Fantastic Firearms Part 2 - General

[b]Special Edition 3:[/b] Nonlethal Alternatives part 2. Ok so last time we covered means of avoiding confrontation which can be summed up as common sense and we covered some simple self-defense weapons. But now we're getting into the good stuff. What if, say, you aren't very popular in your neighborhood and there is a very angry mob outside your house? What now? Well the world of Law Enforcement has offered you a number of choices for just such an occasion. -In the crowd control department we have a little number known as Tear Gas (or CS). It is an aerosol, solid at room temperature and is usually dispersed via pressurized canisters. Everything from hand-thrown grenades to specialized grenade launcher shells has been used as a vehicle to haul it to the ranks of angry mobs around the world. Although it is officially classified as a nonlethal weapon some studies such as one done in 2000 by the FBI have found that if victims are unprotected when the gas is released in a confined space the effects can aggravate existing medical conditions or be lethal by itself. It is known to do significant damage to the heart and liver. But so long as the exposure is temporary and not concentrated it is simply unpleasant rather than fatal. And boy is it unpleasant. People exposed to it feel a strong burning sensation on their skin and are soon overpowered by a strong urge to vomit uncontrollably. It is also impossible to keep your eyes open, victims report running noses and horrible dizziness. Provided you can still stand you won't be able to walk much. Happily the effects tend to be short term and they almost completely wear off within minutes. By that time any given suspect or group of suspects could be controlled. The exact effects vary based on the amount of gas, the concentration, the exact chemical used (other variants such as CN, CNB and CNC exist) the way it's distributed (sometimes it is distributed as an airborne powder or as a solution in another chemical) and the victim in question. Interestingly animals seem to be far less susceptible due to less efficient tear ducts and the protection offered by fur. It remains essentially the default crowd control weapon. Portable, potent and because the cops have gas masks only effective on the unruly peasants. It has also been manufactured in smaller doses for individual self-defense use. It is even occasionally used by criminals. Interestingly, the military isn't allowed to use CS on the battlefield because it is a chemical weapon. The doctrine is that if one country uses CS gas the other will switch to another, more horrendous chemical weapon. Thus the use of Tear Gas on the battlefield is banned by the Geneva Convention. -Another alternative is a much simpler chemical. H2O. Lots of it. It has no toxic after-effect and it doesn't sound that scary. But when you have a pressurized hose of the stuff from a fire truck or the water cannon of a specialized anti-riot vehicle it can be quite scary. It was an icon of the 1960's in the US where police departments of such cities as Birmingham, Alabama recruited fire engines to hose down rioters. It proved relatively effective since the water would knock anyone down. But it created a less than perfect image. The use of water cannons while prolific in Europe and Asia is for this reason rare within the United States. But image isn't the only problem. There have been serious health and safety concerns. Pressurized water can rip clothes on victims, cause lacerations and even if pressurized enough it can break bones. The more immediate issue is debris picked up and carried by the stream. In Europe particularly cobblestone streets have been ripped apart, sending chunks of the road at the crowds. But there is another interesting prospect. In Indonesia riot police occasionally add a pink dye to the water in order to distinguish rioters after the riot is dispersed. Because it is a flexible and effective tool in the crowd control arsenal (if a bit unwieldy and overpowered) it has remained in service over the years. -Stink bombs and scent-based weapons present yet another alternative. The scent that most such devices try to mimic is that of a Skunk. It is so unpleasant and disorienting that a victim sprayed with the substance will usually submit or disperse in order to begin the tedious process of riding themselves of the smell. While the concept is simple the delivery systems can vary. It is sometimes used as an additive in water cannons. Israel in particular is known to do this. Other times it is used as an additive in gas canisters, as a spray, a powder pretty much every delivery system you can think of. It is effective essentially for the same reasons it works so well in nature. It is just nasty stuff and no matter what you were trying to do before being sprayed with it your attention immediately focuses on trying to get that shit off. They are used as both riot control weapons, occasionally in day-to-day law enforcement duties and for personal self-defense. -But what if we tried something completely different? Remember Star-Trek? How they had the phasers that could be set to "stun"? Something to that effect is already in development. A company called Raytheon is developing an Active Denial System which uses what is essentially a huge microwave to burn anyone within the beam's reach. The idea is that if you are within the beam the surface of your skin will instantly reach 130 degrees and you will move away from the affected area. But it isn't perfect. If the victim is stuck in that area for more than a few seconds the "death ray" could actually leave second degree burns. This weapons is promising but still in the development stage and the aforementioned safety concerns could halt its development. The Japanese were experimenting with a similar weapon in WW2 but they wanted a lethal weapon and they couldn't achieve the necessary range in order for that concept to ever leave the prototype stage. -A similar idea was done with sound, rather than heat. It is called an LRAD. A Long Range Acoustic Device. It was invented recently by the American Technology Corporation (A nominee for Bean-O's creative company name of 2009 award). In technical terms it is a 45 pound (20 something Kilo) disc that emits the sound of a smoke detector out to about 300 yards but loud enough to pass the human threshold of pain [b]or even cause permanent hearing damage[/b]. This device has also seen use in military and law enforcement applications around the world. ATC has even sold a number to China because although existing laws prohibit the sale of weapons to China by American companies the LRAD is simply not classified as a weapon. Where other weapons are forbidden the LRAD has often slipped past the red tape as a "stereo system". Sometimes with the help of a little bribe money but it usually doesn't even take that much. Because of this classification it has found a bit of use in international waters by various vessels that aren't allowed to carry firearms. It was used to great effect against pirates in Somalia. If you have ever seen the show "Shadow Force" which follows a real team of mercenaries in Africa one episode had them using an LRAD off the coast of Sierra Leone where due to UN ceasefire policies the team wasn't allowed to carry any firearms for their own protection whatsoever. Tomorrow I plan on wrapping up this series with a more personal approach. Paintball guns, rubber bullets, specialized shotgun shells, nightsticks and canines.

Hey Bean-O, question out of the blue. What do you think would happen if you were to load a 2 3/4 12 gauge shell with .12g 6mm airsoft bb's AND do you think it could be used effectively as a defense/less-than-lethal round?

[QUOTE=UncleJimmema;15915125]Hey Bean-O, question out of the blue. What do you think would happen if you were to load a 2 3/4 12 gauge shell with .12g 6mm airsoft bb's AND do you think it could be used effectively as a defense/less-than-lethal round?[/QUOTE] I wouldn't say it would be effective as a non-lethal. Those BB's will be flying at a pretty high rate of speed. They would probably be pretty warm too. Might leave some nasty burns on (or in, assuming they break the skin) the target.

[QUOTE=UncleJimmema;15915125]Hey Bean-O, question out of the blue. What do you think would happen if you were to load a 2 3/4 12 gauge shell with .12g 6mm airsoft bb's AND do you think it could be used effectively as a defense/less-than-lethal round?[/QUOTE] they wouldn't live being fired :v:

[QUOTE=UncleJimmema;15915125]Hey Bean-O, question out of the blue. What do you think would happen if you were to load a 2 3/4 12 gauge shell with .12g 6mm airsoft bb's AND do you think it could be used effectively as a defense/less-than-lethal round?[/QUOTE] I have no clue. No one to my knowledge has ever tried that. You could get a melon or something, carve up a 12 gauge shell, replace the buckshot with BBs and seal it back up (have some sort of loose-fitting cap over the BBs). Here's the anatomy of a shotgun shell: [img]http://homestudy.ihea.com/ammo/images/ammo_shotshell.gif[/img] 1)Cut open the crimping. 2)Remove the existing shot. 3)Replace the shot with airsoft BBs. 4)Cover the BBs with something that will keep them from rolling down the barrel but not so strong that it would hinder the wad on its way out of the barrel. Or you could re-crimp the shell if you have some way of doing that. 5)Buy a watermelon. 6)Go somewhere where you're allowed to shoot guns. 7)Shoot the watermelon. 8)Take a photo. 9)Tell us what happens. I would try this myself but sadly I don't own any shotguns. Nor do I know of any place that would let me try this.

[QUOTE=Thomas849;15915284]I wouldn't say it would be effective as a non-lethal. Those BB's will be flying at a pretty high rate of speed. They would probably be pretty warm too. Might leave some nasty burns on (or in, assuming they break the skin) the target.[/QUOTE] Well I'd assume they'd break the skin but I'm talking of ranges a little outside of 10 yards for the less than lethal part. Keep in mind that the mass of these projectiles is minuscule and even if the bb's were melting hot they wouldn't exactly stick to the skin and burn you in such a manner. If it was kept around 1000 fps they couldn't penetrate the skin as a bullet would but rather break the skin and ricochet off. I've been hit with an airsoft gun modded to shoot around 950 fps and it hurt like a motherfucker and left a nice welt, but it didn't break the skin nor significantly injure me(not saying it can't, but any less than lethal weapon can be lethal). Now imagine being peppered by 8-12 of those, that would bring a criminal down instantly AND they would still be alive. As for point blank stuff only tazers and pepper spray really work [editline]01:17AM[/editline] [QUOTE=Bean-O;15915703]I have no clue. No one to my knowledge has ever tried that. You could get a melon or something, carve up a 12 gauge shell, replace the buckshot with BBs and seal it back up (have some sort of loose-fitting cap over the BBs). Here's the anatomy of a shotgun shell: [img]http://homestudy.ihea.com/ammo/images/ammo_shotshell.gif[/img] 1)Cut open the crimping. 2)Remove the existing shot. 3)Replace the shot with airsoft BBs. 4)Cover the BBs with something that will keep them from rolling down the barrel but not so strong that it would hinder the wad on its way out of the barrel. Or you could re-crimp the shell if you have some way of doing that. 5)Buy a watermelon. 6)Go somewhere where you're allowed to shoot guns. 7)Shoot the watermelon. 8)Take a photo. 9)Tell us what happens. I would try this myself but sadly I don't own any shotguns. Nor do I know of any place that would let me try this.[/QUOTE] Dammit I wish I had my re-loader here in Cali with me, i left it back in Minnesota :(. That would make things a lot easier, especially since I'm going shooting for a good couple hours this weekend.

[QUOTE=UncleJimmema;15915125]Hey Bean-O, question out of the blue. What do you think would happen if you were to load a 2 3/4 12 gauge shell with .12g 6mm airsoft bb's AND do you think it could be used effectively as a defense/less-than-lethal round?[/QUOTE] If you want a less lethal round, buy walmart value pack sport/skeet loads in no.8 shot or higher. They might make you bleed a little but there's really no risk of killing someone with those unless you're point blank.

[QUOTE=DrMortician;15915821]If you want a less lethal round, buy walmart value pack sport/skeet loads in no.8 shot or higher. They might make you bleed a little but there's really no risk of killing someone with those unless you're point blank.[/QUOTE] Fuck man those get stuck in you! I got hit on the right shoulder from behind with some no.7 from over 75 yards away and 3 pellets got stuck in there nice and deep. Hurt like a motherfucker it did.

[QUOTE=UncleJimmema;15915872]Fuck man those get stuck in you! I got hit on the right shoulder from behind with some no.7 from over 75 yards away and 3 pellets got stuck in there nice and deep. Hurt like a motherfucker it did.[/QUOTE] Yea, but you're still alive... Thus less-than-lethal.

Anyone have anything to say about the Triple Barrel Flintlock Pistol?

[QUOTE=UncleJimmema;15915704]Well I'd assume they'd break the skin but I'm talking of ranges a little outside of 10 yards for the less than lethal part. Keep in mind that the mass of these projectiles is minuscule and even if the bb's were melting hot they wouldn't exactly stick to the skin and burn you in such a manner. If it was kept around 1000 fps they couldn't penetrate the skin as a bullet would but rather break the skin and ricochet off. I've been hit with an airsoft gun modded to shoot around 950 fps and it hurt like a motherfucker and left a nice welt, but it didn't break the skin nor significantly injure me(not saying it can't, but any less than lethal weapon can be lethal). Now imagine being peppered by 8-12 of those, that would bring a criminal down instantly AND they would still be alive.[/QUOTE] That would make sense. But it still depends on the load you're using and the weapon you're firing it out of. I'll see what I can do when I go shooting next week. No promises, but I may be able to try this out.

I liked your special edition, because it was a bit refreshing. I would definately like to see other special editions every 5 or 10 articles or so.

If there's a gas that comes in "CS" and "CnC" variations, I don't know whether it's awesome or terrifying.

dude do something on civil war era weaponry like the volcanic

[QUOTE=DrMortician;15915940]Yea, but you're still alive... Thus less-than-lethal.[/QUOTE] If it gets stuck in you, technically it is lethal. I mean, a bb gun could kill someone if it hits the right spot. Hell, rocks are lethal.

[QUOTE=Bean-O;15915703]I have no clue. No one to my knowledge has ever tried that. You could get a melon or something, carve up a 12 gauge shell, replace the buckshot with BBs and seal it back up (have some sort of loose-fitting cap over the BBs). Here's the anatomy of a shotgun shell: [img]http://homestudy.ihea.com/ammo/images/ammo_shotshell.gif[/img] 1)Cut open the crimping. 2)Remove the existing shot. 3)Replace the shot with airsoft BBs. 4)Cover the BBs with something that will keep them from rolling down the barrel but not so strong that it would hinder the wad on its way out of the barrel. Or you could re-crimp the shell if you have some way of doing that. 5)Buy a watermelon. 6)Go somewhere where you're allowed to shoot guns. 7)Shoot the watermelon. 8)Take a photo. 9)Tell us what happens. I would try this myself but sadly I don't own any shotguns. Nor do I know of any place that would let me try this.[/QUOTE] Quite frankly i don't think cheap BB balls could stand up to that kind of punishment.

[QUOTE=kaskade700;15918174]Quite frankly i don't think cheap BB balls could stand up to that kind of punishment.[/QUOTE] True. They might melt and fuck up your barrel and get stuck in there.

[QUOTE=professional;15827689]Yeah, but the cartridge is pretty overkill for small game. Your money though I guess. Why does every kid and his dog all seem to want to avoid getting something in .22 for their first gun, especially a target gun? Like as if it makes them a pussy or something -.-[/QUOTE] 'Cause .22 is only good enough for Mosad. Granted they kill with that caliber and that takes [i]skill[/i]. (To a rent-a-cop/bodyguard noting is as embarrassing as finding your client with a .22 lodged in his brain. It means the perp was right next to the guy). [QUOTE=JoshuaC;15885395]Needs more CZ-75B.[/QUOTE] I second this idea. ...or more like an article about the remaining members of the "wonder nine" family: The CZ-75 [img]http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/8/81/Cz75.jpg/300px-Cz75.jpg[/img] ...and the SIG 226 [img]http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/6/63/SIG_P226_img_1624.jpg/300px-SIG_P226_img_1624.jpg[/img] ...or just an article about the "wonder nines" in general. We already had the Beretta 92/96, the Glock family, the Browning Highpower and the late comer HK USP. It could be nice to round out the selection. The S&W M59 that some consider the "father" of the Nines (the High Power being the mother with its stacked magazine) also hadn't been written about so far: [img]http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/7/75/S%26W_59_Target_Champion_Waffenwiki.jpg/300px-S%26W_59_Target_Champion_Waffenwiki.jpg[/img]

Famas?

The FAMAS is a piece of shit. As for less than lethal shotgun shells, Rock salt is always a favorite at parties.

[QUOTE=GunFox;15919905]The FAMAS is a piece of shit. As for less than lethal shotgun shells, Rock salt is always a favorite at parties.[/QUOTE] Lol shit, that's got to burn. Talk about salt in open wounds.

[QUOTE=-Jesus-;15918291]True. They might melt and fuck up your barrel and get stuck in there.[/QUOTE] Should be fine, first you have the wad which helps hold them together until they leave the gun and secondly they would need to be heated up while remaining more or less stationary in order to stick to the sides of the smoothbore barrel. [QUOTE=GunFox;15919905]The FAMAS is a piece of shit. As for less than lethal shotgun shells, Rock salt is always a favorite at parties.[/QUOTE] I think box-o-truth tried that. [url]http://www.theboxotruth.com/docs/bot33.htm[/url]

[QUOTE=GunFox;15919905]The FAMAS is a piece of shit. As for less than lethal shotgun shells, Rock salt is always a favorite at parties.[/QUOTE] Chill, just wondering.

[QUOTE=Hellduck;15926061]Chill, just wondering.[/QUOTE] Note I didn't capitalize FAMAS for emphasis. It's an acronym. Wasn't coming down on yah, bud.

[b]Special Edition 4:[/b] Nonlethal Alternatives part 3. By now we have discussed various means of crowd control. But of course most of you are probably not too interested in joining the ranks of riot police, or becoming very, VERY unpopular. A more realistic scenario would be the typical dark alley situation. It's you, some guy who doesn't care for you very much and the only route of escape is behind him. So what might there be to help you get past this guy? -Many people stick with a little number called a stun gun. Simply put It's a small battery-powered device that has some metallic prongs. Stick those into your attacker, push the magic button and ZAP. They won't be able to do much of anything for a few seconds because they will be too busy writhing in pain. And there is no way to resist getting stunned either. You can't shrug it off. This is because of the way they work. A stun gun has a very high voltage current which can enter the body, but the amperage is very low (around 3 milliamps), so it's not intense enough to do any damage. This current is meant to interrupt electrical currents within the body that are used by the brain to order muscle functions. In effect it's like what would happen if you were to run a current over your computer's ethernet card. All that current would mix everything up. Thus when the current overrides a human's nerve system he or she will spaz out uncontrollably, no matter how much PCP they might have done that morning. This method of defense is very popular within the US and in particular abroad, where firearm use tends to be more restricted. Stun guns have also become somewhat feared, with enough voltage to make electricity arc between the contacts people have occasionally reported fending off attackers without even needing to shock them. That distinctive blue spark and zapping noise is the nemesis of many a dark alley denizen. Such a tool is highly popular with the police as well, since it offers a completely effective weapon that has a very minor chance of doing lasting harm. But it isn't perfect. The weapon could be a bit too effective if it is, say, raining and both the attacker and defender are wet. In that case the current could travel through the water and hit the user. It is also on occasion not perfectly safe. In rare cases people who were hit with stun guns have died shortly after due to heart attacks induced by the current. People with pacemakers are particularly susceptible. The biggest disadvantage is range. You have to go right up to the aggressor in order to use it, something that puts you within arm's reach and therefore in greater danger. -But there is a solution for that and it is called a Taser. Tasers differ from stun guns in that a Taser fires a pair of contacts with wires that run back to the gun. This allows it to be used at some kind of range (at least beyond that of arm's reach, the longest range being 35 feet). But it has to be reloaded with a fresh cartridge between shots. Until one or more of the electrodes (which are designed to penetrate clothes and dig in) have been removed the user can send supplementary shocks in order to subdue the perpetrator. This weapon is more famous in the hands of the Police than it is in the hands of civilians. The company that makes them (Taser International) mostly goes after the LE market although there have been variants made for both the military and civilians, both of which are reasonably successful. Use of this technology has grown exponentially since the 1990's when it was introduced, with mixed results. Untold thousands of lives were saved where the Taser has made it unnecessary to use deadly force. Millions of criminals who would have otherwise evaded capture were apprehended with the use of the Taser as well (since shooting a fleeing suspect in the back is unacceptable in the modern law enforcement doctrine). But the public image of this weapon is less than pleasant. With incidents such as the famous "Don't tase me, bro" debacle in the University of Florida where Andrew Meyer was mercilessly tased by campus police the public is very quick to say that cops are a bit too tase-happy now that they have been given a new toy to play with. There is, perhaps, a grain of truth in that statement. There is a common perception among some cops that while Tasers hurt, they don't do any lasting damage. Therefore they can be used very liberally. While this is the exception rather than the rule, outrageous headlines of cops overusing this indispensable tool aren't uncommon. Never the less it remains just that, an indispensable tool that saves countless thousands of lives every year. -But what if you don't want to have to count on a battery to be fully charged when you have to defend yourself? What if you have a gun, but you prefer not to kill your attacker? The crucial element lies not within the gun, but the ammunition. Bullets made out of anything from rubber to wax to plastic can offer most of the critical punch of an actual firearm, but with a significantly reduced risk of killing the victim. Because the ammunition isn't made of an actual metal the power and accuracy are severely reduced. But you still have quite a bit of power in your hands, plus the menacing appearance of a firearm. Since you still need a very real gun for this to work, it is rare that civilians have access to or ever use rubber bullets. To a civilian if you're going to go to the trouble to get permission to carry a loaded firearm you may as well be packing lead and since the law usually doesn't differentiate between the ammunition carried by a person this is what people who have the right to carry guns usually do. Rather rubber bullets are mostly used by the police for riot control and handling specific suspects. -But as far as non-lethal ammunition dispensers go, there is a king of this hill. The pump-action shotgun. No other weapon is so flexible that it can fire such a wide variety of reasonably large objects down a smooth barrel at someone who just HAS to go down. That and the pump-action in particular is prized for how easy it is to switch between the different specialty rounds. Indeed, pretty much anything you can think of that you can cram into a 2 inch tube with the width of a nickel has been crammed in there and shot at something (or somebody). Everything from simple rock salt, to technologically advanced electroshock rounds that function like stun guns on impact have been used to ruin someone's day. There are even such loads as "Dragon's Breath" which shoot a giant fireball, or rubber slugs which can topple a mule, or simple birdshot which lacks the potency to kill people under most circumstances but can still royally ruin someone's fighting spirit. The shotgun has been the vehicle of choice to deliver just about everything under the sun to just about every scumbag under the sun. One of the most common projectiles is a simple hackey sack. Well, the technical term is a "Bean-Bag round". Because it is a single object it packs a menacing whallop, but because it is flexible it can't break skin, although it can leave bruises or even break bones at point blank range. Various non-lethal 12 and 20 gauge shells have been offered to civilians, police and the military for many years and they are quite popular with the first two. Cops like to avoid killing suspects whenever possible and so do people who want a shotgun that they want to keep within easy reach somewhere in their house. For home defense there is the added benefit that most of these shots can't penetrate drywall, so it is that much less of a pain to clean up. -But I am forgetting something. Why put yourself at risk when you can have someone else kick (or rather bite) their ass for you? If you want to be really technical the dog falls under the blanket of "Zoological Warfare". And as long as there have been cops, there have been cops who used big dogs to help them catch bad guys. But naturally it goes back farther than that. Since before the first humans domesticated them, wolves have had the pack mentality that made them ideal for this exact purpose. They have a concept of loyalty which makes them very determined to act on behalf of their master and the wit to know just how to do it, and do it efficiently. These instincts have been watered down in dogs to make them more hospitable to other humans, but they still persist throughout the canine species. Certain dogs have been bred and trained from an early age to bring out these traits. The dog offers a means of catching up to and (assuming the dog is of decent size) disabling just about any individual. Almost no one can outrun a big dog and this dog will know instinctively just how to time the exact moment of attack as to bring down the fleeing perpetrator quickly and efficiently. Yet they are also smart enough to know how to keep the person occupied while help arrives and how to avoid doing serious, lasting or potentially fatal injuries (unless trained otherwise). For this reason (and because of their highly tuned senses) dogs are a crucial staple within day-to-day police function. You simply can't outrun a dog, or hide from it. If dogs had working thumbs there would be next to nothing any fleeing suspect could do. The presence of these instinctive traits, coupled with the territorial nature of the beast makes a dog the default choice for domestic protection. Numerous people keep a nice big dog in their house in order to ward off would-be intruders. Or they just enjoy having a canine companion and the protection offered is a neat bonus. One thing for sure, when burglars look for a house to hit, the one that says "Beware of Dog" is the last on the list. They are, however not exactly portable. You can't take a dog everywhere with you and you can't simply leave one at home indefinitely. The dogs bred to be small enough to be carried about are virtually useless for protection. Another issue is that some people just don't like them. If you have a dog that is big enough to offer you some kind of protection, anyone with any canine phobias could very well be terrified. And this is assuming that you yourself don't have such phobias. So while they are efficient, fine-tuned with millenia of breeding, they aren't for everyone, you can't take them around with you and naturally you have to take care of them. Simply put, it is a symbiotic relationship. And one you shouldn't enter into just because you want the dog to protect you.

Its actually illegal to teach a dog to attack in the United Kingdom, and if a dog bites without good reason the police will make you destroy it :( Still, mums always had a nice big German Shepard around the house. She rescued a police dog when I was younger, this dog was so nice to the family but if anything or anyone touched me the dog would go for them. We used to live in this house just outside London that was a little secluded, it was set back about 400 yards behind the row of houses on the street and when this dog did eventually bite someone she managed to talk the officer into just giving her a warning using the location as an excuse. "oh I need the dog that can protect me, I'm far away from everyone with my kid and their dads working nights." That was 17 years ago or so now. Even in self defence most dogs are destroyed now :( How the law has changed in the past 20 years. You used to have to have a dog licence. This seemed to sway more if your dog attacked someone. As for self defence laws in general. Its a MASSIVE grey area in the UK. Police were just as brutal as the criminal underworld, if anyone's seen Life on Mars or Ashes to Ashes, British police really were like that in the 70's and 80's.They could beat people and stuff. And if only they could do that now. In the 1990's things became alot more politicly correct. And this included self defence. There was a farmer in 1999 called Tony Martin. 2 people broke into his farm house in the middle of no where, which they planned to rob and prepared for it. He had been robbed 6 times before. Martin shot the 2 people, one in the leg, and one in the back, both trying to escape. One died a while later in the farm grounds. Tony Martin then hid the evidence and ran (what should have been his only crime that night) He was arrested and convicted for shooting the man (who was 16) and is still serving a prison sentence. Self-defence in your own home is the most confusing. The Tony Martin case is very controversial in the UK, and has changed opinions across the country. More and more people are defending themselves. And law has actually changed slightly. you can now use "reasonable force", the new grey area is "what is reasonable force?" And, "Intent" If you intend on buying a gun (easier than you think in the UK) solely to defend yourself, its a crime. If you sleep with a baseball bat and a knife next to your bed, and you kill someone with them, chances are you'd get put away. But, had say, a nice heavy blunt object like, I don't know, some decorative statue next to your bed. You can claim it was spontaneous and in self defence, and chances are you'll get off. Still break ins are fortunately rare. And with law being more lenient... On the street its alot different, you can get away with more. Legally you can own a rifle or shotgun but its no use carrying it around with out cos it has to be in a case at all times. Illegal firearms are rare so lucky gun crime isn't something that is common. Knives on the other hand. If your caught with a knife, especially now, your screwed. You shouldn't use weapons in self defence from a legal standing. (Unless its improvised) You LEGALLY have to inform the person attacking you if you box, play rugby, if your a soldier, or know any martial arts. Otherwise you can get arrested. Tl:dr Self defense law in the UK is confusing, complex, and shit.

I loved the shotgunpart

[QUOTE=Darkhorse01;15936308]Tl:dr Self defense law in the UK is confusing, complex, and shit.[/QUOTE] A-fucking-men.

I remember in my paralegal class a couple months ago we talked about how Britain was the origin of common law. Which meant that there were no laws, just judges who would pass judgment on people who harmed others any way they felt necessary. It was very flexible but inconsistent. A judge could have one guy get a slap on the wrist for stealing and another executed. So the judges started getting together and telling each other what their rulings on certain common law violations were. They found that they were for the most part pretty consistent in their judgments. Thus these conversations spawned a set of unofficial "guidelines" that they would usually follow. It was all based on precedent. The first lawyers were simply those who were aware of these tendencies and argued on behalf of their customers to urge the judge to follow ruling X as opposed to ruling Y. But what does this have to do with the fact that English laws (and therefore by Proxy pretty much all codified laws) are packed with these grey zones? Well the common law system had to be removed. The judge had too much power. He could do anything to anyone for any reason. Instead these rulings were "codified". They were turned into actual law codes that were consistent. But they didn't want to take all of the power away from the judges. This is why the grey zones exist. Supported with weasel-words such as "reasonable" it ultimately leaves that aspect of any given law up to the court's discretion.

Review on the Hi-Point Model 995 Carbine please. :smug: