Blogs: 0 (Add) Vehicle: 2001 Ford Supercrew Joined: Dec 2006 Member # 1638 From: League City Texas Visit Gallery
Posted - December 4 2008 : 7:54p
I am looking at getting a pistol for home defense, carrying, etc. I would like something reliable. I have always been a fan of the 1911 style. Anybody have any thoughts, issues, pros cons etc? I am 6'4", @ 210 so recoil isn't that big a deal to me. I'd really like a desert eagle, but I think a 50 is too big.
Blogs: 0 (Add) Vehicle: 1997 F-150/ 2006 Mustang Joined: May 2005 Member # 55 From: Nor Cal CA. Visit Gallery
Posted
- December 4 2008 : 8:06p
Would this be your first firearm purchase?
If so I would suggest revolver over a semi auto pistol. At least until you become proficient with the revolver. For a revolver i would suggest at least a .357 Magnum if you do choose a auto go with at least a .40 Cal.
Blogs: 0 (Add) Vehicle: 1997 F-150/ 2006 Mustang Joined: May 2005 Member # 55 From: Nor Cal CA. Visit Gallery
Posted
- December 4 2008 : 8:08p
If your going to go with a auto go to a public range that rents some and try various makes and models and then buy based on what you feel most comfortable with.
Blogs: 2 (View) Vehicle: 2000 Lightning Joined: Sep 2005 Member # 275 From: New Orleans LA. Visit Gallery
Posted
- December 4 2008 : 11:59p
My 2cents.
1. Is this going to be your first hand gun?
2. Have you handle and or fired a pistol before, either auto or revolver?
3. Are you looking to a auto or a revolver?.
4. Are there going to be young kids in the area?
5. Is this firearm going to be for HD or carry, Or both?
Ok, If this is going to be your first hand gun. A revolver will be a good start and you will have alot less chance of the gun failing when yiou really need it.. No matter what a revolver will always work. With a revolver, If you get a dud round you can always pull the trigger again to advance to the next round so it can fire. But you have limited amount of ammo that you can fire at one time.
An auto is also a very good choice. Yes you have a better chance of the the gun failing when you need it, but not likely . With an auto, If you do have a dud round there is more you have to do to clear the dud round in order to continue.. You find yourself having to protect you family. You fire 2 shots, then you go to pull the trigger again and nothing happens. Here is where it can get harry if you are new to hand guns. A newbe to hand guns will have to look down at the gun because he will drop the gun and bring it close to the body to get better levage to operate the side ( this bad cause you are taking you eyes off the target) and have to rack the slide . Now you will have to bring the gun back up to aquire a site picture again on the target before firing again if needed. Now you can work on this while you are at the range by loading a snap cap somewhere in the mag. When you come to the snap cap. you can work on racking the slide with out droping the gun from your line of site.. more practics is need with an auto. With an auto you will be able to carry alot more ammo than a revolver. I would atleast put 500+ rounds of different ammo from ball (range ammo) to HP (hollow Points) before I would trust an auto 100%.
The best thing to do is go to the local range that rents hand guns and try out both auto and revolvers of different caliber to see which one fits you best. Also talk with the works of the range they will also be able to help you out in choosing the correct hand gun for you. Plus an NRA basic pistol course would not be a bad idea either.
Since you do have some time with firearms, I am sure most of this is not new to you. When it comes to gun I kinda ramble on about it.
Blogs: 4 (View) Vehicle: 2009 Hyundai 1-Ton Joined: May 2005 Member # 20 From: PartsUnknown Visit Gallery
Posted
- December 5 2008 : 5:26a
I would also highly recommend you rent a few things first before buying. I personally don't like the feel of 1911's or most Glocks, they just don't fit me well. My preference has been H&K mostly, but you need to see what works best for you.
Blogs: 4 (View) Vehicle: 2003 F-350 PSD Joined: Sep 2005 Member # 322 From: Spring TEXAS Visit Gallery
Posted
- December 5 2008 : 7:53a
Screw that.
You are a guy who likes to cut to the chase. You don't fit well with subtle.
I say Go Big Or Go Home - Desert Eagle 50 Caliber Action Express.
You don't really want any home invaders sticking around to testify against you. You've got a wife, so you have someone to clean up the mess it will make.
TA
This message is not endorsed by the Americans For Obama Home Defense Coalition.
Blogs: 2 (View) Vehicle: 2000 Lightning Joined: Sep 2005 Member # 275 From: New Orleans LA. Visit Gallery
Posted
- December 5 2008 : 11:27a
Quote:
Originally posted by Texas Termin8er
Screw that.
You are a guy who likes to cut to the chase. You don't fit well with subtle.
I say Go Big Or Go Home - Desert Eagle 50 Caliber Action Express.
You don't really want any home invaders sticking around to testify against you. You've got a wife, so you have someone to clean up the mess it will make.
It's comment like that all these Anti-Gun people go looking for and put there little spin on it , To make the general law abiding gun owning public look bad.
Blogs: 4 (View) Vehicle: 2003 F-350 PSD Joined: Sep 2005 Member # 322 From: Spring TEXAS Visit Gallery
Posted
- December 5 2008 : 3:18p
Quote:
Originally posted by water spider
Quote:
Originally posted by Texas Termin8er
Screw that.
You are a guy who likes to cut to the chase. You don't fit well with subtle.
I say Go Big Or Go Home - Desert Eagle 50 Caliber Action Express.
You don't really want any home invaders sticking around to testify against you. You've got a wife, so you have someone to clean up the mess it will make.
It's comment like that all these Anti-Gun people go looking for and put there little spin on it , To make the general law abiding gun owning public look bad.
Bryan
So I'm confused..... are you saying my comment makes "the general law abiding gun owning public look bad"?
Blogs: 0 (Add) Vehicle: 2002 F-150, 2005 Yamaha Joined: Jun 2005 Member # 118 From: Andrews AFB, Maryland Visit Gallery
Posted
- December 5 2008 : 4:04p
I suggest the Taurus 1911 if you're going that route. I've pumped about 3000 rounds of random different ammo through it trying to make it jam, but it just won't do it.
Blogs: 2 (View) Vehicle: 2000 Lightning Joined: Sep 2005 Member # 275 From: New Orleans LA. Visit Gallery
Posted
- December 5 2008 : 4:14p
Quote:
So I'm confused..... are you saying my comment makes "the general law abiding gun owning public look bad"?
^^^I am not saying that.
I am saying that these anti-gun nuts (people) go searching on alot of forums looking quotes like the one you stated above. I know a couple of these anti-gun people mostly through alot of gun forums I visit and they have amitted that they do go searching on forums looking for comments they can exploit. Hell even one of them is one is a good friend.
Now we do disagree on gun control and who should have access to gun. We have had discussions about it and we both accept each other opinion. I happen to agree with some of the stuff he beleaves and vice versa.
Blogs: 0 (Add) Vehicle: 2004 F250 7.3 PSD 4x4 Joined: Jun 2007 Member # 2917 From: South Yunder Western Au
Posted
- December 6 2008 : 3:09a
A Texans idea of arms control.........is being able to hit the bullseye 9 outta 10 with his Colt Peacemaker!
Whatever you do - don't get one of them old Browning .32 semi autos (Fabrique Nationale Arms DeGuerre) - I had one for cash payrol duties many years ago - it it couldn't hit the side of a barn with a hand full of wheat, would a done better to throw the amo box at any robber!
Seriously - not much beats a Glock 9 mm semi auto, but nuthing beats actually being able to point it straight!
Practice practice & practice some more.
Failing that a .357 Win Mag Smith & Wesson revolver.
Blogs: 0 (Add) Vehicle: 2001 Ford Lightning Joined: May 2005 Member # 7 From: Santa Clarit CA Visit Gallery
Posted
- December 7 2008 : 8:44a
Personally I think if this is used for home security a .357 is way too much gun. The problem being is if you miss your target that bullet is going out thru your house into someone elses house and could kill a child or innocent person. VERY DANGEROUS WEAPON. Even if you hit your target it could also continue to go out of your house and be a loose bullet.
As far as home defense there is nothing like a shotgun. You wont miss your target and when an intruder hears that loading mechanism it will scare the hell out of him. There is no mistaking the sound a a shotgun loading a round. Plus a shotgun wont go outside your home.
I dont know what the laws are in Texas but as far as carrying a weapon in California it is against the law to carry a concealed weapon and you cant get a permit. It is ok to carry one in a holster in clear view but cops get very nervous and while they cannot arrest you for having it they will arrest you for disturbing the peace by the fact that your weapon is making everyone else uncomfortable.
Lastly if you want a hand gun I suggest a 7MM magnum and take a home defense class. Thats what I did and they teach you all the laws in your state concerning killing someone in or outside your home and all laws for carrying it and transporting it in your car. They will make you proficient in the usage of the weapon until you are able to put 2 rounds in 5 people at different distances and different light sources in 3 seconds from a draw Consistantly.
Blogs: 0 (Add) Vehicle: 2004 F250 7.3 PSD 4x4 Joined: Jun 2007 Member # 2917 From: South Yunder Western Au
Posted
- December 7 2008 : 6:56p
Greeze - I reckon your right about the .357 Mag revolver...being too much gun for use in the home. (Down here our homes are mostly double brick = 8 inches of baked clay however, not the timber frame & plasterboard + cladding exterior, so much).
However,
That same revolver will quite happily fire .38 special rounds - the caliber of choice for many years for police forces around the globe because they don't tend to carry.
That way you have the best of both worlds - a .38 Special for inside the home and a .357 Mag if you have to use something with enough kinetic energy to stop "Mr T" or the Incredible Hulk or Arnie Swartzenegger.
No denying the effectiveness of a shotgun - but i think the thread was about a handgun for home defense?
A double barrel shotgun - with the barrels sawed off however, might be the untimate home protection conceilable carry weapon!
Blogs: 0 (Add) Vehicle: 2004 F250 7.3 PSD 4x4 Joined: Jun 2007 Member # 2917 From: South Yunder Western Au
Posted
- December 8 2008 : 9:30p
Quote:
I never knew a .357 could use .38 special rounds. Thats awesome.
Greeze, I never knew that either - until I was victim of a cruel trick bye a couple shooting buddies many years ago, who just happened to have a .357 S&W
They took the .357 out spotlighting rabbits (vermin) etc one night, and unbeknowns to me had loaded 2 x .38 specials rounds into the first 2 chambers, and a hand loaded souped up .357 mag round into the 3rd cylinder.
We stopped and they took a turn each at firing a round into a tree as "target practice"....it looked pretty easy to me, not much recoil, and the sound wasn't too loud, - so like an idiot - I took my turn much to their merriment!
I still recall the blinding muzzel flash from all the extra ignited powder exiting the muzzel from the souped up magnum round, and the thunderclap makin my ears ring, and the recoil put both arms behind my head and sat me on my butt on the ground.
Obviously I wasn't ready for such a big bang....and like them had been standing flat footed etc.
They got a good laugh outta it, at my expense.
At first I honestly figured in that split second when everything was going haywire that there had been a chamber explosion or primer failure / backfire or something and that I was going to be wounded in some way - maybe blinded or something & hand or hands blown off...
When I finally accepted I was still alive and unhurt, I queried what happened with my round, to be so different from the first two, - and my two mates "fessed up" that they had set me up pretty good.
They showed me the first 2 x .38 special empty casings and the 3rd magnum casing.
Essentially the .357 is just a elongated .38 casing and yes there's a fraction smaller diameter but it's in the hundredths of an inch range, so both casings will slide easily into the cylinder of the revolver because of the built in expansion tolerances machined into the cylinder.
Also - the projectile - the couple hundredths of an inch extra diameter of the .38 is within the copper crush tolerances of the rifling lands within the .357 barrel - so the projectile will force it's way down the .357 barrel - albeit pressures do go up a little but still no where near the pressures of the .357 mag round - so well within the capability of the .357 SW breach & frame to cope.
Thus you can fire a .38 Special round out of the longer length cylinder of a .357 revolver, and the fatter .38 special projectile will travel down a slightly thinner .357 caliber barrel.
Where people have to be carefull is to NOT try the opposite, i.e putting a 357 magnum into a old .38 special snub nose revolver.
The cylinder is too short to take the longer .357 round, and even if it could be loaded, the breach and frame aren't built to take those kind of pressures.
I am aware of a case here - where I believe a policeman, (involved in a local target pistol club & experienced in reloading and interior / exterior ballistics)) comitted a murder, using a old police issue .38 special service revolver, into which he loaded a specially prepaired, hand loaded round using a .38 special case & used a projectile suited to a .357 magnum.
The coroner and police ballistics revovered and analysed what they believed to be a .357 caliber projectile from the murdered guys head where he was shot point blank in the temple, while sitting at the wheel of his car, having just arrived home from work and sitting in his driveway - his wife & kids waiting inside for dad to walk in thru the door.
He never did.
The police leading the investigation (probably the same policeman who pulled the trigger) made "the assumption" such a caliber projectile must have come from a .357 hand gun. (as you would unless you knew of any other possibilities, ballistically speaking).
Becase our gun laws are so tight, and all conceilables either issued to police, security, military or licensed pistol club members, ALL licensed .357 magnum handguns were called in by police ballistics branch as part of the murder investigation....and test fired into ballistic gel in order to find a ballistic match for the murder projectile.
No match was ever found...
Either - the gun was a black market unlicensed .357 OR.... it was a specially hand loaded .357 projectile in a 38 special case, fired from a .38 special police issue S&W service weapon.
Anyway the trial case progressed with much fan fare in the press, and one crown witness dissapeared and a second was found murdered! The first one likely ended up in a lobster trap with no rope.
At the murder trial - a crown witness, when cross examined by defense council - confessed to the murder!
Under our laws - this raised the issue of "sufficient doubt" - for the judge to have to direct the jury to aquit, and at the same time - the crown witness for the prosecution, who confessed while under oath, cannot be charged with the crime, basically a law similar to your 5th amendement where you can't self incriminate while a crown witness.
Hence murder never solved - to this day some 10 years later
"Interestingly" within a few months of the Murder case ending so spectacularly with no conviction at all, the state police authority - decided to retire ALL .38 special S & W revolvers from active duty - and tendered them off - to the Police Department in India of all places.........hence the likely murder weapon left the country...making any conviction now, basically impossible.
Weapons of choice now for the police force are 9 mm Glocks and Sigma semi autos which replaced all the .38 S & W's.
Reason I believe the guy was murdered by a policeman is a little long - but revolves around what this guy did in the 6 months prior to his murder - which was known to me.
Basically he was a middle aged father / husband with zero criminal convictions, what our police term a "cleanskin" - probably not even a speeding fine - a model citizen if you like.
He was a licensed firearm owner who had a small range of rifles and shotguns all licnesed to himself. He also belonged to the local pistol club and had a couple handguns licensed to himself - but these unlike his rifles etc were classed as "firearms range restricted" on his license, and were a .22 cal and a .44 cal
He didn't happen to own a .357 cal in either rifle or handgun. (The caliber he was supposedly murdered with).
Due to a loophole within our then >100 year old firearms act based on earlier Brittish firearm acts, there was no differentiation in the act between a long arm (rifle or shotgun) and a hand gun, all were just classified under the act as "firearms". (I an interesteing but relevant anomally - a loaded round of ammunition under the same act is also classified as a "firearm", for the purposes of the act.
As you may kow we have very restrictive firearms laws - where you must be licensed to own any firearm and only rifles or shotguns can be owned, UNLESS you are a member of a pistol club with an approved firing range, and then, those hand guns are ONLY licensed for use at the range. It's even an offense to be caught driving anywhere with the handguns in your vehicle, except between your house and the approved club firing range, or your house and the gunsmiths shop to get it/them repaired if required.
Well - the loophole in our old firearms act - was that there was no differentiation between long arms and hand guns...the control of handguns was done entirely by local police "regulations" made up by the police force, in how they would administer the act.
In the 150 odd years of white settlement - no one had ever challenged the police departments right to "make up rules" about how the act would be administered by the police....meaning that basically they could decide on a whim whether you got a firearms license at all.
In the 6 months before he was murdered in his car in his driveway - with a single gunshot to the head from what's presumed as a .357 magnum, this guy had actually challenged for the first time ever in our history - our old firearms act.
This is how he did it!
He applied for a firearms license at his police station for what you might call an "open carry permit" for one of his currently "range restricted" handguns.
Under the police firearms "regulations" - the police declined his application (Because under their in house regulations - they would only allow Police, Security guards doing cash transfers i.e armed guards & Pistol club members to own a handgun) and they declined his request, under their internal regulations, which are NOT LAW as the Firearms ACT defines, instead the regs are just an Police Internal administrative guide, as to how the Act should be implemented.
This guy lodged an appeal against the Police decision to to deny him his application, be heqard by a Judge - and, in that situation, the Judge can ONLY rule - by whats in the Firearms ACT - the police regulations have no basis in legal standing, in court.
Here's a guy who has no criminal record, & is licensed for long arms and handguns (albeit thehand guns are "range restricted") appealing against a decision to deny his further fireamrs lisense application when under the old act - there is no legal difference between a long arm and handgun..
The Judge would have no choice under law but to find in his favour.
This would set a new legal precedent, where ANY aussie citizen would then have almost the SAME rights that the US constitution affords to all US citzens, the right to bear arms.
Our govt & police could NOT afford for this to happen and set a new legal precedent where all our citizens could then demand the right thru appeal - to thwart the police regulations currently stopping us from carying conceilable weapons, albeit licensed to do so.
This is how the Police thwarted his attempt and why he was murdered by a policeman with his police issue .38 special revolver firing a .357 hand loaded projectile to fool the ballistics investigation.
Some 3 weeks after the lodging of the appeal against denial of his open carry license application for his handgun, there was a knock at his door one night.
It was the police with a warrant to search his premises for
Quote:
Unlicensed Firearms"
Knowing that he has a valid license for all of his rifles, shot guns and range restricted pistols, he figured he had nothng to fear and it must be a mistake of some sort.
During the search of his house ONE particular officer claimed to have found a loded round of .357 mag ammunition and he had no licensed firearms of that caliber - not rile or handgun.
The guy claimed - he was "fitted up / framed" and that the round wasn't his - and that one of the policemen must have brought it with him into the house in his pocket.
He was charged with "being in posession of an unlicensed firearm" because under the old act any loaded round of ammo - is calssified as a firearm, and because he didn't have a license for any weapon of that caliber, - he was technicaly "in posession of an unlicensed firearm" according to the act.
The police arranged for a speedy expedited hearing of the firearms charge against him and their case was heard before his appeal case.
He was convicted of being in posession of an unlicensed firearm.
When he went to his appeal case hearing the Police Firearms branch claimed that because of his convition for being in posession of an unlicensed firearm he was now not "a fit and proper person" under the act, to hold a firearms license, which is why they denied his application for the open carry license for his handgun.
The Judge upheld the Police firearms branch position.
Mr model citizen, father & husband now has himself a criminal conviction for a firearms related offence.
All because he became "an enemy of the state" by trying to set a legal precdent that would heave enabled West Aussies - to carry handguns with an apropriate firearms license and been very much like their US couterparts under the US constiution.
The guy was so angry about what happened - that he figured the policeman who fitted him up / framed him must be corrupt, so he started investigation into his involvement in the towns drug scene and got too close to the truth - and was murdered as described.
It doesn't pay to become "an enemy of the state" in any of the old British jurisdictions, like Australia - when there are murderers working within the police service.
We don't have any right to "bear arms" and we never will have,
What amazes me, is that you guys in electing Obama have just apparently joined us downunder - in willingly giving up the constitutional rights to firearm ownership, that your forebears fought and died to afford you, in that constiution - which we lack!.
You have effectively just allowed yourselves to now be forced to live within the police state that we find ourselves living in....where there is no justice, and state sanctioned murder is a fact of life and your rights under the constiution are neing eroded daily.
You will suffer the same bans on guns, confiscation of guns, gun buy back scemes etc etc - that we have enduired in the last 10 years.
Our gun rights (what little we had) have been so eroded, that now - Greezes suggestion to scare someone by the racking sound of a pump action shotgun, as home defense initiative, cannot happen here - all semi auto and pump action firearms are on the "banned list".
Likely what you will end up with, is similar to what we have, - the right to a bolt action .22 pea shooter - or break open double barrel 12 gauge and a pistol or two for use at the range if you are in training for a olympics game contest involving pistols and an active member of an approved competition firing range.
To get those restricted pistols, you will have to have a completely clean criminal record and be a model upstanding citizen and NOT be prepared to stand up to the man, for your legal rights, - or challenge the system in any way, where you might actually beat them at their own game.
Trust me they don't take kindly to it! Welcome to the brave new world - of one world government!
Blogs: 0 (Add) Vehicle: 2001 Ford Supercrew Joined: Dec 2006 Member # 1638 From: League City Texas Visit Gallery
Posted
- December 8 2008 : 10:26p
Thanks for the replies guys i put a pistol on the back burner for now. I have a shotgun, just kind of unwieldy around the house with the length and all. I may look for a pawn shop model I can cut down.
fly west, i have read recently about the gun related crime stats in your country, with the firearms restrictions ya'll have. any truth to that?
Blogs: 0 (Add) Vehicle: 2004 F250 7.3 PSD 4x4 Joined: Jun 2007 Member # 2917 From: South Yunder Western Au
Posted
- December 9 2008 : 6:34a
There is a lot of truth in the fact that our gun related crime stats are way up - when compared to yours, on a per head of population basis.
Statistically ours look low - but we only have 20 million entire population compared to the uSA at 280 million.
The population disparity can make our gun related crime stats look "low" - we only have a handfull of gun related murders in the 6 states each year - and that seems like a small number compared to US gun related deaths and injurys....but again ours looks distorrted because we have such a small population.
The screwed up thing is - that when guns are outlawed - only outlaws have guns - virtualy zero murders are solved withthe gun licensing system - basically law abiding people who qualify for a gun license, don't go round murdering others.
It's the criminals who get hold of unlicensed or unregistered guns, to do their dirty work. And then all the gun licensing n thw world is of little help or use in slving the crime.
In reality I think a LOT of valuable police resources are often wasted bringing in all the licensed calibre / make brand of guns that are suspected of being a murder weapon and testing them ballistically for a match to the muder projectile. All this dies is exclude a whole heap of basically honest law abiding gun owners from the investigation.
Ok - statistically maybe it eliminates 90% of the "possible" murder weapons in the country from the investigation...and from a police work perspective maybe thats a good thing - but without finding the actual murder weapon which is invariably a black market unlicensed firearm - the police are then left with little to go on.
Most of our gun related murders are solved by good old fashioned police foot slogging following up leads of someone who knows something they havent revealed etc..and the actual weapon and ballistics are put together after the rest of the crime is solved - Licensing on it;s own is VERY wastefull of resources and solves very very few cases.
The downside of such strict control - is that the crims feel almost invoncible - they KNOW that the likelihood of confrontying anyone else bearing a weapon is zero to none.
Most of our police do NOT carry a weapon on the beat - it is ONLY if they are doing cash escorts of security armoured vans etc that they would issue themselves an auto handgun now days.
OK if they are in pursuit f a known felon with unlicensed firearm convictions etc they would then arm themselves vbefore going out - but as a generalisation - when you meet a policeman here he isnot carrying a weapon.
For example - a traffic stop - here at least you would nopt expect to see an armed policeman - he might have a long maglight torch, maybe a tazer, a 2 way radio in his belt etc and cuffs of course but its unusual enough that when you Do happen to see a oliceman with a sidearm that people make comment about it (oooh - look - that policeman has a gun - there must be something serious going down).
We still get the typical liquor store hold up.....stealing the contents of the till, some booze and smokes...
But our robber will come in armed with a pinch bar - or long screw driver or maybe a syringe filled with blood (claiming it to be aids infected) and thats his hold up weapon of choice.
The liquor store owner won;t have a gun for self defence - maybe a baseball bat under the counter of ro0bbery is a regular thing.
Gun related crime tends to be reserved by crims for such things as armoured car heists or attempted bank robberys.
A security guard at a bank might have a sidearm...but I can't remember the last timeI actally saw one - heck i was at the local branch today with my 19 year old son, while hge applied for a personal loan for a car!
The most dangerous weapons in the whole place, were the pair of .38's the lady loans officer was pointing at me!
It is a double edged sword living in a world devoid of guns - yes - we feel safer on the streets becaise just about no one will openly display a weapon in public except cash transfer guards,andthe occasional policeman.
That said - any criminal who obtains a gun has almost unlimited power if he;s preapared to use it because the chances if anyone else in the vicinity having one are maybe 1 in 100,000 or less - so the bad guy is in control.
Worse - our police have an aversion to getting shot at!
You ring 911 (trple zero here downunder) and mention gun play you can bet the police will show after it is all over and they are just their to sweep up.
Wedo have the swat teams etc - and in a big threat situation - they can and do show up to do the actual shooting..
Here we recently had a policeman who lost his job - for discharging his firearm, when an offender tried to make good his escape in a vehicle by driving it at the police officer. The media got mobile phone video from a by stander and showed him drawing the weapon for self defense and discharging it once at the vehicle to get the driver to take evasive action and thus not run the policeman over.
Becauseit was on the national news - he lost his job....the court of public opinion thought gun play wasn't warranted in that situation....supposedly he should have run from the cars path rather than stand his ground and shoot.
I guess it's hard to comprehend somewhere that has a different firearm culture to that which you have in the USA!
What I'm trying to tell you guys - is yu don;t know how good you have it - and you might be about to lose it if the gn control lobby take sway in your nation with Obama in power as many are predicting.
Australian gun laws led to fewer deaths 14 December 2006 The risk of dying by gunshot has halved since Australia destroyed 700,000 privately owned firearms, according to a new study published today in the international research journal, Injury Prevention.
"Not only were Australia's post-Port Arthur gun laws followed by a decade in which the crime they were designed to reduce hasn't happened again, but we also saw a life-saving bonus: the decline in overall gun deaths accelerated to twice the rate seen before the new gun laws," says study lead author and Acting Head of the School of Public Health, Professor Simon Chapman.
"From 1996 to 2003, the total number of gun deaths each year fell from 521 to 289, suggesting that the removal of more than 700,000 guns was associated with a faster declining rate of gun suicide and gun homicide," said adjunct associate professor Philip Alpers, also from the School of Public Health at the University of Sydney. "This was a milestone public health and safety issue, driven by an overwhelming swing in public opinion, and promptly delivered by governments."
After 112 people were shot dead in 11 mass shootings* in a decade, Australia collected and destroyed categories of firearms designed to kill many people quickly. In his immediate reaction to the Port Arthur massacre, Prime Minister John Howard said of semi-automatic rifles and shotguns: "There is no legitimate interest served in my view by the free availability in this country of weapons of this kind… That is why we have proposed a comprehensive package of reforms designed to implement tougher, more effective and uniform gun laws."
As study co-author Philip Alpers points out: "The new legislation's first declared aim was to reduce the risk of similar gun massacres. In the 10½ years since the gun buy-back announcement, no mass shootings have occurred in Australia."
"On top of that, and despite the new gun laws not being designed to reduce gun suicide, domestic shootings, and the much less common 'stranger danger' individual gun homicides, firearm fatalities in the three largest categories - total firearm deaths, firearm homicides and firearm suicides - all at least doubled their previous rates of decline following the revised firearm legislation."
While the rates per 100,000 of total firearm deaths, firearm suicides and firearm homicides were already reducing by an average of 3 per cent each year until 1996, these average rates of decline doubled to 6 per centeach year (total gun death), and more than doubled to 7.4 per cent(gun suicide) and 7.5 per centeach year (gun homicide) following the introduction of new gun laws.
By 2002/03, Australia's rate of 0.27 firearm-related homicides per 100,000 population had dropped to one-fifteenth that of the United States.
The authors conclude that "The Australian example provides evidence that removing large numbers of firearms from a community can be associated with a sudden and on-going decline in mass shootings, and accelerating declines in total firearm-related deaths, firearm homicides and firearm suicides."
*International definitions of "mass shooting" and "mass homicide" range from 3 to 5 victims killed. To exclude most spousal and family violence killings, a "mass shooting" is defined here as one in which five or more victims are shot dead in proximate events.
Gun Deaths - International Comparisons Gun deaths per 100,000 population (for the year indicated):
Homicide Suicide Other (inc Accident)
USA (2001) 3.98 5.92 0.36 Italy (1997) 0.81 1.1 0.07 Switzerland (1998) 0.50 5.8 0.10 Canada (2002) 0.4 2.0 0.04 Finland (2003) 0.35 4.45 0.10 Australia (2001) 0.24 1.34 0.10 France (2001) 0.21 3.4 0.49 England/Wales (2002)0.15 0.2 0.03 Scotland (2002) 0.06 0.2 0.02 Japan (2002) 0.02 0.04 0
Data taken from Cukier and Sidel (2006) The Global Gun Epidemic. Praeger Security International. Westport.
It would seem that reducing the incidence of gun ownership has many benefits for society in general - including the reductions in gun related suicide
But does that REALLY tell the WHOLE story?
Good questions to ask & answer would be:-
Has the incidence of suicide by other means (hanging monoxide poisoning drug overdises etc gone UP since guns were banned and if so - by how much?
Yes - we have reduced gun related crime in Australia - and now we are dealing with an epidemic of such dispicable crimes as:-
"pensioner bashings"...old folks retired and living alone in their homes now subject to "violent intruder bashings" for their life savings, 70+ year old grandmothers raoed in their beds etc.
All we have reallydone is ALTER the crime stats to make gun related crime look much better - but it has come at a huge and largely unreported ncrteasei other forms of violent crime and suicide.
People are still people - they will still kill each other and themselves at much the same rate - they will jus resort to using "non gun related" weapons.
A really insidious crime of late, for some unknown reason popular among the youth - while out drinking at hotel's and night clubs now is called "glassing".
Glassing is the practice of smashing your glass on the edge of the table or bar and permanently disfiguring the other persons face with it, by repeatedly punching the person in the face with the broken base section and it's jaged edges, aiming to do the maximum facial damage possible in as rapid a time as possible.
This happens every weekend at a hotel here in Perth Western Australia.
It is NOT just males doing it to other males either - it s now seemingly acceptable social behaviour to do it to females if they accept free drinks, & then subsequently fail to put out!
Yes - males will glass the face of young good looking women frequently and now women are startying to do it to the men & each other.
I don't now what our worlds comming to!
I know - no one would EVER consider smashing a glass and shoving it in my face, if when he smashed the glass I drew a .357 and blew his fr!cken head off first!
I reckon the "frequency of glassing attacks" would drop to zero overnight, if the chances were that someone was carrying!
As it is - the govt are thinking of elgislating for all hotels and clubs etc to have to serve alcohol now in plastic cups to try and stem the glassing attacks incidence.
Sorry - looks like I've strayed a bit from the topic...
Blogs: 0 (Add) Vehicle: 2004 F250 7.3 PSD 4x4 Joined: Jun 2007 Member # 2917 From: South Yunder Western Au
Posted
- December 9 2008 : 6:47p
Back in the day (before the gun bans and buy backs etc) - I used to own an old marlin lever gun in saddle carbine that was chambered for .45 US govt.
Back then I used to work in railways engineering and our fettlers (line maintenance workers) would use a "velocity railgun" powered by blank US Govt .45/70 brass to fire a round hardened steel cylinder thru the web of any proken rails - to attach a pair of fish plates to hold the joint closed until it could be thermit welded!
I would get al my .45/70 brass for free from the guys with the velocity railgun punches, who would save the emptys - they are sich a big round and our pacific peso so weak that each shell was worth about a buck a peice!
I'd load them ol blackpowder rounds (that was one of the cartridges that Custers men were using back at the battle of the little big horn) and load them suckers in the Marlin lever gun up with new smokeless nitrocellulite powder and 450 grain projectiles.
That gun would knock you outta the saddle with recoil if you weren't ready for it - I couldn't use if from horseback unless the horse had ear muffs on.
It would shoot straight thru saplings 8 inches in diameter and thru a double clay brick wall 8 inches thick - just punch a hole the size of your fist out the other side.
Probably the best pig hunting gun ever made for thick scrub - would even drop the asiatic water buffalo in his tracks down here if you placed your shot!
Not much good out past 150 yards - I still miss that ol lever gun.
I can't even imagine firing that round in a revolver like that one in the vid clip - thats just awesome.
Blogs: 10 (View) Vehicle: JAKD 07 HD F-250 Joined: May 2005 Member # 27 From: Virginia Visit Gallery
Posted
- December 9 2008 : 7:16p
Quote:
Originally posted by Flywest
It would shoot straight thru saplings 8 inches in diameter and thru a double clay brick wall 8 inches thick - just punch a hole the size of your fist out the other side.
Probably the best pig hunting gun ever made for thick scrub - would even drop the asiatic water buffalo in his tracks down here if you placed your shot!
Not much good out past 150 yards - I still miss that ol lever gun.
I can't even imagine firing that round in a revolver like that one in the vid clip - thats just awesome.
Cheers
That's about right. I dropped a Black Bear in Alaska with my Marlin (Guide Gun) 45-70 at 50 yards. Took out a lung and had had about a fist sized exit wound. It still managed to travel about 300 yards. Took 18 hours to find it since it started raining shortly after I shot it and brush was really thick. The "Pucker" factor was definately high that night.
Possible Pistol purchase
Posted - December 4 2008 : 7:54p
