Gents, just curious if we have any 141'ers who enjoy shooting guns--as in firearms.  Shoot any on a regular basis?  Have you every shot firearms (perhaps military service for your Singaporeans)?  Do you own firearms now?

I know many of your Euro and Asian gents are not permitted, or very limited in your private ownership of firearms. I know many of you Canadians are gun owners and shooters.  I think you can still own some guns in Australia.

I, for one, collect and shoot a number of different firearms--rifles, pistols, and shotguns. When home I spend my leisure time at the rifle range practicing rifle and pistol marksmanship about once a week (like many of you probably play golf).  Nothing like shooting a 10" armored-steel plate at 200m with open iron sights...bang...ping!...its quite addicting.  Then stretch it out to 300m+ and start seriously factoring in the wind. Good fun.

Here's a pic from one of my ranges...some of your San Diego punters may recognize the facility.

Would love to try but where I come from, all firearms are banned especially semi automatic weapons. Am no weapon addict but would love to shoot old guns like an M1 Garand and this kind of stuff. If I ever get to live in the US, I'll definitely five it a try.

There are a bunch of cheap places to do this in the Philippines. It's a great way to blow off some steaming Manila. If you are there, the concierge at your hotel will know 2 or 3 good places nearby.

What's the largest calibre you've ever fired off?

Mine was 84mm. Aiming for 105mm next!

Most exhilarating: 23mm ZSU-23-4!

[ Last edited by  JckJr at 26-2-2013 18:46 ]

maybe we should also discuss gun control (US) here aswell  

There is a shooting club here in HK. I recall it was expensive to join and then like most real clubs you have to pay monthly fees in perpetuity.

In the US I own several firearms.  My favorite is my HK 9mm USP.  They are all in a safe at my father's house.  Here in GZ there is a shooting range.  I haven't gone because the prices are outrageous.  7-15RMB per bullet depending on calibur.  There are probably several other fees.

@ Frenchexpat: I have a beautiful M1 Garand, made in late 1945.  Doesn't look like it was ever issued.  It is a lovely rifle to shoot but kicks like a mule, and is expensive to feed (.30-06).  You maybe familiar with another rifle I own, a MAS 49/56 in 7,5x54mm.  Don't' much like the trigger, but very compact, accurate and hard-hitting.  A great battle rifle/carbine.  I also love my Manurhin (Walther) PP-32 (a la Bond).  French weapons are greatly underrated.   

@ Intenseslacker: I forgot that the Philippines also has a long ingrained gun culture!  Who can own them and is there a permit/licensing process there?

@ JckJr: Largest I've fired? A measly .470 Nitro…twice…and maybe never again.  Great if you need to stop a charging rhino I suppose, but not conducive to my shoulder health.  Never having served military, I have not had the pleasure to fire artillery or anti-aircraft systems (you lucky dog!).

@ twiceAweek: Ouch! Touchy subject.  I've tried having this conversation with many a foreign friend.  US gun owners believe owning firearms makes you a Citizen, being disarmed makes you a Subject.  Firearms ownership so deeply ingrained in US culture that I don't think those raised in non-permissive countries will ever thoroughly understand.

@ kaleu: I had a HK USP .40.  It was truly one of the most accurate pistols in my hands personally.  Don't know why I ever sold it.  I shoot/own mainly Glocks in 9mm and 10mm now.

I do believe that a guns/shooting hobby is nearly as dear (and addicting) as punting!

but the logic of possessing firearms to protect oneself may seem sound in a country where killing people is part of life ... but does one really need machine guns and such where a simple shotgun would do ?

You really never know when 30 people might try to break into your home from all different directions.  Think man!

I'm not a gun person myself.  But I've heard that Cambodia is the place if you really want to play with the big dogs...  http://travel.nytimes.com/2012/1 ... en-to-tourists.html  Where else can you shoot a Soviet B-40 rocket-propelled grenade launcher?  Check it out...  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0sDT_F0s6VU

Have fun, CGP

Let's be intellectually honest, and let me ask you do you feel safe while travelling to the U.S.?  How about Thailand?  The two have approximately the same annual homicides per 100,000---4.9 vs 4.8 respectively.  Is "killing a part of life" in Thailand too?  I for one never have felt killing is a part of life in either country.  Hollywood I think does our reputation a great disservice.  The U.S. isn't anywhere near the top of the homicide rates by country...we're about in the middle in the rankings...but definitely higher on the list than some more affluent countries.

Also, the vast majority of murders in the U.S. occur in poor, drug-infested and gang-infested areas.  And those Cities with the STRICTEST gun control laws, are the cities with the HIGHEST murder rates--i.e. Chicago, Washington DC, Detroit, Baltimore, etc.  Want logic?  Write LAWS to disarm the populace, and only the criminals (who don't give a sh!t about laws by definition) have guns.  Of course the murder rates skyrocket in those places.

Machine-guns have been tightly controlled since 1968 in the U.S.  They require extensive background, fees, law approval to own and are very expensive.  That said, in 45 years there has not been one reported homicide by a legally owned and registered machine-gun in the U.S.  Not one.

Do criminals have machine guns?  Sure.  They don't care about the law remember?  So, while I don't own any machine guns, I would LIKE to be better armed than the criminals.  However, where I live it is not practical to obtain one.

Also, tAw it sounds like you have some military or service background?  Remember too that fully-automatic individual weapon fire is a niche--it is difficult to control and consumes all your ammunition.  Therefore in properly trained small units, sound tactics restrict fully-auto to suppressive fire and for breaking contact. That's it.  For any other self-defense or combat application aimed semi-automatic fire is the always best tactic.

Finally, I don't believe in restricting magazine capacity, etc.  But I will say having trained in self-defense for years now...I truly believe if you need more than 10 rounds to solve any real-world self-defense problem...you problem isn't that you don't have enough rounds, its you don't have enough friends at that moment.

Sorry for the soap box.  Stepping down now.

I've heard much the same of some of the Soviet satellite States...Georgia, Estonia, etc.  Wow, that looks like ALOT of fun without having to enlist!

Please don't turn this thread into a gun control debate!!!!

I think we all agree, assuming that we all are level headed responsible people, that shooting guns is fun!

What male doesn't like to feel that power in his hands! (no, i'm not talking about jerking-off!)

But honestly, first time I shot a gun, it was a little scary..... I mean, I had a the power to instantly kill (intentionally or accidentally) anyone standing near me. And my loved ones were standing right next to me!

That recent school shooting was done with a registered machine gun, though it was registered to his mother but he still had access to it.
(or was it an assault rifle? maybe you could clarify this as well for me)

[ Last edited by  cruman999 at 28-2-2013 09:55 ]

It was registered to her, yes.  Machine gun, NO.  It was a semi-automatic rifle, like many hunting rifles.  It just "looks like" a machine gun.  Big difference.  Much like a Ferrari with a Smart car engine under the hood, is still only as fast as a Smart car.

The US and Foreign media do not explain the difference because they don't care to, as they are biased towards more gun control.

The tragedy at Sandy Hook was really the mother's ineptitude and carelessness.  She kept firearms accessible to her mentally sick and sociopathic son.  She also paid with her life for not getting him treatment.

----
EDITED TO ADD
----

"Assault Rifle" is a made up term by gun control advocates.  It makes semi-automatic guns sound scary.  Sociopaths can and will kill with any instrument--bats, knives, swords, garrot, etc.  Put "Assault" in the name in front of any inanimate object used to kill and banning that object becomes an easier sell to the public.  Assault Bat, Assault Knife, Assault Sword...get it?  Who doesn't want to ban anything with "Assault" in front of the name. There is NO such thing as an Assault Rifle.

The closest thing to it though would be what the Germans conceptualized and perfected as a "sturmgewehr" during WWII.  It roughly translates as "Storm Rifle".  It is basically defined as a compact, carbine-sized rifle, that is capable of firing FULLY AUTOMATIC.  Smaller than full-sized battle rifles of WWI which fired big 1000m+ cartridges.  It was perfected for close-range urban combat (<200m), and fires an intermediate cartridge again with max effective range of say 400m.  Modern armies all have adopted this concept.  The M16/M4, AK-47/74, FAMAS, L85, etc. are all evolved from the WWII sturmgewehr.  These types of weapons are strictly controlled in the U.S.--and as explained above--are strictly licensed and limited in distribution--police know where each an every LEGAL registered gun of this type are.  They cost in excess of US$ 12,000 EACH.  There have been ZERO crimes committed with these weapons since first restricted in 1968.

Doesn't mean criminals don't have them in the U.S.  They probably do.  The point is, however, that the legally-owned ones aren't used for crimes.

[ Last edited by  jetsetting2much at 28-2-2013 10:17 ]

Funny. Am no american (you guessed right?) and I have no specific love of guns or fascination for them but why is it everyone (especially us europeans) when they start talking guns with an american feel the urge to try and patronize them about their gun policy? They can do what they want, its their country! if this is what rock their boats, let them! they're not pushing for the others to have a liberal gun policy right?

Doesnt mean I agree with that policiy (actually I dont, limiting all weapons works in Europe) but means that as long as they are not fanatics imposing a religion and not threatening their neighbors, its their problem to deal with it. When my neighbour doesnt mawn the lawn for 10 days, its not my problem, its his... As long as his trees dont grow in my garden, I have nothing to say. In France there is a simple say: your freedom ends where my freedom starts.

Said like a true Frenchman. Wasn't it Voltaire who said "we must cultivate our garden".

Speaking of Europeans and guns. I am in Switzerland on biz quite often.  When walking through the Banhoff/Gare, you see Swiss citizenry walking through with FULLY AUTOMATIC SIG-551 rifles on their backs--laughing, back-slapping, on their way to/from training weekends.  No one bats an eye.  The Swiss probably have the highest gun ownership rate in the world--each citizen between 18-45 (I think) is REQUIRED to retain his SIG-551 at home with a cannister of ammunition.  But you don't see high gun crime there, do you?  Quite the opposite as Switzerland is viewed as one of the SAFEST countries in the world.

More guns doesn't mean more crime.

As stated above, Thailand (69M population) has roughly the same homicide rate as the U.S. (313M).  But they don't have a fraction of the guns we do (the U.S. has an conservatively estimated 300M guns in cirulation).  How is it that they have the same rate, but no guns?  Because its not the guns, its the culture/society/legal system.

In the U.S. gun crime results from poverty, drugs, gangs, a broken mental health system, and a revolving-door criminal justice system.  Its sad, but true.

---
EDITED TO ADD
---

Speaking more of Europeans, many of my most cherished shooting buddies are disproportionately immigrated Brits, or British ex-pats living here.  Ironic, in the sense that gun ownership as a Right sprang from King George's disarmament of his American Colonists in the 1700's.  Those who aren't aware of US History should know.  Anyway, these ame Brits are some of the most ardent gun owners I know.

Speaking of Asian.  I have even more immigrated Chinese, Korean, and Philippino friends who are ardent gun owners.  Anybody remember the pictures from the 1992 LA Rodney King riots here in the US?  Remember the images of the Korean shop merchants atop their stores with rifles protecting their lives and livelihood from roving gangs of arsonists and looters?   Don't think it can happen in your modern society?  Do a google search for violent protests, or riots, and think again?  Guns take lives, yes.  They also save lives and property even more often.

Go to a firing line at a public range here in the U.S. and it is truly a melting pot of every nation.  Many of the most arden supporters are recently immigrated Citizens from other countries who were denied the Right in their original homeland.

[ Last edited by  jetsetting2much at 28-2-2013 12:25 ]

@ twiceAweek

@ jetsetting2much

The Swiss vote of 56% to 44% of not tightening gun control regulations on 13 Feb is sufficiently narrow that the anti gun lobby will continue to fight for better control.

24 gun homicides a year is relatively low say compared to the highest, which is of course the US, or about 0.3 gun homicides per 100,000 inhabitants. By comparison, the U.S. rate in 2007 — the most recent available figure — was 4.2 per 100,000 people. But if you consider the socio-econimical back ground, adjust for the affluence and the relative absence of the "underclasses" in Switzerland, the figures paint a different picture.

More guns doesn't mean more crimes. It means more crimes committed with guns. And as a consequence, more likely to result in deaths & serious injuries.

Your figures and arguments are often cited by the gun lobby but they don't stand up to serious scrutiny.

Also, almost everyone I know who has to deal with firearms as part of his work wants strict firearm regulations, preferably a complete ban. Guns have one purpose: kill.(That's why names like H&K MP5 make me laugh, it is not Multi-Purposes, it has one)

Even when operating in countries where it is permitted for private agencies & citizens to carry firearms, many professionals chose not to carry. Firearms escalate conflicts to a lethal outcome very quickly. In 2011, a traffic cop in HK drew his firearm when a couple in a stationary vehicle refused to comply with a request to step out. At which point the feisty, and perhaps mental, woman jumped out and "threatened" him with a pair of small scissors http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9oSKPMelYjs

This reflects the appalling training of the HK police and for my point, he went for his sidearm as his first defence option. Unless exceptionally experienced, almost everybody opts for firearms as their first option when they are carrying. That's bad, bad, bad!
When they are NOT carrying, the "trained" personnel has a myriad of techniques to deescalate most situations. An untrained individual may even have a few. But when they are carrying, they opt for the last resort first, every time!

Now why did the HK cop backed away and ended up looking like such a complete cunt (and for the whole world to see)? Because once his weapon was drawn, it left him with only one escalation: shoot. He was never going to shoot a mouthy woman with a pair of nail clippers for not wearing a seatbelt in the first place. So why did he, a supposedly trained individual, left himself with no option but to escalate the confrontation to the extreme immediately? Because he had a gun (and badly trained).

Imagine gun enthusiasts without the years of experience & training in dealing with conflicts resolution (or badly trained policemen), in any slight provocation, they will whip their guns out faster than a Frenchmen whip out his dick in a brothel. No more options except deaths & mayhem.

Even with gun restrictions, it is not impossible to obtain weapons. In Frank Coles book "How to Drive a Tank: and other Everyday Tips for the Modern Gentleman", one chapter talked about how to obtain a gun in any foreign country in short notice, with or without a permit. He significantly left out a primary source on which we exchanged a correspondence. For the same reasons he left it out, I will not mention it here either but suffice to say if anyone, for any reason, believe that they need firearms, they are shockingly easy to obtain. For me, that's a bad thing.

The only times when I would acquiesce to carrying firearms are in places where assault rifles can be carried openly by all and sundry.

I practice as much as I can at various ranges in Eastern Europe when possible. We work only after opening hours as the ranges' insurance don't cover our drills and we work on private land where we need no permit. But I am not a gun enthusiast. Be an enthusiast if that rocks your boat but perhaps do some re-think on supporting any gun lobby. It's very masculine to shoot guns but I suggest that it is more manly to act responsibly for the safety of all in society. Gun controls save lives.

You can't own or maintain any type of machine gun in the US without a Type III firearm license.  There are less than 2K of these in a population of 300+ million people.  

Semi-automatic firearms are fully legal and can be owned by anyone that meets the age and criminal history requirements and weapons laws in their area of residence.

Guns have many purposes.  I regularly shoot for entertainment.  It is not unlike darts, horseshoes, or golf to me.  Personal practice and excellence allow for quality competition.

I own lots of guns.  Each has a specific use.  I also have a military grade safe where each is stored along with a large supply of ammunition.  

I also like to fish.  The fish are in much more danger from me than any person will ever be.  Unless they should attempt to harm me or mine.