Firearm questions

[OSP1340]

After the old man shooting the criminal thread I thought about it for a couple days and decided to see what you guys thought.

I have a couple questions for you guys here.

1) Should the gun laws be more relaxed here?
(more firearm types allowed with less restrictions)

2) Concealed carry laws. (with proper training and qualification required)

3) Castle doctrine for here in WA Castle Doctrine in the United States - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

I am not trolling here with this thread.
I am very serious about firearms and self defence with them.

[kenty]

leave the system as is, it is confusing as hell, and its as hard as it needs to be i have gone through both processes for both low power and high power rifles put it this way you chase your tail alot
Posted via Mobile Device

[Cam]

1) Should the gun laws be more relaxed here?
(more firearm types allowed with less restrictions)

I like to think so. I have no doubt there would be a short-term rise in fuckwits hurting themselves, though that is simply natural selection doing its job.

2) Concealed carry laws. (with proper training and qualification required)

I'd have no problem with this either.

3) Castle doctrin for here in WA Castle Doctrine in the United States - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

I completely adore this.

[HotelBushranger]

1) Only slightly, to make it slightly less ridiculous.

2)No

3)No

And I'm a big firearms person too, so don't think I'm one of those knee-jerk reaction, paranoid hippy types. Just don't think it's necessary to own firearms in ordinary, day to day life.

Bet you hated givin up all your guns when you came to Australia eh OSP?

[The Saint]

I have a couple questions for you guys here.

OK, shoot. Owait hold your fire! HOLD YOUR FIRE!!!11

Fuck dude, that was just a figure of speech.

OK, go ahead.

1) Should the gun laws be more relaxed here?
(more firearm types allowed with less restrictions)

No.

2) Concealed carry laws. (with proper training and qualification required)

What's your question?

3) Castle doctrin for here in WA Castle Doctrine in the United States - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

What's your question?

[OSP1340]

Just as an example here are a few of the firearms I owned in the US.

The first two are my AR's

The one on the left is a .223 (5.56) AR15 with a 11.5 in bbl
The one on the right is a 9mm AR with a 10.5 in bbl



And my "sniper rife" It is a FN SPR A1A .308 with a fixed 10X SS scope

[The Saint]

Come on man, posting pics of your dick on the forum is NOT COOL

lc

[Maxo]

No, no, no.



edit:
what the fuck do you need an ar-15 in your house for?

[HotelBushranger]

See, shit like that just isn't necessary unless you plan on waging a war against someone.

[OSP1340]

OK, shoot. Owait hold your fire! HOLD YOUR FIRE!!!11

Fuck dude, that was just a figure of speech.

OK, go ahead.

No.

What's your question?

What's your question?

The questions were would you support a CCW law and a Castle doctrine law.

[Rock]

Good questions...and no doubt will raise some hackles on both the 'for' and 'against' side of the argument.

All I can say that when I was a kid (in the '70's), firearms were in pretty much every house in the town I grew up in. Crime was pretty much non-existant. Never had to worry about locking doors, windows, cars etc (not that locking the cars in those days did much good). If you broke into a local house, you could expect to get shot if the owner was home. Sure there was crime around...just not much. Then again, people tended to respect other peoples and public property a bit more.

Anyway, personally I believe that we live in a 'free' country, and as such should have the right to choose. Shooting is good fun, and the defence of this country used to rest on the ability of the common aussie to shoot accurately (just ask Field Marshall Rommel). Obviously you should need to be able to pass suitablitity testing, meet licensing requirements, storage requirements and competency requirements, much like the armed forces weapons users do.

As for the 'laws' regarding self-defence, I strongly believe that you should have the right to defend your property, family and self from those entering your property uninvited with the 'intent' to steal/cause harm (the two seem linked these days) with whatever means at your disposal, not with equal force or whatever the term is. If the crims don't want to get shot/stabbed or have a Slazenger V600 (my personal fav) wrapped around their head, then don't trespass. Easy.

I am a single parent with 3 young children - you break in (or try to) I couldn't give a rats arse what the 'law' says (if I have time to read it before hand), I will defend with whatever force I have available..including 'lethal'. I'd rather go to gaol than bury my kids or visit them in hospital.

Personally I commend the old man for his bravery, giving fair warning and defending with all his might. I would have done the same.

I dare say that if most homes were 'armed' with a licensed firearm, a trained user and laws supporting the right of home/self defence, the crims would perhaps think twice. At the moment, they can pretty much do what they want knowing all they will get is a slap on the wrist or a holiday in a local resort (gaol).

[aussieman]

with the gun laws as they are now you must have them locked in a secure cabinet, i fail to see how any one would have the time to unlock the cabinet and load a gun with an intruder crashing through the front door of your home . think about the time it would take, 5 or 6 seconds and the intruders are on top of you, so the only way to defend your self and home is to have the gun sitting on your lap ?? if so and you get up to go make a coffee and you leave the gun on the chair along side of you where your kid can pick it up and good night some one , i think more people will live with the laws as they are now

[The Saint]

Concealed carry: no, not necessary
Castle doctrine: no, not necessary

[shmoo]

I am a single parent with 3 young children - you break in (or try to) I couldn't give a rats arse what the 'law' says (if I have time to read it before hand), I will defend with whatever force I have available..including 'lethal'. I'd rather go to gaol than bury my kids or visit them in hospital.

yeah cause your 3 kids would be so much better off with you in goal.

Also, you ARE allowed to defend yourself/your property. Its just that you can only use "reasonable force." The problem is that your only told what is "reasonable" after the fact, by a court.

[Johnno]

What possible use is there for a gun like that in a city?

self defense doesn't require the intruder to be shot 800 times a minute.

[HotelBushranger]

a trained user

This ^ is good. Problem is, without screening for mature, responsible people, you're gonna get the same people who hoon around in big hodded up cars, i.e. the immature, aggressive, irresponsible people now going around with loaded firearms. Recipe for disaster.

[Rider]

YES to all 3 questions.

I say fuck it YOU break into someones house and you get shot, though luck.

[The Saint]

What's that got to do with walking around the Galleria with a concealed pistol?

[Rider]

OK the number 2 migh not be a good idea BUT it would be cool

[Satan1]

What's that got to do with walking around the Galleria with a concealed pistol?

Someone pisses you off, you invite them round for a "coffee".