Canada Ban

[Mentalmac]

43 minutes ago, Scully said:

Not really. I’m rather indifferent regarding assault rifles, although I can appreciate how much fun they can be. 

Just your posts in this thread, I’m not aware of any posts you’ve made in other threads. 

Believe me, I’m not stressed at all. 🙂

Oh I bet if I was on holiday In the Deep South of the USA, I’d have great fun playing with some different weapons on a range... my point really (fun arguments aside) is that if they are banned, but hunters can still buy and use traditional style rifles even if semi auto etc... I’d just go with it. 
 

I’ve only been messing, just being a bit silly this week so felt like being a bit of a bother - my apologies, I’ll revert to my normal (slightly not-normal) self :-). 

[chrisjpainter]

2 hours ago, Mentalmac said:

Oh I bet if I was on holiday In the Deep South of the USA, I’d have great fun playing with some different weapons on a range... my point really (fun arguments aside) is that if they are banned, but hunters can still buy and use traditional style rifles even if semi auto etc... I’d just go with it. 
 

I’ve only been messing, just being a bit silly this week so felt like being a bit of a bother - my apologies, I’ll revert to my normal (slightly not-normal) self :-). 

Do you have a red line, at which you'd no longer 'just go with it' and start actively not going with it, and what would the not going with it look like?

Edited May 5, 2020 by chrisjpainter

[Fisheruk]

On 01/05/2020 at 20:30, MirokuMK70 said:

An absolute myth. The cartridge was not designed to wound. The smaller calibres were developed following ww2 when studies showed most small arm engagements took place at relatively  short range, that larger high powered rounds were 'overkill' at those ranges and problematic through automatic weapons. The added advantage was allowing a soldier to carry more ammunition into battle. The only reason the high velocity small calibres weren't  more widely introduced in the 50s prior to 5.56 was the usa's insistence on a full power cartridge (7.62) for the nato standard. 

I fully agree.

The myth of the 5.56 being a wounding calibre is nonsense. If you have seen the wound damage a carefully placed round Of 5.56 it is as efficient at killing as a 7.62. In military terms it is accuracy that kills. 
The Japanese used the .22 rimfire as a wounding calibre. Not centre fire.

This is a section of RSJ, shot at 100 metres. Soft point hunting ammo. The small holes are 5.56. The larger 6.5x55 Swed.

Can’t say I’d expect to survive either.

free photo upload

[NoBodyImportant]

2 hours ago, Fisheruk said:

I fully agree.

The myth of the 5.56 being a wounding calibre is nonsense. If you have seen the wound damage a carefully placed round Of 5.56 it is as efficient at killing as a 7.62. In military terms it is accuracy that kills. 
The Japanese used the .22 rimfire as a wounding calibre. Not centre fire.

This is a section of RSJ, shot at 100 metres. Soft point hunting ammo. The small holes are 5.56. The larger 6.5x55 Swed.

Can’t say I’d expect to survive either.

free photo upload

I seen first hand what a 556 round will do to a deer, cow, coyotes.  It’s a nasty wound maker. 

[Vince Green]

On 01/05/2020 at 22:01, Walker570 said:

Why on earth would you need that magazine capacity.  I have a ten shot mag on my Browning T Bolt but have never needed to use them in a string even on a night lamping rabbits.

Things like the steel plate events where you compete against the clock. Person who hits ten different steel plates in fastest time wins. It has a lot of advantages for getting a lot of people competing in a simple fun event.

Its carried out on a 25yd range, each competitor only takes a few minutes to shoot so you get a fast turn around  of people. . It only uses about £2 worth of ammo, entry level rifles only cost £200, its quiet compared to clays or fullbore.

Its visual, spectators and the competitor hear and see the hits and the score is known ; It gets people into shooting, novices can compete along side experienced shooters.

Edited May 6, 2020 by Vince Green

[REDINGTON]

[bluesj]

Just seen a video say that the Canadian government may have just banned 10 and 12 bore shotguns that have removable chokes because of the way the new law and old laws are written!

because with the chokes removed they have a barrel diameter of more that 20mm

[mossy835]

how sad they are,any old thing to ban guns, 

[Scully]

1 hour ago, bluesj said:

Just seen a video say that the Canadian government may have just banned 10 and 12 bore shotguns that have removable chokes because of the way the new law and old laws are written!

because with the chokes removed they have a barrel diameter of more that 20mm

If true, they may be having a rethink; if they have the guts to admit they’ve messed up. Knee jerk reactions are never a good thing. 

[nines]

I have no idea what use anyone will find in an assault weapon of any sort.

[NoBodyImportant]

21 minutes ago, nines said:

I have no idea what use anyone will find in an assault weapon of any sort.

Ergonomics, reliability, ease of use,  my 8 year old can handle a lightweight AR 15 much easier then a M1.  

Edited May 30, 2020 by NoBodyImportant

[Scully]

9 hours ago, nines said:

I have no idea what use anyone will find in an assault weapon of any sort.

Oh I don’t know, the military seem to find them pretty useful. 🙂

[London Best]

12 minutes ago, Scully said:

Oh I don’t know, the military seem to find them pretty useful. 🙂

Exactly, Scully. And we are not in the military.

[Scully]

11 minutes ago, London Best said:

Exactly, Scully. And we are not in the military.

Nor do we use ‘assault’ weapons, and nor have we ever. Like I’ve said before, it’s only the rate of fire which makes it an ‘assault’ weapon. 

[ordnance]

On 30/05/2020 at 22:16, nines said:

I have no idea what use anyone will find in an assault weapon of any sort.

Because they are fun to shoot. 

[Rewulf]

On 30/05/2020 at 22:16, nines said:

I have no idea what use anyone will find in an assault weapon of any sort.

Thats probably because you have no idea what an assault rifle is.

 

On 31/05/2020 at 08:04, London Best said:

And we are not in the military.

Go back 70 years , and military rifles look suspiciously like sporting rifles, and are even the same calibres in some.
Making them in black plastic , with pistol grips and  small mags on them , doesnt make them military, or any more dangerous, it makes them more efficient for the sporting task they were designed for.

[grrclark]

What a really interesting thread and it has thrown up a lot of recurring themes in any discussions where there is a level of subjectivity about what should or shouldn't be allowed.

People put forward an opinion that is based on their own value judgement, so in the context of this thread that opinion is often something like 'I don't like the look of the gun, or more accurately the image that particular gun portrays that may also reflect on me, so they should not be allowed.'

It is very similar to the debates had about shooting extreme pheasants or shooting large bag numbers or even shooting animals at all.  People have their comfort zone where they have found a way to justify to themselves the type of shooting they do, the guns that they own, etc and anything outside of that comfort zone becomes harder to justify and ultimately leads to discomfort.

A lot of people do get into shooting because of the image it portrays of them, I know many people who shoot because they want to be seen to be part of that 'country set' and behave and dress accordingly, despite living in mid terrace urban setting.  So just as there are people aspiring to that image of being the country squire there will be people who are attracted to using military style guns and aspiring to the image of the soldier because it ticks a box for them.  Is one any weirder that the other?  They are both make believe.

I have seen guys around pay and play clay grounds dressed in camo and using a 'tacticool' shotgun, they are having fun just the very same as I am, making wee clouds of stoor and laughing about it with mates.  If i am being honest do I think they look a bit knobbish? yes I do, but no more so than the folk who insist on wearing head to toe branded merchandise for whatever their favourite brand of gun/cartridge is.  I am quite sure they think i look a bit knobbish too when i typically will be wearing shorts, a t-shirt and a bunnet.

Where the line sits for gun control is massively subjective and has so many factors to consider, part of which is the optics of how it all looks.  It is stupid when broken down to detail, but there is an image issue of a military style weapon versus wooden furnishings, same as there is an image of skinheads versus a nice traditional hairstyle, or someone with tattoos on the hands, neck and face.  We are judgemental and shallow, that's the reality.

We used to (and sadly all too often still do) judge black faces, accents, foreign names, etc because of exactly the same reason, if it is outside our comfort zone then it makes us uneasy and that shouldn't be allowed.

 

[Mr.C]

My word, what a considered and reasonable post. 

[Rewulf]

6 minutes ago, Mr.C said:

My word, what a considered and reasonable post. 

+1

[Houseplant]

+2