Long Range Rifles

[malakadang]

Personally I don't think they should be outlawed as such, merely regulated so only hunters are allowed to use them.
Have a special sort of license regulating their use, and have the gun itself registered etc.

 

[Niini]

In what countries have dictatorships been stopped by well armed militias?

 

[kid elvranqe]

In what countries have dictatorships been stopped by well armed militias?

What country has a dictator that prior to the dictator had a well armed militia? Yeah that's what I thought.
Almost all dictatorships are created out of civil unrest and an oppressed people looking for a quick solution to their current government.

OT: I don't think long range/high powered rifles should be outlawed or regulated. The people that use them for unethical reasons could get them easily enough in the blackmarket. Plus if rifles are so dangerous, outlaw cars. I could kill a helluva lot more people with a car

And to date, I can't think of a single assassination/killing spree with a high power rifle where the perpetrator(s) got away indefinitely.

 

[Niini]

You forgot to answer my question. Someone said the best defence against a dictatorship (or something along those lines) was a well armed militia. So I'm asking in what countries have dictatorships been stopped by well armed militias? I don't want to know about successful dictatorships.

And to date, I can't think of a single assassination/killing spree with a high power rifle where the perpetrator(s) got away indefinitely

I bet in all of these the perp wouldnt have killed as many people if they were using reguar firearms.

 

[malakadang]

You forgot to answer my question. Someone said the best defence against a dictatorship (or something along those lines) was a well armed militia. So I'm asking in what countries have dictatorships been stopped by well armed militias? I don't want to know about successful dictatorships.

I bet in all of these the perp wouldnt have killed as many people if they were using reguar firearms.

In what country has a well armed militia been established before a dictatorship? None.

The ideology behind that statement is this.

Lets say you have a town of 1,000 people. 1 of them tries to assume a dictatorship role and tries to brainwash people. He may succeed initially brainwashing 50-100 people, however the town will soon catch on and being well armed they can halt such a dictatorship from forming if they feel it is against their best interests as a community.

If however they did not do anything as they were powerless to, a dictatorship would ensue.

 

[Niini]

In what country has a well armed militia been established before a dictatorship? None.

The ideology behind that statement is this.

Lets say you have a town of 1,000 people. 1 of them tries to assume a dictatorship role and tries to brainwash people. He may succeed initially brainwashing 50-100 people, however the town will soon catch on and being well armed they can halt such a dictatorship from forming if they feel it is against their best interests as a community.

If however they did not do anything as they were powerless to, a dictatorship would ensue.

Most dictator ships are started by someone who has control of an army (i.e either a established leader or through a coup) not through brainwashing.

 

[waltrulz]

the military doesn't use the best guns, a prime example of that is the m14. the m14 was superb rifle so good it was not practical on the modern (Vietnam) battlefeild. So the us military used a cheaper and practical rifle. because most engagements rarely exceed 300 yards. a rifle that boast 600 -800 yard range is quite redundant at the cost of a few extra pounds. The M14 is still used to day by the us military but only for "snipers". in fact back in vietnam snipers used standard issue rifles, until commanding officers recognized the potential of the sniper, but some of them opted for a civilian springfeild 700, which is a high end hunting rifle for military use.

Now most high end hunting rifles have the same capability as us sniper rifles but the main difference is that, you may own one of these rifles for a few grand but you will not be able to use it at said 1000 yard range. it takes years of training with a partner that perfectly communicates with you in order to pull of such a shot. "sniper" rifles are only very effective at longer ranges around 400-500 yards, which would be a very challenging shot for the avid hunter to pull off with a stationary target and little wind.

long range shots are only done by trained military teams, not lone political assassins.

 

[aus aaz]

To be honest i would rather someone try to rob me with a long range rifle then a pistol as most of the rifles are bolt action whereas the pistols are semi auto.

In Australia we dont have no 2nd amendment or right to bare arms, but i have had a slug gun (shitty little old one) in my roof which i picked up off a mate for $200 lol. Is used to use it to shoot annoying birds in my backyard when i was younger haha.

As for a security threat? well, so are all the other guns out there, and to pick off a president from a distance I'm guessing you cant just be your average hunter or layman, you have to have some sort of professional training to achieve a shot off 200m + , while evading other government personnel? ( am not speaking from experience just guessing as i have never shot one of these long range rifles) i have tho toyed around with .22 and .33 rifles at a farm which barely shoot 70m accurately.

 

[Flight]

The average joe isn't going to know how to hit a target from 1/2 a mile away.

Really the only people that can hit a target that far will have had training, so there's really no reason to have a law against it.

Anyone can use a gun for harm, regardless of the distance.

Plus if there's a need to assassinate someone from a distance, they're probably going to have a supplier and they don't care about the law.

So the problem is basically solved, if there is or was any.

 

[Grrr]

The only real reason you would argue about banning them would be if people resorted to using them to kill others? But surely if someone is intent on killing others it will not matter what type of gun they get a hold of, they will do it anyway regardless if it's a pistol or a long range rifle.

It's very hard in America to try and outlaw these types of things because at the end of the day people will complain it breaches constitutional rights.

 

[Airie]

This talk of legal guns is really making me jealous

I don't see why the general public would need a long-range rifle or even any firearm at all to be honest. But hey... i'm not from the US.

 

[ShockWaveee]

There is part of me that says no, they should not be legal. This is because it could very easily fall into the wrong hands and bad shit could happen.. assassinations/killing sprees/etc.

Then at the same time it does have its uses such as hunting/sport.. and honestly if someone wants to get a hold of a long range rifle badly enough with the intent to assassinate somebody/go on a rampage, they WILL find a way, even if it isn't legal.

So my viewpoints are a little conflicting, but I think if I had to pick only one option I'd have to say make it illegal, or legal with VERY, VERY strict outlines/requirements.

 

[k-mart]

I would just like to put my two cents in about long range rifles. Unless you are hunting strictly for food then I am okay with long range shots. If you are hunting for sport, where is the sense of achievement bringing down an animal at 300+ yards. It is no more impressive then target shooting at this range. I hunt with a muzzleloader because I feel it gives the game more of an advantage and makes my hunting more enjoyable.

Also shooting at 500+ yards is irresponsible because have no idea whats behind what your shooting and 1000+ yards is uncalled for and just unsportsmanlike. If these guns are shot in gun ranges that is responsible and to be enjoye.

*Also I come from Canada where we have way more wildlife left so there is no need to shoot 1000 yards to get a deer*