Buy or sell

[Genghis]

1 hour ago, ryle said:

My mum has had a similar opinion in the past. "Ban guns, get rid of them" she'd say.

I'd ask her "What's your experience with them?" Id also say the only guns you've seen are the one's bieng thrown around in Hollywood films. This is the issue, educated by the tv rather than actually seeing any form of shooting in reality.

They also hear about every mass shooting in America and fail to understand the difference between a Section 2 shotgun and an assault rifle. To a lot of people a gun is a gun. They don’t care about context.

 

It’s also an unfortunate British trait that as a culture we have a history of calling for bans on things that we don’t enjoy on a personal level.

 

My only hope is that legislation drags on until after the next election. There is a small possibility of this but it entirely depends on whether or not there is another prominent shooting incident while Labour are in power. If anything like Plymouth happens before the next election then the response will be draconian.

[wymberley]

5 hours ago, TIGHTCHOKE said:

In reality any legislation introduced to take guns from private hands will be, as always, based on fear.

Fixed it for you.

I agree with Old Farrier in as much as we have to enjoy it while we can. As OF says, no one knows what will happen in the future, "particularly long term" (my parentheses). Albeit with changes to practises, game/driven game will possibly continue mid term; as will clay pigeon shooting. Where shooting is deemed the most effective, vermin control will continue but we can only hope that some of the existing legislation - which at the moment is largely ignored - is not extended to include other species and then enforced.

[TIGHTCHOKE]

5 hours ago, TIGHTCHOKE said:

In reality it is a CLASS action to take guns from private hands.

Above is what I posted.

[Konor]

It seems from a lot of posts that it’s the inability to see the guns that are owned in a proper context. I used to organise work days out to a commercial clay shooting set up. I’d easily have 35 to 40 people attending,some would drag their partners along. We’d break for a lunch of soup and sandwiches that the venue catered for. Without exception everyone loved it. Occasionally we’d have a quad bike relay race splitting up into 4 or 5 teams it was a great day out but it also gave each person attending the opportunity to talk about the experience and show shooting as a source of enjoyment. When I changed jobs the new place had someone organising a large group of around 20 attending a twice yearly charity shoot ,coaching was available and the targets mostly on the easy side. Burgers and pies for lunch and a raffle on a summers day ,another success and again people being able to put gun ownership in a different context. When any of the people mentioned opted to follow up on their experience it’s amazing how the need to do so through coaching and the increase in expense that occurs had them focused on the practicality of eventually owning their own shotgun to practice and enjoy the day in a more affordable way.

[wymberley]

24 minutes ago, TIGHTCHOKE said:

Above is what I posted.

Yep, apologies, my bad. I should have quoted you and then amended it.

[ryle]

The idea that governments wish to remove guns through thier own fear is in a way tin-hat material...

Except for the fact that there are certain countries and governments that have done just that for those very reasons.

I suppose it shows the importance of inviting your local mp to a clay shoot for them to try and see what its all about. The clay shoot bieng a very 'social' and informal yet overtly saftey conscious and accessible type of shooting.

[Scully]

I doubt S1 would restrict anyone to any particular ground or club; it never did in the past. Clay/target shooting at any approved ground would suffice as ‘good reason’ I would think. 
For live quarry shooting it would probably be on an open ticket as S1 is now…..ie: Clay/target/sporting use and AOLQ. 

[Konor]

58 minutes ago, Scully said:

I doubt S1 would restrict anyone to any particular ground or club; it never did in the past. Clay/target shooting at any approved ground would suffice as ‘good reason’ I would think. 
For live quarry shooting it would probably be on an open ticket as S1 is now…..ie: Clay/target/sporting use and AOLQ. 

I think we’d get by and others following would get on with it not knowing any different. It would be a kick in the pants though if the need for a good reason for everything resulted in you failing to acquire that extra gun on your wish list.

[ryle]

That why I believe that a lightweight english sxs, a modern 32" clay busting machine as well as a 3 1/2" semi are all built for different jobs. The only similarity is the calibre.

You would surely have good reason for all 3.

[Konor]

7 minutes ago, ryle said:

That why I believe that a lightweight english sxs, a modern 32" clay busting machine as well as a 3 1/2" semi are all built for different jobs. The only similarity is the calibre.

You would surely have good reason for all 3.

3 quality guns fitting the description above would satisfy perhaps the majority of owners for those wishing to justify an extended armoury then an open bored side by side ,or over and under, for Skeet with barrels shorter than the 32 inch clay busting machine and a dedicated trap gun could probably be justified .As advice seems to be match your chamber length for steel shot  it would be possible to justify a couple of wildfowling semi autos. The biggest loser is the guy who just likes his guns and makes full use of his present freedom to buy whatever his heart desires. Such a person and his guns would most likely be of little threat to anyone.

Edited 9 hours ago by Konor
Addition

[udderlyoffroad]

I think we do ourselves no favours by imagining how we would follow new as yet unknown rules. Better to respond robustly, but succinctly to the consultation when it happens, and ensure every shooter in your social circle does too. There really in 2025 can be no excuse for not responding.
 

[ryle]

1 hour ago, udderlyoffroad said:

I think we do ourselves no favours by imagining how we would follow new as yet unknown rules. Better to respond robustly, but succinctly to the consultation when it happens, and ensure every shooter in your social circle does too. There really in 2025 can be no excuse for not responding.
 

You're absolutely right.

Sometimes I'm a little pessimistic to avoid disappointment I suppose, thats just me

[Konor]

6 hours ago, udderlyoffroad said:

I think we do ourselves no favours by imagining how we would follow new as yet unknown rules. Better to respond robustly, but succinctly to the consultation when it happens, and ensure every shooter in your social circle does too. There really in 2025 can be no excuse for not responding.
 

I imagine there will be a range of views on opposition just as there are on the lead shot proposals. If for instance for discussion’s sake a limit was set at 6 shotguns I’m sure there are many who would happily go along with that limit added to that there will no doubt be a significant proportion who will have no intention of responding whatever the proposed changes. I don’t see how discussion on the forum regarding people’s intentions on tackling any possible proposed changes would have any bearing on proposals coming in to effect. I agree with your need to respond robustly perhaps if our organisations had done so regarding the lead shot issue and insisted on relevant evidence before opting to support a voluntary ban we wouldn’t be facing the prospect of putting steel shot through our Damascus barrelled guns for clay shooting.