shotgun laws bound to be tightend because of 1 man

[al4x]

careful with that one Nial, the government could take it in house if they really felt like it. Fundamentally there needs to be an inquiry as to what went wrong in this case and whether there are lessons to be learned. If there are then fine we have nothing to hide as legitimate owners and anything that may help in this case is good for everyone to try and stop it happening again. If there have been any cock ups by the force or his FEO then we need to know and the public will understandably want to be assured that as far as possible the mistake won't be made again.

[Vipa]

People wouldn't see this as a valid reason, they would quote you Bambi.

 

Damn you Walt Disney!!!!

[Breastman]

I think you and others who have (understandably, I suppose as it's very easy to read into something what you want when feelings are running high) jumped on my comments have either not read my post properly or have misunderstood what I said.

 

Let's get this straight, I love shooting, I love target shooting, I stalk, I pigeon shoot and, when the opportunity arrises (usually cash flow prevents it) I get involved in driven shoots. Before Dunblane I was a pistol shooter and everytime I go out with rifle or shotgun I enjoy myself.

 

In your original post you said

 

"reinstate the very useful tools we lost before" when refering to S/A rifles & handguns.

 

What I am saying is that in no way shape or form can you refer to assault rifles or handguns (as stated earlier with some VERY specific exceptions) as "very useful tools" when refering to them in civilan ownership terms. I agree, they are a desirable item and it would be great fun to be able to use and own them again but aside from target shooting, they serve NO purpose in civilan ownership.... remember, unlike the States or Northern Ireland, self defence is absolutely no reason to posess a handgun and thankfully, unless you live in one of the inner city hotspots, in the UK you are very unlikely to ever need to resort to such force. I am 44 years old and in my entire life I've never been or put myself in a position where I would need to defend myself with my fists let alone a weapon. Whatever you may think of this country or the direction it is heading, we are all privilaged to live in an incredibly safe environment unlike some places where you hve consciously worry about your personal security/safety!

 

BASC are doing a stirling job and that's why I am a member but we also need to ensure that we get accross to the non-shooting community that firearms do serve a useful purpose and are not just playthings for power mad potential nutters! Trust me, most of the population would question whether punching holes in paper was a reasonable reason to allow the private ownership of guns and I would hazard a guess and say that, in this day and age, if that's all guns were used for, this very sad episode would possibly see their prohibition. If we start stating things like assault rifles and handguns serve a useful purpose, we are just playing into the media's hands. We haven't got them anymore and the chances of getting them back are remote to none so we need to avoid, at all costs, using this as some sort of reason or excuse (however it may be spun) to get said weapons back into our gun cabinets.

 

That being the case we need to focus our efforts on educating the public and ensuring we can justify the continuation of the privilage we have been granted. We need to show that the community at large benefits from the use of guns, accidents are prevented due to deer control, crops are protected and health is preserved through the control of vermin. If you tried to justify your posession of any gun now based on the fact that you 'like it' and want to shoot bits of paper, I think the majority of the non-shooting public would, in the current climate, laugh at you and tell you to get a grip...... In a way, I would probably agree with their sentiment!

 

Sorry but that was not my original post, it was Mr Logics. Personally i think its a very dangerous road to go down justifying firearms ownership by only listing occupational uses for them. The immediate response from anti's will be "only farmers and game keepers need guns for that" and you would effectively remove 90% of firearms ownership in one stroke.

 

I'm in complete agreement that the uneducated general public would weigh my, and hundreds of thousands of others desire for target shooting and plinking lightly against such tragic events but that is only because of their ignorance of the sport. I find it worrying however when shooters agree. I think if someone went on a rampage with a cricket bat or someone kicked a load of people to death with football boots, then the government suggested banning those items and effectively destroying the sport it might be a different matter.

 

Mark

[Vipa]

careful with that one Nial, the government could take it in house if they really felt like it. Fundamentally there needs to be an inquiry as to what went wrong in this case and whether there are lessons to be learned. If there are then fine we have nothing to hide as legitimate owners and anything that may help in this case is good for everyone to try and stop it happening again. If there have been any cock ups by the force or his FEO then we need to know and the public will understandably want to be assured that as far as possible the mistake won't be made again.

 

 

Yes, a possibility but who do the government recruit to do the culling, the Police? The forces? they just don't have the manpower or the money to pay for this to be done. What would happen in this instance is that stalkers/managers would have to register as a Government authorised deer manager and fall under their control...... wait.... that is what pretty much happens now!

 

I full agree with your final sentiments however, we are unfortunately caught between a rock and a hard place, the public won't care whether or not the Police got it right or whether it could have been prevented some other way. The shooting community needs to start immediately educating the public as to the real need for firearms within the community, both from a H&S standpoint and a financial one. We haven't got the luxury of time to sit back watch the unfolding of all of this as, unfortunately, the media are already 'making up the minds of the public' on their behalf, they cetainly won't wait/aren't waiting until all the facts are in...

 

We need to educate and we need to educate sooner rather than later, it's much easier to get someone to see your point of view when they have no preconceived ideas than it is to sway someone who has already made their mind up!

[Guest]

Never has a truer word been said

Agreed

 

I hope that a full balanced enquirey exonerates the current strict system, if it doesn't then we'll see.

 

I'm also hearing the views of non-shooters that 'why can't they all just use them in the clubs, and not have them at home?' - the point needs to be put across that a vast number of us don't have the luxuary of a club within a sensible distance, we belong to a club (where you quite rightly have to maintain a reasonable attendance) but only have the use of outdoor or military ranges. We also travel for competitions too.

 

Does anyone know what type of SG he had? I could see Gallery / Practical Rifle disiplines (22 semi and underleaver/repeater) and Practical Shotgun (FAC Multi Shot semi and pump) coming in for a hard time especially.

 

On another point

I would say there's afair amount of drivers, be they agressive, speed freaks or chancers on our roads every day of the week that are accidents waiting to happen, yet we hear no mention of drivers being retested say every 5 years with a psycological assesment included.

 

PS - BASC lapsed in April, renewed yesterday, jointly with the missus.

Edited June 4, 2010 by Guest

[Mr_Logic]

In your original post you said

 

"reinstate the very useful tools we lost before" when refering to S/A rifles & handguns.

 

What I am saying is that in no way shape or form can you refer to assault rifles or handguns (as stated earlier with some VERY specific exceptions) as "very useful tools" when refering to them in civilan ownership terms. I agree, they are a desirable item and it would be great fun to be able to use and own them again but aside from target shooting, they serve NO purpose in civilan ownership.... remember, unlike the States or Northern Ireland, self defence is absolutely no reason to posess a handgun and thankfully, unless you live in one of the inner city hotspots, in the UK you are very unlikely to ever need to resort to such force. I am 44 years old and in my entire life I've never been or put myself in a position where I would need to defend myself with my fists let alone a weapon. Whatever you may think of this country or the direction it is heading, we are all privilaged to live in an incredibly safe environment unlike some places where you hve consciously worry about your personal security/safety!

 

It was me that said that.

 

And I utterly disagree with you.

 

Semi auto rifles are fantastic for foxing, they allow quick second shots if required which is more humane. I pride myself on being as humane as possible, and so I am in favour of anything that allows me to do this better. Regarding pistols, while they are allowed for humane despatch, many forces just don't issue them, and/or **** about with lots of restrictions. They are useful for that purpose and again, it makes life easier, so I'd have one if they were readily available.

 

It is absolutely not the case that they serve NO purpose - what about repeating rifles? You only need one round to kill a fox or a deer - so should we make it single shot only?! Daft.

 

I would also like to see pistols allowed for self defence. You can likely do without, but how many people would not have died in Cumbria if someone had been carrying a handgun? Bird would have been shot himself very quickly, and lives saved.

[al4x]

its only one step further to the Forrestry commission doing their own culling. IMHO we don't need to go on the offensive as it shows a lack of sincerity at the events at the moment we just need to have an organisation to field questions about it and probably the same organisation to make sure the truth comes out. Should he have held a licence and was there anything that would have justified a revoke etc If so then we have a system that should work if the authorities were up to the job. Spouting how hard done by we are as shooters isn't the way forward IMHO The BASC are doing a good job so far at explaining how well regulated we are and that is fine up to a point and the point is it went wrong somewhere and people want to know where. It may just be a freak occurrence which certainly the prime minister is sugesting but how do you tell people this could happen again?

[Vipa]

Sorry but that was not my original post, it was Mr Logics. Personally i think its a very dangerous road to go down justifying firearms ownership by only listing occupational uses for them. The immediate response from anti's will be "only farmers and game keepers need guns for that" and you would effectively remove 90% of firearms ownership in one stroke.

 

I'm in complete agreement that the uneducated general public would weigh my, and hundreds of thousands of others desire for target shooting and plinking lightly against such tragic events but that is only because of their ignorance of the sport. I find it worrying however when shooters agree. I think if someone went on a rampage with a cricket bat or someone kicked a load of people to death with football boots, then the government suggested banning those items and effectively destroying the sport it might be a different matter.

 

Mark

 

Appologies Mark, you are quite right, wasn't in your original post.

 

I still feel you are missunderstanding me though. I am not suggesting that we ONLY sell firearm ownership on the basis of isolated necessities, what I am saying is that we need to promote ownership based on the fact that there really is a need in society for guns, they are not merely 'boys toys' which, sadly, is the way the majority of the public see them. Most have absolutely no idea what guns are used for and assume that they are just used for shooting targets or, to quote one interviewee, 'bunnies!, We need to be very careful not to come accross in the wrong way and for Mr Logic to refer to assault rifles (edit: sorry you don't say assault rifles, you refer to 'automatics,' Joe Public would read that as 'assault rifle' because that is what the media tell them they are!) and pistols as 'useful tools' does exactly that.

 

Mr non-shooting public sees no need for anyone to own any gun and they know full well that assault rifles and handguns are pretty much only designed for one purpose which I don't need to spell out here, remember for the vast majority of people in this country the only exposure they have to firearms is either on the news from Afgan or on the TV (mainly from America) with the likes of Jack Bauer running round shooting everything up. They simply are not aware that privately owned guns in the UK do not resemble 99% of the guns they are exposed to on TV or in movies. We MUST educate and not be seen as 'gun nuts!'

 

So if we start making statements like handguns and assault rifles being 'tools,' we are just re-inforcing mr publics existing beliefs as he will associate our desire/need to possess firearms with assault rifles and handguns. We have already seen such an association with the chap on the news refering to Bird's moderated .22 (we can only assume RF here or I think more would have been made of it) as a 'huge, James Bond style sniper rifle'

Edited June 4, 2010 by Vipa

[Guest]

I would also like to see pistols allowed for self defence. You can likely do without, but how many people would not have died in Cumbria if someone had been carrying a handgun? Bird would have been shot himself very quickly, and lives saved.

 

A little off topic:

Currently allowed only under the 'Personal Defense Weapon' regs - I think someone quoted 65'000 - which is about 10 times the number of what I guessed. I was quite surprised by the ratio compared to sporting FAC holders (2:1?).

 

It is and unfortunate and yet undeniable fact that in the immidiacy of the situation only another armed individual could have stopped this horror.

I'm not advocating 'Carry and conceal' (where Bird could himself have applied for one, giving him handguns too lets not forget) type of thing, we are so far from that (and I personally wouldn't won't the responsibility for one) it's a moot point, but had there been a couple of locals on emergeny pagers, be they Justicies of the Peace or off duty police etc, who were fully trained and with local knowledge, this guy could have been stopped, or held in one place for SO19 far earlier.

 

I am thinking along the lines of our rural Emergeny Responders we have for first aid when the nearest A&E is an hour away.

It's not just this situation, but maybe criminals would think twice about robbing and in some cases killing post office staff and the like during robberies, knowing that while SO19 are an hour or so away there are responsible trained people that can be on them within minutes.

Edited June 4, 2010 by Guest

[Cranfield]

Point taken. Could you explain, "Obviously if the law was less beaurocratic then the police would have more time to spot a bad 'un than chasing paper as thet do now"?

However, your point, as said, is noted and is taken on board.

Cheers

 

As I didn't make the statement you refer to, I obviously can't answer the question.

 

 

Cranfield,u should remove every post on here that gives the antis Or a journo ideas or before one of the posts on this tragic subject gets put on the tv.. We should not be givin people anti anything shooting ideas for them to exploit.just leave the basc updates on here.

 

We think we have removed the most extreme comments from all the threads on this subject, but we can't read every post and we do reply on members using the "Report" facility to draw things to our attention.

The "free speech" mantra always gets trotted out to justify the most outlandish comments, but "free speech" on Pigeon Watch has to be within the House Rules.

[David BASC]

The if and how anything went wrong will be in the police report, so there is little point speculation on what this may or may not say.

 

Public opinion is no, perhaps, so 'anti gun' as you may expect, look at what the papers are saying…there is no mass public outcry against legitimate firearm ownership, and there is no ;'knee jerk' reaction from politicians.

 

Why? Well partly due to the media and political work of the organisations of course, but also because people frankly realise that this is a very unusual event and is not in any way a reflection legitimate owners of firearms.

 

We must be on our guard of course as there will undoubtedly be calls for bans or further restrictions from some, who would probably be saying this anyway if given the chance.

 

The BASC media and political teams are on the case (as you have seen) and will continue to keep abreast of the issues.

 

Best wishes

 

David

[wymberley]

As I didn't make the statement you refer to, I obviously can't answer the question.

Agreed, but I trust that you understood what I was getting at.

 

 

 

We think we have removed the most extreme comments from all the threads on this subject, but we can't read every post and we do reply on members using the "Report" facility to draw things to our attention.

The "free speech" mantra always gets trotted out to justify the most outlandish comments, but "free speech" on Pigeon Watch has to be within the House Rules.

Having accepted your earlier rebuke without reservation, I think my remarks about free speech could have been as acceptable to you as they were, judging by his gracious reply, to RM.

 

Nuff said now.

Cheers

Edited June 4, 2010 by wymberley

[Browning GTS]

Some very good reading on here. My sugestion is all us serious shooters should now join BASC if not a member already ( ive been for 4 years ). Also if you are members of other forums or have mates who are not members try to get them to join. I think very soon we will need to stick together and this could be the way to go. I know they are not the cheapest around for insurance but that money will be well spent in the long run.

[Cottonseed]

Labour MP Chris Williamson said the government should not "rule out the possibility of the complete prohibition of private ownership of firearms as the best way of preventing future atrocities like this".

 

****.

 

 

No worries, the guy is a moronic nonentity.

[berettaman]

Some very good reading on here. My sugestion is all us serious shooters should now join BASC if not a member already ( ive been for 4 years ). Also if you are members of other forums or have mates who are not members try to get them to join. I think very soon we will need to stick together and this could be the way to go. I know they are not the cheapest around for insurance but that money will be well spent in the long run.

 

 

FINE, NOW FAST TRACK THE PAYMENTS PLAN OPTIONS AND A LOT OF US HARD UP SHOOTERS WILL JOIN

[eric parker]

Been reading some interesting stuff here!

This incident really highlights how detached many people are from country life/farming etc. So many people I have met have very little clue about how their food is produced, its not surprising that they don't realize that in order to produce meat vermin control is vital (fox's, & competing grazers), and even vegetarians who eat cereals, veg etc. this need pest control to protect the crop, using guns! Its very frustrating, but education is definitely needed, i think it should be part of the curriculum in schools.

I started farming after uni, and some people's ignorance never ceases to surprise me! I have SGC but just applied for FAC a week or so ago mainly to control the plague of foxes on the chicken farm where i currently work. On a side note, if they ban guns I suggest a pack of hounds for efficient fox control, we could follow them on...horseback? an idea....

Sorry for going off at a tangent!

[JR1960]

From the BBC website.....

 

'The UK has some of the toughest gun control laws in the world. If you want to own a gun, it is very difficult to do so'

 

Really?

 

How many people do you reckon apply for firearms just because they want a gun? The old classic

'I've just got my SGC/FAC could somebody help me as I've no where to shoot' or 'I already have two .22's but I want another one, what should I say on my application?'

 

The system needs tightened. Over here shotguns, air rifles, rifles etc are held on an FAC. If you don't have a good reason to have them then you don't get them.

Well that's a really helpful comment! If i remember rightly the reason the laws are so tight over there was you had a propensity for shooting each other!

The laws over here are quite tight enough and the handgun/automatic weapon ban was ridiculous, sadly i expect more of the same this time.

[mossy835]

 

we dont need comments like that.

[Guest topshot_2k]

From the BBC website.....

 

'The UK has some of the toughest gun control laws in the world. If you want to own a gun, it is very difficult to do so'

 

Really?

 

How many people do you reckon apply for firearms just because they want a gun? The old classic

'I've just got my SGC/FAC could somebody help me as I've no where to shoot' or 'I already have two .22's but I want another one, what should I say on my application?'

 

The system needs tightened. Over here shotguns, air rifles, rifles etc are held on an FAC. If you don't have a good reason to have them then you don't get them.

 

What a stupid comment.

 

1. You cant get a FAc without land to use it on already.

2. SGC shooting at clay ground is good reason so anyone could get access to shoot, most people who are asking the question you posted shoot at clay grounds but want some pigeon shooting/rabbit shooting aswell.

 

Our laws are tight enough. The gunman had land to shoot over so your crazy new laws would have had no effect in stopping this incident.

Edited June 4, 2010 by topshot_2k

[Christopher Graffius]

We expect the Cumbrian police inquiry to report within the next month. That will allow a debate to be held in parliament - as the Home Secretary promised - before the summer recess, probably before July 15th. If the Home Office is on the ball they could then review the legislation and have a proposal for a Bill announced in the Queen's speech in November.

 

One of the problems of the "no knee jerk" response is that it doesn't feed the media's hunger for developing news. As a result the press will speculate frantically on all sorts of changes to legislation, the most dramatic the better. BASC will be participating in those and putting a robust case for shooting. Some of you may have heard the Jeremy Vine debate today and we'll be on the "Politics Show" on Sunday. Our regional Directors will be covering local radio and TV.

 

The key to the debate from here in won't be the media froth. It will be about building a sensible consensus across parties for reasonable reform and leaving the antis on the sidelines. A lot of this work will need to be done in private and it starts now.

 

The good news is that the independent PACEC report - 70% funded by BASC - demonstrated that live quarry shooting alone puts more than £1.6 billion into the rural economy, contributes 2.7 million work days on conservation and funded the full time equivalent of 70,000 jobs. No government is going to want to damage that.

 

I'm exploring the possibility of getting the BASC election site reborn as a parliamentary lobbying tool for shooters to use. That should take a few days but it will allow all of you - whether or not you're a BASC member - to let your MPs know where you stand.

 

Christopher

[Guest topshot_2k]

Good work

[Vipa]

We expect the Cumbrian police inquiry to report within the next month. That will allow a debate to be held in parliament - as the Home Secretary promised - before the summer recess, probably before July 15th. If the Home Office is on the ball they could then review the legislation and have a proposal for a Bill announced in the Queen's speech in November.

 

One of the problems of the "no knee jerk" response is that it doesn't feed the media's hunger for developing news. As a result the press will speculate frantically on all sorts of changes to legislation, the most dramatic the better. BASC will be participating in those and putting a robust case for shooting. Some of you may have heard the Jeremy Vine debate today and we'll be on the "Politics Show" on Sunday. Our regional Directors will be covering local radio and TV.

 

The key to the debate from here in won't be the media froth. It will be about building a sensible consensus across parties for reasonable reform and leaving the antis on the sidelines. A lot of this work will need to be done in private and it starts now.

 

The good news is that the independent PACEC report - 70% funded by BASC - demonstrated that live quarry shooting alone puts more than £1.6 billion into the rural economy, contributes 2.7 million work days on conservation and funded the full time equivalent of 70,000 jobs. No government is going to want to damage that.

 

I'm exploring the possibility of getting the BASC election site reborn as a parliamentary lobbying tool for shooters to use. That should take a few days but it will allow all of you - whether or not you're a BASC member - to let your MPs know where you stand.

 

Christopher

 

This is superb Christopher and, if there is anything I, as a member can do to help with the hard work ahead, please just ask, I'm sure I'll not be alone in offering my time to help.

 

I would offer a word of caution though, I am not sure that BASC members lobbying MPs this soon after the event is a wise move, the ensuing email bombardment from the shooting community could be misinterpreted as insensitive and a little crass. Far better for BASC to do the initial lobbying and damage limitation on our behalf and then, once the Cumbria Police report is published, open the floodgates for members to lobby directly?

Edited June 4, 2010 by Vipa

[poontang]

Yep, it's good to see BASC in the spotlight. I've seen Mike Eveleigh interviewed a couple of times and he's put his points over well.

However, Bill Harrimans interview on Wednesday evening was, quite frankly, unbelievable. Hopefully he'll be kept well away from the media in future.

[Vipa]

However, Bill Harrimans interview on Wednesday evening was, quite frankly, unbelievable. Hopefully he'll be kept well away from the media in future.

 

Missed that, what was the issue? is there a link to it anywhere?

[Greymaster]

The BASC has come in for a lot of flak because of their stance on raised laying cages, (aligning with the League Against Cruel Sports, and sponsoring parliamentary early day motions on same), and lately for conceding that the end is in sight for lead shot. So much so that the highly regarded John Humphries and some of his Shooting Times colleagues have publicly quit the organsation.

 

The BASC IS the Voice of Shooting, even if it still has a wildfowlers bent, so it is good to see the BASC speaking up for commonsense and speaking up for shooting and shooters, because without them there would be nothing to counter the Ministry of Hysteria AKA the BBC and the rest of the ignorant "meeja".

 

The fact is that this recent atrocity is a one off. An otherwise and outwardly sane man suffered a bout of temporary insanity and decided to do for those he knew who had slighted him in a state of high paranoia. Also taking pot shots apparently at others who happened to get in his way or who might have reported him while he was sitill intent on his crazy mission. He could have done this with an illegal hand gun, a knife, a baseball bat or even his car.

 

Also in the headlines but overshadowed was the killing of a woman and daughter, shot by a man known to them.

 

We have 5 guns per 100 people in this country and some of the toughest gun laws in the world. The number in Germany is 30 per hundred and in France, 32 per hundred. There is no greater inicidence of maniacal atrocities in Germany or France.

 

It is a one off and in testament to this, the Cumbrian outrage has not sparked off a series of copy-cat killing sprees. By and large shooters are as sane and reliable as the next person, except that this has to be vouched for very five years or so in the case of shooters.

 

More people are killed by random or orchestrated acts of violence by people on ASBO's. How can that be permitted?

 

What we have is a solid sensible Conservative government and we are not going to get a knee jerk reaction legislating for stricter restrictions, although we might get more regular checks and even random visits from the Police.

 

Shooters out vermin shooting will be subjected to more harassment (even persecution) by the Police, and antis and other members of the public will over react to the sight of guns in fields and hedgerows. Right to Roam has given the public access to areas where they now come into eyeshot of shooters more often and drama queens armed with mobile phones will get up to mischief, triggering ARU siezing guns out in the field.

 

We now need BASC more than ever before. Ten years of determined education of the public and the media has been undone in a flash. It will be a difficult and anxious time but I think we have the right party in government. A united front by shooters and all shooting organisations is paramount.

Edited June 4, 2010 by Greymaster