Would you?

[** Pending Removal **]

I quite like the look of those tiny little shinny ones that can fit in your purse.......

But......

Saying that.....I also quite fancy the ones a bit bigger from the 'do you feel lucky Punk!!' era.

I also would prefer the concealed carry rather than the obvious gun slinger look.....(unless you are in Texas of course where they look luuuuuurvley on those 501 washed denim jeans which blend in so nicely with the Stetson and the cowboy boots......Mmmmm that takes me back....).

But folks we are never going to get them back. An attempt was made at the time we got 15 RFD section 5's for the Olympians to train here in the UK rather than using Switzerland.....but it has not been listened to.

 

[Les53]

I quite like the look of those tiny little shinny ones that can fit in your purse.......

But......

Saying that.....I also quite fancy the ones a bit bigger from the 'do you feel lucky Punk!!' era.

I also would prefer the concealed carry rather than the obvious gun slinger look.....(unless you are in Texas of course where they look luuuuuurvley on those 501 washed denim jeans which blend in so nicely with the Stetson and the cowboy boots......Mmmmm that takes me back....).

But folks we are never going to get them back. An attempt was made at the time we got 15 RFD section 5's for the Olympians to train here in the UK rather than using Switzerland.....but it has not been listened to.

S&W Mod 29 .44mag, that's the way to go! "Come on punk, make my day" !!!!    Alas I feel you are correct Nic, it is unlikely that we will ever get the man stoppers back again!

 

[clayclouter]

So why stop law abiding people from owning hand guns for use in their sport?  The only people who have hand guns now are the scrotes, the scrotes had hand guns before the ban and they still have them, so what use is the ban, what exactly did it achieve????????????...........................NOTHING.

I take a long view on my ANTI stance, I have great respect and no little sympathy for your comments, however if hand guns were reintroduced  I see it as just a matter of time before a legally owned one is acquired and misused by some w-----ker (as has been the case more than once recently with shotguns) The ensuing hue and cry with emotions resurrected regarding Dunblane would spill over into the entire shooting structure and I fear we woyuld then be fighting a knee jerk blanket ban on the sport of shooting as a whole.  A little far fetched perhaps but that is my concern, we are on the back foot at the moment as regards the use of shotguns and rifles, hunting, field sports and the like a reintroduction of something already tainted whether justified or not is to invite further unwanted uninformed prejudices to gather around the sport as a whole. I do not for one moment expect you to agree with me but that is my logic not fully explained but the basic tenets of my argument.

 

[** Pending Removal **]

Actually that is a good point CC

 

[ips]

yeah i have to admit i hadnt thought of it that way, spose its a bit like sacrifising one for the benefit and longevity of the other, still rubbish weather in uk though

 

[Mike]

I take a long view on my ANTI stance, I have great respect and no little sympathy for your comments, however if hand guns were reintroduced  I see it as just a matter of time before a legally owned one is acquired and misused by some w-----ker (as has been the case more than once recently with shotguns) The ensuing hue and cry with emotions resurrected regarding Dunblane would spill over into the entire shooting structure and I fear we woyuld then be fighting a knee jerk blanket ban on the sport of shooting as a whole.  A little far fetched perhaps but that is my concern, we are on the back foot at the moment as regards the use of shotguns and rifles, hunting, field sports and the like a reintroduction of something already tainted whether justified or not is to invite further unwanted uninformed prejudices to gather around the sport as a whole. I do not for one moment expect you to agree with me but that is my logic not fully explained but the basic tenets of my argument.

 
May I suggest that if you have a bit of time to spare that you read this http://www.libertarian.co.uk/lapubs/histn/histn043.htm#VI.%20The%20British%20Gun%20Control%20System%20in%20Practice:%20Administrative%20Abuse

 

[Les53]

May I suggest that if you have a bit of time to spare that you read this http://www.libertarian.co.uk/lapubs/histn/histn043.htm#VI.%20The%20British%20Gun%20Control%20System%20in%20Practice:%20Administrative%20Abuse

Yes exactly! Our rights have been taken away bit by bit for god only knows how long in this country and not just with regard to guns. Let's face it, one does not need a gun so as to kill people! So where could we be going next, a ban booze,a ban on fags, no knives without a license, no cars unless they have their speed restricted to 30mph, a ban on razor blades, a ban on fishing?  We live in a nanny state that is getting worse by the year and we do nothing about it.   :angry:

 

[** Pending Removal **]

INTERESTING FACTS FOR GUN OWNERS……AND DOCTORS!

Doctors
(A) The number of physicians in the U.S. is 700,000.
( B) Accidental deaths caused by Physicians per year are 120,000.
© Accidental deaths per physician is 0.171
Statistics courtesy of U.S. Dept of Health and Human Services.

Now think about this:
 
Guns
(A) The number of gun owners in the U.S. is 80,000,000. (Yes, that's 80 million)
( B) The number of accidental gun deaths per year, all age groups, is 1,500.
© The number of accidental deaths per gun owner is 0.0000188 
Statistics courtesy of the FBI

So statistically, doctors are approximately 9,000 times more dangerous than gun owners. Remember, Guns don't kill people, doctors do!!!

FACT: NOT EVERYONE HAS A GUN, BUT, almost everyone has at least one doctor. This means you are over 9,000 times more likely to be killed by a doctor than as by a gun owner!!!

Please alert your friends to this alarming threat. We must ban doctors before this gets completely out of hand!!!!!

Out of concern for the public at large, I withheld the statistics on Lawyers for fear the shock would cause people to panic and seek medical attention!

 

Typo....I cannot deal with the thing that keeps altering letters....!! you all know it means A B or C

 

[Les53]

INTERESTING FACTS FOR GUN OWNERS……AND DOCTORS!

Doctors

(A) The number of physicians in the U.S. is 700,000.

( B) Accidental deaths caused by Physicians per year are 120,000.

© Accidental deaths per physician is 0.171

Statistics courtesy of U.S. Dept of Health and Human Services.

Now think about this:

Guns

(A) The number of gun owners in the U.S. is 80,000,000. (Yes, that's 80 million)

( B) The number of accidental gun deaths per year, all age groups, is 1,500.

© The number of accidental deaths per gun owner is 0.0000188 

Statistics courtesy of the FBI

So statistically, doctors are approximately 9,000 times more dangerous than gun owners. Remember, Guns don't kill people, doctors do!!!

FACT: NOT EVERYONE HAS A GUN, BUT, almost everyone has at least one doctor. This means you are over 9,000 times more likely to be killed by a doctor than as by a gun owner!!!

Please alert your friends to this alarming threat. We must ban doctors before this gets completely out of hand!!!!!

Out of concern for the public at large, I withheld the statistics on Lawyers for fear the shock would cause people to panic and seek medical attention!

Typo....I cannot deal with the thing that keeps altering letters....!! you all know it means A B or C

Wonderful Nic! :lol:  I read somewhere a few years ago that you are more likely to get injured whilst putting on your trousers in the morning  than by being shot. :lol:

 

[clayclouter]

i dont disagree with anything you have said, I only put forward my logic for being anti, being a pragmatist I think the current environment is not conducive to starting a campaign for the reintroduction of Sporting/Competition  Handguns, I think we need to see a susbstantial amount of time elapse with no adverse publicity or events, and  the recent events concerning firearms  etc.in the press which seems to be constant at the moment.

 

[Mike]

I had a look at the Handgun campaign on another forum, my view is that we will never be allowed them ever again.

The anti gun lobby do a very good job...we just argue amongst ourselves. Well most of the time.

 

[Les53]

I had a look at the Handgun campaign on another forum, my view is that we will never be allowed them ever again.

The anti gun lobby do a very good job...we just argue amongst ourselves. Well most of the time.

This true Mike. If we ever did get a single "Gun Owners Association", which I doubt, then we may at least stand a small chance, but as we are now it simply will not happen.

 

[Les53]

i dont disagree with anything you have said, I only put forward my logic for being anti, being a pragmatist I think the current environment is not conducive to starting a campaign for the reintroduction of Sporting/Competition  Handguns, I think we need to see a susbstantial amount of time elapse with no adverse publicity or events, and  the recent events concerning firearms  etc.in the press which seems to be constant at the moment.

Your logic was of course spot on mate!!!

 

[EdSolomons]

S&W Mod 29 .44mag, that's the way to go! "Come on punk, make my day" !!!!    Alas I feel you are correct Nic, it is unlikely that we will ever get the man stoppers back again!

I think refering to them as "man stoppers" wouldnt help your cause any...

 

[Les53]

I think refering to them as "man stoppers" wouldnt help your cause any...

Dead right Ed! However I doubt if we even have a cause anymore!

 

[Growl]

Strict control but definateley pro.

 

[Guerini Guy]

Sadly David (Mr Clayclouter), although I understand your logic, I don't agree with it.

What you are in effect saying is "sod you Jack, I'm alright" simply because you happen to be a shotgun shooter and currently not so severely at risk. And it was precisely that attitude which stopped the majority of shooters from getting squarely behind the pistol shooters at that time. You know, the "it doesn't affect me" syndrome.

But it would be interesting to see how you felt about it had it been the ownership of shotguns on the line, and you LOST your right to own one partly because the rest of the shooting community didn't support you?

And whoever said it, is quite right, although I'm sure said somewhat tongue in cheek, talk of things such as Dirty Harry and Man Stoppers is definitely not helpful and, in fact, simply would not be tolerated within the Practical Pistol community around the world today. The anti brigade trawl forums such as this and seriously do pick up on such things and, more importantly, use them to great effect.

Even the targets that are shot in PP have changed shape so that they cannot be construed in any way as mimicking "human" targets which, evidently, a square target with a smaller square target above it allegedly did. PC gone bloody mad, but the powers that be at IPSC (the worldwide governing body for Practical Shooting) have done as much as they feel should be done to make the sport as PC as possible.

Oh well, as you see I am passionate about the subject so I will bugger off now, but hope I've at least given some food for thought ? 

 

[clayclouter]

I fully take your point regarding self interest, however my reluctance to support the reintroduction of Sporting/Competition Handguns is not at all based on your view, I was at the time of Dunblane and the ensuing Fall Out getting into and exploring the possibility of Sporting /Competition Handguns along with my son who was mad keen to to get involved, he is not a shotgunner of any serious intent and never has been. He was devastated when the whole thing got panned and I have to say so was I, I have come to sporting shooting late on life so I was not really wise enough at the time to know what avenues of protest I might be able to make and I was not really up to speed with the concept of Forums etc. I do not offer the classic excuses I just make you aware of the background.

I think in retropspect the whole gruesome episode left the vast majority of the shooting world completely stunned with the enormity of the act and the tragic trail of shattered lives it left behind.The general public were quite rightly outraged and emotionally in sync with the outpourings of grief from those suffering in Dunblane. The government wanted to be seen to do something so it banned Handguns across the board, the shooting community ran for cover its is as simple as that.

However it came about,we are where we are and we have to deal with that, I think that then was not the appropriate time to put forward a case to stop the ban  given the intense emotions and reactions emanating from the public and the press. Since then the various lobbies and organisations that are anti anything to do with shooting, blood sports, field sports, etc have had a high profile access to the media. This constant barrage against  any thing to do with for want of  better phrase "Country Pursuits" equally had nothing to do with the events at Dublane but they are now a fact of life we have to contend with.

As I have said before I think the environment is still not conducive to starting a campaign to reintroduce Handguns until we can demonstrate a significant amount of time has elapsed without a major incident of some kind occurring. As to your contention that we might have acted differently  had it been shotguns that were banned I cannot dispute that the vast majority would have. It does not detract from the fact that no matter what would have been said,done or proposed at the time, the horror and revulsion felt by the public was such that any kind of argument put forward would have been dismissed out of hand.

The shooting community is still under great threat from numerous bodies who would love to see what is left of it dissappear without  trace, I think we as a community are still in the bridge building phase of our rehabilitation for want of a better word  and talk of reintroducing firearms that are identified by the public  with the slaughter of innocents no matter by whom and with what, is still somewhat premature. What ever the reality of the situation then and now, perceptions are the truth by which the public make their decisions. We have to work very hard and conscientiously to help change those perceptions, at the moment advocating the reintroduction of handguns is not going to help. Again I do not expect you to agree but it is a point of view which I think it is a view which has some validity.

 

[Mike]

Sadly David (Mr Clayclouter), although I understand your logic, I don't agree with it.

What you are in effect saying is "sod you Jack, I'm alright" simply because you happen to be a shotgun shooter and currently not so severely at risk. And it was precisely that attitude which stopped the majority of shooters from getting squarely behind the pistol shooters at that time. You know, the "it doesn't affect me" syndrome.

But it would be interesting to see how you felt about it had it been the ownership of shotguns on the line, and you LOST your right to own one partly because the rest of the shooting community didn't support you?

And whoever said it, is quite right, although I'm sure said somewhat tongue in cheek, talk of things such as Dirty Harry and Man Stoppers is definitely not helpful and, in fact, simply would not be tolerated within the Practical Pistol community around the world today. The anti brigade trawl forums such as this and seriously do pick up on such things and, more importantly, use them to great effect.

Even the targets that are shot in PP have changed shape so that they cannot be construed in any way as mimicking "human" targets which, evidently, a square target with a smaller square target above it allegedly did. PC gone bloody mad, but the powers that be at IPSC (the worldwide governing body for Practical Shooting) have done as much as they feel should be done to make the sport as PC as possible.

Oh well, as you see I am passionate about the subject so I will bugger off now, but hope I've at least given some food for thought ? 

I would have thought that if ALL shooters do not act as one body the antis will nibble at the edges and slowly everything we shoot will go.

The Police still arrest people in fancy dress carrying toy guns etc; we are on a downwards slope, thats why I posted that link.

 

[Les53]

Sadly David (Mr Clayclouter), although I understand your logic, I don't agree with it.

What you are in effect saying is "sod you Jack, I'm alright" simply because you happen to be a shotgun shooter and currently not so severely at risk. And it was precisely that attitude which stopped the majority of shooters from getting squarely behind the pistol shooters at that time. You know, the "it doesn't affect me" syndrome.

But it would be interesting to see how you felt about it had it been the ownership of shotguns on the line, and you LOST your right to own one partly because the rest of the shooting community didn't support you?

And whoever said it, is quite right, although I'm sure said somewhat tongue in cheek, talk of things such as Dirty Harry and Man Stoppers is definitely not helpful and, in fact, simply would not be tolerated within the Practical Pistol community around the world today. The anti brigade trawl forums such as this and seriously do pick up on such things and, more importantly, use them to great effect.

Even the targets that are shot in PP have changed shape so that they cannot be construed in any way as mimicking "human" targets which, evidently, a square target with a smaller square target above it allegedly did. PC gone bloody mad, but the powers that be at IPSC (the worldwide governing body for Practical Shooting) have done as much as they feel should be done to make the sport as PC as possible.

Oh well, as you see I am passionate about the subject so I will bugger off now, but hope I've at least given some food for thought ? 

 Yes my comments about Dirty Harry and Man Stoppers were tongue in cheek of course, if we still had handguns I would not be using such terms. The Anti's in this country seem to be better at getting their case across than gun owners are, they seem to have a wonderful PR dept and an even better political lobby!  We can no longer say what we like in this country and are getting close to being told what we should think too. As for full bore handguns, well in most cases their basic design function is for use against humans and we cannot escape that fact, even though some are heavily modified for target use as we all know. The public have every right to be worried about such weapons, nobody should ever regard the things as anything other than deadly. But with proper control and correct training they are as safe as any other sort of gun. Yes there are going to be times when a looney takes a gun of some sort and uses it on people, but if one really wants to kill people there are plenty of ways to do it as the whole world knows, a gun is not the only instrument available. As we all know, it is not possible to make the world safe against every potential looney! Excuse the pun, but shooters of all types are an easy target and remain almost without any real protection in this country.