Gun Control: Replicas

Helo · Feb 16, 2006

Ive got a question for people who are for gun control.

Do you hold the same objection for metal, non-firing, replicas of weapons?

I had a relative over for dinner tonight and after dinner, I got a delivery. I ordered a replica of a Walther P99, I collect odd and unsual weapons or replicas of weapons plus a P99 is a little more threatening than the Colt Peacemaker I usually keep under my pillow for the "just in case" scenarios.

This relative pitched a fit (Shes very anti-gun) and basically said that replica guns were just as bad as real ones.

So do you think that gun restrictions should extend to replica weapons?

Keep in mind that its nearly impossible to modify a replica or blank firing gun to fire live ammunition without SERIOUS machining with special equipment.

loriersea · Feb 16, 2006

Obviously not. They don't kill people.

I do think that anyone with a gun replica should be very careful with it, as it can be mistaken for a real weapon. If it were used in the commision of a robbery, I think the robbery should be considered an armed robbery, since that was the intent. I would hope that anyone with a gun replica would use care so as to not be mistaken for having a real gun and getting themselves into trouble.

But, obviously it would be silly to put the same restrictions on them that should be put on real guns.

Helo · Feb 16, 2006

Most law enforcement agencies treat replica weapons as though they were real if its involved in a crime.

Most replicas have some sort of distinguishing mark. The ATF requires that you have something on the gun that makes it an obvious reproduction, usually a red dot on the inside of the barrel of the gun.

Personally, if Im going to have a replica gun for self defense, Im going to blacken that dot out. The realism of the gun is what makes it effective.

coyoteBR · Feb 16, 2006

Hm.
I've gone thru an accident with domestic firearms* so my opinion may be biased.

There's nothing wrong with fake/replica guns for collection purposes only. Why, many people use katanas and other (non-sharpened)swords for decoration. A restaurant in my city, trying to go for a medievil italian feel, decorated his walls with heraldic simbols and real-looking maces, axes... Why, one of my consumist dreams is a replica of the gun made with a pen. lighter and cigarette holder of 007 and the Man with the Golden Gun

Now, if this replica is used to scare/coerce somebody... the results may be as deadly. If a burglar, for ijnstance, is stupid enough to brake into your house with yourself in, he is stupid enough to do anything. even more with a gun pointed to him, fake or not. It's potentially dangerous.

*Ok, i will tell ya about it. I was in my late teens, and my father took me to the shooting gallery club he used to go. It was the first time I had a revolver on my hand. He gave me 3 bullets (ammo is expensive).
So I was there, feeling the weapon, the big kick back of it, trying to make the most of my first two shots. I was, of course, holding it with both hands - no Dirty Harry tricks in the first time - Then the instructor, a nice fellow, come to help me.
And I, young, new to the ambient, innocent and polite, did what I do naturally: I turned to the person I was talking to. I can remember to this day his words:

"Now, you think you are aiming, but you are not, you are looking over the aim. Try to lower your head a little. Also, set your feet apart to give you more balance AND DON'T POINT THAT GUN TO ME!"

At that moment, I realized I was pointing a lethal instrumento to another human being, and my instinct said to low it, as fast as I could. In fact, the order of my instinct was so fast it made me forget about the basics of a male body. I was holding the gun with both hands, remember, so of course the back of it would hit - hardly - my... huh... :o

Anyway, I gave up firing the 3rd shot.

Yusuf Evans · Feb 16, 2006

loriersea said:
Obviously not. They don't kill people.

I do think that anyone with a gun replica should be very careful with it, as it can be mistaken for a real weapon. If it were used in the commision of a robbery, I think the robbery should be considered an armed robbery, since that was the intent. I would hope that anyone with a gun replica would use care so as to not be mistaken for having a real gun and getting themselves into trouble.

But, obviously it would be silly to put the same restrictions on them that should be put on real guns.

Tell that to the kid who was shot holding a replica and pointing it at the police. Gun control has not been proven to be a 100% effective way to deter crime. If you can find me stats saying otherwise, I would like to see. Obviously,people don't need to own uzi's and third world automatic weapons, but the Brady bunch want to confiscate all weapons, and so do their supporters.

loriersea · Feb 17, 2006

christianmarine said:
Tell that to the kid who was shot holding a replica and pointing it at the police.

Which is exactly why I think it's important that anyone with a fake gun be careful. People should not go around pretending that fake guns are real guns. If you do so, to threaten someone or rob them or whatever, it should be punished as if you were doing it with a real gun. And, obviously, it's just not smart to be walking around with a real-looking gun in many places. I know that, if I had an older child living in Detroit, they would NOT be allowed out of the house with any kind of gun replica. The last thing they need is some other kid or the police or anyone to think they are walking around with a real gun.

Gun control has not been proven to be a 100% effective way to deter crime. If you can find me stats saying otherwise, I would like to see.

No, not 100% effective. But, there are too many guns, too many of which have no purpose other than harming people. I have no desire to see the government telling people how many shotguns they can or cannot have, but there are many guns in circulation right now that were bought legally then sold illegally to criminals that should never have been bought legally in the first place. For me, I prefer to have no guns, and luckily my husband is not a gun person. I have been thinking of getting a low-voltage taser, since I work nights and come home late, but I'm even wary of that, since I think it's more likely it would be used against me than the other way around.

DailyBlessings · Feb 17, 2006

I don't think that there is an ethical problem with replica guns, per say, but I would still discourage their propogation. When I lived in LA, there was a story at least once a month about some poor kid dying with a hundred cop bullets in him over a misunderstanding with a fake gun. I'd be quite content never to have to read that story again.

fillerbunny · Feb 17, 2006

I'm with DB. I have no problem with people owning firearm replicas.. but I do think it's important to know the risks and exercise caution.

Personally, regardless of where I lived, I wouldn't allow my children to leave the house with a realistic replica gun. The fact of the matter is, carrying a realistic looking weapon is potentially dangerous. In the middle of an altercation, people aren't going to take the time to ascertain whether or not the gun is real. If they perceive a threat, they're going to shoot first and ask questions later.

With small children, I would take particular caution to treat the replica gun as a real firearm and not a plaything. While the replica itself isn't going to injure them, I wouldn't want them to make the same assumption regarding a real gun they might find outside the home.

Ananel · Feb 17, 2006

Helo said:
This relative pitched a fit (Shes very anti-gun) and basically said that replica guns were just as bad as real ones.

Airsoft replica or just artistic replica: Well, it's hard for something that doesn't fire normal bullets to be "just as bad," no matter how much it looks like the original. Mockups that are essentially the same weapon, only manufactured by someone else? A gun's a gun.

I'm not 100% a fan of gun controls, myself. I find that, outside of military hardware, I am not fully convinced as to their efficacy at halting anything other than 2nd degree murder and manslaughter, as they would in that case reduce access to weapons. A crook is a crook, and if they need the gun, the law's likely to be ignored for that too.

Besides... I am also occasionally (despite my misgivings for armed conflict in general) reminded of the purpose of the second amendment in the minds of some founding fathers (Yes, I mean armed revolution. These men were the ones who revolted against Britain if you recall. Not all fully trusted the new government yet.).

kopilo · Feb 17, 2006

If you could completely outlaw stupidy + replica guns, then yes they are fine (don't know if they look that great in a house though )..... The issue is with those who use them to hold up service stations or as protection because they believe the bluff will stop an intruder. Not to mention those who try to use the barronets (or whatever the name is for pointy blunt attachment on certian historical military guns).

I think replica guns (behind glass) in musems and other such establishments is a good idea.

Blackmarch · Feb 17, 2006

Helo said:
Ive got a question for people who are for gun control.

Do you hold the same objection for metal, non-firing, replicas of weapons?

I had a relative over for dinner tonight and after dinner, I got a delivery. I ordered a replica of a Walther P99, I collect odd and unsual weapons or replicas of weapons plus a P99 is a little more threatening than the Colt Peacemaker I usually keep under my pillow for the "just in case" scenarios.

This relative pitched a fit (Shes very anti-gun) and basically said that replica guns were just as bad as real ones.

So do you think that gun restrictions should extend to replica weapons?

Keep in mind that its nearly impossible to modify a replica or blank firing gun to fire live ammunition without SERIOUS machining with special equipment.

Not really, but if being held (in such a way to cause alarm or get arrested by authority) outside of the home, or used in a manner that is unwanted threat- then a person should be prosecuted as though they had a real gun.

Depending on if the Gun was made with obvious certain signature features that would identify it as a fake, then the punishment should be less or different than if the replica did not have those features.

kopilo · Feb 17, 2006

Blackmarch said:
Not really, but if being held (in such a way to cause alarm or get arrested by authority) outside of the home, or used in a manner that is unwanted threat- then a person should be prosecuted as though they had a real gun.

Depending on if the Gun was made with obvious certain signature features that would identify it as a fake, then the punishment should be less or different than if the replica did not have those features.

What is your reasoning for giving a less of a punishment because a gun may be able to identified as a fake because of missing features?

(Especially considering if someone points a weapon which within the flash of an eyelid which could make you require medical treament. Do you think someone would want to take the risk, that it is a fake... The police do not seem to.)

Silent Bob · Feb 17, 2006

Replicas when used for intimidation can be very dangerous. Not as dangerous as real guns, but they are dangerous especially for the person holding the gun.

It is as simple as this: you are bluffing. If the other person calls your bluff you are dead. If he knows you are bluffing, you are dead. If a cop sees you pointing it, you are dead (can be used for suicide by cop). Even if your bluff is not called then you are still damaging society. So using this gun outside film studios or your own house should be illegal.

Possession shouldn't be illegal as it is not directly lethal, it has decorative and collecting value and it is a nice alternative to displaying a working hand cannon in your living room (if that is your idea of decoration).

This topic reminded me of a play I saw when I was young which was called "The sound of the gun." In the play an early 20s guy finds a gun in the dumpster and his more sensible friend convinces him to give it to him for disposal. Through some events the gun finds itself hidden in the second persons house and during an argument with his mother the sensible friend takes it out. The mother dies instantly from a heart attack. The gun is never fired, hence there is no sound.

Colt Peacemaker I usually keep under my pillow for the "just in case" scenarios.

I thank God every day that I was not born in the US. In the UK and Greece where I have lived we keep large kitchen knives in the drawer for cutting bread, chicken and fighting off 16 yo neds who may try to rob your house.

Blackmarch · Feb 17, 2006

kopilo said:
What is your reasoning for giving a less of a punishment because a gun may be able to identified as a fake because of missing features?

(Especially considering if someone points a weapon which within the flash of an eyelid which could make you require medical treament. Do you think someone would want to take the risk, that it is a fake... The police do not seem to.)

For example a couple of teenagers pointing clear squirtguns at each other. vs pointing accurate replicas- would both warrant the same amount of punishment/action(what ever that would be)? If not then there is a difference, and there must be a line somewhere.

And to correct you, not because of missing features but more like added features.. such as being transparent, things that depending on the laws of the land are required to have to denote a fake as a fake. Usually such features are supposed to be obvious.
If it is missing those features then it should be punishable as though they were real guns.

kopilo · Feb 17, 2006

Blackmarch said:
For example a couple of teenagers pointing clear squirtguns at each other. vs pointing accurate replicas- would both warrant the same amount of punishment/action(what ever that would be)? If not then there is a difference, and there must be a line somewhere.

And to correct you, not because of missing features but more like added features.. such as being transparent, things that depending on the laws of the land are required to have to denote a fake as a fake. Usually such features are supposed to be obvious.
If it is missing those features then it should be punishable as though they were real guns.

Ahh so you mean along the lines of waterfights or want not, I can agree with that. If you meant someone holding up a store or similar, well in the past people have been able to do that with a hand in their pocket, so I would not agree.

Silent Bob · Feb 17, 2006

kopilo said:
Ahh so you mean along the lines of waterfights or want not, I can agree with that. If you meant someone holding up a store or similar, well in the past people have been able to do that with a hand in their pocket, so I would not agree.

Hey, you can rob a bank with a cell phone (well theoretically, watch Pulp Fiction) that doesn't mean we have to outlaw Nokias.

Blackmarch · Feb 17, 2006

kopilo said:
Ahh so you mean along the lines of waterfights or want not, I can agree with that. If you meant someone holding up a store or similar, well in the past people have been able to do that with a hand in their pocket, so I would not agree.

Ya, That would warrant a very serious response, even if they didn't use anything but their jacket and their hand.
Should've also included a "dependant on the situation" sort of clause as well... my bad.

Cerberus~ · Feb 17, 2006

"Now, you think you are aiming, but you are not, you are looking over the aim. Try to lower your head a little. Also, set your feet apart to give you more balance AND DON'T POINT THAT GUN TO ME!"

You're father should have told you the ins and outs of gun safety before you ever held a gun. And if the instructor yelled at you like that, then he too was an idiot. You don't yell at a nervous kid who's never held a gun before. That's more dangerous than you pointing the gun at him, and combined with that, we'll that's just asking to get shot.

Silent Bob · Feb 17, 2006

Cerberus~ said:
You're father should have told you the ins and outs of gun safety before you ever held a gun. And if the instructor yelled at you like that, then he too was an idiot. You don't yell at a nervous kid who's never held a gun before. That's more dangerous than you pointing the gun at him, and combined with that, we'll that's just asking to get shot.

You would be amazed at how careless professionals can be sometimes. A friend of mine who is in the army, full time, tried to give me a loaded gun without safety by pointing the barrel on my belly.

coyoteBR · Feb 22, 2006

I agree that my father and the instructor could handle the situation better. Even if I was never with more than one bullet on that revolver (my father load one bullet, I shoot, I gave the gun to him, he put another one...), one never knows, when comes to guns. And people get so used they get displicent. Sad, sad.

Now, after reading http://www.ananova.com/news/story/sm_1734176.html this at Ananova news site, I am about to rethink my opinion on replicas, too. What a concept from a toy company.

We hope the site problems here are now solved, however, if you still have any issues, please start a ticket in Contact Us

Gun Control: Replicas

Helo

Guest

Well-Known Member

Helo

Guest

greetings

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

O Christianos Cryptos; Amor Vincit Omnia!

Well-Known Member

Half-mad apologist

Envisioner

Legend

Envisioner

Silent Bob

Guest

Legend

Envisioner

Silent Bob

Guest

Legend

Cerberus~

Guest

Silent Bob

Guest

greetings

Similar threads

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency