bring back pistols ?

[Scully]

We're going round in circles here!When all else fails you keep repeating that statement about handguns not coming back.I'm not arguing with you,;you may have a point,but I think the thread has moved on from there to one of judging a shooters character and stability of mind simply from the way they dress and the perceived threat other shooters feel they represent because of the type of shooting they prefer and the guns involved.

Do you really think the general publics perception of shooters and shooting,and GUNS in particular,is going to change simply because one discipline of shooting is sacrificed in order to safeguard another?

If that was the case everything would be hunky dory now wouldn't it?Or can you suggest another discipline we should get rid of to placate the public?

I am sick and tired of this misguided belief amongst shooters that THEIR particular discipline is looked on more favourably than another.Can you not see the bigger picture?We're all in this together,like it or not.If you own a gun then your discipline is very much just as at risk as any other,make no mistake about that.

All that these fractures amongst shooters achieve is to make us weak.Even our shooting organisations are fractured;how many do we have now?Even they can't see the bigger picture,and most of those came about because one discipline or another felt the association they were allied to wasn't pulling it's weight when their particular discipline was in the spotlight,so another association was formed,with fewer members and less impact.

If we don't get our acts together and start singing from the same book,well....................

[Scully]

Sorry lads,seem to have posted that twice!It's an age thing! :o

[al4x]

So we should accept the walt element and support them in getting the guns of their fantasies?

[Nial]

So we should accept the walt element and support them in getting the guns of their fantasies?

 

 

Don't be a **** Alex, not everyone who wants to shoot handguns is a walt.

 

And anyway, how many walts have turned out to be dangerous rather than just sad?

 

 

Nial

[al4x]

sadly it took two to get to the situation at the moment, how many more do we need? was more an off the cuff comment as this thread has got pretty ridiculous but there is a certain point

[the running man]

So we should accept the walt element and support them in getting the guns of their fantasies?

Why not,I support you in you're element. Perhaps some people think you're living out you're fantasy of killing animals?

[Mungler]

You see these ex-pistol shooters are just foaming at their mouths and can't do any of the following:

 

1. get over the fact that pistols have gone and they are not coming back - aside from all other issues, having gone through that pain barrier there's just nothing "in it" for the government to effect a change. Indeed, what has changed since the ban? Nothing. That means there's no legal basis for change. Any time spent pursuing a repeal is a waste (full stop) and those that crack on regardless, well, I think they must be mental, but good luck to them. If you like banging your head against a wall then bang away.

 

2. dressing like a nutter will leave the public thinking you are a nutter. This ranks up there with how people are judged by how short their hair is cut, tatoos, how they dress and speak. It's not fair but that is how it works. If shooters that dress up as ninjas can't see that, then fine. You can't educate pork.

 

3. sporting shooters are the acceptable face of shooting. People "get" side by side shotguns, bolt action rifles, rabbits, pigeons and game being shot. Some may not like it or approve of it but they "get it" as being part of the countryside. People don't get grown men dressed up like ninjas and with tactical gear. You might think they do, but that shows an inability to see how the general public look at shooters. They don't give a monkeys how safe we say we are because they aren't interested in our sport and they know that when "these lawful and safe shooters" go postal the body count is in double figures. Yes, greater education of the public is always needed and that's why I am keen on BASC - they have the backing and where-with-all to get something done. Obviously re-educating the public whilst dressed as a ninja and sporting a chest rig.... well that's a negatory mag to grid there Bravo two zero.

Edited June 6, 2011 by Mungler

[al4x]

You see these ex-pistol shooters are just foaming at their mouths and can't do any of the following:

 

1. get over the fact that pistols have gone and they are not coming back - aside from all other issues, having gone through that pain barrier there's just nothing "in it" for the government to effect a change. Indeed, what has changed since the ban?

 

 

 

the only thing that hasn't happened is no one has gone tonto with a legally held one

[Vipa]

You see these ex-pistol shooters are just foaming at their mouths and can't do any of the following:

 

1. get over the fact that pistols have gone and they are not coming back - aside from all other issues, having gone through that pain barrier there's just nothing "in it" for the government to effect a change. Indeed, what has changed since the ban? Nothing. That means there's no legal basis for change. Any time spent pursuing a repeal is a waste (full stop) and those that crack on regardless, well, I think they must be mental, but good luck to them. If you like banging your head against a wall then bang away.

 

2. dressing like a nutter will leave the public thinking you are a nutter. This ranks up there with how people are judged by how short their hair is cut, tatoos, how they dress and speak. It's not fair but that is how it works. If shooters that dress up as ninjas can't see that, then fine. You can't educate pork.

 

3. sporting shooters are the acceptable face of shooting. People get side by side shotguns, bolt action rifles, rabbits, pigeons and game being shot. Some may not like it or approve of it but they "get it" as being part of the countryside. People don't get grown men dressed up like ninjas and with tactical gear. You might think they do, but that shows an inability to see how to general public look at shooters. They don't give a monkeys how safe we say we are because they aren't interested in our sport and they know that when "these lawful and safe shooters" go postal the body count is double figures. Yes, greater education of the public is always needed and that's why I am keen on BASC - they have the backing and where with all to get something done. Obviously re-educating the public whilst dressed as a ninja and sporting a chest rig.... well that's a negatory mag to grid there Bravo two zero.

 

I would love to know where these walts and ninjas hang out as I have never met any!

 

I still think you have your ideas about public acceptability upside down.... most of the public don't 'get' killing animals at all... they find it absolutely abhorent. They buy thier pre packed joints at a supermarket and would rather forget where it came from!

 

This is not a target shooting vs hunting thing, I do both but I am very mindful about what the public do and do not find offensive and distasteful. As I have previously said, if you think the public at large would prefer to condone (if they HAD to choose) between you killing animals for fun or punching holes in paper I can, with 100% certainty tell you which way 99% of them would swing... Go on Mung, get yourself out there with a picture of a target shoot meet and the one of you with the hog and show them to 20 random people on the street, ask them which pusuit they find the most acceptable and then come back to us with the results...

 

I really do think you are living in a little bubble of Mungler World if you think the vote would swing your way!

Edited June 6, 2011 by Vipa

[Breastman]

the only thing that hasn't happened is no one has gone tonto with a legally held one

AND??

No ones been mauled or killed by a legally owned dog on the Dangerous Dogs list but it hasn't stopped it happening - the supposed point of the legislation!

 

Would you honestly be more upset being shoot at by a person with a legally held firearm than an illegal one?!

 

Mark

[Vipa]

the only thing that hasn't happened is no one has gone tonto with a legally held one

 

Strange that!

[al4x]

ok legally held may be the wrong phrase but we haven't had another massacre with either a legal or illegal hand gun

[Vipa]

ok legally held may be the wrong phrase but we haven't had another massacre with either a legal or illegal hand gun

 

And, as there was only one notable incident in the decades prior to the ban, the one that caused it, the lack of incidents since could be put down to the statistical unlikelyhood (think I just made a new word up) of it happening at all just as much as the ban itself..

 

However, I will speculate and say that if Bird had had access to handguns when he decided to leave the reservation, he would have probably taken those with him rather than the shotty and bunny basher!

[Breastman]

ok legally held may be the wrong phrase but we haven't had another massacre with either a legal or illegal hand gun

And how many had there been before the ban in 300 years of handgun ownership, 1 or technically 2?! Horrific as those events were destroying part of a right (and firearm ownership is a right in the sense of the way the legislation is worded -dont want to open another can of worms with that one so please dont start) several sports Inc Olympic events, hundreds of businesses and clubs and 10's of thousands of people's sport was not proportionate or based on any kind of logic.

 

Clapping your hands at or laughing at people who were affected by the mickey mouse legislation is ridiculous

 

Mark

[Scully]

So we should accept the walt element and support them in getting the guns of their fantasies?

Gordon Bennett!How the hell do you,me or anyone else know who the walts are?Because of the way they dress?How arrogant can you be?

Ok try it this way then.I' reckon pistols aren't coming back either,as Mungler is so fond of saying.Ok?

So what?if I say you are right and I am wrong,what will that prove?Have we achieved anything?No.

What gives you or anyone else the right to point at someone and say 'he's a walt'?Who the hell do you think you are?

If a person fulfills the requirements to satisfy the Police and licensing which means they can own firearms,should we put it on hold until you can get there to check them out for suspected 'waltism'?

Guilty of being a walt until proven innocent eh?Give me strength.

It's not about who is right and who is wrong,those things are just our opinions.It's about supporting each other.

Pistols as we knew them have gone,due to a killing spree.Semauto rifles have gone for the same reason.

The next spree was carried out with the sort of sporting firearms most of us use.Outcome?Know one knows yet.What happens if the next one involves some deranged rifle owner sniping at people from a multi-storey car park?Will he be a walt?We've all got qualifications in hindsight.

[Mungler]

I really do think you are living in a little bubble of Mungler World if you think the vote would swing your way!

 

Lets find a neutral forum somewhere and put it to the vote...

[Vince Green]

Scully

 

Calm down Dear, I appear to be the one who first used the "Walter" word on this thread. I also said they were ****** and I stand by my opinion on that subject but it was nearly twenty years ago so what does it matter now? They are long gone, probably still ****** but doing something else now.

Edited June 6, 2011 by Vince Green

[Breastman]

Lets find a neutral forum somewhere and put it to the vote...

 

:lol: Where do i sign up for THAT club Oh right, it doesn't exist.

 

Those pictures are about as balanced as a Spanish taxi driver stuck in rush hour!

 

How about;

 

 

V

 

 

And thats as 'bloody' as i dared otherwise the thread would get pulled

 

Mark

Edited June 6, 2011 by Breastman

[Mungler]

That's not balanced; I've never seen anyone dressed like that chick in Ultimate Force...

[Breastman]

That's not balanced; I've never seen anyone dressed like that chick in Ultimate Force...

Riiiiigght, i think i'm starting to see where you're going wrong then . . .

 

Mark

[Scully]

Scully

 

Calm down Dear,

Calm down? I think it's hilarious!I admit to being a gun nut,have beenn all my life.Some folk get a buzz from speed,I get mine from guns!If it fires a projectile,and preferably goes bang in the process,then I'll have one please!Damn....does that mean I'm a 'Walt'? I did once shoot a turnip with a triple 4 Marlin on Warcop range(awesome..diced and cooked at the same time!)better turn myself in!

My kids are gonna be disappointed(daughter and son 14 and 11 respectively)as they like their guns also.

Son is called Walter strangely enough,daughter is Waltilda.

If we ever do lose our rifles,shotguns also,it will grieve me greatly,but at least I'll be able to console myself with the fact there are those on here who will be affected also.

[Vince Green]

Right well I am getting bored with this so lets try and kick this whole discussion in a new direction.

 

What was good about pistol shooting

1) a lot of indoor pistol ranges were in basements of office buildings and the like, loads in London, one under Baker Street Station providing sport in the evenings for people who wanted to shoot in the evenings without travelling miles

A realy quite small indoor range could provide a lot of shooting for a lot of people very cost effectively.

 

2) good social life in a lot of the clubs with a real cross section of people

 

3) it didn't cost the earth.

 

4) Lots of competitions at all different levels and a lot of postal leagues which meant you could compete without travelling.

 

5) Not really restricted by age or (most) disabilities.

 

6) Lots of clubs were company clubs subsidised by the employer.

 

7) Club instruction and training was free. As long as they were able to pay their way clubs were non profit making

Edited June 6, 2011 by Vince Green

[BlaserF3]

I really enjoyed shooting my GSP at county level, there was just something satisfying about shooting a .22

[Mungler]

If we ever do lose our rifles,shotguns also,it will grieve me greatly,but at least I'll be able to console myself with the fact there are those on here who will be affected also.

 

Relax, big Dave Cameron and that fella off Location, location, location - well they're Sporting Shooters. Big Dave's running the show for now and that fella with the lisp off the telly, well, people like him. Also, 99% of the House of Lords like a driven day or two and a bit of deer stalking on their estates in Scotland.

 

With no cargo pants or chest rigs in sight it will be fine. Besides, everyone knows that most of the nut nuts went with the handgun ban. Mind you, I still can't believe there won't be any fall out from Cumbria, and as above, the kick that the shooting community receives as a result need not be directly connected to the deed itself. It's not like the government will ban tax dodging taxi drivers with criminal convictions from obtaining SGC/FAC, that would be too obvious. If there's a lamb that has to be slaughtered or offered upto the Gods, my money is on the semi auto .22RF and a tightening of the medical criteria / checks. Time will tell.

[masterzone2]

Pistol shooting will not return- at least not as long as we have total tossers in this sport

who

1. don't give a **** about any aspect of shooting bar their own.

 

2. those who just bend over for this and previous governments.

 

3. not having our facts straight- we go on about the anti group not getting their facts right

yet no one else does-lets stick to the facts and not over flared opinions.

 

IF any aspect of this sport is to be returned WE ALL need to tell the government

that is what we demand-looked what happened with the recent firearms enquire when we were asked to give our views as shooter-WE crashed their computer system it couldn't handle US.

 

Can it return YES

 

BUT with the way we are and the way we work not a ******* chance.