When I checked the board this morning, I wasn't at all surprised to see this thread having added so many posts overnight (I'm on European time), since it started yesterday, knowing how controversial guns are.
I lived in the US a couple of years ago, so don't write me off as another ignorant European - but in my opinion you are basically beyond where something could have been done about your gun problem - it is now out of everyone's hand. Wheter you like it or not..
Hearing about yet another school shooting yesterday doesn't even raise an eyebrow anymore... this will just keep on happening again and again - believe me!

I'm glad I live in a society where guns are illegal, and HARD TO GET, and where shootings are so rare they almost never happen. I HAVE plenty of gun experience, being a tank gunner in the army when I was younger, and the fact are - guns are used to kill people! http://www.pelicanparts.com/ultimate/frown.gif

I get sooo tired when people use arguments that belong in the 18th or 19th century to justify their right to carry guns (I won't name names, since offending people won't get us anywhere)

No - I DON'T have a solution for your gun problem.
As I said - I think you are too far gone.
Because of lobbying organisations like NRA, politicians not having the guts to do what it took decades ago and a cowboy mentality still being present, you are today faced with a situation that could have been avoided.

Please keep the board clear of issues like this, and focus on our one common denominator - the P-cars! http://www.pelicanparts.com/ultimate/tongue.gif

(I'm probably gonna be beaten up for this post - but it's my honest to God opinion. Reflect over the meaning of it, and you may agree to some extent..)

WOW GUYS, ALL I WANTED WAS A LITTLE HELP TO DECIDE ON MY FIRST GUN....!

I didn't aim for this to become a discussion for or against guns. And I certainly didn't expect a nutcase teenager to pull the trigger on his schoolmates in California. By the way; what the hell happened??? 2 dead one person said...? Saw it on CNN by coincidence yesterday evening.

Well now that this topic has developed itself I might as well join the fun.

Let me say again: It's extremely hard for normal people (non millitary/police) in Denmark to own guns legally. Actually most people here think that guns are completely banned. I can't remember exactly but I think we have about 40000 gun owners out of a 5 million population. That's not much. I'm going to be one of those gun owners and I have a hard time imagining other people being afraid of me. Why should they be? I'm still the same person even if I own a gun.

Actually we have a number of crimes here where guns are involved. Funny enough I haven't heard of ONE SINGLE CASE involving a legal gun owner. All cases involve illegal guns that have been either stolen from legal gun owners, the police or the millitary. And then a lot of guns that have been smuggled over the border from Eastern Europe. So it seems that criminals will have guns even if guns are illegal!!!

Still I think it's too easy to get a gun in the US. As long as you don't register guns like you for example register cars/motorcycles you won't be able to fight the problems. Here guns are registered to its owner and said person will have to show his gun once every year to the local gun club for them to make sure that the owner didn't sell the gun on the black market. This system actually works...

[This message has been edited by Mikkel (edited 03-06-2001).]

Bo,
do you think that noone can own guns in Sweden except if they are police/millitary persons? Actually, as I understand it, you have a system similar to our's here in Denmark. Which means that even normal people can own guns. In fact you swedes can own guns like 45s and other powerful versions. Here in Denmark the "fun" ends at 357 Mag. This is exactly why the gun club I attend holds an annual trip to Sweden so we can try the "big" guns over at your place... http://www.pelicanparts.com/ultimate/tongue.gif

Still as you say you rarely see gun crimes in Sweden...Which again prooves that letting people own guns doesn't necessarily lead to gun crimes. CONTROL and common sense are the keywords.

But I must admit that I agree with you on 2 points:
1. I too am glad that I don't live in a gun crazed contry like the US.
2. You're right when you say that the gun problems are out of control in the US.

Weekend before last a mother and her 12 yr old son were killed by a d.u.i. driver who ran a red light and broadsided their car. This unfortunate crime happens 100s of times a yr in the US but is far less sensational than a school shooting. But the people are just as dead. I find the real crime here is that you can buy beer and gas up your weapon at the same stop.


Colt 1991 A-1 45 ACP

------------------
Robert Stoll
83 SC
83 944

A dum question from someone who doesn't speak english every day. What's d.u.i.??

driving under the influence. (drunk driver)

Amendment II

A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed


Section 8. The Congress shall have power to lay and collect taxes, duties, imposts and excises, to pay the debts and provide for the common defense and general welfare of the United States; but all duties, imposts and excises shall be uniform throughout the United States;


To borrow money on the credit of the United States;


To regulate commerce with foreign nations, and among the several states, and with the Indian tribes;


To establish a uniform rule of naturalization, and uniform laws on the subject of bankruptcies throughout the United States;


To coin money, regulate the value thereof, and of foreign coin, and fix the standard of weights and measures;


To provide for the punishment of counterfeiting the securities and current coin of the United States;


To establish post offices and post roads;


To promote the progress of science and useful arts, by securing for limited times to authors and inventors the exclusive right to their respective writings and discoveries;


To constitute tribunals inferior to the Supreme Court;


To define and punish piracies and felonies committed on the high seas, and offenses against the law of nations;


To declare war, grant letters of marque and reprisal, and make rules concerning captures on land and water;


To raise and support armies, but no appropriation of money to that use shall be for a longer term than two years;


To provide and maintain a navy;


To make rules for the government and regulation of the land and naval forces;


To provide for calling forth the militia to execute the laws of the union, suppress insurrections and repel invasions;


To provide for organizing, arming, and disciplining, the militia, and for governing such part of them as may be employed in the service of the United States, reserving to the states respectively, the appointment of the officers, and the authority of training the militia according to the discipline prescribed by Congress;


To exercise exclusive legislation in all cases whatsoever, over such District (not exceeding ten miles square) as may, by cession of particular states, and the acceptance of Congress, become the seat of the government of the United States, and to exercise like authority over all places purchased by the consent of the legislature of the state in which the same shall be, for the erection of forts, magazines, arsenals, dockyards, and other needful buildings;--And


To make all laws which shall be necessary and proper for carrying into execution the foregoing powers, and all other powers vested by this Constitution in the government of the United States, or in any department or officer thereof.

To establish post offices and post roads;

Amendment II

A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed

Article VI

All debts contracted and engagements entered into, before the adoption of this Constitution, shall be as valid against the United States under this Constitution, as under the Confederation.


This Constitution, and the laws of the United States which shall be made in pursuance thereof; and all treaties made, or which shall be made, under the authority of the United States, shall be the supreme law of the land; and the judges in every state shall be bound thereby, anything in the Constitution or laws of any State to the contrary notwithstanding.


The Senators and Representatives before mentioned, and the members of the several state legislatures, and all executive and judicial officers, both of the United States and of the several states, shall be bound by oath or affirmation, to support this Constitution; but no religious test shall ever be required as a qualification to any office or public trust under the United States.


THIS SAYS IT ALL.

FREEDOM IS NOT FREE,WOULD YOU PLEDGE YOUR LIFE TO MAKE SURE WE HAVE A FREE NATION?


Done in convention by the unanimous consent of the states present the seventeenth day of September in the year of our Lord one thousand seven hundred and eighty seven and of the independence of the United States of America the twelfth.


In witness whereof We have hereunto subscribed our Names,


G. Washington-Presidt. and deputy from Virginia


New Hampshire: John Langdon, Nicholas Gilman


Massachusetts: Nathaniel Gorham, Rufus King


Connecticut: Wm: Saml. Johnson, Roger Sherman


New York: Alexander Hamilton


New Jersey: Wil: Livingston, David Brearly, Wm. Paterson, Jona: Dayton


Pennsylvania: B. Franklin, Thomas Mifflin, Robt. Morris, Geo. Clymer, Thos. FitzSimons, Jared Ingersoll, James Wilson, Gouv Morris


Delaware: Geo: Read, Gunning Bedford jun, John Dickinson, Richard Bassett, Jaco: Broom


Maryland: James McHenry, Dan of St Thos. Jenifer, Danl Carroll


Virginia: John Blair--, James Madison Jr.


North Carolina: Wm. Blount, Richd. Dobbs Spaight, Hu Williamson


South Carolina: J. Rutledge, Charles Cotesworth Pinckney, Charles Pinckney, Pierce Butler


Georgia: William Few, Abr Baldwin

These men did,Would YOU?????

STEVE STROMBERG

TWO MOVIES TO WATCH: RED DAWN FARWELL TO THE KING





[This message has been edited by SteveStromberg (edited 03-06-2001).]

[This message has been edited by SteveStromberg (edited 03-06-2001).]

d.u.i. is: "driving under the influence". That is, the influence of alcohol. It is a lower limit than D.W.I, "driving while intoxicanted".
Drinking and drugging is behind all kinds of killing.

OK thanks.

BTW I saw something yesterday on german tv about teenage kids who threw small rocks at cars from bridges over the autobahns. This is getting a common problem in Germany and it causes accidents in a lot of cases. So stupidity and small rocks can be dangerous as well. They talked about a 9 year old boy who did it for fun and caused a serious accident to a Mercedes driving under the bridge. The front seat passenger got her faced scarred for life.

While we are on the subject of America and 'right to bear arms blah, blah'.
Whats all this about...
'Glod Bless America' why should he feel oblidged to bless one Nation and not another?.
Why not just 'Glod Bless Us?'
Just a thought!

Internet site: http://trp.orn.com/ Listen to what Frank from Queens and John from Stanten Island have to say.

Or try this site: http://www.americanfreedomnews.com/index.htm
or this one:
http://www.gcnlive.com/
hers one more:
http://www.hbroadcast.com/
Here is the Truth.Open your ears.The NAZI GUN CONTROL ACT OF 1936 was put in place in our country in 1968. The GUN CONTROL ACT of 1968 is a derict word for word tranlation of the NAZI GUN CONTROL ACT, THE NAZI MURDERED HOW MANY? MY GUNS KEEP YOU FREE. EVERYONE SHOULD OWN AS MANY GUNS AND AS MUCH AMMO AS THEY CAN GET. THE SWAT TEAM WERE INVENTED BY THE SS TO SEIZE GUNS. NOW THE SMALLEST PD HAS A SWAT TEAM WHY? TO COME AND GET YOUR GUNS???? Steve

[This message has been edited by SteveStromberg (edited 03-06-2001).]

[This message has been edited by SteveStromberg (edited 03-06-2001).]

"God bless America" is a song.

On the subject of songs...Who was that in "ancient times" walking around England?? Why England??

Besides, Old Blighty is best enjoyed in a dark pub!

'God Bless America', may very well be song title, but it is also a statement often spoken by American politicians inc. presidents at the end of 'Patriotic Speeches'!

Mikkel,

the Marlin i have is a nice fun gun to use. it is dirt cheap, very simple, and very reliable. 1100 rounds of ammo cost around $5-$20 depending on quality.

here's the manufacturers website:
http://www.marlinfirearms.com/

here's mine:
http://albums.photopoint.com/j/View?...nce=0&res=high

the rifle, and scope were $120 for all. it is in perfect condition. if you like accurate shooting and don't want to spend a lot then i'd say that they are a great deal! also, you tube load the ammo, so you aren't cranking through lots of expensive ammo like the other rifles i am looking at. the 5.6mm (22 calibre) ammo is not as dangerous as higher calibers so you don't have to worry about shooting at a target and the bullet travelling through the brick wall behind it, and the car parked behind a brick wall. when we go shooting, the only thing stopping the ammo is a soft earth wall behind the targets. the bullets sink in and they don't throw up a mountian of dirt like a higher caliber rifle.

good luck!

obin

This is an interesting debate and I am not going to get too crazy about it except to say that if you remember the L.A. riots - the police WERE NOT anywhere to be seen. They were retreating, leaving the people to defend themselves.

I'm not just talking about the initial stages of the riots, but for days and weeks after they did not have any control of the neighborhoods not to mention the businesses.

This didn't just effect the downtown areas it spread to the outlying areas (Faifax Distric, Long Beach etc).

The message was clear the you could not count on the police be there when there is a problem. So what do you do if a bunch come beating on your door with your wife and kids inside ? I would choose the ABILITY to defend over submission.

The stores were looted at will with the exception of a few where the owners were on the roofs armed with automatic weapons - they were never touched !

Give ME the choice of whether or not I want to BE ABLE to protect myself and my family not the government.

Funny that Rosie O'Donnel is so opposed to guns, yet her body guard filed for a permit to carry one.

/

[This message has been edited by team5150 (edited 03-06-2001).]

oops, mispost.

obin

[This message has been edited by Obin Robinson (edited 03-06-2001).]

This post is sort of all over the place, and for that I can only blame myself and lack of coffee.

The Uunited States does not have a "Gun Problem" The United States has a culture problem. Somewhere along the line, something went horribly wrong. There is a lack of personal responsability in this country that is terrifying. Everyone is a victim. This kid in San Diego can't be to blame, he was picked on by the bigger kids. Give Me A Fu*king Break. Everyone had a unhappy childhood. Everyone got picked on in high school, even the popular kids got picked on. You get over it, and get on with your life.

Near here, some moron lawyer had 2 attack dogs living with him in his urban apartment. They mauled his neighbor to death. His comment was that it was the dead woman's fault, because the perfume she was wearing must have upset the dog. What makes it worse is the stupid news organizations give this prick TV airtime to spout this utter bull****.

Foreign countries, and even US anti-gun groups often compare the crime rates of the US and other countries, picking the ones with the strictest laws & lowest crime. There is more to it than gun laws though. What this propaganda fails to consider is the huge cultural differences. I really wish I could find the study, but I had a newspaper article about gun control a couple years ago that listed 2 neighboring European countries (may have been Belgium and Netherlands) that had similar crime rates, even though one had much stricter gun laws.

Switzerland is also a fine example of why guns are not the problem. Any Swiss on this board hopefully can clarify this, but most Swiss men are members of the home guard, and have their service weapon in their homes.

If guns are not available, people will still go nuts. How many people would have died if that little **** in San Diego decided a bottle full of gasoline and a lit rag was the way to go, and threw it down the hall instead?

I am sure someone will soon reference the Kellerman study stating a "gun in the home is 43 times more likely to kill you than an intruder" study often mentioned by gun control groups. That methodology of that study is a joke. It referres to one year in one city (Seattle), and included suicides in the totals (37 of the 43). It also didn't diferentiate if the murder weapon actually belonged to the victim. Using the same methodology, you can conclude that insulin causes diabetes. The researcher that did the study was later interviewed in the San Francisco paper and admitted that he had a gun for his wife when he was out of town.
FOr details of the Kellerman study, go here:
http://www.firearmsfacts.org/facts.html

Americans use firearms to defend themselves from criminals about 760,000 times a year. This figure is the lowest among a group of 15 nationwide polls done by organizations including Gallup and the Los Angeles Times. The high estimate is 2.5 million times per year.

Someone also mentioned economist John Lott, and his book "More Guns, Less Crime". Kind of funny, but if you go to the various anti-gun lobby groups web pages, you will see him mentioned. You will also see lots of personal attacks on him. What you don't see is anything refuting his data or statistics.

If anyone is interested, some of Dr Lott's articles can be found here: http://www.tsra.com/LottPage.htm
A discussion of his work and some criticism can be found here:
http://justfacts.com/jlott.htm

Australia. I knew someone would mention that as well. Actually according to Australian Bureau of Statistics figures, the crime rate for homicides with a gun has actually been coming down since 1979. Australian crime rate in general has gone up since the major new gun controls introduced in 1996. For details on these figures, with citations, go here:
http://www.ssaa.org.au/gunleg.html

For some quotes from polititians on the on the Australian "gun buyback" go here:
http://www.ssaa.org.au/quotes.html

For general gun control statistics and information, with citations, go here:
http://justfacts.com/gun_control.htm

Tom
Fremont, CA

I think the problem with gun ownership is education and respect.

I have had guns in the house all of my life. I never "played" with the guns when my parents were not around and I never considered killing people because I was or was not popular. The guns were in easy access and I knew how to handle them if there was an unwelcome intruder, needless to say either the intruder or myself would come out of the house in a bodybag. I learned at an early age how to take care of guns and shoot them properly. The NRA offers plenty of classes for adults and kids to learn, there is no excuse for uneducated gun owners.

I grew up knowing/learning how to hunt tree rats, groundhogs, and deer. Once you actually kill an animal you realize the guns power and are humbled by it. This builds a respect similar to motorcycle drivers have for the bikes, once you loose the healthy respect you are eating gravel.

I am a strong proponent of game hunting and feel it keeps people closer to nature if done properly, and you eat it. Except groundhog/varmits of course. Fishing is easier for most people to deal with because you can throw back, hunting does not have this option.

Also if you cannot mentally be prepared to kill what you are eating, you should be a vegitarian. How many people do you know that love lobster, but could not bear to dump the live lobster in the water and watch it squirm until it dies? Most of the people I know would not eat animals if they had to kill them, or should I say harvest.

Back to the oroginal question. I have two rifles, one Savage .243 with a left handed bolt action and a Remington pump action .22. I am looking into getting a Mossberg(sp) 410 shotgun for home security, seems very light and compact with good stopping, killing, power. I want something that is not hard to aim for my wife to use. Yes, she will go to the range to learn how to use it properly.

Support the NRA before the liberals and irrational soccer moms take our guns away. Also I am opposed to registering guns because then the SS, I mean government, knows where to come get them when they are outlawed.

For everyone without guns, the home security business thanks you for your support. I pay for a gun once, you pay service fees every month... And from what I hear these home security systems are not effective anyway.

It is a tragedy what happened to those high school kids. I can assure you that the shooter did not know how to handle a gun otherwise there would be no incident at all or more than two dead with how many shots he got off.

Peas,

------------------
Adrian Pillow
1979 911 SC
1966 VW Microbus
PCA - Peachstate Region

Regardless of what everyone thinks, a law abiding citizen is allowed to own firearms.

Back to your original question, stick with a .22 pistol for a first gun. They are a lot of fun and very inexpensive to shot. Roughly $15 for a 1000 rounds of .22 versus $15 for 50 rounds of .40 calibre. I first bought a Browning Hi-Power .40, and now regularly shot a Ruger MK-II .22.

This post makes me think we need a off-topic forum to discuss stuff like this with out pissing off those who dont want to talk about other stuff.

Craig

------------------
Craig 73T in many pieces