rimmie Posted May 22, 2011 Report Share Posted May 22, 2011 (edited) Without being rude - AGAIN - exactly what is the discipline related to these weapons? The point of these guns is target shooting namely "gallery" or "mini" rifle shooting there are many disciplines these guns are used in some are against the clock in timed stages etc.. So high capacity mags are very useful in saving time when shooting a stage. there is a whole event at bisley for this type of shooting called the phoenix were 1,000s of people attend.also these guns are used by "club" shooters who go to there local shooting range during the week or on a sat Edited May 22, 2011 by rimmie Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scully Posted May 22, 2011 Report Share Posted May 22, 2011 When we start banning things due to their appearance,or a lack of justification for it's use(cars and bikes capable of 180 mph or more when the legal speed limit is 70 spring to mind)then we're on a slippery road in my opinion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bigstevouk Posted May 22, 2011 Report Share Posted May 22, 2011 We all have 2 things in common 'Guns & Shooting' ..... United We Stand Divided We Fall Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr_Logic Posted May 22, 2011 Report Share Posted May 22, 2011 It is utter rubbish to suggest something should be banned because of what it looks like, or the perceived lack of application. Sure a 50-round mag for a Ruger 10/22 allows any would-be mass murderer to bop off a whole class of small schoolchildren. But then, buying a Humvee allows me to mow down a whole bus queue without even noticing. Let's ban everything shall we, we can all sit around by the fire and wait to die. Oh wait, better ban fires because they can cause carbon monoxide poisoning... At some point you have to take it on trust. If the licensing system doesn't ensure that almost all homicidal maniacs aren't granted guns, then that's where we must start. Banning things is NEVER the answer - because items and behaviour are generally a symptom of something deeper, and we should always tackle the root cause. Personally, I don't see the point of the militaristic side, at least not taking it seriously with army gear and camo clothing on ranges etc. But that's me. Those guys probably don't see the point of a single shot target rifle with a barrel like a flagpole. But here's a thing, they shoot, I shoot. At that level we agree. Given that the current ratio is a hundred or so thousand folks versus 70 million in the UK, I think we shouldn't argue about piddly little rubbish like whether or not a 50-round magazine on a semi auto rifle makes someone more likely to commit an atrocity. Anyone that thinks this is important and that we should ban XYZ.... well... there's a term for you. It's called being a ******* retard. Rant over! Sorry folks if OTT, just this sort of thing SERIOUSLY annoys me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gixer1 Posted May 22, 2011 Report Share Posted May 22, 2011 I can think of one thing to ban.....the nugget OP from PW.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chrispti Posted May 23, 2011 Report Share Posted May 23, 2011 There's a good story about an soldier being interviewed about shooting in schools, the news girl says "are you not worried you are equipping these kids to kill" and the old salty army guy replies " well ma'am, you're equipped to be a prostitute but you're not one are you".... Regards, Gixer I remember reading about it Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
njc110381 Posted May 23, 2011 Report Share Posted May 23, 2011 I really don't think high capacity mags pose a threat, no more than any other firearm anyway. When I had my 10/22 I could reload that fast you would hardly notice a pause in the shots. Anyway, who's to say a nutter would do well with a high capacity .22lr? I recon I could do much better numbers with something bigger, sitting well in the background with a modded centrefire and plinking. You could go on for days without being found if you took shots from several hundred yards - something you couldn't do with a .22lr. At the end of the day there are that many dangerous items in the world that we will always be under threat. If you ban something criminals will either get it illegally or use another method. Why spoil the fun for people who would never dream of hurting anyone (99.99% of us)? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
arjimlad Posted May 23, 2011 Report Share Posted May 23, 2011 In answer to the original question, no, I'm not worried at all. Military lookylikeys don't always float my boat, but I can see they'd be fun to shoot at the range. If the shooter is safe to own a single shot he/she is safe to own a multi-shot. What does it matter if the gun looks like a H&K MP5 or a walnut/blued steel traditional gun ? Not one jot. My CZ is synthetic/steel - does that make it a nasty sniper rifle ? Should we all go down to single shot rifles? I don't think that makes any sense. And if he ain't safe he can get a gun off his criminal associates, make one, or use a car.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dr_Scholl Posted May 23, 2011 Report Share Posted May 23, 2011 I really don't think high capacity mags pose a threat, no more than any other firearm anyway. When I had my 10/22 I could reload that fast you would hardly notice a pause in the shots. Anyway, who's to say a nutter would do well with a high capacity .22lr? I recon I could do much better numbers with something bigger, sitting well in the background with a modded centrefire and plinking. You could go on for days without being found if you took shots from several hundred yards - something you couldn't do with a .22lr. At the end of the day there are that many dangerous items in the world that we will always be under threat. If you ban something criminals will either get it illegally or use another method. Why spoil the fun for people who would never dream of hurting anyone (99.99% of us)? I remember when the Virginia Tech Massacre happened and the antis were calling for high cap mags(anything holding over 10 rounds) to be banned. After all, Cho used 15 round magazines for his Glock 19. But when the details started coming out, it turned out he fired 174 rounds and reloaded 17 times. So roughly 10 shots per reload. You don't need high cap mags or even a self loading firearm to kill a lot of people. Google Christian Dornier. He killed 14 people and wounded 8 others with a side by side 12 gauge. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
artschool Posted May 23, 2011 Report Share Posted May 23, 2011 The thread that never ends, with the op nowhere to be seen Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blunderbust Posted May 23, 2011 Report Share Posted May 23, 2011 The thread that never ends, with the op nowhere to be seen I was thinking the same myself, it may be that he has eventually thought long and hard about his comments and thinks "ok, I can’t be the only one who is right about this on PW" but then again he may just have sobered up. I have never thought about this subject and would certainly never worry about it, everyone to their own is what I say. I do hope however that he has not deserted us, as everyone is entitled to their own opinion, otherwise we would not have a debate. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Katash Posted May 24, 2011 Report Share Posted May 24, 2011 Man this site, it seems, is cram packed with really, really good examples of why people shouldnt have firearms.......................................... I have read your OP and your replies and it seems to be that rather than accept the sensible explanations given to you by numerous people here you still adopt the "I'm still right and all of you are wrong!" approach - If anything this concerns me more, assuming you are an FAC/SGC holder. Here is an example of a potential reply that could be used :- "Wow I had no idea there was such a following for shooting sports such as mini-rifle in the UK, I must admit before I knew that I did think there was no need for hi-cap mags but now I see why people use them" Your right! .... There are people here who shouldnt own firearms! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mungler Posted May 24, 2011 Report Share Posted May 24, 2011 I have read your OP and your replies and it seems to be that rather than accept the sensible explanations given to you by numerous people here you still adopt the "I'm still right and all of you are wrong!" approach - If anything this concerns me more, assuming you are an FAC/SGC holder. It does it appear to be the overwhelming observation / consensus. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
njc110381 Posted May 24, 2011 Report Share Posted May 24, 2011 I remember when the Virginia Tech Massacre happened and the antis were calling for high cap mags(anything holding over 10 rounds) to be banned. After all, Cho used 15 round magazines for his Glock 19. But when the details started coming out, it turned out he fired 174 rounds and reloaded 17 times. So roughly 10 shots per reload. You don't need high cap mags or even a self loading firearm to kill a lot of people. Google Christian Dornier. He killed 14 people and wounded 8 others with a side by side 12 gauge. When I posted my comment I was thinking about those guys in the states. The Washington Sniper was it? He used a modified car? How many days/weeks was he driving around, making the odd accurately placed hit and then moving on? That frightened more people than any of the one day hit types that just go nuts and start shooting. With that guy nobody was safe - out shopping, buying petrol or walking the kids to school - it really was a nasty situation and he could have done all of that with a single shot bolt action. It's a sad fact that things like this will always happen. Banning guns may go a very small way to stopping it, but people will always die. If they couldn't be shot there is always another way and if you're not actually saving any lives, why ban anything? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Horrocks Posted May 24, 2011 Report Share Posted May 24, 2011 (edited) Do yu know why Bird shot his brother 11 times because it was a .22! they are designed for killing bunnies and knocking cans off walls, it is only the UK gov't who put them in the same bracket as 'real' guns! Like I said, FAR more damage could be done with 10 CF rounds than 50 RF rounds.. Excuse me!?! Vipa in the past I've appreciated your posts and concurred with you on many things, but what you've just said is (i think) pretty shocking. If you dont't think a .22 is a dangerous piece of kit, capable of killing someone, then you shoud in no way have the bloody thing! Of course .22lr is a 'real' gun, it is a round that started of as a man killer. Sure a CF will do more damage, but they'll both kill someone. I honestly think you should take a step back and read that again, your FAO would NOT be happy if you expressed that view to him, you wouldn't have been issued an FAC and if I heard you (off the bat) saying that I'd feel inclined to pull you up on it or report you! Newport shooter's legitimate concerns have provoked a knee jerk reaction from a lot of you guys. I agree solidarity is the key to maintaining this sport, more shooters should have backed fox hunting. However, as far as .22's that look like MP5's go, I don't think they should be licensed for field shooting either, practical competitions yes, but no-one should be walking around the countryside with a replica military weapon, it is a very bad image for the sport, unneccesary too, they're largely far less accurate and are simply not designed for a hunting situation. Practical comps are no doubt a wonderful thing, though not my cup of tea, but people should not be allowed a military replica .22 for their first rifle unless they shoot in those competitions, simples. H Edit: I would stress that I do not think anyone dressing up and rambo-ing it is more likely to go off on a sudden murderous rampage. However, to most people over the age of about 50 (and many under), the overtly militaristic nature of these firearms is innappropriate and possibly threatening, they are not made for hunting, competitions fair enough. I do not apply this to those AR type .223's which I'm sure with the right twist rate etc. make for a more that useful hunting rifle. I'm sorry, but using a .22 military looking MP5 thing to nail bunnies just isn't appropriate. Edited May 24, 2011 by Horrocks Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ellebarto Posted May 24, 2011 Report Share Posted May 24, 2011 They have no use at all,but people want to own such a type of rifle.Do i have a use for owning 30 calibre rifles? Of course not,but i want to. I know what you're trying to do.You're giving the anti's something to concentate on in the hope they'll leave your chosen type of gun alone,but they wont.Just remember-gun control is like a dripping tap that everytime they ban or restrict one thing it will soon lead to you over time.So what i say to you is shame on you because shooters should be showing solidarity no matter what discipline they choose. Best response so far! Kind of see the original point but there is a bigger picture here! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
al4x Posted May 24, 2011 Report Share Posted May 24, 2011 You've worded it far better than the OP Horrocks, I'm with you on pretty much all of that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ellebarto Posted May 24, 2011 Report Share Posted May 24, 2011 Here's my real time experience of this. Judge as you will. Been shooting shotguns for years but got into rifles 2 years ago at my local range, so relatively inexperienced time wise. This quickly led to vermin control permissions. I bought an MP5 look alikey for the range but as it was a .22 it was also allowed on my shooting permission. I had both 30 round mags (6 of) and a 50 round drum. I must admit I was amazed these were even available! I had a lot of fun paper punching at the range with it. If you can find mass produced .22 ammo reliable enough to put 30 through a gun your doing well. 50 is virtually impossible! (just a side comment) I hesitated to take it on to my shooting permission for fear of its agressive look but when I eventually did one farmer loved it and was interested, one wasn't over keen. Over 50 yards it was rubbish and after 4 trips out it never hit the field again. After a dozen trips to the range it bored me and it went to be replaced by a .357 under lever Marlin (Cowboy gun) In summary, I do think they portray the wrong image for shooters, I personally dont believe you should be allowed them in the field and you should have to be a member of a range where they can be used. Ive found them to be gimicky and of limited fun/use. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vipa Posted May 24, 2011 Report Share Posted May 24, 2011 (edited) Excuse me!?! Vipa in the past I've appreciated your posts and concurred with you on many things, but what you've just said is (i think) pretty shocking. If you dont't think a .22 is a dangerous piece of kit, capable of killing someone, then you shoud in no way have the bloody thing! Of course .22lr is a 'real' gun, it is a round that started of as a man killer. Sure a CF will do more damage, but they'll both kill someone. I honestly think you should take a step back and read that again, your FAO would NOT be happy if you expressed that view to him, you wouldn't have been issued an FAC and if I heard you (off the bat) saying that I'd feel inclined to pull you up on it or report you! Wind your neck in and re-read my posts... no where did I say a I "don't think .22 is a dangerous piece of kit, capable of killing someone" I also never wrote that I didn't think a .22lr was a 'real gun.' I did give CF rifles a cursory 'real' tag.... after all... we used to plink at funfairs with .22s. That is NOT the same as saying a.22 isn't a 'real' gun!! You are also confusing .22lr with 'rimfire' rounds... Rimfire came long before centre fire but they still used big heavy bullets to kill people... the .22lr was never designed as a military round or something that was intended to be used with human sized targets... work on your firearms history.. If you can't read and understand a post, please do not get on your soap box and start trying to be 'holier than though.' How dare you take my posts, change the words completely and then "QUOTE" those words, completely out of context and then, pretty much 'threaten' to report me to my FEO..... what planet are you on!!!! A close family friend was killed 6 years ago (just about the same time you were going through puberty! sorry, I know that was immature of me but I just couldn't help myself! ) with a 12ft/lb .22 air pellet at the age of 16... why on earth would I ever think a .22lr wasn't a lethal round... I've also probably forgotten more about firearms & munitions (military and otherwise) than you will ever know.... re-read my posts, absorb them, perhaps go and sit in a dark room and spend a couple of hours mulling them over so you are ABSOLUTELY CERTAIN you understand what they say and the context they were written in and THEN come back and criricize & threaten me! I would also STRONGLY suggest you copy and paste if you intend to quote me as your copy typing leaves EVERYTHING to be desired!!!! Edited May 24, 2011 by Vipa Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mungler Posted May 24, 2011 Report Share Posted May 24, 2011 There's only one way to settle this - mock MP5 in .22RF with 50 round drum mags at 50 paces. Oh hang on, 50 paces would be too much - that's about 3 feet of hold over, best make it 5 paces Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ellebarto Posted May 24, 2011 Report Share Posted May 24, 2011 There's only one way to settle this - mock MP5 in .22RF with 50 round drum mags at 50 paces. Oh hang on, 50 paces would be too much - that's about 3 feet of hold over, best make it 5 paces An it will miss feed after 15 anyway. Better fix bayonets if you want to get it right! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vipa Posted May 24, 2011 Report Share Posted May 24, 2011 (edited) There's only one way to settle this - mock MP5 in .22RF with 50 round drum mags at 50 paces. Oh hang on, 50 paces would be too much - that's about 3 feet of hold over, best make it 5 paces You've also got the problem of ricochets off boney bits of skull or clothing at such 'extreme' range :yp: Edited May 24, 2011 by Vipa Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mungler Posted May 24, 2011 Report Share Posted May 24, 2011 (edited) I was going to suggest that goggles be worn Edited May 24, 2011 by Mungler Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vipa Posted May 24, 2011 Report Share Posted May 24, 2011 I was going to suggest that goggles be worn Good safety tip mungler Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fishermanpaddy Posted May 24, 2011 Report Share Posted May 24, 2011 Its not the fork that makes us fat........... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts