Would you give up your country to live with guns?

Post Reply New Topic

I know of one local gun shop owner that left the UK over the gun laws here as opposed to there.
Depends on what one's priorities are.

GGPViper wrote:

Cal me cheap but my vanity wouldn't allow me to spend that much on one rifle even if I had Bill Gates’ money and I love rifles.
$4500 would get you into a very nice “sniper” rifle and scope combo that would get you out to 1000M or more and that would include a Pelican case for it. It won’t be an Accuracy International, though…

Not the point. The two situations are not exactly the same.

My point is that the type of law known as "gun control" typically creates a bunch of hoops you need to jump through in order to own a gun - it does not take away your right to own a gun. So the whole idea behind the original post is nonsense.

i have a custom shop 6.5-55 swedish mauser with a cut rifled barrel based on a savage 110 action with acu trigger.took a nice deer with it back in november

The 6.5x55mm cartridge is probably one of the best long rifle cartridges devised; the usual awesome characteristics of the 6.5mm/.264 bullet (high sectional density and ballistic coefficient for velocity retention and penetration), relatively low recoil, and powerful enough for...pretty much everything (barring dangerous game). If it was your thing, you'd easily be able to compete in the 1,000 yard matches with that (it's easy to load the 6.5mm Swede so it's supersonic at 1,000 meters, which apart from an accurate rifle, is the other main point. A good shooter too, of course).

I've always been meaning to get a medium bore modern bolt gun (got WW2 stuff and .22s), usually a Savage (sometimes a Remington 700 though), but then I see something that reminds me of Quigley and go with that. I'll get me a Sharps in .45-70 some day.

the rifle is good enough for competition and the gunsmith that cut the barrel does compete in 1000 meter competitions usualy with .260rem.this guy in new hampshire builds rigs for people all over the country.the last time i was there he was customizing a .338 RUM headed for arizona.
the longest target at my range is 150 yds,i shoot two inch groups at 100yds and im not that great a shooter i spend all my time practicing my piano.i guess i need to get out to the range more often.

i also have a H&R gun too although mine is a 16 guage shotgun.it says 1901 on it but im not sure if thats the year it was made or the patent on the model.i dont know a lot about antique guns so im not sure if it was really built in 1901.

Why should I? O_o

Sorry I love to live in a place where the most dangerous things for kids are, unresponsible used fireworks. I dont need unresponsible used guns too, as long as there are still people even too dumb to handle the first one with care.

It does essentially mean a ban on many types of guns (semi-automatic or automatic ones mainly, as well as most types of pistols) here in Great Britain.

Yeah, .260 is a good cartridge; similar to the 6.5 Swede, but with a shorter case (fitting in a shorter action would be a plus, I guess, plus plentiful .308 cases around -- you can find them on the floor of ranges!); I was probably going to get one in that same caliber for long range matches, but the range is too far away from me so I can't practice enough. That's ok though, as there's lots of things to play with.

Two inches at 100 yards is decent. Good enough for any form of hunting.

Cool there with the 16 gauge H&R (it's a nifty gauge in my opinion). They make good, cheap and rugged guns that last. People often malign the old single shots, but eh, we should all train to get it down with one shot for the hunt. I have a single shot 12 gauge, a double, and a lever-action (all 12 gauge).

I'll eventually be looking for a .45-70 barrel for the H&R .44 Magnum in my avatar (1970s made); they came in both calibers, a long rifle (.45-70) and a carbine (the pictured .44 Magnum). Much cheaper than getting a complete H&R .45-70. The .44 Magnum from the rifle is pretty powerful though, if only medium ranged (300 meters max); it and a 12 gauge with Foster slugs are my hunting arms on boar (will go deer hunting one day). I'd prefer the .45-70 as you can run 500 grain projectiles compared to the 300 of the .44, and I also intend to go on a buffalo hunt, so that'll come in handy there (I'm sure a 300 grain hardcast .44 Magnum would work, but I'd prefer something heavier). The non-existent bunnies get the .22s.

And there's me talking about sport/recreation in a political forum. Sad that firearms have often gone down that path.

you really like the big bores.you should hunt black bear in maine

I'm very happy to live here, partly because of the strict gun laws. I've no desire to have one. I'm not at considerable risk of being shot. It can and does happen, to innocent people, unconnected to the shooter, but those incidences are extremely rare, thankfully and because of the law. There were 5 gun killings in Scotland last year. After the Dunblane tragedy, I think most Scots would say anyone who wanted to keep a gun in their home posed a concern for the community.

And most Scots would be wrong.

Well, I did guess you would say that. Our culture is very different, and as I said, I'm quite happy with how it is.

Of course your culture is different; my point is/was that adding or subtracting guns would not change it. A person who is "a danger to the community" is a danger with or without a gun, someone who is no danger also does not change status simply because they own a firearm. It's this idea of the gun as somehow "corrupting" that I find particularly repugnant, that in your mind your neighbor suddenly becomes a threatening entity merely by desiring to possess one. They're not radioactive, they don't just randomly "go off", and are only as dangerous (or not) as the person wielding them; people act upon guns, not the other way around.

Mummy_of_Peanut, my community also has the same viewpoints as yours. I just wish Scotland was a bit warmer

I would consider emigrating if there where not gun-control

Well, "car control" also bans certain types of cars. But people see it as reasonable, since any legitimate purpose that a dodgy car could be used for, a safe car could also be used for.