?

Log in

No account? Create an account
entries friends calendar profile my webpage Previous Previous Next Next
From the altfriday5: 1. Have you ever fired a firearm at a… - Tina Marie's Ramblings
Red hair and black leather, my favorite colour scheme...
skywhisperer
skywhisperer
From the altfriday5:

1. Have you ever fired a firearm at a target or other inanimate object? Why or why not?
2. Have you ever fired a firearm at a living entity (animal or human)? Why or why not?
3. Have you ever owned a firearm? Why or why not?

This week, these make more sense to all be answered together.

I own two firearms - a Browning .22 and a Remington 20 gauge. I've always had boyfriends who had guns, but I never owned one. I'd shot all sorts of handguns, but they were all too big for me. When I decided I wanted to try target shooting, I went looking for something smaller that I'd be comfortable with. I really liked the Browning, so that's what I bought.

Later, I decided I wanted to try skeet shooting. The 12-gauge pump my boyfriend had was too long for my arms - I couldn't pump it with it up on my shoulder. So for Christmas one year, he bought me a 20-gauge - the Remington child's model. It's perfect. Skeet shooting has sort of gone by the wayside as a hobby, because I just don't have time for it, but I still have the gun.

I've never hunted. I don't have any problem with people who do, and I don't even have any problem with the idea of doing it myself, but I've never made the time. I think hunting is like fishing - if you do it, you need to eat (or arrange for someone to eat) what you kill. Catch-and-release fishing is evil - it's essentially torturing small animals for fun, but that's a rant for another day. I don't see how people can eat meat and be against hunting for food.

I don't have a concealed carry license, but that, too, is mostly because of a lack of time. If I had the license, I would probably carry in limited situations - for example, there are lots of times I end up alone on a dark airport late at night. And I wouldn't have a problem pulling/using a gun if I truly felt my life was in danger.

4. Do you feel that there should be restrictions on what types of firearms people can own? What should the restrictions be (ranging from "none available" to "no restrictions")?
5. What do you feel a person should have to do or be in order to purchase a firearm (ranging from "it should be impossible" to "walk to the corner store")?

When I bought the Browning, I went to the gun store on a Monday night because I wanted to be sure to have it for the weekend, and I'd heard about all these rules about wait times. I walked out with it.

I don't see any point in restricting the types of guns people can own, or where they can buy them. I can see valid points to restricting who can own a gun - people with convictions for gun-related crimes would be an obvious one.

In an ideal world, anyone could buy any type of gun they wanted. If they were convicted of committing a crime with a gun, they lose all rights to own or possess a gun permanently. If a gun that they owned was used in a crime committed by someone else (this would be things like "my 5-yr-old shot his friend"), they obviously did not properly secure it, and lose their right to own for 5 years the first time, and permanently the second.

But that's too sensible to ever be law.

Tags:

6 comments or Leave a comment
Comments
alioth1 From: alioth1 Date: November 4th, 2005 07:18 pm (UTC) (Link)

Gnu control

I used to think (like the vast majority of the British population) that 'guns are bad, mkay?' (Even though my grandfather still owns an illegal firearm - he kept his service revolver from the war and still has ammo for it, indeed, I think he's shot rabbits with it, and I had myself gone to the range to fire guns - including a World War 1 Lee Enfield .303 rifle)

Well, after thinking about it for a while, my opinion did change - basically to what you argue in your entry here.

I'd love to own a Lee-Enfield .303 - bolt action, accurate even just with the iron sights, but accurate to around 1.5 MOA at some ridiculous distance with a scope and this is a WW1 rifle! (I think the British Army took the most accurate ones and sniperized them).

I did like your Browning - I was quite surprised how accurate it was (I dunno if you remember, but the instructor had us try it on the rifle range to demonstrate that it was accurate for a hand gun). Michael's shotty on the other hand left a massive bruise on my shoulder even though I'm sure I had it up properly against my shoulder when I squeezed the trigger!

We should go to the range next time I'm over. I have considered joining a rifle club here, but I've just never got around to it.

alioth1 From: alioth1 Date: November 4th, 2005 07:21 pm (UTC) (Link)
Oh yeah, and once we had an air rifle...WITH A SCOPE!

We used that for acquiring the ingredients to rabbit stew. It was .22 and was fatal to rabbits at a surprising distance.
ptomblin_lj From: ptomblin_lj Date: November 4th, 2005 07:24 pm (UTC) (Link)
I was in the Army reserve and on the Southern Ontario Biathlon team. So I fired lots of guns, and was trained how to do it. I owned a .22 rifle or two, and I once had to kill a couple of squirrels because they were gnawing through the insulation in the attic.

I think people should have to pass a background check and a safety exam and prove that they have a safe and secure way to store the weapon so that thieves can't steal it and use it (like a safe for the whole weapon or the breech block or firing pin). I think there are weapons that nobody has any need to own, and I know the line lives somewhere between .50 calibre sniper rifles and fully automatic weapons on one side, and .22 rifles on the other, but I have no idea how or where to draw that line. I do think that the more deadly the weapon, the stricter the background check, safety exam and secure storage requirements should be. Again, I'm glad I'm not going to be the one making the rules, though. Although I'd sure as hell not make a law based strictly on cosmetics like the "assault rifle" ban.

I remember a congressman arguing that he needed an "assault rifle" because his wife was often alone at their house in rural upstate NY, and she needed to protect herself. And I thought "if she needs a 30 round magazine in her personal protection weapon, maybe you should teach her how to aim!"

One thing on your point about people with convictions for gun-related crimes: I saw a TV interview with Gordon Libby on his farm shooting a wide variety of guns and rifles. He is a convicted felon, so he's not allowed to own firearms, but there is nothing to prevent his wife from owning hundreds of weapons and letting him use them. That's a stupid loophole.

From: robnorth Date: November 4th, 2005 08:45 pm (UTC) (Link)
I remember a congressman arguing that he needed an "assault rifle" because his wife was often alone at their house in rural upstate NY, and she needed to protect herself. And I thought "if she needs a 30 round magazine in her personal protection weapon, maybe you should teach her how to aim!"

That's why a shotgun is perhaps a preferable personal protection weapon. I plan to buy me a 12-gauge when I have the time to go out and properly learn how to shoot it.
alioth1 From: alioth1 Date: November 5th, 2005 01:23 pm (UTC) (Link)
My philosophy on home defence weapons is - well, a pump action shotgun is the best. The noise it makes when you cycle it is intimidating enough to make most intruders flee without needing to fire a single shot (which is really the best outcome). If you do have to fire it, unlike the hand cannons some people seem to prefer - if you miss it won't go through your wall, your neighbour's wall, and perforate your next door neighbour.
From: robnorth Date: November 4th, 2005 08:33 pm (UTC) (Link)
I did the meme meself in me own journal here: robnorth

Read and enjoy
6 comments or Leave a comment