Thread: Only in America

Well I guess a lot of fellas must have been soldiers back then The Klashnikov has been around since 1948. Farmers could have them and M16's provided the property was over 5000 acres. Now they are banned except if disabled and stored correctly.
Back when I was a kid they were common. So to answer your question Graeme. Yes Really.

Originally Posted by rustynail

Well I guess a lot of fellas must have been soldiers back then

Thanks, Rusty.

I worked for a while in a civvy job in the army in the late sixties, and was well aware that a lot of stuff came back "unofficially" from Vietnam. One AK47 finished up in a museum, as in "If you donate it to a museum we will not have to charge you."

I am in Tasmania and fully automatic weapons were always totally banned here, and I thought similar bans applied in other states. Never heard of the 5,000 acre differentiation.

We live and learn.

Graeme, To me, "totally banned," means in any form. Even today, a licenced firearms collector can have an M16 or an AK47 or any other Assualt Rifle provided the muzzle is plugged and the bolt halved. Well that's a relief isn't it? Saw off the muzzle and braze or weld the bolt, a quick hit with an angle grinder and your back in business. Probably not quite as accurate with a sawn off barrel but plenty of fire power to make up the difference. I hope the collector has a bloody good safe and never turns rogue.
You would be surprised what is still out there, not to mention how it got here and in what numbers. The buy backs and moratoriums didnt make the problem go away. More 6" PVC pipe and end caps were sold during that period than any other. I guess people sleep better knowing our politicians have our best interests at heart and never cease to remind us.

Originally Posted by AlexS

What are the odds of a good guy with a gun stopping a bad guy with a gun?

Most people, apart from a few in the army or a very few police, have never had a gun pointed at them, and most legitimate gun owners have never shot a human. On the other hand, a few psychopaths have previously shot people, or are so drugged out or mentally ill that to shoot someone else is no big deal. To take the decision to kill someone else, even if you are in danger yourself, is very difficult. Even in a military firefight, on average only about 1/3 of soldiers fire effective kill shots.

So, if it's an an armed, drugged up nutter with a weapon pointed at you, versus you, a legitimate gun owner, who has to get your weapon from its hiding place and then aim. who is going to get shot? And where is your gun going to end up?

There was a 20/20 like show many years ago that did a piece on a university that was testing the armed bystander theory that guns save lives... They assigned one preparator that would pull the gun in a group situation and a few in the group would have a stowed weapon also. I think it ended up being no one took out the shooter, even those who claimed they had handgun experience. Shot a few innocents but that's about it.

Once the adrenaline hits the blood, you have no hope of holding a gun steady and aiming it, and then trying to pull the trigger with a glitchy finger. I'd say that's why seppo cops are trained to fire until they've emptied their 17 shot clip. They hope one with hit the mark... Innocents be damned. And for them, get the gun out first and fire, worry about being wrong later...

No need to worry about the adrenaline. Most people , these days, wouldn't be able to hold a gun steady anyway. Or know how to handle it, or how to open it, or how to load it, or how to cock it. All they could do would be throw it at you. God help us when push does come to shove.

Originally Posted by The Spin Doctor

Once the adrenaline hits the blood, you have no hope of holding a gun steady and aiming it, and then trying to pull the trigger with a glitchy finger. I'd say that's why seppo cops are trained to fire until they've emptied their 17 shot clip. They hope one with hit the mark... Innocents be damned. And for them, get the gun out first and fire, worry about being wrong later...

I'd agree with that. D1 in the USA is a rifle & pistol target shooter. One of the competitions they have is a 'Steel Action' shoot, where competitors have to shoot from within an area marked out on the ground at a number of targets, through various 'windows'. They are allowed 2 shots at each target, and are scored on both time taken and number of targets hit. Competitors may shoot the targets in any order, from anywhere in the area, and are monitored by a safety marshal for breaches like 'finger on trigger when moving' etc. They may use any rifle or pistol.
It was noticeable how few shooters, even those who do really well from fixed positions, were able to hit all, or even most of the targets when under time pressure and having to move. When, potentially, you have someone shooting back at you and you haven't shot at a person before, it's pretty unlikely you're going to shoot effectively.
It did make me feel better, though, that in the competition I saw, the only person who was able to hit all targets, and did so repeatedly, was a local cop.

I think that saying one lot of gun laws is
better than another is not very useful…. It’s more a matter of the quality of society and individuals involved

Maybe "effective" would be preferable to better. If a law is more effective than another it has some benefit. If a law places innocents at risk and has little effect on the lawless, it would be fair to assume the benefit is somewhat diluted. Our current situation has the general, law abiding population as the minority when it comes to gun ownwership, while the criminal element, per capita, are well and truely the majority and confident in knowing that whoever they wish to accost will be easy prey.
My Dad used to say to me, "You won't beat a bullet son." As a detective, he carried a pistol every day of his working life and knew how to use it. I asked him once, what would he do if the Force decided to disarm? His answer, "Quit."
My Grandfather was a sniper in WW1, his son, my Dad, was a sniper in WW11. Both crack shots. Grew up with guns, as did I. Just another tool on the farm. There if you need it.

Originally Posted by rustynail

Grew up with guns, as did I. Just another tool on the farm. There if you need it.

Just another tool. Also country background; On my twelfth birthday, like my brothers, cousins and most of my friends, I was given a rifle - a Lithgow 22 single shot - the girls were asked if they wanted one; two-thirds said "yes". Later graduated to 303's and shotguns - not the 410, that's your grandmothers. I was comfortable with and around guns - 22's, 303's and shotguns, never pistols.

At my first job, as a 16½ year old trainee accountant, the most junior person there, I was made "assistant pay clerk". Two of us had to accept the cash delivery from Mayne Nickless, count it into envelopes and then pay everyone. When I turned 18 I was told I had to do fire arms training. A couple of afternoon lectures by Federal police officer, an hour on a army small arms range and that was that. Bottom line:

• gun is to protect people, not property,
• hand the cash over, if necessary,
• If you shoot some one, hell of a lot of paper work.

I was given a Browning 32 pistol with a nine shot magazine, a box of 25 bullets and a "letter of carriage" and told to report to the range at 2.00 pm Saturday. I fired my allotted 25 shots over two distances - 5 and 10 yards, I think - an managed to hit the card a couple of times - never did hit the actual target - and got the all important certificate from the range master that I had fired all 25 shots, and went home. Accuracy? Somewhere between hopeless and worse.

Often wondered what I was supposed to do if we had a payroll hold up. Hand the cash over? Or go to the bosses safe and:

• Open the safe whose combination I did not know,
• Then open the bottom draw in the safe with a key that I did not have,
• Remove the pistol from that drawer,
• Then open the other bottom drawer with the other key that I did not have,
• Then get the magazines and bullets from that drawer,
• Then insert bullets in magazine and load pistol,
• Then read mind of masked man to determine whether he intended to shoot anyone,
• Then ...

Far easier to hand over the cash and call the lift so he could make his getaway.

Still wonder why I was sent for pistol "training".

Hate pistols. Give me a well tuned rifle any day. But a pistol comes in handy for close work in dangerous country.
A mate was camping with his wife in a remote area in NSW. At midnight, a bunch of bikies pulled up and decided he could take a hike while they made themselves known to his wife. He always carries a shotty and a pistol. When he came out of the tent, he was carrying them both. 10 in the shotty and five in the pistol. There were 7 bikies. He gave them the odds and they left without any further ado. I wonder how he would have got on if he had come out empty handed? Just saying.

Originally Posted by rustynail

Hate pistols. Give me a well tuned rifle any day. But a pistol comes in handy for close work in dangerous country.
A mate was camping with his wife in a remote area in NSW. At midnight, a bunch of bikies pulled up and decided he could take a hike while they made themselves known to his wife. He always carries a shotty and a pistol. When he came out of the tent, he was carrying them both. 10 in the shotty and five in the pistol. There were 7 bikies. He gave them the odds and they left without any further ado. I wonder how he would have got on if he had come out empty handed? Just saying.

Probably something similar to what happens in the US. A bunch of dead folks, good and bad.

If guns are readily available to the public, the scum bags have better access...

What I think is the biggest issue is law ENFORCEMENT. Todays cops are law investigate. After the fact, because the scum bag politicians keep cutting budgets. If the criminals can't breathe, you don't have crime.

If your crime is hunting other people you spend the rest of your life in jail, no exceptions. And you get to pay for it also, making items we import from china - t-shirts and underwear. If you refuse, you get a subsistence diet, thirty mins in the yard, and thrown in the ocean when you die. At least the fish will benefit from your scum bag life. I don't care if you're 12 or 102, you hunt others, you go away for the rest of your life. Better to kill them but we don't do that any more...

On a lighter note... If you are worried about scumbags breaking in... Have a few 2kg fire extinguishers placed around your home. If someone is trying to get in, wait till you can see their face and let them have it with a blast from the fire extinguisher. If the first blast doesn't blind and choke them, let them have it again - only one or two second blasts so you have some in reserve. Then smash them in the face with the butt of the extinguisher - harder the better. If, you're too genteel, then smash them in the knee or groin with the extinguisher. Either way they'll consider their predicament untenable and at the very least leave.

And when the cops come... The only thing you say (over and over): I was afraid for my LIFE, AND MY FAMIL'S. The perpetrator kept fighting. I stopped when they stopped trying to attack US.

Originally Posted by rustynail

A mate was camping with his wife in a remote area in NSW. At midnight, a bunch of bikies pulled up and decided he could take a hike while they made themselves known to his wife. He always carries a shotty and a pistol. When he came out of the tent, he was carrying them both. 10 in the shotty and five in the pistol. There were 7 bikies. He gave them the odds and they left without any further ado. I wonder how he would have got on if he had come out empty handed? Just saying.

I’m calling BS on your mate’s story!

Originally Posted by jack620

I’m calling BS on your mate’s story!

Please yourself. If you require confermation it can be arranged.