Jump to content

Woman shot in the eye with airgun, news this morning


lakeside1000
 Share

Recommended Posts

A woman was hit in the eye by an air gun pellet and is in hospital, I know we have little control over those who own and abuse air guns but it certainly does not bode well for those of us that stay within the law, Scotland already have licencing , it wont be long before it starts here and then more restrictions will follow, I only use mine for rabbit control but I would miss it if I had to stop, watch this space. :no::no:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Things like this make me so angry! One complete wingnut has potentially blinded an innocent person and is more than likely going to create a huge amount of grief and aggro for the wider shooting community.

 

I hope the lady recovers and isnt permanently injured, though as its a hit to the eye I would suspect there will be some permanent damage poor woman! :(

 

I know public safety has to trump all (and rightly so) and with thugs and random idiots acting like this you can understand why the legislators are calling for airgun licensing, but I agree its absolutely infuriating when the tiniest minority of wallys ruin things for the hundreds of thousands of law abiding shooters.

 

Inch by inch the whole sport could get legislated out of existence :(

 

EDIT: Also just seen this...

 

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3179737/The-shocking-moment-one-brave-woman-confronts-rifle-wielding-thug-drunken-rampage-fuelled-27-pints-beer.html

 

Drunken lunatic causing mayhem in Scarborough with a .22 air rifle! Now I know he could have easily done the same thing with a knife or cricket bat (and probably would have had the airgun not been available) but its still potentially more fuel for the licence/ban fire. :no:

Edited by stubear
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Very brave woman.

 

Brave indeed, she probably did not know it was an air rifle and certainly would not have known it was broken. 12 months with his record, its a joke, bet the cop who drove his car at him wished he'd kept going.

 

Having said she probably did not know it was an air gun (not meant to play down the incident) they can still be dangerous things in the hands of an idiot. It only takes one shot in the wrong place at close range to produce serious injuries or worse. Anyone on here who shoots rabbits, squirrels etc has seen the damage they can do at 30 yards + Look at that poor lady in Norfolk serious eye injury. Really hope she recovers with her sight intact.

 

Another two nails in the coffin of shooting I'm afraid.

 

I could go on to say a lot of things about our courts, justice, punishment etc but I won't as everyone here as responsible shooters will already think the same things.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The problem is that there are so many ****** SMK springers in the hands of scum.

 

On facebook, someone posted a link to that guy in Leicestershire who shot a burglar and the judge agreed with him. All the scrotes were coming out of the woodwork saying about how they keep their air rifles under their bed for protection.

 

That is how children get shot, when little Shane finds daddy's crappy air gun under the bed and tries to re-enact William tell on little Sharon.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That may be the case, but we don't hear of scrotes shooting someone in the eye with a cheapie 22lr.you can pick them up off gun trader for sub £100, but what stops the scrotes is licensing & unfortunately this is now what air guns need.Those that own expensive air rifles I would assume have somewhere to shoot them be it a range or permissions and if this is the case should have nothing too fear regards licensing,Other than that a total ban will be enforced, it's only a case of when.

Edited by Davyo
Link to comment
Share on other sites

That may be the case, but we don't hear of scrotes shooting someone in the eye with a cheapie 22lr.you can pick them up off gun trader for sub £100, but what stops the scrotes is licensing & unfortunately this is now what air guns need.Those that own expensive air rifles I would assume have somewhere to shoot them be it a range or permissions and if this is the case should have nothing too fear regards licensing,Other than that a total ban will be enforced, it's only a case of when.

 

You make a good point.

 

I'm in two minds. In one hand, I see airgun licensing as another restriction. In the other, I see it as protecting real shooters by reducing crime. They won't but I'd hope that they'd reach a compromise and increase the energy limit on licensed airguns.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That may be the case, but we don't hear of scrotes shooting someone in the eye with a cheapie 22lr.you can pick them up off gun trader for sub £100, but what stops the scrotes is licensing & unfortunately this is now what air guns need.Those that own expensive air rifles I would assume have somewhere to shoot them be it a range or permissions and if this is the case should have nothing too fear regards licensing,Other than that a total ban will be enforced, it's only a case of when.

 

If there were several million unlicensed rim fires floating around and ammunition was freely available make no mistake you would hear of many more incidents involving them. Rim fires have always required a FAC so you are not comparing like with like.

 

Until every single illegal air rifle is destroyed in Scotland things will not change as regards idiots misusing them. And do you honestly think the idiots are going to hand them in or not bring one back from England. or not get a mate to post one, or not order one from Germany mail order.

 

The only people who will be penalised by licencing are the responsible people who are doing everything legally. So in answer to your question licencing is not the answer. The answer is to throw the book at the idiots who misuse air rifles.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Licensing wont stop air gun shootings anymore than a complete ban would. There are far too many out there already for even a complete ban to have any effect.

The sort of people who abuse firearms aren't gong to be bothered about licenses. A driving ban or no license at all doesn't deter those who have no regard for the law or others from driving; all licensing of air guns will achieve is to penalise the law abiding and cut off entry level shooting for many youngsters.

Education and severe penalties cost money, which is why licensing or a ban is a quick fix for any government which can then say 'Hey, look, we've done something about it' while not really achieving anything in the name of public safety.

The barm pot in Scarborough had mental health issues, had supped 27 pints of beer, had 31 convictions for 60 offences including 3 for possession of an offensive weapon in public, ABH, arson, criminal damage etc etc etc. Do we blame the air gun, the beer, his mental health issues or the system which allows someone like him to roam the streets?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It is already against the law to shoot somebody and that doesn't stop the wallopers so how on earth would the threat of a lesser penalty somehow be more effective.

 

If we started from a position of no air guns in circulation then the argument of making it harder to obtain one would be true, but as it is there are millions of the bloody things.

 

Although the incidents above are terrible the misuse of air guns is still absolutely tiny relative to the number of them in circulation, there are far greater number of serious injuries caused by people glassing or bottling people yet no campaign to licence the use of glass in pubs.

 

Although I can understand the motivation behind those suggesting stricter controls, please let's not have any more invitation of creeping legislation into our lives. That applies across the board and not just in respect to fire arms, far too many calls from far too many people to legislate against everything.

Edited by grrclark
Link to comment
Share on other sites

but what stops the scrotes is licensing & unfortunately this is now what air guns need.

 

Respectfully NO! NO! NO!

 

IMHO, the only impact of more restrictions and licensing is on the already law abiding sector?

The off "piste brigade" don't give a fig for the law, so how does it have any effect?

Please tell me?

Incidentally this morning I had the misfortune to pass an "off piste" encampment of some sort on public land, i would suggest It would not be wise to confront them and suggest more rules and regulations?

If you choose to do so i will hold your coat.....lol

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This p***ed up lunatic gets only 12 mths for threatening behaviour whereas the 88 yr old (see off topic) gets 2 yrs for carrying a loaded shotgun in his car and threatening nobody. Yes, the old guy was wrong to do so but the comparable sentences are illogical.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If there were several million unlicensed rim fires floating around and ammunition was freely available make no mistake you would hear of many more incidents involving them. Rim fires have always required a FAC so you are not comparing like with like.

 

Until every single illegal air rifle is destroyed in Scotland things will not change as regards idiots misusing them. And do you honestly think the idiots are going to hand them in or not bring one back from England. or not get a mate to post one, or not order one from Germany mail order.

 

The only people who will be penalised by licencing are the responsible people who are doing everything legally. So in answer to your question licencing is not the answer. The answer is to throw the book at the idiots who misuse air rifles.

And the reason there isn't several million rimfires floating around & people getting shot in the eye is because they are licenced.We know there are loads of air rifles floating about but it needs an amnesty for a period with a clear warning that after that amnesty expires heavy punishment will follow.There will always be that element thick enough to keep hold of them we know ( just like the minority that drive with no valid licence)but there is only one other direction this will go and that's a total ban,which will enevitably move on to all Firearms & shotguns

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Licencing is the first step to a total ban, politicians know that licencing airguns will not work due to the amount of airguns in circulation and the amount of scrotes that are likely to keep them. This will allow them to gleefully announce in a few years that licencing hasn't worked and the only way to keep the public safe will be a total ban.

 

It won't stop that lady being shot in the face, save the swan in the local pond or that traffic light from getting shot. It must be resisted at every turn and every shooter must be willing to march in London to protest.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Licencing is the first step to a total ban, politicians know that licencing airguns will not work due to the amount of airguns in circulation and the amount of scrotes that are likely to keep them. This will allow them to gleefully announce in a few years that licencing hasn't worked and the only way to keep the public safe will be a total ban.

 

It won't stop that lady being shot in the face, save the swan in the local pond or that traffic light from getting shot. It must be resisted at every turn and every shooter must be willing to march in London to protest.

That is the key point, all of these are already illegal yet they still happen. Stabbing people, shoving a broken bottle in someone's face or, to go to an extreme, abducting children are all illegal and they all still happen with depressing regularity.

 

Legislation will not correct the problem of numpties with airguns and the more we clamour for some sort of magical rule of law to fix problems then we more we cede our liberties in what is an utterly futile exercise.

 

This is a universal truth and not restricted to firearm legislation. Legislation is great in order to penalise someone who is caught during or after the event, it does not prevent it from happening.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

but there is only one other direction this will go and that's a total ban,which will enevitably move on to all Firearms & shotguns

This we can agree on.

Unless all shooters join an organisation and all organisations come together on some level as a National Organisation?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This we can agree on.

Unless all shooters join an organisation and all organisations come together on some level as a National Organisation?

That's another worrying factor that should be compulsory when applying for SGC/FAC and checked annualy,insurance,we say we are all responsible shooters but on this forum you read about it frequently of members have no insurance or no membership to any of our organisations.Its only when they get an issue they contemplate joining one of our shooting organisations.In fact an RDF should be asking for insurance liability before letting you purchase a gun,just a thought.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

talking of licensing air rifles,,,,just how many air rifles are out there running above 12 ftlb ???

 

probably thousands,,,,something does need to be done but what I don't know,

 

stiffer sentencing is one way, but then some will disagree with that because it certainly hasn,t worked with knives,

 

these idiots will continue to be idiots with or without laws,,as said it will only be the law abiding shooters who will suffer,

 

I do agree ALL shooters should have insurance otherwise you should not be able to have any firearm, but then again there will be those mingebags who will winge about that,,

 

 

we cant win, marching or not, but being forced to have insurance with a national shooting org must surely give shooters more clout to stand up and be counted

Link to comment
Share on other sites

We need a license to drive cars, but it doesn't stop idiots killing people with them.

When they do, there isn't a public outcry to ban cars or tighten up the licensing laws.

Even if you get a ban, they give you your license back after a few months.

Why is the world so hard on gun owners, yet so lax on other potential weapons?

If someone is bent on hurting someone, they will do it whether guns exist or not.

It is people that are the problem, always has been, always will be.

Not only is the world full of idiots, they fuel themselves with drugs and alcohol, go out and steal cars and joy ride all over the place, usually on CCTV or police video, then we let them off because of lack of evidence.

Yet, if we, as licensed gun owners, put a foot out of line, we are descended on by armed response units and have our guns confiscated, usually for life.

I find it ridiculous that I could flip my lid, jump in my car and deliberately plough into a bus stop full of people and what would be the outcome?

I would be arrested (rightly so), have my guns confiscated, probably for life (rightly so), got to court and probably do a spell at Her Majesty's pleasure. Then, I would get out of prison and be allowed to jump straight back into my weapon of choice and potentially do it all over again.

There's real logic for you.

The point is, it's not the license that stops me hurting people, it is mental stability and maturity.

Given the best will in the world, that is not something we can always predict or control.

We need to stop knee jerk reactions as a result of tragic incidents and understand that no matter how many bits is paper (or plastic) we issue, or how much we charge for the privilege, we will never stop people hurting or killing each other.

Don't get me wrong, I believe that powerful guns need to be licensed and controlled, but kicking decent, law abiding citizens in the nuts every time there is an incident does not solve anything.

We would be far better putting the effort into banning violent video games or trying to control extremist web sites that brainwash people into thinking that violence is the answer.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Who is going to pay for it all the cost of setting up the infrastructure will be massive, the best way is as mentioned above you have to have insurance not a license it does not have to be expensive and this then allows you to own an air rifle whilst you are insured,

no insurance no rifle, the insurance could be through two insurers that will have to tender for the right to insure the shooter and hold all the details on a central created data base that already exist like for car insurance etc.

If they ever do make it a law to own one how many cabinets will be required as they will have to make sure the rifle is locked away best start investing in a cabinet makers

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I dont have a problem with a licence, if its administered properly and easy to amend ie an internet portal. Sadly the case is that wont happen the police are strteched as it is,, i cant get a confirmation when i make an ammendment ie add or remove a gun off my licence.

 

The only thing i think it may help with are clearer deffinitions of what is and isnt allowed. It may stop the sports/gun shops selling rifles to which ever ***** walks in off the road.

 

If some scally is caught witha rifle, then they currently are allowed to posses it irrelivant of any previous convictions. My understanding is if you have previous criminal record or are known to the police then you wont get a licence, that then would make it an illegal firearm carrying a heavier sentence

 

I accept a 100% its not so much the type of weapon but who has control of it. If the underworld want a gun i guess its easy enough for them to get one so no licence wouldnt be an issue.

 

As for security, i think again im right in understanding they should be suitably secured so anyone under 14 doesnt have access to it, so a simple trigger guard may suffice. My pcp is in my safe but thats simply because i have granddaughter and although they she is very well behaved accidents happen.

 

I cant see the Police with their current funding, work load, and resources being able to cope with the additional paperwork, premises checks, and reenforcement of such an additional section to licences.

Edited by geoffwales
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm not against licensing either, but regarding air rifles it's a bit like the proverbial stable door and bolting horse. Simply too late.

The government hasn't the will nor the money to administer stiff prison sentences; much easier to license in the full knowledge that it will achieve nothing in the respect of protecting the public but they have been seen to have 'done something', and leave the onus on the law-abiding shooter to comply or risk prosecution and the police to sort it all out. Sorted. :good:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...