View Full Version : Gun control
Can anyone give me a good reason why all Firearms and Shotgun licences should not be revoked at midnight tonight?
They could be re-applied for tomorrow, and if you have a good reason to have one, and can prove you are not off your head, be re-issued.
Anyone think this kind of loss of life every 5 years almost like clockwork, is an acceptable price to pay?
Boozeburglar
02-Jun-10, 19:09
As I pointed out in the other thread regarding this, many using this board have relatives in the area involved, and starting a hot button topic of a related nature right now seems inappropriate to me.
As I pointed out in the other thread regarding this, many using this board have relatives in the area involved, and starting a hot button topic of a related nature right now seems inappropriate to me.
And me......
Can anyone give me a good reason why all Firearms and Shotgun licences should not be revoked at midnight tonight?
They could be re-applied for tomorrow, and if you have a good reason to have one, and can prove you are not off your head, be re-issued.
Anyone think this kind of loss of life every 5 years almost like clockwork, is an acceptable price to pay?
And do u think everyone wud turn in their 'toys'?
DeHaviLand
02-Jun-10, 19:52
Can anyone give me a good reason why all Firearms and Shotgun licences should not be revoked at midnight tonight?
They could be re-applied for tomorrow, and if you have a good reason to have one, and can prove you are not off your head, be re-issued.
Anyone think this kind of loss of life every 5 years almost like clockwork, is an acceptable price to pay?
Thats just about the most idiotic thing I've heard in a long time. Why should we punish anyone else for the actions of one man? Why dont you get on that lame high horse of yours every time some kid dies at the hands of a knife wielding thug?
Firearms licences and shotgun certificates are only issued to those who can show good reason. And prove you're not off your head? Anyone of us could be seriously afflicted by mental disease tomorrow, which could not have been diagnosed today. Cant find the screw you smiley, sorry!
Thats just about the most idiotic thing I've heard in a long time. Why should we punish anyone else for the actions of one man? Why dont you get on that lame high horse of yours every time some kid dies at the hands of a knife wielding thug?
Firearms licences and shotgun certificates are only issued to those who can show good reason. And prove you're not off your head? Anyone of us could be seriously afflicted by mental disease tomorrow, which could not have been diagnosed today. Cant find the screw you smiley, sorry!
Be kind to your fellow man... He knows not what he Sayeth!
Its not the gun that kills - it's the person using it that kills.
here here gronnuck
Ditto............
Thats just about the most idiotic thing I've heard in a long time. Why should we punish anyone else for the actions of one man? Why dont you get on that lame high horse of yours every time some kid dies at the hands of a knife wielding thug?
Firearms licences and shotgun certificates are only issued to those who can show good reason. And prove you're not off your head? Anyone of us could be seriously afflicted by mental disease tomorrow, which could not have been diagnosed today. Cant find the screw you smiley, sorry!
So what you are saying is this loss of life is an acceptable price to pay to keep your guns-sorry heard it all before and very very uninpressed.
Maybe all driving licenses should be revoked when people are killed through drink driving, or better still ban all drink , till you can prove you are sane.
And prove you're not off your head? Anyone of us could be seriously afflicted by mental disease tomorrow, which could not have been diagnosed today.
Why don't we check?
DeHaviLand
02-Jun-10, 20:23
So what you are saying is this loss of life is an acceptable price to pay to keep your guns-sorry heard it all before and very very uninpressed.
And yet more idiocy, you're really showing your true colours now. Do not, under any circumstances, attempt to attribute words to me that I haven't said or typed.:roll:
And yet more idiocy, you're really showing your true colours now. Do not, under any circumstances, attempt to attribute words to me that I haven't said or typed.:roll:
Well in that case keep a civil key board, Screw You?
Why don't we check?
That would mean having to check up every single day and every single minute.
more people die in pub /night club fights than die by LEGALY held guns in one year, so lets ban pubs and clubs first instead.
There are more illegaly held guns in this country than ther ever has been, smuggled into the country.
Typical knee jerk reactions not thought through properly just causes more proplems down the road.
That would mean having to check up every single day and every single minute.
more people die in pub /night club fights than die by LEGALY held guns in one year, so lets ban pubs and clubs first instead.
There are more illegaly held guns in this country than ther ever has been, smuggled into the country.
Typical knee jerk reactions not thought through properly just causes more proplems down the road.
Well lets ban the one thing we know, absolutely, kills again and again and again. If not why not?
That would mean having to check up every single day and every single minute.
more people die in pub /night club fights than die by LEGALY held guns in one year, so lets ban pubs and clubs first instead.
There are more illegaly held guns in this country than ther ever has been, smuggled into the country.
Typical knee jerk reactions not thought through properly just causes more proplems down the road.
Do you realise what you just said was almost word for word the responses made after the last two deadly killing sprees? When will it end?
nightspirit
02-Jun-10, 20:39
Well good luck trying to ban the human race - is the only thing that kills and kills again. I am no pro gun or anything but any tool used improperly can kill- a gun is a tool as much as a screwdriver and a screwdriver can kill you or another person also. The same Item using it is man. So we have to regulate fairly and recognise the need controls yes but not somthing that is going to penalise the users that use these tools correctly.
DeHaviLand
02-Jun-10, 20:39
Well lets ban the one thing we know, absolutely, kills again and again and again. If not why not?
Oh, so now we're going to ban people? After all, its people who kill, whatever they happen to have in their hands at the time is just the method of killing. So, lets hear your simple solution for ridding the country of the blight that is murder by knife.
OK I've had my say, lets do it again in 5 years or so.
Its not the gun that kills - it's the person using it that kills.
Perhaps we should ban husbands from going home unexpectedly at 3 in the afternoon.
That could save a few lives.
Oh, so now we're going to ban people? After all, its people who kill, whatever they happen to have in their hands at the time is just the method of killing. So, lets hear your simple solution for ridding the country of the blight that is murder by knife.
Just to explain the difference as I see it. If you're interested. I, you, anyone, has half a chance of defending themselves against a mad person weilding a knife, baseball bat, what ever. You have no chance if someone is shooting you from long range.
Do you realise what you just said was almost word for word the responses made after the last two deadly killing sprees? When will it end?
It will never end. People who lose control will find ways to harm or kill others wether it a gun, knife, rope, hammer, car, electrocution or pushing off a cliff.
We should be taking more care of each other and helping those that might need help instead of, "I'm not getting involved I don't know him/her"
we live in a very uncaring country.
Last year I pulled two people out of the sea who were drowning I'm no great swimmer, but I didn't just stand there watching screaming like the father was doing I pulled his daughter out and went back for his wife. the wife was very thankfull but her husband just totaly ignored me and walked off.
thats the sort of country we live in more, it's this sort of attitude that has to change. He saw me and his own family struggling and he made no attempt to help, what if everyone had that sort of attitude.
It's this sort of attitude that no doubt leads to people to reach breaking point and it will make no difference wether it's a gun or knife thats handy. keep an eye on each other and try to help each other, sometimes it's just a chat some people want.
Just to explain the difference as I see it. If you're interested. I, you, anyone, has half a chance of defending themselves against a mad person weilding a knife, baseball bat, what ever. You have no chance if someone is shooting you from long range.
hypocrite!
you were saying exactly the opposite on the aid flottila massacre
DeHaviLand
02-Jun-10, 21:06
Just to explain the difference as I see it. If you're interested. I, you, anyone, has half a chance of defending themselves against a mad person weilding a knife, baseball bat, what ever. You have no chance if someone is shooting you from long range.
Actually you have more of a chance. Shotguns start to lose their efficiency at ranges of over 30 yards. Give me a madman with a shotgun and a 60 yard head start anyday.
Yeah, lets get rid of guns.
Infact, since cars are involved in a extreme amount of deaths each year, lets get rid of them too.
Oh, tall buildings, cliffs, bridges, anything sharp and pointy, chemicals and anything else that can be dangerous.
The world is dangerous, occaisonally there is some loony who does something stupid.
Virginia Tech Massacre, Dunblane, and various other terrible happenings had a gunman behind it. There was no revoking of weapons and weapons licensing, this won't be any different.
im behind you
02-Jun-10, 21:22
Perhaps we should ban husbands from going home unexpectedly at 3 in the afternoon.
That could save a few lives.
did this happen to you fred. same here a few months ago. went home early to surppise the wife.and WELL you could imagine my horror.by the time i got my shot gun out of it's well locked up cupboard and the shells in the gun they had done a runner. and i only came home early to tell it was over between us and that i met some one else HA-HA.
nightspirit
02-Jun-10, 21:22
Don't forget large passenger air liners on that list ...
Actually you have more of a chance. Shotguns lose their efficiency at ranges of over 30 yards. Give me a madman with a shotgun and a 60 yard head start anyday.
Didn't help many people today.
How about a long rifle with a telescopic sight?
did this happen to you fred. same here a few months ago. went home early to surppise the wife.and WELL you could imagine my horror.by the time i got my shot gun out of it's well locked up cupboard and the shells in the gun they had done a runner. and i only came home early to tell it was over between us and that i met some one else HA-HA.
Yes, it happened to me a few months ago. Fortunately I got away before he had time to get his shotgun out of the cabinet.
What a coincidence eh.
hypocrite!
you were saying exactly the opposite on the aid flottila massacre
Not really. There is a difference being shot attacking a soldier and being shot cutting your hedge.
Disgusted by this member on the thread they have started. I have family from down there (Egremont) and all this thread is aimed at is to start a trolling campaign on who knows best, with no thoughts or remorse to the people involved in the events that happened in Cumbria.
RIP to those involved and shame on the org for yet again doing what you do best
Can anyone give me a good reason why all Firearms and Shotgun licences should not be revoked at midnight tonight?
The point being?
At this time, as far as I can tell, it is unknown wether the individual concerned had a licence or not. Also the police want to know where his weapons came from, this suggests he was not a licence holder.
buggyracer
02-Jun-10, 22:39
If Guns are Out Lawed only Owtlaws will have guns. :confused
Virginia Tech Massacre, Dunblane, and various other terrible happenings had a gunman behind it. There was no revoking of weapons and weapons licensing, this won't be any different.
I believe it was after the Hungerford massacre that the gun laws were severly updated with the Firearms Act of 1986. This made it much more difficult to justify applying for a Section 1 Firearms certificate. However, I still think it is far too easy to be a legal holder of a shotgun. Whilst they may not be very accurate over long distances they are just as lethal at close range. Maybe, another overhaul of the gun laws is now needed, although this will never stop illegal gun ownership of course.
I believe it was after the Hungerford massacre that the gun laws were severly updated with the Firearms Act of 1986. This made it much more difficult to justify applying for a Section 1 Firearms certificate. However, I still think it is far too easy to be a legal holder of a shotgun. Whilst they may not be very accurate over long distances they are just as lethal at close range. Maybe, another overhaul of the gun laws is now needed, although this will never stop illegal gun ownership of course.
After Hungerford, semi-automatic weapons were banned. After Dunblane, pistols were banned. Of course, none of this stopped an 11 year old child, Rhys Jones, being gunned down on a street in Liverpool a couple of years ago by a kid with a pistol. :(
If Guns are Out Lawed only Owtlaws will have guns. :confused
A valid point then all the loonies would be in control and we woud all end up being victims.
Cant help feeling that there is somthing not right with this dreadful busines!
Just to explain the difference as I see it. If you're interested. I, you, anyone, has half a chance of defending themselves against a mad person weilding a knife, baseball bat, what ever. You have no chance if someone is shooting you from long range.
I should imagine that you have more chance of winning the national lottery jackpot than of being shot by a deranged madman running amok with a couple of guns, blasting indiscriminately out of his car window.
I may be wrong.
But it hasn't happened to me in the past 50-odd years of my time on this planet. Yet. And I've been in a few dodgy places in my time.
here here gronnuck
If Guns are Out Lawed only Owtlaws will have guns. :confused
Ahhhhhhhhhh Haaaaaaaaaaaaa... now u have it correct.
If Guns are Out Lawed only Owtlaws will have guns. :confused
That's just the sort of moronic statement that legitimises my argument
A valid point then all the loonies would be in control and we woud all end up being victims.
Not a valid point at all. Guns can never legally be used in self defence. By the time you have unlocked your gun cabinet, gone and got your amunition, kept in a different place, loaded your weapon and shot your assailant. It isnt self defence is it?
I would agree, ban them all - and have a statutory 10 year jail term for anyone found with a illegal firearm.
I should imagine that you have more chance of winning the national lottery jackpot than of being shot by a deranged madman running amok with a couple of guns, blasting indiscriminately out of his car window.
I may be wrong.
But it hasn't happened to me in the past 50-odd years of my time on this planet. Yet. And I've been in a few dodgy places in my time.
The lottery is regulary won.
The lottery is regulary won.
But not by you. The 3of8 was refering to the likelihood of YOU winning the lottery, not ANYONE winning the lottery. Statistically they are very different.
But not by you. The 3of8 was refering to the likelihood of YOU winning the lottery, not ANYONE winning the lottery. Statistically they are very different.
For your information I have suffered a number of flesh wounds;)
The point being?
At this time, as far as I can tell, it is unknown wether the individual concerned had a licence or not. Also the police want to know where his weapons came from, this suggests he was not a licence holder.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/10220974.stm (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/10220974.stm)
"Cumbria Police say that Derrick Bird held licences for a shotgun and a firearm. Deputy Chief Constable Stuart Hyde said that the two weapons they had recovered, a shotgun and a rifle, appeared similar to those described on the licences, but officers would need to perform a detailed forensic examination to confirm this."
buggyracer
03-Jun-10, 09:13
That's just the sort of moronic statement that legitimises my argument
in your opinion :roll:, you have a very dogmatic attitude. Which makes it questionable whether or not it is worth having a reasonable debate with you or not, i think the latter :confused
buggyracer
03-Jun-10, 09:19
shooting is worth over £1.6 billion to the UK economy, i cant see them banning it soon ;)
shooting is worth over £1.6 billion to the UK economy, i cant see them banning it soon ;)
When you put it like that, I can perfectly understand why it is worth sacrificing a dozen or so citizens every few years :eek:
buggyracer
03-Jun-10, 09:54
When you put it like that, I can perfectly understand why it is worth sacrificing a dozen or so citizens every few years :eek:
with nearly 2 million liceanced responsible firearms holders in England and wales alone, do you propose we ban them all from keeping arms due to one nutcase? :eek:
with nearly 2 million liceanced responsible firearms holders in England and wales alone, do you propose we ban them all from keeping arms due to one nutcase? :eek:
All I did was ask a question, and suggest a very quick fix that would probably result in a reduction on the number of gun licences held. In the light of recent events, I don't think that was unreasonable.
The Angel Of Death
03-Jun-10, 10:15
with nearly 2 million liceanced responsible firearms holders in England and wales alone, do you propose we ban them all from keeping arms due to one nutcase? :eek:
Yes why not just another case of people coming up with stupid suggestions when something bad happens
I mean if I went on a shooting spree tomorrow it would be because I played computer games and that obviously unhinged me
If I mowed a crowd of people down in my car would all form of transport be banned
If I went nuts with the contents of my shed and toolbox would B & Q / Homebase get closed because they sold me the contents I mean whoa nails you can really go to town with a bag of them heaven forbid you stick them in a nail gun
Yes bad things happen to good people but just because you own a gun (for whatever legal reason) doesn't mean that your going to go nuts at some point with it as pointed out if we all have a look round our immediate environment I can bet you anything you want you will find something that can be brandished as a weapon and cause serious damage if you put your mind to it
And say we do ban all guns today from 12pm onwards what will it be next time knifes screwdrivers sharp sticks with nails on the end of them the list goes on and on
Why not just ban life and be done with it once and for all
with nearly 2 million liceanced responsible firearms holders in England and wales alone, do you propose we ban them all from keeping arms due to one nutcase? :eek:
If there are "nearly 2 million liceanced responsible firearms holders in England and wales alone" that is a very worrying statistic.
That means that one in 28 people own at least one gun, as many licenced firearm holders own more than one weapon.
If these people are "responsible" why do so many firearms end up in the hands of criminals, where do criminals get their weapons from?
I visited a house once in Orkney and just inside the front door (which was open) was an umbrella/hatstand type of thing, but instead of umbrellas there were two shotguns
buggyracer
03-Jun-10, 12:50
If there are "nearly 2 million liceanced responsible firearms holders in England and wales alone" that is a very worrying statistic.
That means that one in 28 people own at least one gun, as many licenced firearm holders own more than one weapon.
If these people are "responsible" why do so many firearms end up in the hands of criminals, where do criminals get their weapons from?
I visited a house once in Orkney and just inside the front door (which was open) was an umbrella/hatstand type of thing, but instead of umbrellas there were two shotguns
at a guess illeagaly imported from abroad, if gun ownership is banned, only criminals will hold/have guns, not going to solve much is it, considering 99% of gun related crime comes from unliceancsed guns.
NickInTheNorth
03-Jun-10, 15:01
Obviously the whole issue of availability of any type of firearm is an emotive subject. It's a marmite sort of a subject.
What is required is a root and branch review of the laws regarding firearms, not as has been said by many posters a knee jerk reaction.
There is a need for some guns, but maybe there may be some sensible further restrictions, I'm not an expert on exactly what guns are currently legal, other than knowing that handguns are banned following Dunblane, and semi-automatic weapons as used by Michael Ryan at Hungerford.
Both bans are probably generally right, but could also be looked at afresh.
For example I would like to see target pistols re-allowed, probably with more security such as only allowed in fully licensed and regularly checked gun clubs, but as to what can be done with shot guns or rifles, I just don't know...
NickInTheNorth
03-Jun-10, 15:05
As to killing lots of people easily, lets ban fertiliser and diesel, can do a lot of damage with a mixture of those 2, both totally harmless without the ill-will of a human being...
tonkatojo
03-Jun-10, 17:02
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/10220974.stm (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/10220974.stm)
"Cumbria Police say that Derrick Bird held licences for a shotgun and a firearm. Deputy Chief Constable Stuart Hyde said that the two weapons they had recovered, a shotgun and a rifle, appeared similar to those described on the licences, but officers would need to perform a detailed forensic examination to confirm this."
Forensic examination my foot, either the gun numbers match what's on his certificate or they don't. I despair the tosh some folk take as fact.
Shabbychic
03-Jun-10, 17:12
Just to explain the difference as I see it. If you're interested. I, you, anyone, has half a chance of defending themselves against a mad person weilding a knife, baseball bat, what ever. You have no chance if someone is shooting you from long range.
Don't think schools in China feel the same. These madmen (http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/asia/article7123716.ece) didn't need guns. The world has gone crazy.
manloveswife
03-Jun-10, 17:15
Right, I'm not particularly on one side of the fence or the other.
I know there is many a legitimate reason for gun ownership, especially when it comes to people who have quite a few acres of land and need to protect livestock or whatever.
Then you have people who hunt, if done legally in a proper manner I have no problem with it.
However I do not see the need for a lot of the licenced guns that are out there. I know enough people who have less than an acre of land, with neighbours on the other side of the fence, who own guns for little reason other than they can. I am talking not just of shotguns but rifles also.
These guns are very rarely if ever taken out to the places where there legitimate use is claimed to be.
So people with no more justification to own a gun than myself, and I have no need or justification, have firearms that are licensed each time ( believe you have to justify the need and place to use a rifle, and the area of land to be large enough) by stating they are for use on someones land where they never go.
So can the pro gun people explain why these people should have a gun.
As said, I am not anti gun, but do not see the need for so many legitimate licences, so please enlighten the ignorant on this one.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/10220974.stm (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/10220974.stm)
"Cumbria Police say that Derrick Bird held licences for a shotgun and a firearm. Deputy Chief Constable Stuart Hyde said that the two weapons they had recovered, a shotgun and a rifle, appeared similar to those described on the licences, but officers would need to perform a detailed forensic examination to confirm this."
On the gun certs the gun serial numbers are listed so why is a forensic exam needed this wont prove if that is the gun listed on the cert?
Also on every renewal the investigting officer checks the serial numbers on the guns match the ones on the certificate.
I doubt he removed the numbers if he was going to kill himself.
On the gun certs the gun serial numbers are listed so why is a forensic exam needed this wont prove if that is the gun listed on the cert?
Also on every renewal the investigting officer checks the serial numbers on the guns match the ones on the certificate.
I doubt he removed the numbers if he was going to kill himself.
That's just a quote from the link, I posted it without comment.
bluemafia
03-Jun-10, 17:30
Its not the gun that kills - it's the person using it that kills.
so basically anyone in the forces is a killer!
Why does a taxi driver need a gun? Why does a postman, milkman, company director, bank manager, anyone who doesnt work the land or manage it or run some sort of sporting estate need a gun in their house with ammunition? I understand the fascinaton with guns and other weapons but to be honest I dont like them, never had, bb guns, air rifles the lot - why would you give your kid a gun for a present. .
If you want to play with guns or do gun sports then join a gun club. All guns should be kept there and no - one without a very very good reason should be allowed to keep guns at home.
Why does a taxi driver need a gun? Why does a postman, milkman, company director, bank manager, anyone who doesnt work the land or manage it or run some sort of sporting estate need a gun in their house with ammunition? I understand the fascinaton with guns and other weapons but to be honest I dont like them, never had, bb guns, air rifles the lot - why would you give your kid a gun for a present. .
If you want to play with guns or do gun sports then join a gun club. All guns should be kept there and no - one without a very very good reason should be allowed to keep guns at home.
Some sanity at last :eek:
Originally Posted by Phill http://forum.caithness.org/images/buttons/viewpost.gif (http://forum.caithness.org/showthread.php?p=716120#post716120)
The point being?
At this time, as far as I can tell, it is unknown wether the individual concerned had a licence or not. Also the police want to know where his weapons came from, this suggests he was not a licence holder.
"Cumbria Police say that Derrick Bird held licences for a shotgun .....
OK, we now know different, but at the time it was a little knee jerk.
If these people are "responsible" why do so many firearms end up in the hands of criminals, where do criminals get their weapons from?
Theft of guns from legitimate holders and brought in from abroad, also thefts from within military establishments. Also some illegal weapons are reactivated or blank firing/starter pistol types that have been drilled out.
What is required is a root and branch review of the laws regarding firearms, not as has been said by many posters a knee jerk reaction.
Sensible idea.
If you want to play with guns or do gun sports then join a gun club. All guns should be kept there and no - one without a very very good reason should be allowed to keep guns at home.
Makes a lot of sense, if guns had to be checked out before use then the people who've gone over the edge or have lost the plot will be prevented from carrying out this type of horror.
It's nonsens that tighter gun laws mean less crime. crims feel safer knowing that they are not going to face armed resistance. take a country like Switzerland wher guns are a part of swiss culture, but the crime rate is amazingly so low, statistcs are not even kept! Violent crime is rare. swiss men and women view firearms as being strictly conected to a sense of collective responsibilaty.
Google English Bill of Rights 1689. Blackstones summery of English Law is an eye opner. The American equivelent was modeled 100 years later. Comentaries of 1765, also afirm the English peoples right of having arms for their defence.
The Angel Of Death
03-Jun-10, 18:27
The main fact of the matter is no rules can be set in place to prevent someone snapping and going on a rampage how can you predict someone's mental health and what there going to do tomorrow or the day after etc
Think of it this way we as a country have a relatively small gun crimes because guns are not as easy to get hold of
Take America as an example ANYONE can simply walk into a gun shop and purchase a gun and get it within 30 days
Yes the laws will never prevent something like this happening I don't think any laws could ever do so but consider the opposite side and use America as an example and then tell me we wouldn't have a lot more gun crimes
If you want to play with guns or do gun sports then join a gun club. All guns should be kept there and no - one without a very very good reason should be allowed to keep guns at home.
If a loonatic cant get hold of a gun whats to stop a deranged nutter stabing or running many people over? :roll:
If a loonatic cant get hold of a gun whats to stop a deranged nutter stabing or running many people over? :roll:
nothing but at least he wont have ready access to a weapon that can kill at long range -he would have to get close to stab you and to run you over.
If you want to play with guns or do gun sports then join a gun club. All guns should be kept there and no - one without a very very good reason should be allowed to keep guns at home.
I used to shoot clays and I wouldn't have had any problem leaving my gun at the club, you allways wonder who actually knows that I had a gun in the house.
What happens when you want to go to another club who and how would you transport the gun.
Security would have to be very tight as the wrong people would know that a large cache of firearms are on the property.
And who do you trust with the keys, the police?
It's nonsens that tighter gun laws mean less crime. crims feel safer knowing that they are not going to face armed resistance. take a country like Switzerland wher guns are a part of swiss culture, but the crime rate is amazingly so low, statistcs are not even kept! Violent crime is rare. swiss men and women view firearms as being strictly conected to a sense of collective responsibilaty.
Google English Bill of Rights 1689. Blackstones summery of English Law is an eye opner. The American equivelent was modeled 100 years later. Comentaries of 1765, also afirm the English peoples right of having arms for their defence.
You are really going off on one now chuck. You do understand no one in UK has a gun for defence don't you?
I just wondered who am i to talk at various times in our house there are three swords two battle axes ( and no...Im not talking about me and my mum) a warhammer, two flails, several spears and a mace or two.
Somehow I think im not qualified to be sanctimonious about this
I just wondered who am i to talk at various times in our house there are three swords two battle axes ( and no...Im not talking about me and my mum) a warhammer, two flails, several spears and a mace or two.
Somehow I think im not qualified to be sanctimonious about this
And that's just the tableware :eek:
Aaldtimer
04-Jun-10, 03:02
so basically anyone in the forces is a killer!
Believe it or not, not everyone in the Forces is weapons trained, and those that are , are not killers, just potentially lethal.[disgust]
oldchemist
04-Jun-10, 20:11
Cars (well their drivers) are responsible for many more fatalities than firearms in the UK so why not start by banning the more serious item?
Whatever gets banned people will still do. The only thing that you can ban effectively is things that people dont want to do. Human nature innit.
Per capita the Highlands have one of the highest rate of legal gun ownership. It is also an area with one of the lowest rates of gun crime.
Fortunately, the sort of horrible incident of this week is extremely rare. This is no comfort to the families of those poor people who happened to be in the way.
The real problem in this country is the ease with which criminals manage to get illegal weapons which they are prepared to use to aid their criminal activities. No amount of tightening the legislation on legal gun ownership is going to affect these people.
Ducati you are an idiot!
If the guy mowed down the people invloved in his taxi would you call for an outright ban on cars?
I think not, you are a typical irrational person how has one opinon that is not justified in any way and is unwilling to take things into perspective or listen to others opinions who may actually know what they are talking about![evil]
If our police were armed would cumbria been ended sooner ??? Just a thought !!!
Per capita the Highlands have one of the highest rate of legal gun ownership. It is also an area with one of the lowest rates of gun crime.
Mebbe its because its one of the lowest density population areas. Just a thought.
so basically anyone in the forces is a killer!
Listen carefully – I shall say this only once.
These guns or rifles, described as hand-held weapons are inanimate objects; that is, they are non-living, i.e. lifeless. They cannot do anything of their own volition. The can only kill legally or illegally when used by man.
Most members of the Armed Services will be trained in the use of these weapons for use in a variety of hostile situations. They are well aware of the impact the use of such weapons have. Their use will be governed by strict, ‘Rules of Engagement’ which state how and when the legitimate use of such force may be used. Members of the military take this responsibility seriously.
When military personnel use their weapons according to the Rules of Engagement they are doing so legally as required by law and the government of the day.
The government is of course elected by you, the people.
Statisics never could get my head round them!!!
If our police were armed would cumbria been ended sooner ??? Just a thought !!!
Our police are armed. Every area has an armed response unit with weapons and trained officers ready to go 24 hours a day. In a country where gun ownership is not the norm arming every officer would be counter productive.
The Angel Of Death
04-Jun-10, 21:41
If our police were armed would cumbria been ended sooner ??? Just a thought !!!
Properly not given no one had a clue where he was or where he was going there didn't seem to be any sense to it
Properly not given no one had a clue where he was or where he was going there didn't seem to be any sense to it
And the geography of Cumbria would only help anyone trying to evade the law.
Their use will be governed by strict, ‘Rules of Engagement’ which state how and when the legitimate use of such force may be used. Members of the military take this responsibility seriously.
When military personnel use their weapons according to the Rules of Engagement they are doing so legally as required by law and the government of the day.
The government is of course elected by you, the people.
Just like in Derry on 30 January 1972 when UK troops opened fire on 27 civil rights marchers killing 12.
Ducati you are an idiot!
If the guy mowed down the people invloved in his taxi would you call for an outright ban on cars?
I think not, you are a typical irrational person how has one opinon that is not justified in any way and is unwilling to take things into perspective or listen to others opinions who may actually know what they are talking about![evil]
Hello. I don't think I have spoken to you before, the first thing you say is I am an Idiot. Have you been talking to my wife?
First of all, if you had actually read my post, you would know I was not calling for a ban. Go back and read it again, I used quite short words.
If you are an example of the responsible, stable gun owners in our society I am very worried indeed.
I heard a suggestion today that resonates with me. Have a public list of all legal gun owners so you know if your neighbour is one. That way, if you think they are off their head you can tell the police. The other part of this suggestion was, like planning permission, anyone applying for a licence would canvass the area they reside in and neighbours would be invited to object. I wonder if given the choice how many people would choose to live next to a gun owner?
Just like in Derry on 30 January 1972 when UK troops opened fire on 27 civil rights marchers killing 12.
!972, that's 38 years ago.
Did they finish typing up the report from the enquiry yet? They seem to have been typing it a for a long time now.
Sorry closed due to hijack by conspiracy freeks
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.