let him clean them up afterwards (he likes that part too).

Well I'm one of the few people here who can make a real case for using guns for self defense in the wild. I like to go hiking, and I live in Western Montana. Bears and wild cats of various sizes. The ocassional wolf even. Shotgun and rifle is too damned heavy to carry while hiking. Pistol works great as a self defense tool. When my dad goes hunting he definately takes his .357 magnum because the bears are awfuly friendly to humans with all that dead meat around.

'Do not own but like having the option'.

I've grown up with guns; they're not the safest things in the world, mind, but as long as you take proper precautions such as never storing them loaded, then that's not a huge issue.

Personally I fancy the idea of building a kit gun, such as the old CVA Hawken or Kentucky Rifle. I doubt I would purchase a handgun; I might acquire one for home defense, but given the paperwork required I doubt I would. A shotgun is a possibility in that case.

Don't own one, and don't plan on owning one in the immediate/near future. Having the option to do so is nice, but as it is I've never really been a huge gun fan. Aside from the fact that my aim simply sucks the few times I've gone shooting, I just don't care for the feel of em.

Well where I live we have these fascists called park rangers no one is allowed to have firearms.

on the otherhand I have a shotgun, and a 6 shot revolver back at my mom's

The Yosemite Bear wrote:Well where I live we have these fascists called park rangers no one is allowed to have firearms.

on the otherhand I have a shotgun, and a 6 shot revolver back at my mom's

Pets and firearms are both prohibited in Yosemite wilderness. One firearm may be carried by the lead packer provided it is unloaded, out of sight, and ammunition is kept separate from the weapon.



Seriously, though. Yosemite is private property, and they aren't being any more fascist than any other business owner, or home owner that doesn't allow firearms on their property. It's their right.

Edit* - I own a Glock 23. I need it for my job, but even if I didn't I'd have one anyway. Target shooting is a lot of fun....