I didn't want to "bash" the NRA as such but it does seem overly "zealous" in fighting a gun ban . Maybe having too much emotion attached to the situation. Maybe it's the way US media reports that makes it very difficult for other nations to see a more balanced view of the NRA (portrayed as a bunch of die hard that wont listen to any criticism) . It's why I stated that the middle ground people should speak up more against both sides . At the moment the extremes of both sides are so loud that responsible and reasonable voices can not be heard .
Wide wing I respect that yourself and many other gun owners in the US are responsible and to be held up as how things should be done .
I'm not saying that the US should adopt all of the UK model but that maybe aspects of it should be investigated and adapted for your country . I'm sure that yourself would agree that a more active role in instructing people and making storage safe for the user and family .
While such measures wont stop illegal gun crime it could reduce gun accidents and such events as witnessed in the last few years .
Actually, nationwide, while guns sales were up 45% in 2012, gun injuries are down almost 20%. Closer to 30% in California.
http://www.sacbee.com/2012/12/27/5079151/california-gun-sales-increase.htmlI am a strong supporter of gun safety training for all, not just gun owners. It should be taught in our schools, inasmuch as 60% of all households have a firearm. However, the liberal teacher's unions and left leaning administrators won't even hear of this. IMHO, they are being obtuse. They can teach 12 year-olds about condoms, that's okay in their minds. However, no one has ever been accidentally shot with a condom and died... It's just common sense, which is a term that is becoming more and more of an oxymoron in this world.
Another simple way to encourage gun safety training is to make the cost of it tax deductible. Anything that can reduce gun accidents should be encouraged by the government at the state and federal level. Again, common sense.
Storing firearms is important. I used to store mine in a closest with an entry door lock and deadbolt (requiring 2 different keys to get into it). However, a determined burglar could eventually defeat this and get to the guns. So, I bought two Stack-On brand steel gun cabinets (really just very stout steel lockers). I keep these in the locked closet, lag bolted to wall studs. Each holds up to 8 rifles/shotguns and my revolvers. Some of my black powder rifles are in the closet, with some actually on display on the gun rack in my den. However, these are retained by a cable lock through the rack and trigger guards. The cap nipples are plugged with solder, making them useless. Besides, a burglar would not have clue one on what was required to load and shoot one of these, and they are all single shot. The powder and ball are locked up.
You said you had your eye on a Enfield rifle. I own several Enfields, a US made 1943 (Savage) No.4 Mk.I*, a Canadian made 1944 (Longbranch) No.4 Mk.I* and a beautiful Australian made 1917 (Lithgow) No.I Mk.III*. Even today, I would not consider myself badly armed with either of those three Enfields. As to the cost of shooting an Enfield... Surplus ammo is getting harder to come by, and is increasing in cost. New manufacture ammo is expensive, with the cheaper.303 ball ammo (FMJ) going for between 80 and 90 cents a round. High quality ammo can easily exceed $1 per round. So, consider the investment required to shoot frequently.
The least expensive rifle to shoot is a .22 cal type. A good .22 caliber bolt action rifle is inexpensive operate. Here, I can buy top quality, very accurate ammo for about $25 for 525 rounds. My BRNO (a Mauser design) Model 1 rifle is a true tack driver. I frequently take the BRNO and my Henry lever gun out for a relaxing afternoon of shooting, and not spend very much money. Of course, I haul a lot of gear with me. Two rifles, ammo box, tool box, cleaning box, bench rest pads, spotting scope, and a folding stool. Plus, a thermos of coffee.
