My view regarding guns in the USA as a foreigner.

[Gawdzilla Sama]

Maybe you shouldn't be hunting cougars or bears or boars alone anyway.

[The Grand Nudger]

"Sport"

I agree, though, ofc, no one should hunt anything alone.  Being alone in the woods with a gun trying to do something inherently dangerous is always a bad idea, lol. The general use, though, for semi-autos in hunting is fast movers, and anything that could..conceivably, hurt you. That seems like a valid application of tech for sport.

Most folks don;t hunt with pistols..and thats public enemy no 1 on the gun front. Right behind that, though, are shotguns and bolt action rifles. Semi auto hunting (and sporting) rifles just don't present themselves in crime or gun death data very often. That's why I suggested breach loaders...since bolt rifles are in the no2 spot for gun death anyway. They account for the most "accidents" after pistols...both in the field and at home..maybe due to how many there are and their relative peception of being "safer" somehow. Those "accidents" themselves..account for more death and injuy than all intentional shootings with any other kind of rifle - though far..far less than both accidental and intentional shootings with handguns.

[Gawdzilla Sama]

"Sport"

I agree, though, ofc, no one should hunt anything alone.  Being alone in the woods with a gun trying to do something inherently dangerous is always a bad idea, lol.  The general use, though, for semi-autos in hunting is fast movers, and anything that could..conceivably, hurt you.  That seems like a valid application of tech for sport.

Most folks don;t hunt with pistols..and thats public enemy no 1 on the gun front.  Right behind that, though, are shotguns and bolt action rifles.  Semi auto hunting (and sporting) rifles just don't present themselves in crime or gun death data very often.  That's why I suggested breach loaders...since bolt rifles are in the no2 spot for gun death anyway.  They account for the most "accidents" after pistols...both in the field and at home..maybe due to how many there are and their relative peception of being "safer" somehow.  Those "accidents" themselves..account for more death and injuy than all intentional shootings with any other kind of rifle - though far..far less than both accidental and intentional shootings with handguns.

I went as backup for a guy who was hunting razorbacks. 

With a bow. 

Certifiable, but then so are most of my friends. 

We were in heavy bush so I carried a .50 revolver. I know they'll stop an angry boar. Didn't feel the need for a rifle with 30 rounds.

[The Grand Nudger]

@OP

At the risk of sounding coarse...and this is especially relevant to a dirty foreigner ( ) whose view of the subject is likely to invoke more of an image of a free-for-all hellscape than would be warranted..we don't have a "gun" problem, in america.  We have a pistol problem.  

You suggestion would not address mass shootings or our pistol problem, because our problem entirely circumvents background testing.  If it -could- be enforced in the current climate..it might reduce some portion of our pistol problem..but it would be unlikely to do anything to our mass shooting problem.  Our "gun problem" is illegal guns and ownership..but mass shootings are overwhelmingly committed with legally procured firearms.  The people who purchase them would pass those tests.

[Brian37]

We don't need rifles that have more than one round available without reloading. Bolt-action long guns are fine for hunting. If you've ever seen "The Magic Christian"* there's a scene where the lead actor "hunts" birds with an anti-aircraft cannon. Not very sporting, eh mate?

Call it hunting, don't call it a sport. A sport is a game, and in a sport all sides are aware of the rules going into the game. Killing an animal is hunting, not a game, not a sport. The human has the unfair advantage. I am not against hunting, I am only against calling it a sport.

[The Grand Nudger]

I went as backup for a guy who was hunting razorbacks. 

With a bow. 

Certifiable, but then so are most of my friends. 

We were in heavy bush so I carried a .50 revolver. I know they'll stop an angry boar. Didn't feel the need for a rifle with 30 rounds.

Yeah, with pigs it's about hitting hard, not shooting alot real fast.  Bows are actually legit as hell for that...but maybe not on foot, lol.  You're a good friend.

---

Call it hunting, don't call it a sport. A sport is a game, and in a sport all sides are aware of the rules going into the game. Killing an animal is hunting, not a game, not a sport. The human has the unfair advantage. I am not against hunting, I am only against calling it a sport.

Agreed...that;s why we have sporting rifles and hunting rifles.  Some -can- pull dual purpose....but they're generally inferior to other specific actions.  An AR-15..for example..is a sporting rifle.  Best employed, and largely chambered, to shoot at paper targets on a range.  You know...I've always wondered why we couldn't insist that sporting rifles remain in storage at the range, while we allow hunting rifles to be securely stored at home.  It would seem like the things so useful for sport shooting are best kept in a place that's been designed with those specific risks in mind.

There's an idea that actually would lead to fewer mass shootings, or at least change their venue from schools to the shooting range.....where they belong.

[Gawdzilla Sama]

We don't need rifles that have more than one round available without reloading. Bolt-action long guns are fine for hunting. If you've ever seen "The Magic Christian"* there's a scene where the lead actor "hunts" birds with an anti-aircraft cannon. Not very sporting, eh mate?

Call it hunting, don't call it a sport. A sport is a game, and in a sport all sides are aware of the rules going into the game. Killing an animal is hunting, not a game, not a sport. The human has the unfair advantage. I am not against hunting, I am only against calling it a sport.

Properly it's a "blood sport", like fighting gladiators against each other in Hadrian's Amphitheater.

[The Grand Nudger]

The sport is in the shooting, not in the killing, lol.

@Brian
A .22b Fortner with a staged trigger, for example.....sport. I want one so bad. Wouldn't hunt with it though. Plus, they start at $3500 (before fitting). I can get a rem700 for $50 at Court Day. OTOH, a fitted shotty (one that I'd want, anyway) runs $7k and I would absolutely get that for hunting.

[Brian37]

I went as backup for a guy who was hunting razorbacks. 

With a bow. 

Certifiable, but then so are most of my friends. 

We were in heavy bush so I carried a .50 revolver. I know they'll stop an angry boar. Didn't feel the need for a rifle with 30 rounds.

Yeah, with pigs it's about hitting hard, not shooting alot real fast.  Bows are actually legit as hell for that...but maybe not on foot, lol.  You're a good friend.

---

Call it hunting, don't call it a sport. A sport is a game, and in a sport all sides are aware of the rules going into the game. Killing an animal is hunting, not a game, not a sport. The human has the unfair advantage. I am not against hunting, I am only against calling it a sport.

Agreed...that;s why we have sporting rifles and hunting rifles.  Some -can- pull dual purpose....but they're generally inferior to other specific actions.  An AR-15..for example..is a sporting rifle.  Best employed, and largely chambered, to shoot at paper targets on a range.  You know...I've always wondered why we couldn't insist that sporting rifles remain in storage at the range, while we allow hunting rifles to be securely stored at home.  It would seem like the things so useful for sport shooting are best kept in a place that's been designed with those specific risks in mind.

There's an idea that actually would lead to fewer mass shootings, or at least change their venue from schools to the shooting range.....where they belong.  

No, an A-R15 is nothing else but a battlefield weapon. This is what I am talking about. How we as a society downplay a dangerous object, and all guns are dangerous and should be treated as such. 

Australia has laws like what you suggest. Certain types of weapons cannot be kept at home, you can own them, but they stay stored at a gun club and you can only fire them there. 

If someone is really intent on shooting other people, join a paint ball club. I think that is fun, although the one time I did it, I shot my teammate out of panic and we lost all 3 games on the team I was on.

[The Grand Nudger]

No, an A-R15 is nothing else but a battlefield weapon.

Ridiculous.  An m4 is a battlefield weapon.  A 249 is a battlefield weapon.  A 240b is a battlefield weapon.  An AR-15 is a sporting rifle designed to evoke gi-joe feelings in people who look at it..which obviously works on the gun nuts -and- you.  It's a brilliant gimmick on merchandising..and, commercially, the purpose of an ar-15 is to sell accessories.

All guns are dangerous.  There's no need to call any particular gun what it isn't to establish that fact.  An AR-15 is dangerous regardless of the fact that it's not "a battlefield weapon", an even more vacuous term than "assault-style" rifles.  It is on that ground..not on the grounds of some firearm making your joe-balls tingly, that regulations are warranted.