Jump to content

Gun Regulation: Here we go again.


krugerandsmith
 Share

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 59
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

I guess it is only a matter of time and you guys will be trusted with nothing more than a plastic spork. Are BASC on top of this? A united front of firearms related disciplines seems to be distinctly lacking with each specialty form of shooting remaining within their own silos. Hope things come together for all of you before it's too late and yet more of your rights are eroded.

Very true.

In the US the NRA are a force to be reckoned with,I know its different over here,but if all shooting organisations united with a common cause, starting with the preservation of private gun ownership,then perhaps the half a million plus people involved with shooting and related field sports would have a voice.

Because ,at the moment I dont see that we have one.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Very true.

In the US the NRA are a force to be reckoned with,I know its different over here,but if all shooting organisations united with a common cause, starting with the preservation of private gun ownership,then perhaps the half a million plus people involved with shooting and related field sports would have a voice.

Because ,at the moment I dont see that we have one.

http://youtu.be/zsl_rJMw748
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The regulations are sown up tight;

 

if the govt or anyone else wants to make a difference stop cutting budgets so that they can afford to properly enforce and work to standards set out in current guidance.

 

If current guidance is not being followed its a bit quick to say that existing laws are not enough; this is not a regulation issue its an enforcement issue.

 

People in the shooting community have said it over and over and its like shouting at a brick wall with the word **** head written on it,

 

All this chat about stricter regulations is all a complete waste of time and money. Licensing is a public service; we are the ones effected by it and indirectly the public is kept safe from nutters by it.

 

If current guidance is properly adhered to the shooting community remains able to legally pursue sports and hobbies and the public are kept safe from nutters; no amount of legislation will protect anyone from a nutcase.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 

All this chat about stricter regulations is all a complete waste of time and money. Licensing is a public service; we are the ones effected by it and indirectly the public is kept safe from nutters by it.

 

If current guidance is properly adhered to the shooting community remains able to legally pursue sports and hobbies and the public are kept safe from nutters; no amount of legislation will protect anyone from a nutcase.

My own humble thoughts exactly!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've been following this story and hoping it would fizzle out but it hasn't - the suggestion that's it is easier to get a licence to drive a minibus than a gun is of course absolute ******** and a gross distortion of the truth - my car licence covers me to drive a minibus provided I don't carry people for hire reward. I do this weekly! But as far are the sentiment or emotion behind this stupid headline is concerned I can assure you minibuses kill far more people than guns. I looked after a block of insurance with tens of thousands of minibuses and the annual death rate, often from immigrant drivers given the keys to the minibus, was spectacular and were the situations publicised would have put Bird, Ryan or Hamilton to shame! But because a gun was used it gets the big headlines. In one instance a Latvian who was driving on an expired Latvian car licence killed and maimed several migrant workers - estimate for you, I and everyone else who pays insurance was in excess of £3,000,000. I'm sure it is still happening especially as migrant situation has increased/worsened (dependant upon your viewpoint) in the few years since I retired.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The regulations are sown up tight;

 

if the govt or anyone else wants to make a difference stop cutting budgets so that they can afford to properly enforce and work to standards set out in current guidance.

 

If current guidance is not being followed its a bit quick to say that existing laws are not enough; this is not a regulation issue its an enforcement issue.

 

People in the shooting community have said it over and over and its like shouting at a brick wall with the word ******** written on it,

 

All this chat about stricter regulations is all a complete waste of time and money. Licensing is a public service; we are the ones effected by it and indirectly the public is kept safe from nutters by it.

 

If current guidance is properly adhered to the shooting community remains able to legally pursue sports and hobbies and the public are kept safe from nutters; no amount of legislation will protect anyone from a nutcase.

 

 

+1. Well said.

 

A few additional facts (not hard to find).

 

More people in the UK are killed each year due to EACH of the following things:

 

  • through RTAs
  • through alcohol abuse
  • through the effects of other people's alcohol abuse
  • through taking illegal drugs
  • due to the effects of drugs on others
  • through stabbings with kitchen knives
  • through domestic violence
  • due to influenza
  • being hit by cars whilst walking
  • due to drowning
  • due to neglect
  • due to work related accidents
  • due to suicides not involving firearms
  • being killed at railway line crossings (lost a friend recently after he was hit by a train on a barrier-less crossing)

Yet for all of this, not a single one of the above has been the subject of any concerted changes in law to try and reduce preventable deaths in the last decade or more. Indeed, the last Labour government spearheaded all day opening for licencing laws which despite their ill informed claims has actually resulted in an increase in alcohol related violence and additional local byelaws to curb drinking in public places in many areas.

 

Obtaining a driving licence, despite government claims that standards for the test have risen, is still ridiculously easy. They may have increased admin burden, theory tests and costs (read "income" for the driving test industry) but actual practical driving standards have improved hardly at all since the 1950's, and yet traffic related problems have increased a hundred fold since the 50's. A 17 yr old can get behind the wheel of a performance car, funds permitting, and go straight out on the public roads with what is effectively a lethal weapon. Policing on the roads is virtually non existent save for so-called speed checks and the odd unmarked motorway patrol mostly tackling speeding, "safety initiative partnerships"also targeting speeding motorists, where speeding is an easy target yet in isolation is not directly the cause of accidents and death. Revenue streams seem to be where the onus is placed and NOT higher driving standards which is a real gripe of mine. Personally I believe that the advanced driving test ought to be the minimum required standard for today's traffic conditions but that's off topic a little.

 

Drug abuse is still not being effectively targeted to prevent the younger and more vulnerable getting hooked in the first place, and scant few resources are available by county to tackle a massive drug culture problem but do we see any tightening of legislation or additional resource provision? No.

 

We have homeless sleeping rough on our streets which is a national disgrace and more will die through starvation and cold this winter, but are national resources or more social welfare changes being introduced to combat this unacceptable situation? Nope.

 

You could go on, giving examples of where we have very real and very serious flaws in society which clearly result in many more lives needlessly lost every year than due to shooting related deaths (be that accidental or otherwise) yet shooting is a clear area where longer term controls and the longer term agenda is clearly to tighten up on gun ownership to the end point where one could be forgiven for thinking that only "professional users" might be permitted firearms ownership in the future. It is a targeting of a recreational use where perhaps there's no club membership (more control on use). It's all about politics and control and has nothing at all to do with current avoidable deaths. Clearly, one death is one too many but perspective is needed when comparing avoidable deaths by other means. When looked at in perspective, it remains one of the safest sports primarily due to the responsible nature and safety conciousness of legal firearms owners, plus the fact that FACs are not given out like sweeties.

 

For all the arguments, I can see that mandatory standards are on the cards to bring us into line with the rest of Europe, and some form of mandatory competence test is highly likely not too far down the line. I have no problems with that. It's the ever tightening of control and use which seems totally unnecessary given current laws and resources to manage them which seems counter intuitive.

Edited by Savhmr
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...