Ricko Posted June 6, 2011 Report Share Posted June 6, 2011 The last national firearms amnesty took place between 31 March 2003 and 30 April 2003. A total of 43,908 guns and 1,039,358 rounds of ammunition were handed in. Between 16 April and 4 June 2010, a targeted national amnesty for Olympic .380 BBM blank-firing revolvers took place to address the threat posed by the conversion and criminal use of this firearm. Do you think that it is time for another amnesty? Do you think that it would achieve any long term results for the safety of the general public? Would national publicity bring people to hand in illegally held weapons? Are the post WW2 soldiers as guilty as there forebears for holding onto 'souvenirs'? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blunderbuss Posted June 6, 2011 Report Share Posted June 6, 2011 (edited) I have some first hand experience of the post Hungerford firearms amnesty and in my option they are little more than a PR exercise which allows the police to be seen to be doing something to reduce "gun crime" but it's an illusion. The only people inclined to hand anything in are the law abiding who were never a threat anyway. I saw widows terrified into handing in priceless antiques and treasured heirlooms which the police could have allowed to have been sold to an RFD or deactivated. Instead they were crushed to cynically boost the stats and make us all "safe". I honestly saw bb guns, ancient flintlock wall hangers and even (I kid you not) kids cap guns and spud guns taken in and counted as surrendered "firearms". Amongst these I also saw enough Purdeys, H&Hs, Artillery Lugers etc bound for the crusher to make a grown man weep. All handed in by scared mums raiding their kids toy boxes and old grannies bullied into handing over valuable bits of their deceased husbands estate which could have been sold. How many genuine armed blaggers, gang bangers or organised crime gangs handed in their guns? Take a wild guess. A cynical manipulative ploy to con the public into believing something has been done. It makes me angry just thinking about it :( Edited June 6, 2011 by Blunderbuss Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nipper Posted June 6, 2011 Report Share Posted June 6, 2011 WOT HE SAID ^^^^^^. 100% agree! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HDAV Posted June 6, 2011 Report Share Posted June 6, 2011 Amongst these I also saw enough Purdeys, H&Hs, Artillery Lugers etc bound for the crusher to make a grown man weep. Shame they couldn't sell them to raise some funds........ Oh wait they did in durham and look what happened! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
88b Posted June 7, 2011 Report Share Posted June 7, 2011 Totally agree with Blunderbuss Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kent Posted June 7, 2011 Report Share Posted June 7, 2011 I have some first hand experience of the post Hungerford firearms amnesty and in my option they are little more than a PR exercise which allows the police to be seen to be doing something to reduce "gun crime" but it's an illusion. The only people inclined to hand anything in are the law abiding who were never a threat anyway. I saw widows terrified into handing in priceless antiques and treasured heirlooms which the police could have allowed to have been sold to an RFD or deactivated. Instead they were crushed to cynically boost the stats and make us all "safe". I honestly saw bb guns, ancient flintlock wall hangers and even (I kid you not) kids cap guns and spud guns taken in and counted as surrendered "firearms". Amongst these I also saw enough Purdeys, H&Hs, Artillery Lugers etc bound for the crusher to make a grown man weep. All handed in by scared mums raiding their kids toy boxes and old grannies bullied into handing over valuable bits of their deceased husbands estate which could have been sold. How many genuine armed blaggers, gang bangers or organised crime gangs handed in their guns? Take a wild guess. A cynical manipulative ploy to con the public into believing something has been done. It makes me angry just thinking about it :( the home office now sell items of special monitary or historical value, guess were the money goes oh there were those cops selling guns also Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sha Bu Le Posted June 7, 2011 Report Share Posted June 7, 2011 BB spot on & +1? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
imissalot Posted June 7, 2011 Report Share Posted June 7, 2011 Got to admit I handed in a couple of 7.62 NATO rounds in a few years ago Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gsm1968 Posted June 7, 2011 Report Share Posted June 7, 2011 WOT HE SAID ^^^^^^. 100% agree! +1 Not often a thread is sorted on the first reply. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ricko Posted June 7, 2011 Author Report Share Posted June 7, 2011 I started this thread to look at opinions on PW. From a general public viewpoint an amnesty looks great on the news, all those dangerous weapons off the streets etc. As most members of PW observe the 'crooks' will always get their hands on weapons, in recent years we have seen people sentenced for converting de-act. weapons in 'back-yard' workshops. I have handed in various items during my time whilst involved with shooting, although not as spectacular as my grandmother who took a live grenade in a paper bag on the bus into a police station after she cleared out my grandfathers wardrobe (1980) or my mate in the army who had a SLR under the bed (1989). I work in an inner city that is rife with gun crime, in the case of many of these incidents they either are: -stolen shotties from farmhouses, where the safe has been attacked -imported items from eastern europe -WW1 vintage items that are still out there Gun crime is a terrible crime on the streets of this country Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kidney505 Posted June 7, 2011 Report Share Posted June 7, 2011 Totally agree with BB all this kind of thing does is punish responsible people in order improve PR and probably also gives those blaseted antis some more fuel for their anti gun fire. Import/ reactivation of illegal firearms is the real problem. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
imissalot Posted June 7, 2011 Report Share Posted June 7, 2011 I started this thread to look at opinions on PW. From a general public viewpoint an amnesty looks great on the news, all those dangerous weapons off the streets etc. As most members of PW observe the 'crooks' will always get their hands on weapons, in recent years we have seen people sentenced for converting de-act. weapons in 'back-yard' workshops. I have handed in various items during my time whilst involved with shooting, although not as spectacular as my grandmother who took a live grenade in a paper bag on the bus into a police station after she cleared out my grandfathers wardrobe (1980) or my mate in the army who had a SLR under the bed (1989). I work in an inner city that is rife with gun crime, in the case of many of these incidents they either are: -stolen shotties from farmhouses, where the safe has been attacked -imported items from eastern europe -WW1 vintage items that are still out there Gun crime is a terrible crime on the streets of this country SLR wot a rifle shot a few and was a marksman with mine in the 80s Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ricko Posted June 7, 2011 Author Report Share Posted June 7, 2011 Ahh yes, the SLR a truly awesome weapon, worst decision by the govt. to replace it with SA80, although the SLR wasn't suited to all theatres of war eg FIBUA Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
imissalot Posted June 7, 2011 Report Share Posted June 7, 2011 Ahh yes, the SLR a truly awesome weapon, worst decision by the govt. to replace it with SA80, although the SLR wasn't suited to all theatres of war eg FIBUA That gave us the sa80 when we came back from Ireland in 87 wot a pile of **** Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ricko Posted June 7, 2011 Author Report Share Posted June 7, 2011 I never understood the idea that if the terrs had AK47s then why didn't we, I suppose it is to do with the cold war era. The only disadvantage I found with the AK is that the mag got in the way in a prone position. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
imissalot Posted June 7, 2011 Report Share Posted June 7, 2011 I never understood the idea that if the terrs had AK47s then why didn't we, I suppose it is to do with the cold war era. The only disadvantage I found with the AK is that the mag got in the way in a prone position. Only people that used that shot and run Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scully Posted June 7, 2011 Report Share Posted June 7, 2011 There's a big display of surrendered 'firearms' in the CRIME section of the Leeds Royal Armouries.While there are some genuine firearms among them,the majority are replicas,deacts,etc.Even some obvious toys!But they all count as 'firearms' in HO statistics. As an example of how reports are compiled,according to a retired cop I know,if someone reports seeing a gun,it is filed as a 'firearm incident' whether the existence of said 'firearm' is proved or not!Neat eh! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Algiz Posted June 9, 2011 Report Share Posted June 9, 2011 Totally agree with what other have said, whenever I’ve seen pictures in the media of these amnesties the tables have been full of air rifles and pistols. Occasionally you see the odd Webley revolver which has probably been sat in a draw for the past 50 years. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ab1964 Posted June 9, 2011 Report Share Posted June 9, 2011 The Lone Star State of Texas has the most liberal guns laws as any one may own just about any firearm they desire. And Texas has the lowest firearm crime rate of all the fifty States. This amnesty non-sense can be solved legalizing firearms for everyone. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blunderbuss Posted June 10, 2011 Report Share Posted June 10, 2011 (edited) The Lone Star State of Texas has the most liberal guns laws as any one may own just about any firearm they desire. And Texas has the lowest firearm crime rate of all the fifty States. Nice idea but not true I'm afraid Statements like that can't go unchallenged, so I thought I'd give it a quick Google. In 2009 the latest year for which figures were available there were 862 firearms murders in Texas (by comparison in the whole of the UK in 2005/6 there were just 50). Gun murders per 100,000 population in Texas is 3.49, much higher than the US average of 2.98 (UK 0.1 for 2005/6, or about 30 times lower than the US average). There were 30 US states with lower firearms death rates than Texas. The worst by the way in terms of numbers killed was California with 1,360 but the worst against population was DC with 18.84 per 100,000 population. Source This amnesty non-sense can be solved legalizing firearms for everyone. Now some of our laws are a little too restrictive, and need a serious overhaul but I can't buy that Do you really think the world would be a better place if every smack head, extremist and low life in this country's underclass could buy what ever guns they wanted? Edited June 10, 2011 by Blunderbuss Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Canis Posted June 10, 2011 Report Share Posted June 10, 2011 Nice idea but not true I'm afraid Statements like that can't go unchallenged, so I thought I'd give it a quick Google. In 2009 the latest year for which figures were available there were 862 firearms murders in Texas (by comparison in the whole of the UK in 2005/6 there were just 50). Gun murders per 100,000 population in Texas is 3.49, much higher than the US average of 2.98 (UK 0.1 for 2005/6, or about 30 times lower than the US average). There were 30 US states with lower firearms death rates than Texas. The worst by the way in terms of numbers killed was California with 1,360 but the worst against population was DC with 18.84 per 100,000 population. Source Just out of interest,The firearms death rates you quote above from google , do they include the legaly shot people or just the ilegally shot ones (shooting someone burgling your house, while you may have to justify your actions in court is not a crime in america, its called "home defense" Likewise there is a recognised suicide method in the USA where you force a policeman to shoot you known as "Death by Cop".( I have met someone who has been on the shooter end of this. He had a harrowing few weeks while his actions where investigated and will have to live with the fact that he had to kill another human being but his career prospects were not harmed by the episode.) are Death by cop killings included in the google figures ? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blunderbuss Posted June 10, 2011 Report Share Posted June 10, 2011 Just out of interest,The firearms death rates you quote above from google , do they include the legaly shot people or just the ilegally shot ones The figures are for "murders" which implies illegal! are Death by cop killings included in the google figures ? Since they are probably not classed as murders, I suspect not, but hey - I didn't compile them so not sure. I posted the link, go and have a look. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scully Posted June 10, 2011 Report Share Posted June 10, 2011 Funny that,according to the HASC report(if I remember corectly)Dc was chosen as a sample pre capita as it has firearms restrictions comparable to the UK,and some of the most restrictive firearms legislation in the US.Despite this it also has the highest rate of murders committed with firearms! In the '80's,all the US military forces use to send their trainee medics to Washington DC hospitals in order to gain experience in treating gunshot wounds! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ab1964 Posted June 11, 2011 Report Share Posted June 11, 2011 Nice idea but not true I'm afraid Statements like that can't go unchallenged, so I thought I'd give it a quick Google. In 2009 the latest year for which figures were available there were 862 firearms murders in Texas (by comparison in the whole of the UK in 2005/6 there were just 50). Gun murders per 100,000 population in Texas is 3.49, much higher than the US average of 2.98 (UK 0.1 for 2005/6, or about 30 times lower than the US average). There were 30 US states with lower firearms death rates than Texas. The worst by the way in terms of numbers killed was California with 1,360 but the worst against population was DC with 18.84 per 100,000 population. Source Thank you for the correction, however, you prove my point. California and DC have very strict gun control laws, yet - they have the worst stats for gun murders. Why? My opinion is because only the scum have guns - and the regular law abiding citizen who shuns guns, can't defend themselves. In Texas, and other liberal firearms states, the regular folks can at least defend themselves if necessary as the bad guys don't know whose armed? In California, D.C. New York, etc, etc, in those states the bad guys know that most people are not armed. AND the police are not a protection force. 99.9 percent of the time they show up after a crime is committed. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
guest1957 Posted June 12, 2011 Report Share Posted June 12, 2011 Thank you for the correction, however, you prove my point. California and DC have very strict gun control laws, yet - they have the worst stats for gun murders. Why? My opinion is because only the scum have guns - and the regular law abiding citizen who shuns guns, can't defend themselves. In Texas, and other liberal firearms states, the regular folks can at least defend themselves if necessary as the bad guys don't know whose armed? In California, D.C. New York, etc, etc, in those states the bad guys know that most people are not armed. AND the police are not a protection force. 99.9 percent of the time they show up after a crime is committed. It is far to easy to gloss over the other social factors that come into play in these states when making statements like that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
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.