Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[NJW2000]

While I'm tempted to address the obvious nonsense at the end of this post, I'm more interested in why you need actual firearms for a war reenactment.

[TamerVirus]

The reenactment needs to be as authentic as possible

[hector13]

Outlawing guns does make it a little bit harder to kill people, which is rather the point.

Laws like that NY law do rather confirm that the political classes are fucking stupid and order playing games instead of solving problems.

The reenactment needs to be as authentic as possible

War… war never changes.

[MrRoboto75]

The reenactment needs to be as authentic as possible

you can't fight in here, this is the war room!

[EuchreJack]

The reenactment needs to be as authentic as possible

Basically this.
The firearms are loaded with blanks then the reenactors go out and pretend to shoot each other.

Usually before and after, they hold shooting competitions with live ammo.

Some of the firearms are in fact from the eras in question. I'm of course mostly referring to pre-WWI reenactments.

[Lidku]

The assassin, Tetsuya Yamagami, made a 9-barrel electronic shotgun.

9-barrel

shotgun..

...

....

9

barrel

shotgun.. 

O_O

[Starver]

My point is that people who want to kill people are going to kill people. Outlawing guns isn't going to fix that problem.

But it makes it a further task to accomplish. Either choose another method, often with their own (different) legal barriers and technical hurdles, or have to create your own illicit gun. Not just pick up the first one handily lying around (yours or anyone else's) or pop over to the neaerest Walmart and buy the first one you can afford, with or without the trivial time to wait until you can actually take it home with you...


@(first)ninja: Having been involved in a Sealed Knot (English Civil War) re-enactment practice, we had muskets fired over our crouched lines of pikes. Obviously no projectiles, but not so obviously unable to fire projectiles[1].


[1] I don't know if they were all permantly "fire and smoke only" blank-fires, and I've heard of muzzle-ramrods being accidentally projected, so unless you made it impossible to even tamp down the poured charge you couldn't guarantee the musket isn't capable of use. Not sure what the current rules/practice is with modern re-enactment muskets, but similar issues would apply to ACW situations, though breach-loading rifles might be effectively neutered into a projectile-impossible format, even if not outwardly obvious.   

[Telgin]

Regarding reenactments: I think it's reasonable to make some exceptions to potential gun control laws and policy for antique weapons.  You can't kill people with them nearly as fast as modern weapons, and there isn't exactly a glut of them on the streets.

[EuchreJack]

Regarding reenactments: I think it's reasonable to make some exceptions to potential gun control laws and policy for antique weapons.  You can't kill people with them nearly as fast as modern weapons, and there isn't exactly a glut of them on the streets.

...that isn't really how laws work in New York will fuck you State.

[Criptfeind]

Can you link to the text of this new law? I'm trying to google to read about it but getting drown out by all the other drama about new york gun laws recently.

[Telgin]

Regarding reenactments: I think it's reasonable to make some exceptions to potential gun control laws and policy for antique weapons.  You can't kill people with them nearly as fast as modern weapons, and there isn't exactly a glut of them on the streets.

...that isn't really how laws work in New York will fuck you State.

Perhaps not, but I was speaking generally on gun control.  I think it's something that could be proposed as a reasonable alternative to whatever laws New York has passed, regardless of whatever the law is now, or whether it'll pass.

[EuchreJack]

Regarding reenactments: I think it's reasonable to make some exceptions to potential gun control laws and policy for antique weapons.  You can't kill people with them nearly as fast as modern weapons, and there isn't exactly a glut of them on the streets.

...that isn't really how laws work in New York will fuck you State.

Perhaps not, but I was speaking generally on gun control.  I think it's something that could be proposed as a reasonable alternative to whatever laws New York has passed, regardless of whatever the law is now, or whether it'll pass.

New York doesn't do "reasonable alternatives". They just try anything they can to disarm everyone.
....but sure, I guess other states might go for that.

[EuchreJack]

Can you link to the text of this new law? I'm trying to google to read about it but getting drown out by all the other drama about new york gun laws recently.

It's further complicated because there are two new sets of gun laws.

Maybe we can access it from here.

Typical New York State, they hide more shit to screw you in the details
"who  is  not an unlawful user of or addicted to any
 controlled substance as defined in section 21 U.S.C. 802;"
Thus anyone who has a social media account mentioning Crack Cocaine isn't getting a permit.

[Bumber]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Defensive_gun_use#National_Crime_Victimization_Survey

Defensive gun use is upwards of 100k per year.

"A 2013 National Research Council report found that studies looking at the effectiveness of different self-protective strategies had consistently found that victims who used guns defensively had lower injury rates than did victims who used other strategies."


Disarming law abiding citizens while criminals have illegal guns won't help things.

[EuchreJack]

Note: A DWI now disqualifies someone from getting, at a minimum, a concealed carry permit.
... considering how common DWI convictions are, it effectively disarms a lot of people.
Correction: Conviction in Past Five years disqualifies.
... honestly, I don't feel like Gun Owners "Won" the Supreme Court case. We're arguably worse off than before.