Civilian Owned Firearms, what do we think?

[Banshee]

Originally Posted by aido_3927

Yeah my .223 sends them down at a bit over 3000fps, smacks the shit out of bunnies and foxes! And it's pretty much just a centerfire .22 lol



Sorry, you're wrong mate, it's an AK-47.

You seem to have the old version. Here is this years update:

[aido_3927]

Originally Posted by Banshee

You seem to have the old version. Here is this years update:

Dammit! It's too hard to keep up with the media these days... They're always one misinformed step ahead

[Dustbowl]

Originally Posted by Banshee

You seem to have the old version. Here is this years update:

Baaahahahaha

[Shertim]

Excellent, the AR15 glue gun with the extra glue capacity

[AroGantz]

Originally Posted by Shertim

Excellent, the AR15 glue gun with the extra glue capacity

Name me one reason you would need the capacity for that much glue?

[ssgp2]

Guns are tools, they do not assault or kill, people do.
Ignorance about firearms is the problem, media ,politicians,hollywood,etc

Look at the different laws in countries around the world and there is no coherence in what is perceived to be "dangerous" and not acceptable in the hands of civilians.
EX; suppressors, some countries totally ban them with heavy prison time for possession, and some government will promote them to be used by hunters or target shooters.

Do not confuse social problems with the presence of firearms.

You Tube

[Banshee]

And don't forget lack of consistency within governments as well...

I can't find the link at the moment, but in the US, they are looking at banning certain firearms as they are "unsuitable for providing personal protection" & give a list of features that render them unsuitable. Large magazine, pistol grip etc. The same government when tendering for firearms for it's officers gave a spec for the features required for the officers personal protection in the firearms & was almost if not completely identical to the list that says they are unsuitable for non-governmental use.