Guns, Guns, and more Guns, Hosted by Inbred Redneck AntiBlitz Ameritrash

[no_rules_just_play]

Ah, yes, but you see rational people don't think with their feelings, like you do.

why does nobody feel safe in a nation where guns are allowed to be owned and used 'for their own protection', while people that are not allowed to have guns in their land do?

[Son Of Odin]

Yep, hand guns are pretty crap. Good luck getting an aimed shot to hit the target after 10-15 meters. I should exclude some long barrel revolvers from this generalization but if you're 20 meters away from the guy with a pistol, you are pretty safe if you start running... He has to be a pretty good shot to hit you.

Hand guns are pretty much like throwing in crpg now that I think of it.

[zagibu]

The American military. D:

Well, those M16s must be magical, then, because I can tell you it's practically impossible to hit a moving target at 200m with the SIG 550, even if your lying on the ground in the perfect sniping position. And I doubt you can do it with a cheaper rifle that has a shorter barrel.

[Xant]

why does nobody feel safe in a nation where guns are allowed to be owned and used 'for their own protection', while people that are not allowed to have guns in their land do?

I'll answer that right after you prove that no Americans feel safe and all Europeans feel safe.

[no_rules_just_play]

I'll answer that right after you prove that no Americans feel safe and all Europeans feel safe.

hurr durr, dont touch our guns, we need them for protection. hurr durr.

btw, you are not really argumenting. Try something else than:
"you used the word feel, now your argument is not rational anymore" or "I won't answer your argument untill you prove it"

[Xant]

hurr durr, dont touch our guns, we need them for protection. hurr durr.

btw, you are not really argumenting. Try something else than:
"you used the word feel, now your argument is not rational anymore" or "I won't answer your argument untill you prove it"

Ok, I'll argument on your level:

All Europeans are scared because they don't have guns. All Americans feel safe because they have guns.

[Gnjus]

Xant - whoever hurt your anus is a bad person, I assure you, but you can't spend the rest of your days arguing & hating everyone else just because of what happened to you. Your wounds won't heal like that, It doesn't work that way.

[no_rules_just_play]

All Europeans are scared because they don't have guns. All Americans feel safe because they have guns.

europeans feel safe without guns, Americans feel safe only if they have guns (which would be argued as a false feeling of safety). Meanwhile, they have 5.5 homicides per 100.000 capita, while Europe has only 1.

Details of threats/assaults
Looking at what was said about the 'last incident', and again taking all countries together,
offenders were known in about half the incidents of both assaults and threats. Men, though,
were less likely to know the offender(s) than women. The latter finding indicates that violence
against women is of a different nature.
One offender is involved in 60 % of violent crimes against women, compared to 40 % in cases
of violence against men.
Taking assaults and threats together again, for all countries combined weapons were said to
have been used (if only as a threat) in just under 20% of incidents. The figure was higher with
male victims than with female victims. In more than 40% of incidents in which a weapon was
used, victims mentioned a knife, and in 12% a gun. In one in five cases the attack resulted in
injuries of which half required medical treatment.
From a global perspective, the rate of gun-related attacks in European countries is
comparatively low. As said, the same is true for street robberies at gun-point.
Although the prevalence rates for threats/assaults in Europe are roughly similar to those in the
USA, homicide rates are five times higher in the USA (1 per 100,000 in Europe and 5.5 in the
USA). The more serious nature of violent crime in the USA might be related to higher
ownership rates in handguns. According to the EU ICS 4 % of EU households own one or
more guns. The gun ownership rate in the USA is 29%.

source:http://www.europeansafetyobservatory.eu/downloads/EUICS%20-%20The%20Burden%20of%20Crime%20in%20the%20EU.pdf

[Xant]

europeans feel safe without guns, Americans feel safe only if they have guns (which would be argued as a false feeling of safety). Meanwhile, they have 5.5 homicides per 100.000 capita, while Europe has only 1.

source:

Americans feel safe with guns, Europeans don't feel safe without guns.

For homicide rates and gun law correlations, refer to my post a couple pages ago. 5.5 is wrong btw.

[no_rules_just_play]

Americans feel safe with guns, Europeans don't feel safe without guns.

what the fuck mate, can't even have a normal discussion with you

also add a source to your post, looking through 5 pages to find a post with unknown and unrated source was not worth my time..
Your 5 times higher homicide rate might be an average of different states, but so is the european statistic.

The problem is not really the legal use of firearms, but mostly the accesibility to them. Even if you live in a state where they are banned, there is still a huge influx of them from other states next to it.

[Clockworkkiller]

I thought we all agreed to stop arguing....

[Xant]

what the fuck mate, can't even have a normal discussion with you

also add a source to your post, looking through 5 pages to find a post with unknown and unrated source was not worth my time..
Your 5 times higher homicide rate might be an average of different states, but so is the european statistic.

The problem is not really the legal use of firearms, but mostly the accesibility to them. Even if you live in a state where they are banned, there is still a huge influx of them from other states next to it.

The source was FBI crime stats. And yes, the European one is an average. If accessibility of firearms is a problem, how do you explain the low homicide rate of f.ex New Hampshire? Or that of Russia? And China? Or that of European countries higher than New Hampshire's?

I love the fact that you're insulting your own argumentation, because I'm just copying you: claiming shit without any sort of evidence.

[Kafein]

I propose to end the knife/gun debate by only allowing firearms as long as you put a bayonet on them.

[Tibe]

Lets do that and call it a night.

[AntiBlitz]

I thought we all agreed to stop arguing....

YOU THOUGH FUCKING WRONG!

Well, those M16s must be magical, then, because I can tell you it's practically impossible to hit a moving target at 200m with the SIG 550, even if your lying on the ground in the perfect sniping position. And I doubt you can do it with a cheaper rifle that has a shorter barrel.

Ive never tried shooting past 100 yards, only because thats as far as the local range goes, but with iron sights, sitting down, and posted up, i can put a pie plate size pattern on the target quite well, though i cant say i have fired quickly enough to cause severe overheating of the barrel.  I probably could shoot the moving target with a little practice, ive never actually tried a moving distant target before.

This came to my mind instantly. H&K fucked up.

Don't get me on the source. The only English one I could find. The bureau responsible for acquiring army gear pointed that out in an official but "for official use only" paper years ago. It has been ignored.
One has to wonder which interests are secured here? Industry or soldier?

its a pretty new design for a rifle, and its only testing was the middle east conflicts thus far, honestly this kind of stuff could be compared to the original problems of the m16 during its first use in the 1960's.  It all will be worked out im sure, given time and money of course.

Intense criticism began in 1966, when soldiers and Marines in Vietnam reported that their rifles would jam during firefights. The worst malfunction was failure to extract, where a spent cartridge case remained lodged in the chamber after a round was fired. The only way to dislodge the case was to push a metal rod down the muzzle to force the case out, which took valuable time away from returning fire. In 1967, a then-classified Army report showed that out of 1,585 troops questioned in a survey, 80 percent (1,268 troops) experienced a stoppage while firing. This occurred while the Army insisted to the public that the M16 was the best rifle available for fighting in Vietnam. A 1967 Congressional subcommittee investigation found the Army failed to ensure the weapon and ammunition worked well together, failed to train troops on the new weapon, and neglected to issue enough cleaning equipment, including a cleaning rod to clear jammed rifles. Most problems were remedied with the issuing of the M16A1.

what id actually like to see is the new Israeli rifle, and the French Famas, i just think those things are so unique and cool, i want one!  maybe im just a sucker for bullpup designs, i think personally those are the wave of the future, bullpup is great, shorter overall design while keeping a a longer barrel, its weight is positioned more towards the body rather then being stretched out, and the recoil is less controllable due to the bullpup design, but that seems like a fair trade off.  I only wonder how they perform at a distance, since clearly these look to have been made for the area they live within, all tha urban combat.

Israeli Tavor Tar-21

(click to show/hide)

visitors can't see pics , please register or login

French Famas G2

(click to show/hide)

visitors can't see pics , please register or login

I really want one of these but they havent been imported since the 80's and they are going for around $10,000 dollars, which is stupid steep.  Ya bro, im jelly.


I found this site ages ago, and it has a lot of information on it, in the top left corner you can change the field to other weapon styles and it will show what each country used or invented.

http://world.guns.ru/rifle-e.html