New U.K. Gun Law.

[Mcupobob]

Well my sympathies go out to you U.K gun enuthiest and owners. Other than that not much I can help you with. I think gun control is a good thing but it shouldn't have too cost more to obtain the license, sure go through the extra hoops but not extra price..

 

[Valksy]

Inevitable that this would happen and I would think that it is entirely as a result of 12 people being murdered by Derek Bird using weapons that he legally owned under licence.

Each time there has been a massacre our gun laws have tightened, first Hungerford, then Dunblane and now Cumbria. (I doubt Raoul Moat is of great relevance as I don't think that his weapon was owned lawfully - difference between Bird and Moat is the number who died).

Despite what the media likes to suggest, gun crime is pretty rare in the UK.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/10220974

 

[brodie21]

well, restricting shotguns doesnt make sense because they are not readily concealable and are primarily used for skeet shooting and things of that nature. handguns would make more sense, as they are easy to conceal. chances are not a lot of robberies are commited with shotguns as simply walking around with one would probably draw a lot of red flags if some guy was walking around carrying a shotgun

 

[Wadders]

Inevitable that this would happen and I would think that it is entirely as a result of 12 people being murdered by Derek Bird using weapons that he legally owned under licence.

Each time there has been a massacre our gun laws have tightened, first Hungerford, then Dunblane and now Cumbria. (I doubt Raoul Moat is of great relevance as I don't think that his weapon was owned lawfully - difference between Bird and Moat is the number who died).

Despite what the media likes to suggest, gun crime is pretty rare in the UK.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/10220974

Agreed and even as a gun owner I'm all for strict control, but not [t]this[/s] strict. Every now and again something like that will happen wether the laws are changed or not. As I said earlier, Bird was in possession of a FAC for his .22 rifle (described by various media shitstains as a "high powered silenced sniper rifle") therefore as a direct reaction to his spree, this law is totally pointless, as FACs remain unchanged. So even if this law had been made before the events involving Bird took place, it would have done absolutely nothing to prevent them as he still could have bought his shotgun and his little .22 under the Firearms Certificate which he was deemed suitable to hold.

 

[EMFCRACKSHOT]

They accept if you're a registered member of a Rifle Club, or can prove shooting rights to a peice of land. The 'need' can be anything from pest control, target shooting, deer hunting etc. I'd say it's less of a 'need', more like a valid and acceptable reason. 'Cos lets face it, no-one these days needs a rifle and everyone including the police know that. That shouldnt stop people from owning them though

The hardest part is the getting shooting rights/ aquiring membership of a club though I'd say. Not that I own a FAC so I may be wrong, I'm just going on what I've been told by fellow shooters who do.

Aye, i've been trying to find a club to join for absolutely ages. I'm moving to manchester in three weeks, hopefully i'll have more luck there. Until then, i'm stuck with my air rifle in my friends orchard.
Oh and i forgot to mention the pointlessness of this law.

 

[Chrinik]

As an outsider, knowing bugger all about guns, any laws making guns harder to acquire seem reasonable.

It might be a pain in the ass to gun owners but it makes it more difficult for the wrong people to get hold of them.
You could argue that it doesn't make much of a difference since it makes it difficult for the right people to get hold of one, but i'm pretty sure not many people in the UK own guns. And anyone that wants one will probably go through what they need to get one.

Could be wrong but those are my initial thoughts.

Well you are wrong...because it is totally easy to accuire a firearm illegaly if you have the desire to do evil, but legal gunowners are hardly the ones who go shoot people.
THIS is the fact that people don´t get...people who want to commit a crime with a firearm don´t go through the ordeal of legaly accuiring it, they just go to the nearest shaddowy guy and purchase an illegally imported firearm which is NOT registered to you and go shoot at people...
People who legally accuire firearms have a reason, be it sportshooting or hunting or whatever, and they don´t buy a gun to kill people...

 

[Wadders]

well, restricting shotguns doesnt make sense because they are not readily concealable and are primarily used for skeet shooting and things of that nature. handguns would make more sense, as they are easy to conceal. chances are not a lot of robberies are commited with shotguns as it would probably draw a lot of red flags if some guy was walking around carrying a shotgun

Handguns have been illegal in the Uk since 1997, but I agree with your point. In 2008/09, handguns were used in 52% of all non-airgun firearms crime. (source= http://www.basc.org.uk/en/departments/firearms/the-home-affairs-committee-inquiry-into-firearms-control-2010--a-guide-for-submitting-evidence.cfm) so obviously restricting legal guns is not very effective, if guns that have been illegal for over a decade are used in over half of the gun crimes.

So as you rightly say, shotgun restrictions make little sense.

 

[demoman_chaos]

Guns don't kill people, people kill people. Take away the gun, they will replace it with something else. Take away that somthing else, and a new thing will arise.
If guns go away, knife related crime will go up, followed by any other type of potentially lethal object unill nothing is left.

Crime happens, there is no avoiding that fact. Crime exists because lawas exist. Crimes are teh shaodw in the light of the law. You cannot get rid of the shadow, withotu getting rid of the light.
But getting rid of laws all together is not the best solution (though there would indeed be 0 crime), but neither is stricter laws. Those who give up liberty for freedom recieve neither. Punish the criminals, not the people.

 

[oktalist]

Spoiler: YouTube: Charlie Brooker on media coverage of shooting sprees.

A better way to curb incidences of shooting tragedies.

 

[Wadders]

This knee-jerk reaction could be damaging to shooters, sportsman, collecter, and the shooting industry as a whole.

Oh noes! Why, next they might do something damaging to the stabbing and raping industry too! D= No, but really there is absolutely no need to have a gun, and one of the best things about Britain is that you can walk down the street without worrying that any nutter is hiding a firearm.

I said in the OP that I didnt want this to turn into an argument about gun control, kthxbai.

While I agree with you, I'm not sure how they could implement control based on mental health. GPs rarely know what's going on inside the heads of their patients any more than the police do, or at least not enough to make a decent judgement on an issue such as this when asked as referees (which they are btw under current law)

Then what? an appointment with a Psychologist before grant of a Certificate? Yeah, cos that's gona come cheap. Unless they were employed by the Police, but that would ramp costs up for the Cops and the prospective certificate holder too, and I cant see the Police spending any more dough than they absolutely have to...

If I remember correctly, I read that Mr Bird had been diagnosed and labelled as a problem case, but that no further psychological treatment was given, most likely for budget reasons. I can't remember where I read this though.

Hmm, I did not know that

Still that's what it all comes down to isnt it? Costs and budgets. Shameful that 12 lives might have been saved if someone was willing to invest a bit more time and money into treating him.

They accept if you're a registered member of a Rifle Club, or can prove shooting rights to a peice of land. The 'need' can be anything from pest control, target shooting, deer hunting etc. I'd say it's less of a 'need', more like a valid and acceptable reason. 'Cos lets face it, no-one these days needs a rifle and everyone including the police know that. That shouldnt stop people from owning them though

The hardest part is the getting shooting rights/ aquiring membership of a club though I'd say. Not that I own a FAC so I may be wrong, I'm just going on what I've been told by fellow shooters who do.

Aye, i've been trying to find a club to join for absolutely ages. I'm moving to manchester in three weeks, hopefully i'll have more luck there. Until then, i'm stuck with my air rifle in my friends orchard.
Oh and i forgot to mention the pointlessness of this law.

Good luck with that pal, I'd have thought it would be easier to join a rifle club out in the country than in a big city like Manchester though? I live in darkest rural Shropshire and the nearest rifle club is only about 15 mins drive away. Not that I'm a member, don't have the money so I jsut use their Clay set-ups instead

 

[Lord Mountbatten Reborn]

...people who want to commit a crime with a firearm don´t go through the ordeal of legaly accuiring it...

The guns used in the Dunblane massacre were all acquired legally. Whilst it's much easier to get them illegally, it'd still be a good idea to make sure legal requirements weren't laughably weak.

 

[EMFCRACKSHOT]

Good luck with that pal, I'd have thought it would be easier to join a rifle club out in the country than in a big city like Manchester though? I live in darkest rural Shropshire and the nearest rifle club is only about 15 mins drive away. Not that I'm a member, don't have the money so I jsut use their Clay set-ups instead

It probably is, but i'm going to Uni there so i don't have much choice.
And i much prefer rifles to shotguns, so an FAC is definitely needed xD

 

[Slangeveld]

UK stands for "United Kingdom" its not a weird way of saying "America".

 

[Virus0015]

Unfortunately the UK government isn't quite realising that using a firearm is not the only way to kill people. there will always be people who crack and go on a rampage. It doesn't matter if they don't have access to a gun, there are plenty of other methods (use your imagination). tightening shotgun laws will only affect those who use them legally.

This is not even taking into account the huge network of illegal weapons trafficking that happens in the UK. One of my school teachers grew up in a rough area of London, and could recall how easily one could hire an automatic weapon for a day. Anyone could do this, given the motivation and the right contacts.

 

[Wadders]

Spoiler: YouTube: Charlie Brooker on media coverage of shooting sprees.

A better way to curb incidences of shooting tragedies.

Oh god, I cannot agree more.

Someone (I think it was PimpPeter) posted an article similar in purpose to that video, detailing how after every massacre, there are follow up attacks by people seeminly inspired by the killer, thanks to the huge news coverage these things are given. I wish I could find his post with the article but I'm too tired

Sure enough though, Derek Bird does his rampage, then less than a month later, Raol Moat makes his way onto papers and TV across the country doing a very similar thing.

 

[Fallen-Angel Risen-Demon]

Good, stricter gun laws=less idiots with guns.

 

[steevee]

Sometimes I hate our governments *sigh*

Can't wait to get over to Montana.

 

[Wadders]

Good, stricter gun laws=less idiots with legal guns. more idiots with illegal guns

Went ahead and fixed that for you

it'd still be a good idea to make sure legal requirements weren't laughably weak.

...Which they arent. Nowadays the UK has some of the tightest gun legislation around. Not saying we should be like the USA, I fully support our current gun laws but they have gone as far as they need, and this proposal will change nothing for the good.

Good luck with that pal, I'd have thought it would be easier to join a rifle club out in the country than in a big city like Manchester though? I live in darkest rural Shropshire and the nearest rifle club is only about 15 mins drive away. Not that I'm a member, don't have the money so I jsut use their Clay set-ups instead

It probably is, but i'm going to Uni there so i don't have much choice.
And i much prefer rifles to shotguns, so an FAC is definitely needed xD

Ah fair enough, you'll have fun at Uni! I applied to Manchester but wasnt cool/brainy enough to get a place, it looked fantastic.

But shotguns are great fun! Not saying rifles arent either though, never really had the good fortune to use one though so I'm a Shotgun man, for good or ill Got your eye on any particualr rifle?