air rifles

[cockercas]

if your a ned you dont give a **** about the law all im saying i don't think there is enough air gun crime to warrant the over kill of a fire arms licence it would kill the sport for many shooters that's to high a price to pay for a few idiots

im with gixer, there should be some sort of licence. and more crimes are committed with air guns than shotgun/rifle but there licensed.

[wymberley]

Welcome to PW.

An Air-rifle is a very handy tool indeed!

 

Not more bloody tools, it's starting to turn into a flippin' workshop!

[FalconFN]

im with gixer, there should be some sort of licence. and more crimes are committed with air guns than shotgun/rifle but there licensed.

Is that true? Haven't seen any stats so I don't know but it doesn't sound right to me.

[Scully]

I think you're all missing one important point....the air-rifles are already out there,in widespread circulation,and the only indication of what that figure is,is sales figures.Anyone got any idea of just how many air-rifles have been sold in this country in say....the last 60 years,or 50,or 40?

500,000? 1 million? 7 million? I know where there are over 17 air-rifles in just 4 houses locally.Out of those 17,I have 3,and I am the only person who possesses licences,for my shotguns and firearms.

If licensing is introduced owners will be obliged to either surrender their legally obtained rifles,or pay to have them licensed and registered,just like high magazine capacity shotguns following Hungerford.If 'good reason' is also a stipulation of reason to posess,then otherwise law-abiding owners who just like to 'plink' in their back gardens will have to surrender those same legally obtained items.Will they be compensated for said items?

If the laws already exist(which they do)to criminalise the misuse of air-rifles,then what is to be gained by the licensing of said air-rifles?Except for revenue of course.The law-abiding will comply,but the type of people who misuse air-rifles are not the type of people to bother with licenses,so what have we gained?A large pool of unlicensed firearms....again.

Bureaucrats/politicians/legislators seem to think that compulsory legislation is a 'cure all' for the country's woes,and for them it's a winner....the general public are duped into thinking 'something' has been done,and those flouting the new law will be prosecuted and fined,which generates income and looks good in government statistics.

Compulsory micro-chipping of dogs has been mooted for whatever reason,but amongst those reasons is the deterence of dog thefts.Micro-chipping may aid the return of stolen dogs to their rightful owners(but this usually occurs when dogs found on premises raided for some other purpose are found to be chipped),but the type of people who steal dogs are seldom the type to care enough to take them to a vet should the need arise.

With the licensing of air-rifles we would see yet again,the law-abiding majority persecuted for the acts of a mindless minority.Good law?Not in my opinion.

[cockercas]

Is that true? Haven't seen any stats so I don't know but it doesn't sound right to me.

well ive seen plenty of 'CAT SHOT BY YOBS WITH AIR GUN' and 'KIDS SHOOT PIGEONS OUT OF TREE IN PRIMARY SCHOOL PLAYGROUND' and other 'BLIND FROM AIRGUN PELLET TO THE EYE' in the papers. never 'tiddles limped home after shot with 12bore/rim/centerfire' and ive deffinetly never seen anything in the paper saying that someone has a 100gr bullet lodged in there face from full bore wars.

[FalconFN]

well ive seen plenty of 'CAT SHOT BY YOBS WITH AIR GUN' and 'KIDS SHOOT PIGEONS OUT OF TREE IN PRIMARY SCHOOL PLAYGROUND' and other 'BLIND FROM AIRGUN PELLET TO THE EYE' in the papers. never 'tiddles limped home after shot with 12bore/rim/centerfire' and ive deffinetly never seen anything in the paper saying that someone has a 100gr bullet lodged in there face from full bore wars.

I did a bit of research as I was interested in finding out for sure, and I found these figures in the House of Commons Library:

 

'There were 7,024 offences in England and Wales in which non-air weapon firearms were reportedly used, a 13% decrease on the previous year, continuing the general decline since 2005/06.'

 

'There were 4,203 recorded crimes in which air weapons were reportedly used during 2010/11, a fall of 15% compared with the previous year'

 

So air weapons only account for 38% of gun crime.

 

EDIT: looking at the stats more closely it appears that almost every year from 1969 up to 2003 that more offences were caused by air weapons than fire arms, but the last 7 years it has been lower with last year having the lowest number of air weapon offence since 1977 and the lowest overall gun offence since 1990.

 

Interesting stuff.

Edited May 5, 2012 by FalconFN