In searching for some toy guns (which due to political correctness you simply cannot get any kind of toy gun in Britain) I gave up as you can't buy them nor import them.

Anyway, I came across this site (I'm not interested in airsoft, btw): http://www.hobbytron.com/SpringAirsoftRifles.html. But they're like so cheap to be untrue, about $20. If I price up an equivalent airsoft gun from UK they are about $500. What's the obvious thing I'm missing?

Sounds like they're spring-loaded guns. In other words, the projectile is fired by a compressed spring as opposed to compressed gasses. Springs are obviously much less powerful and much less convenient, likely requiring you to "cock" the firearm for each shot. In other words, they're cheap. They're almost certainly made of plastic, whereas higher quality guns are often made of metals. More expensive guns use compressed gas canisters or electric motors powered by batteries to compress air to ultimately fire projectiles.

I went into the regional detachment of the provincial police department a few months ago asking about AirSoft and was told to avoid it because the police want them outlawed^[1] and encouraged to instead get a real gun. Of course, in Canada, it's easier said than done to get a real gun... Nobody along the way has been overly helpful in giving me the information necessary to get licensed (which will probably be a 6+ month process) and I'm still at square one...

Gun laws don't accomplish anything more than revoking freedom from citizens. The people that would kill won't be phased by gun laws if they aren't phased by murder. That said, if an armed assailant does kick my door in I'll be forced to do as I'm told or have my head blown off. Obviously, police response times aren't in the nanoseconds, especially when the nearest station with jurisdiction is about 40 Km away^[2] and they won't even get the call until it's too late.

Here in Hawaii, people load up on assault rifles and go shooting with their kids!
Airsoft guns however will never be banned in the US because of the simple fact that the 2nd amendment allows the right to bear arms, even at a rally where the president is giving a speech, as long as its open carry. I assume Britain has a much lower incidence of gun related deaths much like Japan where guns are completely outlawed. Airsoft guns are almost free in America much like the site you showed, because its California. California has become the poorest state in America with 60 billion dollars in debt btw. But anyways its time to stock up on some real weapons because when the govt fails and Arnold goes back to 1985 to kill John, we'll be needing something against those T-1000's and airsoft will not work against them.

IIRC, sping-powered airsoft guns are fairly inconsistent and a pain to cock back after every single shot. The metal gas powered ones are sweet though

All I was saying though, is at $20 you seem to get a lot for your money. You can't even buy the worst plastic toy cap gun for that much here.

I have a few thousand dollars worth of airsoft gear if that gives my opinion extra weight.

Don't even look at anything under $150 if actually want to get into airsort. Even at $150 you're pushing it unless you get an Echo1 or decent Cyma(I discourage this) gun. The thing you're missing is the QC, fully automatic and semi electric firing, metal bodies, metal internals, MUCH higher fps, etc etc. Same applies to pistols, the good ones cost upwards of $100 for the blowback action, metal bodies, etc etc.

I think you may be miscomparing the guns. No cheap $20 gun should have a $500 equivalent unless there are some incredibly heavy taxes where you are.

It might be the taxes because if GB doesn't want someone to have one, that is the first way most governments can slow sales, before outright banning them.

All I want is a toy gun for my son to run around the garden in! This is all I can get: http://www.kidsarmyshop.co.uk/army-toy-guns.html

I suppose the ak47 does look like a gun and is roughly the right colour...

AirSoft guns aren't really "toys", though with the proper supervision and safety equipment should be harmless... The replica models that look almost indistinguishable from the real firearms are particularly inappropriate for children though. The last thing you need is your neighbors calling the cops because they saw the next door neighbors' son with an assault rifle and then he gets tackled or shot during a misunderstanding with the police. People in countries with strict gun laws are ridiculously paranoid about the thought of guns, probably because they themselves can't have them and are terrified of others that do.

The US is a breeding ground for terror btw, with number of assault rifles moving across the border to Mexico to fuel the drug war, its amazing the irony that exists in that context.

In this case, you should not consider anything powered with gas, as they're likely too powerful, and probably not considered toys by law (obviously I can't tell you how this is in your country ... in Germany and Austria, anything below 0.7 J is considered a toy, if I remember that correctly, and up to 5 (Germany) or 7 (Austria) J [again, these values are drawn from memory] can be carried without a permit, but this is definitely already too much for "fun stuff", you could do some serious injuries with these).

Shooting in the garden (again, speaking for Germany and Austria) is also only allowed if it's guaranteed that no projectile can leave the premises. So you have to pick a weak enough "weapon", surround your property with bullet-proof walls and/or restrict the shooting range within your property (so a projectile will always land on your property).

That said, toys are usually quite cheap (i.e., less than 250 USD).

I wasn't, I was just commenting on how cheap I thought a pump/gas operated replica airsoft gun was - $20.

What I really want is an mp40 lookalike, but will have to make do with a nerf gun

What, and you think telling the drug runners No! is going to change anything? They're running an illegal business and a potentially very profitable one at that. As long as they can get away with it the law isn't going to deter them.

The point is, is that the US should ban assault rifle sales in the first place so the drug dealers don't get them.

Of course the drug dealers are purchasing all of their weaponry from legitimate gun shops. It's not like they can ship crates across the Atlantic or hijack trucks or anything. It's not like gang affiliates would ever sign up for the U.S. forces. Obviously, they walk into the gun store, show their ID, and wait 3 days for the criminal record check like everybody else.

There are good reasons for allowing citizens to lawfully purchase assault rifles. The bad guys, whomever they may be, are always going to have them whether you permit them to or not.

No, if assault weapons were banned by a bill making them illegal, then nobody would be allowed to buy one and even the manufacturer would be outlawed. But the NRA and every gun-toting 2nd amendment Nazi would march on Washington and start a riot!

You sure like your Godwins, don't you?

Reductio ad Hitlerum.

Cause it's not like the American armed forces need assault rifles. You can just get rid of the armed part and just call them forces. They probably don't need guns anyway.

Also, it's not as if some of the best assault rifles come from Europe and Asia. Heckler and Koch? Who are they? Well, fine, you really can't prevent assault rifles from being manufactured elsewhere in the world, but it's not like anybody would be able to smuggle them into America. I mean, if they could smuggle guns in then who knows what else... Pretty soon somebody would realize they could smuggle drugs in and... Ohheywaitaminute.

It's not as easy as just banning guns. The people that do the things you're afraid of aren't deterred by laws. You can take whatever freedoms away from the people that you want, but the outlaws are going to continue to do as they please and you can't stop them until they've already done it. Assault rifles in the hands of responsible and lawful citizens is not a problem. There's no need to take assault rifles away from them.

Ok well then I can only assume you could explain why Japan and England have a low incidence of gun related deaths but the gun laws there are different from the US. Me and a lot of other people including Michael Moore would love to hear an explanation that would help.

How about start by citing your source.

The U.S. is a very different place than England or Japan. There are so many differences that it's nearly impossible to make a simple comparison of gun related deaths. All of the statistics I've seen for gun violence in America versus <gun-controlled-country-here> have been comparing apples to oranges (for example, they'd state how many more gun-related deaths America had, but without factoring in population, density, or other related factors).

I recently saw a news report on an American channel discussing the politics of gun-control. IIRC, they said that when gun control was enforced in Washington^[1] (I don't recall if it was the city or state) gun violence actually increased. The explanation was simply that the criminals still had their guns, but were less concerned with their victims fighting back. One prison inmate interviewed said that it's a lot scarier breaking into a home knowing the owners could be armed too. And that makes perfect sense. The bad guys aren't bullet proof either. He said gun control laws wouldn't stop him from getting a gun though. Why would they? Laws didn't stop him from robbing people. Prison does that.

There was also a gun-proponent telling the story of when a gun saved his life. I don't recall the story, but you could tell he was a strong believer in guns and felt that he owed his life to his right to own one.

The majority of gun violence in America is almost certainly in select neighborhoods that are gang or smuggler influenced (many of them in low-income neighborhoods). Sure, New York is known for having its really bad neighborhoods, but there are still millions of citizens in the city that feel perfectly safe walking down the street everyday. The inevitable happens to a few of them (as it does in every major city in every country), but compared to the entire population it's almost negligible (obviously, or the population wouldn't last long). Edit: I don't get the impression from any of A.cc's American members that they're afraid of walking down the street, but if they are I don't think gun laws would change it.

England has its own problems with crime. It's certainly not a crimeless country. And Japan has the fscking Yakuza. You don't think they're armed? The difference in gun crime can be largely attributed to the vast differences. Making a realistic comparison would probably require lots of data and deep analysis. I don't think gun control would lower gun related deaths in America at all.

And I never really cared which is why I left the mainland.

They don't teach American geography in depth in Ontario, at least not when I was in school (there were probably optional classes, but geography never interested me). At least I have an excuse.

That's so amazing! I would never have thought that a country with fewer guns would have fewer gun related deaths. What's next? Are you going to tell me that the USA has fewer camel related deaths than Saudi Arabia?

Violent crime is a social problem. Guns make it easier to kill somebody, but they don't make you want to kill somebody.

I know that, that was the chutzpah moment!

On a side note, Americans are savage animals, your reasoning for killing someone does not apply to a coyote.

Even leaving aside the gratuitous and offensive slur against all 300 million US citizens, what the heck are you talking about?

Only the gun toting ones, not all 300 million, obviously you don't get out much. But do realize that the support for invading a foreign country on BS was supported by about 70% of the US. That says something about America.

Guns don't kill people. Lead moving at high velocities does.

I'm not afraid to walk down the street. And I'm not talking about just rural Kentucky, I grew up just north of Chicago and I never worried about walking down the street, even at night.

Guns don't necessarily lead to gun violence. I cite Switzerland as evidence for my case. Gun Politics in Switzerland

Why are you insulting Alethiophile when it was your poorly worded sentence that was at fault? Obviously you didn't get much of an education.

Your reply also still doesn't explain why you brought up coyotes.

Because coyotes are the model of the perfect society. All hail the great coyote! Let us all roll in dirt, sniff each other's butts, and eat raw meat that has been dead for a week. And it will be good.

Asshole.

Had they had WMD's that they were planning to use, we would have had a big fat problem on our hands. But no, we took a perfectly justifiable precautionary. Better safe then sorry. And stop acting like you know everything about everything. Because you don't.

So America has WMD, if Iraq (or any other country for that matter,) had of decided that there was a risk of America using them to attack their troops or soil, would they have had the rights to take a 'precautionary' and attack America?

That is a blade that cuts both ways.

WMD's in Iraq a far less secure and easier to fall into terrorist hands (by theft, purchase, etc.). However, in America, this is not the case. WMD's are much more secure and wayyyy less likely to fall into the hands of some extremist group.

That is true. But it doesn't invalidate that your argument is flawed. But take America out of it. India and Pakistan have nuclear weapons, is it ok for them to attack each other, because one of them may use a nuke on the other?