Why it's far better to shoot in Aus than the US

[MHD]

Gun totin photographers... I love this country
http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read. ... e=12377148

[sirhc55]

MHD - saw that last night and thought it would a great idea 200-400VR on the left shoulder and a Uzi on the right

[dooda]

In Canada we only need to carry brass knuckles or broken bottles.

[Oneputt]

A rather sad inditement on their society I'd say Mind you wherever I am out alone these days I stay alert.

[stubbsy]

I've just done a little stroll through the thread seems this guy has stirred up a hornets nest. What gets me is they're so matter of fact about gun ownership without any thought of the fact that its sole purpose is to maim or kill

[Nnnnsic]

I like my idea of packing an umbrella in a Feisol monopod, but you could always stick a sword or a very slim collapsable rifle barrel in the monopod, and then stick the remaining bits in a LowePro bag.

[lukeo]

Perhaps a new market for lowepro to expand into?

New Lowepro AW Gun Trekker

With clips to Hold a Tripod and a Hunting Rifle! Room for 5 lenses and a Magnum 44.

Scary scary stuff.

[MattC]

It is sad state of affairs when a society feels the need to arm itself. God, what a lucky country we live in.

The level of ignorance in that thread astounded me...

I have met a lot of gun owners over the years who own them for all of the wrong reasons and usually, these are the same people who have large dogs for personal protection. I sometimes wonder if they suffer from small (or limp) genitals, and are trying to compensate for their lack of masculinity. Take their guns or dogs away and they are impotent!

Now I am going to go finish of PP'ing of yesterdays shots, before I go out to take some more later this arvo.... sans guns - they can stay locked in the gun safe.

Happy Snappin'

Matt

[Onyx]

I must be outnumbered in this crowd... Most states in the US allow individuals to carry openly and/or concealed (with permits). What's astounding is the fact that states/cities that places restriction upon firearms are the ones experiencing crime problems. The ones that allow concealed (Alaksa, Vermont, etc) without permit have absolutely no problems with firearm related crimes.

Owning/carrying a firearm should not be a crime, only the negligent use of it should be. I personally would prefer the option of whether I can carry even if only for compensatory purposes.... rather than the govt in charge dictating that I should be a victim when confronted with an armed criminal. Banning guns merely makes them harder for the average joe to obtain one - while it does nothing to stop the criminal elements or firearms related crimes.

An armed society is a polite society.

[dooda]

Onyx,

I think that there is much more to it than this. I hear many stats about how states that have educated gun use have less crime, where states that restrict it have more problems. I think that it's a real stretch to connect the issues to the gun control laws. The fact is that most states that attempt to restrict gun ownership are states that have wicked bad crime issues by firearm as it is, and so the attempts to restrict gun use is simply an attempt to stem what caused the problem in the first place, the wreckless use of guns (too many guns in the system). Alaska and Vermont have low crimerates based on many other factors (geography etc).

Most Americans that defend or bring up stats like these are trying to defend their lust for power that involves gun ownership. In an ideal world we would have only the morally responsible in possession of guns, but that is simply impossible to govern as it is so subjective. Another thing that gun advocates will say is that if you invoke laws restricting my right to bear arms, you are only restricting the innocent people like me from getting guns, when in fact they have no plausible way of knowing any one person's intention when in pursuit of the said arms. So the answer then is to supply everyone with guns and hope that the good guys win, or atleast have a chance to win. I have friends that are staunch advocates of guns. When it comes right down to it, they use them to kill animals and shoot targets for fun and bloodlust. They never use them for protection. Guns inherently breed this mentality and it takes a disciplined mind indeed to not adhere.

That being said, I don't blame this fellow with expensive equipment to feel like carrying arms in the LA area. But it is a sad place that he feels that way, and makes me feel very lucky that I live somewhere I don't have to think about making that kind of decision.

I also think that he should have stilhettoes installed in his boots, that way he can take them by surprise.

[MHD]

guns are designed to kill... I dont want many people on this planet to have the option of deciding to (easily) take my life. Too many cases where some one who becomes emotional etc could do something silly... Like the school shootings...

I actually go way over the other side, I like the british system (or at least how it has been explained to me) where the cops do not carry weapons on thier person, just in the wagon but the offence of pulling a gun on a police officer is a very large one...

No I dont think we need projectile weapons capable of inflicting death and suffering on our fellow man to generate a polite society...

[stubbsy]

I don't want to get into a guns are good or bad debate sine it's an issue where people tend to hold strongly held & unchangeable views so I have only one more thing to say. Have you seen Bowling For Columbine (and yes, it's your usual slightly biased Mike Moore stuff)?

And Onyx - there's nothing wrong with "being outnumbered in this crowd" it's an important part of democracy that everyone has a chance to express their opinions. I thank you for expressing yours.

[dooda]

In the US it is problematic though. They were founded using guns. For many years they relied on them to protect their communities when there was no law enforcement. Militias kept the law, as military wasn't very speedy to solve conflicts either. They attained their freedom from the UK by everyday Joes owning guns and using them to protect themselves from unfair taxes and rule. Now the very trait that lead them to freedom causes more violent deaths than any other country 1000 times over. It must be noted that to eradicate a mentality embedded since a nations inception is more than a little difficult, and the situation that they find themselves in right now is a problematic one.

Imagine if someone came along and tried to tell you that you couldn't eat Vegemite anymore, or told me that I couldn't say 'eh' anymore because it was killing people. It wouldn't be that simple to fix...

Edit Stubbsy yoy beat me to the post. Mine is in response to MHD's statement.

[goodrich62]

We have this thing called the "Second Ammendment " to the Constitution that gives the populous the right to bare arms. The history of it can be debated but the founding fathers after just winning our freedom wanted to insure that a government could never supress the will of the people, they felt a well armed populous, even the one they just created, would insure it.
It may sound silly now it the age the F-18, Nukes and Abram's Tanks but that is where it started.
To paraphase John Hancock who signed is name larger then the others on our Declaration of Independence, When king George see's this I want him to be able to see who to hang without putting his specs on
I do not hunt, own a gun, and have not handled one since the service. Then I was trained to use it on people. I will never pick one up again but a population that does not have the right to "to own and bare arms" alows no check on total government control I think I'll skip on that
The original poster lives in a state, California, with one of the most restrictive gun laws if he was not joking if he did carry a gun unless he is a cop he would be breaking the law.
I think he was trolling for a joke and stired a s**t storm
As a previouse poster mentioned the areas with no or limited gun control laws have a lower insident of gun use for violent crime "the jacket is less likely attack a lamb if it could be a wolf.
I am not a gun freak but they have a saying " If guns are illegal then only criminals will have guns" sounds simple but what it say's is if you want to protect yourself you a criminal.
It may be stupid to the rest of the world but on the other hand one of the first things Hitler did in Germany was to remove the populous's right to bare arms.
Just my .02$

[goodrich62]

Sorry on this one:
"the jacket is less likely attack a lamb if it could be a wolf"

I ment:
"the jackal is less likely attack a lamb if it could be a wolf".

I have a mental picture of my windbreaker attacking a pair a wool pants in my draw

[Glen]

Goodrich, I'll watch out for your aggressive jacket if we meet Have you ever been to one of those little tropical islands with no cars, you walk barefoot everywhere and no one bothers to lock their hut? (last one just like that I went to was Koh Phi Phi, sadly no more) Well, Goodrich, Australia is sort of like that but bigger, so you can see why we have a different outlook than others in the world.



Slight exaggeration, but sort of explains our perspective. Yes we do have trouble spots, but not that bad

[gstark]

We have this thing called the "Second Ammendment " to the Constitution that gives the populous the right to bare arms.

Actually, it gives you the right to bear arms in defence of, either your country, or your property. It's certainly not a blanket right to simply carry a firearm.

[MHD]

Or the King of England!
You dont want the King of England coming now do you Marge?

[goodrich62]

Glen rote:

Goodrich, I'll watch out for your aggressive jacket if we meet Have you ever been to one of those little tropical islands with no cars, you walk barefoot everywhere and no one bothers to lock their hut? (last one just like that I went to was Koh Phi Phi, sadly no more) Well, Goodrich, Australia is sort of like that but bigger, so you can see why we have a different outlook than others in the world.

Yes I know I have traveled the world and want to cry over things now lost.
But for what ever the reason the US was born in violence and we choise to buck the tide of 2K years and claim "We can rule our self". We screw it up as often as not and get laughed at for GWB and Bubba Clinton and I may hate one or the other or both but I will back the fool we elected and
know 4 years from now I can vote the idiot out. I do not have to wait for him to die with all due pomp and circumstance.
Sorry but it is a trend we started before "She" loosened her reins on the rest of the empire we took them. But we paid a cost it heritage, history and in no little way knowledge and class but Freedom is Never Free.
I will alway's miss Queens Day and the bond to Royalty and the people but I pay the price.
I may be a Yank or a Wank but we are the first that said "No" to England you now rule yourself and pay homage to you heritage and I envy that tie but I also take pride in saying "NO" you will not take these rights that are self evident "Life, Liberty and thePursuit of Happiness" that was a novel consept in 1776
I will get off my soapbox now I have traveled the Pacific, Indian, Atlantic, Med and still want to get to the other of the 7 seas and would love to kick back on a beach but in the immortal words of Popeye " I am what's I am and that's all that I am"

Gary

Actually, it gives you the right to bear arms in defence of, either your country, or your property. It's certainly not a blanket right to simply carry a firearm.

Thats the rub who determins what is property and when it needs defence. Do we leave that call to the individual or the government me I tend to leave it to the government but I am not ready to say others are wrong only that we differ.
Sorry about the "bare" vs "bear" I always think of bear as I large animal that I want to get a shot at with my D70

[dooda]

Well put Goodrich. It is a subject I think that isn't really well understood by most, much less many young Americans that I have debated with as well.

[gstark]

Gary

Actually, it gives you the right to bear arms in defence of, either your country, or your property. It's certainly not a blanket right to simply carry a firearm.

Thats the rub who determins what is property and when it needs defence. Do we leave that call to the individual or the government me I tend to leave it to the government but I am not ready to say others are wrong only that we differ.
Sorry about the "bare" vs "bear" I always think of bear as I large animal that I want to get a shot at with my D70

No worries about the bare vs bear issue. I just felt an urge to point it out, although I could have had a lot of fun with it.

Regarding who makes that decision, I don't see that as an issue. First of all, I have a very unhealthy distrust of governments. Second, I know what's mine, and what needs (and is deserving of) protection.

And the government, and its opinion, can go to hell.

Third, I have an issue with people who are not mentally competent to hold a plastic knife or fork, carrying a weapon. That thought makes me feel very uncomfortable.

Having lived in California and Texas, I'm very familar with people carrying weapons, and I was quite taken aback, when I initially moved to the US, to hear people talking about their guns over the lunch table at work.

[pippin88]

I simply can't see how common gun ownership is a good thing.

Pro Gunners always argue restriction doesn't stop the criminals. So what I say, either way they have guns. And are you, as the home owner packing heat, willing to shoot someone, nay to grab your gun and shoot first, before the criminal can think, just to protect your property? Are you willing to potentially kill a human based on the fact he has entered your property? What if you've made a mistake? What if it's little billy from next door just completing a dare? Sure, he shouldn't be in your home, but is the crime worth death?

Then you come to the dramatic problem of opportunistic gun crime and accidental gun deaths. Easy access to guns allows many people who wouldn't otherwise have a gun to use one. That could be blowing their wife's / husband's brains out for an affair, or the desperate kid robbing the liquor store for some cash. I've heard many stories of drunk husbands pointing their guns at their wife, or even putting it in their mouth. How can making this sort of thing more likely or possible, be beneficial?

There are also cases fairly frequently of kids blowing their own or others brains out either by accident, or because they've lost the value the should inherently be placed on human life.

So you Pro Gunners say "These things wouldn't happen, because we would store our guns properly". Storing guns properly requries a safe bolted to structural members in the house and the ammo stored separately, with the gun not loaded. In a protection situation you don't have time to go to two parts of the house, including opening at least one safe. So you store it under the pillow and negate safe storage.

I just can't see how an armed society is a safer society. I would never think of walking around most American cities at night, for fear that I would be mugged and quite likely have a gun shoved in my face. In Australia, at least I can be a bit more confident that even if I am mugged, it probably won't be with a gun, a tool of death.

[dooda]

Pippin,

I would never think of walking around most American cities at night, for fear that I would be mugged and quite likely have a gun shoved in my face

That may be a little paranioa and hysteria speaking, I haven't been afraid very often and I lived in Houston, the 4th largest city. I've also spent significant time in LA and New York and didn't find myself being fearful very often, if at all. Obviously the particular area has something to do with that, so I'm talking within reason here. I could easily go out and find a place that makes me feel unsafe, but that isn't common sense.

Your point about proper storage is a good one though. No gun owner is going to store the ammo separatly in a safe, they keep them in close to their beds with ammo accessible and nearby. And this is part of the problematics, there is simply no way to make someone store them properly. They have laws and permits about concealing them, but what is that law worth. I knew a girl from Georgia who just decided to Hell with the law and carried her Glauch .40 in her purse because of safety. Will anyone catch her? Probably not. Do others do the same? Probably. The laws that they try and enact are too far reaching and impossible to logistically enforce. Let's say she was caught, could they possibly dream up a penalty stiff enough to stop her from doing it again?

I know a fellow whose parents lived in Louisiana backcountry and they got house jacked, tortured, raped and robbed (maybe he's lying who knows?) This is one reason why many want guns down there, they'd rather die fighting than be completely debased, and I can't say I blame someone after hearing that kind of story. I would gladly go down in gunfire than get raped and tortured etc. This fellow owns three pitbulls instead.

[gleff]

I find it amusing when an american says 'they don't have a gun problem in their great country'.

[goodrich62]

Dooda Wrote:

Well put Goodrich. It is a subject I think that isn't really well understood by most, much less many young Americans that I have debated with as well.

I don't think I've been called an old buzzard so politly refore
Not that I'm not
I will never say it out loud but I here my fathers voice "OH the youth of today". That "know it all" kid from the 60's is in here screeming in horror
And somewhere my farther is laughing his head off

[dooda]

Funny,

I say that because I served a Mormon Mission in France and spent every day over about two years give or take a month here and there with very conservative young Americans (aged 19-21 on average) and none of them could defend their right to bare arms effectively. They just didn't seem to understand what it meant, why it is the way it was. It was simply drilled into their brains and they never questioned it.

[goodrich62]

Dooda,
I talked to my 2 daughters both it thier early 20's and they also did not understand why it was there. It has become so major of an issue between the NRA on the right and the liberals on the left. Niether side go into the history it is accepted as holy rite on both sites good and bad.
Niether side looks at the reason it was put there was so the populous could protect themselves not only from each other but from governments both the US and Forign. And at the time it made perfect sence there was no money for a standing army and few major cities and poor communications if you lived 20 miles outside a major area you had to be your own police.
Even then we wanted to expand but unlike other expansions we did not sent an army in first to subdue the locals. It was more like "Hey there is land there if you can hold it you can keep it"
So from one point of view it historicly mades not sence to keep it on the other it is another right lost if we give it up

[dooda]

Yes yes the depth of the issue is minimized by people like Michael Moore and his animation. Then it is minimized by the NRA and Heston. Each implore the weakness of the average mind and give no credit to the idea that maybe half of us are completely rational.