The Home Affairs Committee inquiry into Firearms Control 2010

[al4x]

It is interesting, I have to say I've got two people I went to school who topped themselves with shotguns, whether markers would have helped I don't know but mental illness is surprisingly common and there really ought to be some link rather than relying on people to hand their own guns in if there is a problem.

 

edit to say

 

David frankly that is rubbish, no one should be given a 308 with no prior experience and allowed to find out what it can do. I started on airguns moved up to shotguns then rimfires and then onto centrefires and really it was still a steep learning curveand the centrefires still fill me with a lot of respect so I'd be majorly against people with no experience being able to get their hands on them with no hurdles to cross. On a personal basis I have had no mentor clauses no requirement for anything based on experience gained and got everything I've wanted so far, but I have gone about things I think a fairly sensible way. The current system works well and is justifiable to the anti gun lobby where people have to proove need to have a certain firearm. Its one thing there is no way you're going to be able to change and really what you need to be focussing on more is making sure shotguns don't get put onto FAC's as that seems the more popular option

Edited August 27, 2010 by al4x

[Raja Clavata]

I think such a scheme would need to backed up by a certificate of competence to be in any way workable as by the wording it would also imply all certs are open?

[Paul223]

not sure thats a good idea David, so you're suggesting a system where a new license holder could go out and buy any caliber FAC gun?

I am not sure about buying any calibre but if you have a slot for a .22 then why can't you just chop and change as you see fit? after all as long as you own one .22 what difference does it make?

If you just had an FAC like you did a SGC you would get people apply for a FAC with a few acres of land and want a .22 and then they would be off buying a .338 lap mag.

surely 3 seperate levels to the fac, rimfire .22 cf and full bore?

As for tagging medical records personally this makes sense and for me is something we should be offering them to look like we are trying to prevent a repeat of cumbria etc

No no, i can't think of a worse scenario, people who need a little help hiding from the doc because it may affect there fac sgc

I think such a scheme would need to backed up by a certificate of competence to be in any way workable as by the wording it would also imply all certs are open?

I agree, as long as it's not some money spinning idea like the dsc has turned out to be

[scolopax]

Just knocked together a submission to the inquiry committee on the basis of something is better than nothing. Just hope I have not missed the deadline.

[Raja Clavata]

Sent mine in earlier too, up to my eyeballs in it this week but this simply had to be done

[Canis]

Odd that you'd use that as an example of the 'deadliest weapon'. A straight pull rifle is no more dangerous than a bolt action rifle in the same calibre. In fact most are less accurate. Most are also chambered in .223Rem which isn't a particularly 'heavy' calibre anyway. A .338 Lapua or .50BMG bolt action rifle would be far, far more potent.

 

The indoctrination from the anti-gun lobby, mass media and government has taken a fast hold in this country, and has even successfully infiltrated the shooting community, always sad to see

 

Mark

I'm not anti gun in any way in infiltrated by the anti's - I'll justify my point!

 

While a 50 cal bolt action may be caple of taking out the a man at a mile or so it will only have a limited magazine. I quoted an assault rifle because I a straight pull Assault rifle has 20 or 30 rounds in the magazine and assuming you take an an SLR (FNFAL) (7.62) for example you have a weapon that will probably kill most men with a single shot and thefore you have 20 possible kills without Reloading . I am led to believe that with a scope attached, the marines whe sniping with the SLR in the falklands at about 1000m. At short ranges say sub 100m you'd expect 20 hits 20 kills from the SLR and only 5 hits 5 (admittedly messy )kills from the 50 Cal. Admitedly with 5.56 ball even in the improved nato SS109 format has been shown to be a bit pants against human targets, common thinking suggesting that it takes 3 rounds on average to kill a man (though i'm sure people on this forum use it satisfactorily on foxes ) But then this is balanced by the fact that M16 derivative magazines are available with capacities up to 100 rounds !

 

Therefore an 20 shot SLR or 100 round M16 straight pull IMHO is more deadly than a a 5 shot 50 calibrer .

 

The point i was really making however is that our laws put a number of low lethality weapons eg the Saxby And Palmer pistol and the FAC air rifle under FAC when they are are in reality a lot less dangerous than a Shotgun.

 

As a Shotgun Cert holder it seems bizaire that technically if my Weirauch HW77 was chronographed as over 12ft lbs I would be guilty of an offence that carries a mandatory Five stretch when My shotguns are clearly far more lethal weapons than my airgun

[luvbus]

It would be nice to see the current systems simplified as nobody seems to think it is very efficient (except for Northumberland's speedy FAC issue's going by recent topics!!).

 

I appreciate it probably wouldn't be very popular with the air gunners among the group, but to have the 12ft/lb limit scrapped and a combined shotgun/unlimited gas power certificate would make more sense. As canis has said, having to obtain a FAC for an air weapon above 12ft/lbs does seem rather OTT when compared to the lethality of a shotgun. When you look at recent happenings in Scotland, some sort of control on air weapons almost seems inevitable before too long.

 

Surely an FAC system something along the lines of a 3 stages would give an experience/career path without some of the current headaches:-

 

1 - Rim fire

2 - CF up to .243

3 - CF .243 and above

 

Each stage could licence you for the calibres rather than individual guns to save much of the paperwork for FLO's. A land inspection could still be carried out for rim fire until an applicant has earned his 'spurs' but then once experience has been shown tickets would then be 'open' from there.

 

It would still leave a place for DSC or equivalent training for those only interested in deer stalking who want to bypass the whole small calibre thing and move straight onto something suitable for their needs.

 

Only my 2 cents worth, but there you go.......

 

Rich

[Breastman]

I'm not anti gun in any way in infiltrated by the anti's - I'll justify my point!

 

While a 50 cal bolt action may be caple of taking out the a man at a mile or so it will only have a limited magazine. I quoted an assault rifle because I a straight pull Assault rifle has 20 or 30 rounds in the magazine and assuming you take an an SLR (FNFAL) (7.62) for example you have a weapon that will probably kill most men with a single shot and thefore you have 20 possible kills without Reloading . I am led to believe that with a scope attached, the marines whe sniping with the SLR in the falklands at about 1000m. At short ranges say sub 100m you'd expect 20 hits 20 kills from the SLR and only 5 hits 5 (admittedly messy )kills from the 50 Cal. Admitedly with 5.56 ball even in the improved nato SS109 format has been shown to be a bit pants against human targets, common thinking suggesting that it takes 3 rounds on average to kill a man (though i'm sure people on this forum use it satisfactorily on foxes ) But then this is balanced by the fact that M16 derivative magazines are available with capacities up to 100 rounds !

 

Therefore an 20 shot SLR or 100 round M16 straight pull IMHO is more deadly than a a 5 shot 50 calibrer .

 

The point i was really making however is that our laws put a number of low lethality weapons eg the Saxby And Palmer pistol and the FAC air rifle under FAC when they are are in reality a lot less dangerous than a Shotgun.

 

As a Shotgun Cert holder it seems bizaire that technically if my Weirauch HW77 was chronographed as over 12ft lbs I would be guilty of an offence that carries a mandatory Five stretch when My shotguns are clearly far more lethal weapons than my airgun

 

 

I can see where you're coming from but as its Friday night and i'm already late, and we're derailing the tread i'll not bang on much more. All i would say is, i own a straight pull rifle and a bolt action and the difference in RoF between them is minimal but the bolt action in my opinion is the 'deadlier'. And, how long does it take to change a magazine?

 

Mark

Mark

[David BASC]

Not rubbish at all Al4x, indeed when I got my first FAC I was granted a 22 for rabbit and a 30-06 as I was booked onto a deer course.

 

I could use the 30-06 on any land that was cleared for 30 cal or over. Why? Because I had been assessed by the police to be a safe and responsible person, and the land had been assessed to be safe for that caliber of rifle or smaller simple.

 

That is how it should be.

 

If you want to take things more slowly then that’s entirely up to you, do what you like, but lets have the freedom of choice.

 

Similarly there should NOT be compulsory testing, but there should be easy access to voluntary training if you want it.

 

Your suggestion that no one should be given a full bore of X caliber without experience is incredible! You are lucky where you are there are many out there who have to fight with illogical conditions on their FAC’s every single day, because some bright spark in a firearms licensing department came up this exactly the same sort of thought you have.

 

For example not being allowed to shot a deer with a 243 on the same and they are allowed to shot a fox with the same 243.

 

Like those who have to take a 22.250 with them to go foxing and a 243 in case they come across a deer cos the police won’t allow then a 243 for fox.

 

How about the guys that have a condition on their FAC for deer – they have to always shoot from a high seat”! Ever tried stalking the highlands with a high seat?

 

What about the guys who have been foxing with 243 for years, but cant get their FAC varied for deer unless they go on a course…

 

...the list goes on

 

Let’s not add to that a requirement for someone who wants to move from 22 rf to say 22.250 or 243 to say 270 or 22.-250 to 243 has to go though another licensing protocol and show that are ‘capable’!

 

Trust me we do not want to have a system where you have to pass a test before you are granted or varied on your FAC,

 

Best wishes

 

David

Edited August 27, 2010 by David BASC

[Paul223]

David, any idea on the number of people who have submitted evidence?

[David BASC]

Not yet Paul, but I will get a better idea on Tuesday.

 

My reagds

 

David

[Slug]

I can't see the GMC running with the idea of markers the health and Safety implications are terrible for the GP's, would you want to be the one telling the police that you have concerns about a patient ?.

 

So where else are we going to put markers ?

 

Marriage Guidance councillors

All solicitors that deal with Divorce

The social services and child protection teams

 

Your employer ?? Where does it stop ??

 

The nearest your ever going to get to a cast Iron clad system is for a mandatory access to medical records on application, and then every 12 Months there after, and guess who will have to pay for that little lot...

[David BASC]

No firm numbers yet, but by all accounts this consutation had a maasive response, the highest ever! Thanks all.

 

David

[Raja Clavata]

This appeared in my inbox this morning:

 

Thank you for your submission to the Home Affairs Committee’s inquiry on Firearms Control, which will be made available to members of the Committee.

 

 

The Committee may make use of your evidence for the purpose of carrying out its inquiry, including—if it wishes—printing and publishing your evidence, or making it available for public inspection in the Parliamentary Record Office. The Committee has decided that witnesses can themselves publish or otherwise make use of their own evidence. The Committee will not publish or otherwise disclose personal postal or e-mail addresses or telephone numbers.

 

 

If, on further consideration, there is any information you believe to be sensitive you should contact the Clerk to explain what harm you believe would result from its disclosure and the Committee will take this into account when deciding whether to publish the evidence.

 

 

Details of this inquiry will appear in the News Section published on the Home Affairs Committee website at http://www.parliament.uk/homeaffairscom/.

[Breastman]

Me too, FINALLY got an acknowledgement of all FOUR of my submissions Can't believe their system was crashed by 300 emails

 

Mark

[Paul223]

same here :blink:

[DaveK]

I quoted an assault rifle because I a straight pull Assault rifle has 20 or 30 rounds in the magazine and assuming you take an an SLR (FNFAL) (7.62) for example you have a weapon that will probably kill most men with a single shot and thefore you have 20 possible kills without Reloading .

 

A ruger 10/22 will also kill and it's a .22rf. So stick a 30 round banana mag on it and do the same as you're suggesting but in semi auto so you have a possible 30 kills. You really don't have to reload with this one until the mag is empty but contrary to your post, you have to physically chamber every round in a straight pull ASSAULT RIFLE. And why sensationalise it by only relating it to military equipment? I don't think it will have had the impact I think you may have intended mate. Not on a well established shooting forum anyway. Try cutting and pasting it on to the GCN site. They'll appreciate it.

 

Your post is pretty well inviting being shot down.

[Paul223]

There is still time to submit evidence, don't delay, go on make time today

 

new thread below with links

 

http://forums.pigeonwatch.co.uk/forums/ind...=0#entry1176196