Ethnographic Arms & Armour
 

Go Back   Ethnographic Arms & Armour > Discussion Forums > European Armoury

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Old 15th December 2008, 02:52 AM   #1
clockwork
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 96
Default

look at the list and u will find guns that are out lawed on the old list such as the MINI 14 and B.A.Rs also under the law any gun older than 1898 I believe is considered a courio relic and would be excempt so why put them on a list?

I have never seen a list for guns that are allowed only guns to be banned this makes no sence to me. I also noted that the bill contradict its self in a few places. be warry of this bill

Quote:
Originally Posted by David
Once again Ed:

The fact that a firearm is not listed in appendix A shall not be construed to mean that paragraph (1) applies to such firearm. No firearm exempted by this subsection may be deleted from appendix A so long as this subsection is in effect.

This country has an amazingly strong gun lobby. I don't image that the government will be taking all our guns away any time soon. I am sorry, but i see no problem with the banning of assault weapons. They are not necessary for sportsman, collectors or personal protection.
clockwork is offline  
Old 15th December 2008, 02:57 AM   #2
clockwork
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 96
Default

according to wikipeda C&R goes back 50 yrs
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federal_Firearms_License
clockwork is offline  
Old 15th December 2008, 03:00 AM   #3
Ed
Member
 
Ed's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 266
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by clockwork
look at the list and u will find guns that are out lawed on the old list such as the MINI 14 and B.A.Rs also under the law any gun older than 1898 I believe is considered a courio relic and would be excempt so why put them on a list?

I have never seen a list for guns that are allowed only guns to be banned this makes no sence to me. I also noted that the bill contradict its self in a few places. be warry of this bill
The BAR is an NFA weapon. ie. a sevective fire weapon. It is handled under a completely different set of laws. But ... maybe not.
Ed is offline  
Old 15th December 2008, 03:21 AM   #4
clockwork
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 96
Default

there are a cpl diffrent versions of the BAR from full auto to selective fire so it can fall under diffrent regs depending on the type that a person has. I believe that machine gun kelly used this weapon
clockwork is offline  
Old 15th December 2008, 12:31 PM   #5
celtan
Member
 
celtan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: PR, USA
Posts: 679
Default

I think that was Bonnie and Clyde. Stole them from a Govt. Armoury (National Guard?). MGK carried the Tommy Gun (Thompsom .45)

BTW, the BAR had been around since WWI. US Soldiers weren't provided with it cuz' our Govt. was afraid that the germans would capture one and make copies of it. Instead, they were forced to use the french Chauchat, a piece-of-crap that seldom worked, even under ideal conditions. Thousands of "Yanks" needlessly died because of that decision.

I reside in San Juan, PR. Here we have the _toughest gun-laws_ in all the US of A, and also the _worst violent-crime rates_ in the Nation, comparable to Russia's.

Any criminal in PR can buy or actually "rent" an AK-47 on the housing projects, but a honest citizen can't own a flintlock family heirloom without a license, and if he's caught in the possession of an ounce of black powder, it's an automatic 5 year felony sentence !

Yes Virginia, it's true: The only ones who obey gun laws are the honest citizens, who wouldn't misuse guns in the first place. Those who commit crimes with them don't bother with the Law, it can be the toughest gun law in the Universe, and they would still break it.

There have been studies made on the performance of the anti-assault gun laws while it was on effect, and guess what? Zilch, no improvements whatsoever. It's just window-dressing for the PC minded folk. OTOH, states that allow concealed carry have lower crime-rates. Make your own conclussions.

I am in favor of gun control laws, but only those have prioven to be effective in keeping guns out of the hands of criminals, and those unfit to own them.

Merry Xmas y'all!


: ) Manuel Luis



Quote:
Originally Posted by clockwork
there are a cpl diffrent versions of the BAR from full auto to selective fire so it can fall under diffrent regs depending on the type that a person has. I believe that machine gun kelly used this weapon
celtan is offline  
Old 15th December 2008, 01:25 PM   #6
David
Keris forum moderator
 
David's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Nova Scotia
Posts: 7,228
Default

Write yer congressman gentlemen. That always works.
David is offline  
Old 15th December 2008, 03:52 PM   #7
Atlantia
Member
 
Atlantia's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: The Sharp end
Posts: 2,928
Default

Its such a tough issue isn't it gentlemen?
As you'll all probobly know, the gun laws in the UK are now some of the tightest in the world. I used to have strong connections with the gun owning (target range shooting) fraternity in the UK and the total ban on handguns seemed terribly draconian when it was introduced here.
Yes, some terrible crimes ARE committed with legally held guns, but of course most are committed by criminals with illegal weapons. In fact, in the UK the main 'legally held' gun that gets missused has always been the shotgun, and those remain legal because they have such a powerful lobby of users.
We now have a situation where even replica handguns are essentially prohibited.
Has it done any good?
Well, I have to say as someone who athough a lifelong weapons collector (now of course my guns are all relics) and essentially a pacifist who would never ever consider shooting a gun at anything more than a paper target, I think it has had a positive overall effect.
I think banning replicas and toys is a step too far, but I do believe that banning handguns (and nearly all semi automatic rifles) here, has made a difference. Certainly I believe it has affected their use in violent crime, for several reasons.
So was it worth the sacrifice of hobby gun owners?
Well, I would have to say that I think it was (And I say this for the UK as our situation is completely different from yours).

Although we do of course still have a problem with gun crime, it is certainly not as bad as it could be, or IMHO would be if guns were more a part of the British way of life. We have managed to move to a situation where most British kids grow up playing with toy guns, but have no experience of shooting a real one and certainly no experience of killing anything with one. Therefore, I do believe that guns are seen in a completely different way here. Obviously some people DO want to illegally own a gun, but thats a BIG step over the line, and puts you in a definate criminal category. I think this combination of fear of/lack of experience of/and criminalisation of gun ownership does mean that to most people here, the idea of having a gun or using one in anger is just not 'on the table'.

I wish there WAS a solution, simple or not for you guys. I fear that in the end there will come a moment where you have to sacrifice many of your rights of private gun ownership to begin a long term process of lessening gun crime.
I honestly can't see even the most progressive President starting such a contentious process when it will surely take many, many terms of office to show any real results.

I know I've drifted way past the subject in hand, just thought you might want to read the views of someone who spent a lot of time around guns then DID see them banned.

Sad thing is, of course its worth the sacrifce if it works! But where DO you guys start?

Peace all, don't 'shoot me down' for thinking gun control can be a good thing.
Atlantia is offline  
Old 15th December 2008, 04:16 PM   #8
celtan
Member
 
celtan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: PR, USA
Posts: 679
Default

But that's the thing Atlantia,

Puerto Rico, Boston, New York: Extremely restricted gun controls (specially shotguns): High Crime Incidence
Britain, Spain, Japan: Extremely restricted gun controls : Low Crime Incidence (in native populations, inmigrants bring different values)
Ohio: Liberal gun laws: Low Crime Incidence
Switzerland, Finland, Sweden, likewise.
Los Angeles: Liberal Gun Laws: High Crime Incidence

So the crux is not gun control, but the local society mores behind it. In Britain, even drunkards at pubs are usually well behaved.

Draconian gun laws are not the answer. But some control is definitely needed, its only a matter of neither too much nor too little.

Best

M



Quote:
Originally Posted by Atlantia
Its such a tough issue isn't it gentlemen?
As you'll all probobly know, the gun laws in the UK are now some of the tightest in the world. I used to have strong connections with the gun owning (target range shooting) fraternity in the UK and the total ban on handguns seemed terribly draconian when it was introduced here.
Yes, some terrible crimes ARE committed with legally held guns, but of course most are committed by criminals with illegal weapons. In fact, in the UK the main 'legally held' gun that gets missused has always been the shotgun, and those remain legal because they have such a powerful lobby of users.
We now have a situation where even replica handguns are essentially prohibited.
Has it done any good?
Well, I have to say as someone who athough a lifelong weapons collector (now of course my guns are all relics) and essentially a pacifist who would never ever consider shooting a gun at anything more than a paper target, I think it has had a positive overall effect.
I think banning replicas and toys is a step too far, but I do believe that banning handguns (and nearly all semi automatic rifles) here, has made a difference. Certainly I believe it has affected their use in violent crime, for several reasons.
So was it worth the sacrifice of hobby gun owners?
Well, I would have to say that I think it was (And I say this for the UK as our situation is completely different from yours).

Although we do of course still have a problem with gun crime, it is certainly not as bad as it could be, or IMHO would be if guns were more a part of the British way of life. We have managed to move to a situation where most British kids grow up playing with toy guns, but have no experience of shooting a real one and certainly no experience of killing anything with one. Therefore, I do believe that guns are seen in a completely different way here. Obviously some people DO want to illegally own a gun, but thats a BIG step over the line, and puts you in a definate criminal category. I think this combination of fear of/lack of experience of/and criminalisation of gun ownership does mean that to most people here, the idea of having a gun or using one in anger is just not 'on the table'.

I wish there WAS a solution, simple or not for you guys. I fear that in the end there will come a moment where you have to sacrifice many of your rights of private gun ownership to begin a long term process of lessening gun crime.
I honestly can't see even the most progressive President starting such a contentious process when it will surely take many, many terms of office to show any real results.

I know I've drifted way past the subject in hand, just thought you might want to read the views of someone who spent a lot of time around guns then DID see them banned.

Sad thing is, of course its worth the sacrifce if it works! But where DO you guys start?

Peace all, don't 'shoot me down' for thinking gun control can be a good thing.
celtan is offline  
Closed Thread

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 08:02 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
Posts are regarded as being copyrighted by their authors and the act of posting material is deemed to be a granting of an irrevocable nonexclusive license for display here.