This needs to be in both gun related threads. Try it in this country and we'd have civil war. "From my cold dead fingers" How Japan has almost eradicated gun crime Japan has one of the lowest rates of gun crime in the world. In 2014 there were just six gun deaths, compared to 33,599 in the US. What is the secret? Read more: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-38365729
People always ask that! If it was revealed it wouldn't be a secret anymore...and then you would have to be put down [you're a Pool fan so what's one more or less]!
Take that ! If you want to buy a gun in Japan you need patience and determination. You have to attend an all-day class, take a written exam and pass a shooting-range test with a mark of at least 95%. There are also mental health and drugs tests. Your criminal record is checked and police look for links to extremist groups. Then they check your relatives too - and even your work colleagues. And as well as having the power to deny gun licences, police also have sweeping powers to search and seize weapons. That's not all. Handguns are banned outright. Only shotguns and air rifles are allowed. The law restricts the number of gun shops. In most of Japan's 40 or so prefectures there can be no more than three, and you can only buy fresh cartridges by returning the spent cartridges you bought on your last visit. You did ask!!! But could you...in your wildest stretch of imagination that happening here??? Oh and. Born and raised in Anfield.
Uh....oh! Zios Two Fingered Enrico and No Lips Luigi along with associates Carlo The Carver and Shoeless Giuseppe Jackson would put a crimp in my application.
Trump junior solving a hearing safety issue. Donald Trump Jr. Wants Fewer Restrictions on Gun Silencers in 'Hearing Protection Act'
He could do me a favor and reduce the backlog at ATF so I can get my NFA stuff without the 6-8 month wait time, but with the amount of people buying suppressors and SBRs that won't happen anytime soon.
They also have 99% conviction rate. http://www.bbc.com/news/magazine-20810572 The future in Trumps America?
What do you mean by "the future"? We don't know what happens in transportation vans, or on jail cells, or even on the streets...
The problem with assuming the first is not likely is that it take only 1 to be problematic. And I mean 1 sale, not 1 employee. Because it relates to your next post... ...because guns are designed to kill or injure. I see enough YouTube videos our there about people teaching others how to fire a gun, and then that person turning around with the gun pointed at the teacher. Seriously, I blame the teacher in that case for not pounding safety and responsibility into the shooter's head. Why do so many people what them? What is the use? (I'm being serious, as there has to be some logical, non-movie related reason due the high number.)
Florida householder fatally shoots woman searching for dog http://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-38586215 A Florida woman has died after being shot by a homeowner while searching the neighbourhood for her lost dog. The victim, Rebecca Rawson, 65, was fatally injured after approaching the armed householder's home on Tuesday night, say sheriff's officials. As her relative knocked on the door, Eugene Matthews, 83, emerged firing a handgun, according to the Manatee County Sheriff's Office. Ms Rawson was taken to a local hospital, where she died. Officials say that Ms Rawson and her daughter waited in their car as her brother-in-law knocked on Mr Matthew's door to ask if he had seen their dog. Oh, but it gets better (worse?). http://www.fox13news.com/news/local-news/228464134-story video from the scene showed the home has a gate out front with several signs with messages like "private property" and "no trespassing," along with a uniformed mannequin on an elevated platform holding what appears to be a rifle. Okay, I know people really love their dogs, but when you see this person's place, what part of crazy/paranoid does not go though your head? Is the dog really worth your life?
Well the obvious advantage is the noise. A suppressor will make nearly any firearm hearing safe (140DB). You also get the benefit of less felt recoil. If there are any local noise ordinances you don't need to worry about shooting on private property. Just like with other "guy" things (cars, watches,etc) there is definitely a cool factor to shooting a suppressor. Did I mention they are fun to shoot? Once you own one you usually want another, and another.... Two of the places I frequent most are around 50 acres. More than enough space to shoot, but the noise still will travel out to the neighbors. These places are in the country and it is generally acceptable to shoot from around 11am to sundown without pissing anyone off. When I want to shoot earlier in the morning, at night, on a Sunday or holiday, my suppressors allow me to do that without being a jackass.
Thank you. I wish all gun owners had the same consideration of others as you do. Silencers aren't a bad thing. Unfortunately, you and your cohort get drowned out by a lot of wackos who are intentionally conspicuous and contrarian. ON a slightly different note - My favorite part of that Japan article (slightly behind is the proficiency class) was that all spent casings needed to be accounted for and turned in to purchase new ammo. When I go pheasant hunting with my father-in-law (mainly for the dogs), we also hunt down and pack out all of our spent casings. Now, I'm not saying it should be 1-1 casing-new bullet. However, I've gone shooting with my gun-enthusiast brothers and father too. We've gone to several outdoor ranges, and they are complete shit-show dumps. If you had to turn in casings to buy more ammo, that would go a long way to keeping things clean and keeping drunkards from shooting up bone-dry ranges in the middle of the night, which lead to wildfires. (We had a rash of these in Utah a few years back.) There's got to be a way to account for your waste. (I'm similarly pissed at finding cigarette butts in remote areas of mountain wilderness.) If you don't want to clean up after yourself, then go to a for-profit gun range. If you don't, then don't make me pay (taxes or my own personal time) to clean up after your bad manners or wade through it because those government agencies have been so starved of funds that they can't afford to pay someone to clean up after you.
We don't really run into that problem around here, all the ranges are privately owned and well maintained or your shooting on private property. Im guessing you were using a shotgun for the pheasants and the shell casing was plastic, so yes a good idea to pick up. The casings for rifles and handguns are usually brass, which is not a big concern to the environment. The bullet itself is almost always lead which is the concern for the environment. But I can understand how messy it must get at a free outdoor range ( no range officer?) which can be accessed 24/7 by anyone.
Finally!!! A good guy with a gun stops a bad guy with a gun who was beating a good guy with a gun!!!! http://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news...ssing-motorist-who-shot-attacker-dead-n706381 As the trooper exited his vehicle and began to lay out flares, it appears at this point that he was ambushed by the suspect," Milstead said. "In the initial confrontation, the suspect shoots the trooper in the shoulder [and] right chest area at least one time, possibly twice, disabling the use of the trooper's right hand and right arm." The gunman then attacked the trooper with his hands, bashing his head into the pavement, Milstead said. That's when the passing motorist stopped. "The trooper says, 'Please help me,' and asks the uninvolved third party for help," Milstead said. "That person retreats back to his vehicle, removes his own weapon from the vehicle, confronts the suspect, giving him orders to stop assaulting the officer. The suspect refuses. The uninvolved third party fires, striking and killing the suspect."
One thing I forgot to add when we were discussing suppressors is the penalty for illegal possession or using one during criminal activity. Possession of a suppressor during a crime carries a mandatory minimum of 30 years in Federal prison. One of the toughest punishments in our legal system.
Because nothing is more closely linked to conservative/gun-owners than personal responsibility: http://www.cbs7.com/content/news/Hu...Presidio-County-ranch-shooting-413885063.html On Jan. 6th, a deputy with the Presidio County Sheriff's Office responded to a shooting at the Circle Dug Ranch. When he arrived on scene, he found Daughetry and their client Edwin Roberts with gunshot wounds. Both Daughetry and his fiancee claimed to have seen illegal immigrants from Mexico on the property before, and believe the shooters came from across the border. After the shooting, a GoFundMe page was started for Daughetry's medical bills which garnered over $20,000. According to Sheriff Dominguez, an investigation into the shooting showed that Daughetry shot Roberts and that Bryant had shot Daughetry.
Yes, i saw this a few days ago and just shook my head. Whats worse is that a Texas state official went on a tirade claiming that this is why a wall is needed and stricter immigration, yadda yadda yadda. This type of blaming of "others" has been a staple of people like this. I have seen it for the entirety of my 40 something years. Hell, Emmitt Till was probably called out by his accuser (which we know was a lie) because her husband caught her looking at the bulge in his pants, and had to distract attention from that.
And apparently there are killing machines and is possible to regulate the second amendment... http://www.slate.com/blogs/the_slat...mendment_doesn_t_protect_assault_weapons.html The majority opinion opens with a disturbing account of several recent mass shootings enabled by the kind of assault weapons that Maryland seeks to ban. In Newtown, Aurora, San Bernardino, Orlando, Binghamton, Tucson, Virginia Tech, and Fort Hood, mass shooters used either military-style rifles or high-capacity magazines, significantly increasing the ultimate death tolls. Newtown, in particular, compelled Maryland to ban these weapons. The state recognized that the Supreme Court’s decision in D.C. v. Heller protects citizens’ right to keep handguns in the home. But it argued that the firearms it had proscribed constituted “dangerous and unusual weapons,” which the Heller court said could be outlawed. Indeed, Maryland pointed out, the Heller court explicitly declares that especially dangerous weapons “that are most useful in military service—M-16 rifles and the like—may be banned.” /quote
Plus if you look at the people killed, assault rifles mostly kill white people, so I am not surprised they would have more support to be banned. Hand guns kill brown and black people (and lots of whites also) but they are protected by D.C. v. Heller.