Paul223 Posted January 2, 2013 Report Share Posted January 2, 2013 http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/news/4721772/Sandy-Hook-shooting-weapons-on-sale-legally-in-the-UK.html Not a fan of them myself, I know a guy who has one ..........and it'd never be my choice for rabbits I know the thoughts of the press are misguided at best Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
al4x Posted January 2, 2013 Report Share Posted January 2, 2013 Heard this on the news this morning and it was miss leading as I assume they are .22lr rather than anything else. Its one side in the Uk that is a little hard to defend people wanting military styled guns but takes all sorts. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
henry d Posted January 2, 2013 Report Share Posted January 2, 2013 A gun just like this was used to slaughter 20 innocent kids in the hands of crazed loner Adam Lanza. Why are they legal here? Says it all, but the members of the public will miss the point. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LondonLuke Posted January 2, 2013 Report Share Posted January 2, 2013 If you are about to go on a shooting spree surely it matters not what the gun looks like Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gixer1 Posted January 2, 2013 Report Share Posted January 2, 2013 Quote from one of the comments - "With a rimfire .22 in my day I could shoot accurately a mile, which means a .22 can kill at a mile." This must be one of the PW members who often comment :yp: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oscarsdad Posted January 2, 2013 Report Share Posted January 2, 2013 I don't have FAC due to lack of land so may not be best placed to comment, but when I have seen these replica .22lr rifles made to look like military weapons it has always worried me - to me it is too much like "airsoft" type stuff and wannabe soldiers/rambo - whywould you want one to shoot bunnies when you can have a "normal" looking rifle? Only my opinion but I don't think being in a field at night with something that looks like an M16 etc portrays the best image of a responsible hunter. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blunderbuss Posted January 2, 2013 Report Share Posted January 2, 2013 I despise the Sun and feel sorry for people who form their world view based on its contents. Its a sad indictment of this country that so many people do :( Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tug Posted January 2, 2013 Report Share Posted January 2, 2013 I'm not going to give that website a visit. I'd hate to have my IP associated with their statistics. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gixer1 Posted January 2, 2013 Report Share Posted January 2, 2013 I don't have FAC due to lack of land so may not be best placed to comment, but when I have seen these replica .22lr rifles made to look like military weapons it has always worried me - to me it is too much like "airsoft" type stuff and wannabe soldiers/rambo - whywould you want one to shoot bunnies when you can have a "normal" looking rifle? Only my opinion but I don't think being in a field at night with something that looks like an M16 etc portrays the best image of a responsible hunter. Because they are "fun" on a shooting range or at targets, the appearance does not make an object more dangerous. I fully understand the "fun" side as I make a bee-line to an indoor range or friends ranches everytime I am in the USA for the simple fact that I enjoy firing pistols/assault rifles at targets - why is this a problem? I would agree the public image for some is ruined by military looking weapons but could it not be that they need to change their outlook as in reality they are the ones that are wrong by assuming all military rep weapons are carried by crazy murderers! Regards, Gixer Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
countryman Posted January 2, 2013 Report Share Posted January 2, 2013 You just knew that this was coming from our press, eventually we will only be allowed side by sides or over and under guns or single shot rifles, its all ways the people who are so ignorant to shooting that seem to get herd. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gazzthompson Posted January 2, 2013 Report Share Posted January 2, 2013 Terrible article. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChAoS Posted January 2, 2013 Report Share Posted January 2, 2013 (edited) "With a rimfire .22 in my day I could shoot accurately a mile, which means a .22 can kill at a mile." I wondered about that, myself. I don't have any rifles - scary or otherwise - but I *was* under the impression that .22LR was only accurate upto a couple of hundred yards or so. Perhaps they meant ".22WMR"? Or perhaps there's another (scarier) .22 RF round of which I'm not aware. (Perhaps they meant ".17HMR"...) Regards, Mark. Edited January 2, 2013 by ChAoS Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vipa Posted January 2, 2013 Report Share Posted January 2, 2013 I don't have FAC due to lack of land so may not be best placed to comment, but when I have seen these replica .22lr rifles made to look like military weapons it has always worried me - to me it is too much like "airsoft" type stuff and wannabe soldiers/rambo - whywould you want one to shoot bunnies when you can have a "normal" looking rifle? Only my opinion but I don't think being in a field at night with something that looks like an M16 etc portrays the best image of a responsible hunter. Why would anyone be in a field shooting bunnies with one of there??? They are used for mini rifle target shooting.. A slightly different variation would be used for gallery rifle and, str the rails off and you have exactly the same gun to be used in the field! Stop being so blinkered... Just because a certain type of shooting does not appeal or make sense to YOU dous not make it an invalid or lesser sport Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vipa Posted January 2, 2013 Report Share Posted January 2, 2013 (edited) I wondered about that, myself. I don't have any rifles - scary or otherwise - but I *was* under the impression that .22LR was only accurate upto a couple of hundred yards or so. Perhaps they meant ".22WMR"? Or perhaps there's another (scarier) .22 RF round of which I'm not aware. (Perhaps they meant ".17HMR"...) Regards, Mark. A standard .22lr bullet would struggle to get a mile, even if launched at 45deg... Even if it could get that far it would be like getting hit by the pea from a pea shooter... Oh.. That's right.... They banned them too! Edited January 2, 2013 by Vipa Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gixer1 Posted January 2, 2013 Report Share Posted January 2, 2013 Why would anyone be in a field shooting bunnies with one of there??? They are used for mini rifle target shooting.. A slightly different variation would be used for gallery rifle and, str the rails off and you have exactly the same gun to be used in the field! Stop being so blinkered... Just because a certain type of shooting does not appeal or make sense to YOU dous not make it an invalid or lesser sport In all fairness I could buy a sig522 an use it for rabbits tomorrow - it's a choice! And you could argue a bull pup type short military action is a benefit when moving around in a vehicle. Food for thought... Regards, Gixer Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gazzthompson Posted January 2, 2013 Report Share Posted January 2, 2013 Opposition to "these" (Tactical/AR-15's/Whatever)style weapons WITHIN the shooting community is very dangerous IMO. In an already marginalised sport , losing members because you don't like the look of it and to satisfy some peoples fear based purely on ignorance will be the end of shooting in the UK. We already lost the pistol shooters, lost the semi auto centre fire, We lose the "tacitical" and then who supports you when they come for the rest? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vipa Posted January 2, 2013 Report Share Posted January 2, 2013 Opposition to "these" (Tactical/AR-15's/Whatever)style weapons WITHIN the shooting community is very dangerous IMO. In an already marginalised sport , losing members because you don't like the look of it and to satisfy some peoples fear based purely on ignorance will be the end of shooting in the UK. We already lost the pistol shooters, lost the semi auto centre fire, We lose the "tacitical" and then who supports you when they come for the rest? What he said! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sprackles Posted January 2, 2013 Report Share Posted January 2, 2013 Opposition to "these" (Tactical/AR-15's/Whatever)style weapons WITHIN the shooting community is very dangerous IMO. In an already marginalised sport , losing members because you don't like the look of it and to satisfy some peoples fear based purely on ignorance will be the end of shooting in the UK. We already lost the pistol shooters, lost the semi auto centre fire, We lose the "tacitical" and then who supports you when they come for the rest? Well said.....I have always maintained that by agreeing to the antis chipping away at the bits that dont bother us, we eventually make ourselves the target when there is only us left to go at. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
al4x Posted January 2, 2013 Report Share Posted January 2, 2013 on the other side by a minority wanting to use "tactical style" guns in the field the rest of us endure more bad press and restrictions. Lots have no function to field use much like the discussion on that hatstand the other day Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gixer1 Posted January 2, 2013 Report Share Posted January 2, 2013 (edited) on the other side by a minority wanting to use "tactical style" guns in the field the rest of us endure more bad press and restrictions. Lots have no function to field use much like the discussion on that hatstand the other day True - but where does the member of public perception change on the type of firearm? I have friends who don't shoot at all and when they see my rifle with a blued action and synthetic stock (so all black) they nearly always say something along the lines of "that's very sas sniperish" so I wonder where the cut off point is? Is it wood stocks that make a gun less tactical? Or a scope? Some people use the stock mounted round holders which in my opinion is one of the most tac(ky)tical things you can do - I can never remember being in the field and firing more than 3 shots from a CF in fast succession and after that I have pockets - and if at a range surely a round case is a better option? But it's what you feel is right - and after all there is no legal restriction so why not live the way you want to I guess. Edited January 2, 2013 by gixer1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
al4x Posted January 2, 2013 Report Share Posted January 2, 2013 Its the imitating an assault rifle that I think is the sticking point in the story. Obviously they are missing out the fact its for SAS wannabees and they would be most disappointed in the performance compared to the real thing but still it made a headline. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gazzthompson Posted January 2, 2013 Report Share Posted January 2, 2013 How is it intimidating an "assault rifle" ? For being black? Adjustable stock? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JonathanL Posted January 2, 2013 Report Share Posted January 2, 2013 The 'public' will bleat and squeal but in the end they actually don't care one way or another. Most of the public think that pistols and semi-auto centre-fire rifles ate still legal. We get people very oftening asking whether they can come and shoot an L1A1 or a Glock, for instance. These people and actually pay money for papers like the Sun so their opinions should hold sod all weoght with anyonem. To be honest, it's pretty scary that people who believe shuch rubbish are allowed vote! J. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Livefast123 Posted January 2, 2013 Report Share Posted January 2, 2013 (edited) It's not the article thats dangerous it's the attitude of shooters........again. It's the old, I don't like it so nobody else should shoot it mentalitity. I don't have a black rifle, but if I did, so what? does that automatically turn me into a waltastic Rambo wannabee or just somebody who likes to shoot guns that look like that. Typical of The Sun to print inaccurate, sensationalist drivel. Edited January 2, 2013 by Livefast123 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
al4x Posted January 2, 2013 Report Share Posted January 2, 2013 How is it intimidating an "assault rifle" ? For being black? Adjustable stock? its in the advert wording AR 15 CLONE thats the issue they have not hard to see they look pretty similar Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.