Nigel bloody Farage sinks hope of pistol ban repeal

[ordnance]

Ultimately they should be judged sound of mind, I'm not sure why this is such a contentious point.

That's your point of view and that's fine. Apart form the issues I have mentioned, I think it would be unworkable. Where would you start new applicants, take here for example there are around 60 thousand firearms certificate holders here. And in England And Wales There were 141,775 firearm certificates on issue on 31 March 2010, an increase of 2% compared with the end of March 2009
• 580,653 shotgun certificates were on issue on 31 March 2010, 1% up
• Those certificates cover a total of 1.8m guns. Get them all to have some of psychiatric test, who would pay for it and who would do it. I doubt the NHS could coupe with such numbers. It already takes long enough to get a firearms certificate, wait on the NHS to do a psychiatric test on every certificate holder and new applicants and it could take years.

[HALODIN]

Whatever you're trying to say, it sounds hostile.

You have been shooting one year and you have a firearms licence. You must be a very law abiding person to join a club do a 6 month probation period then get granted a firearms certificate in one year. I am impressed.

[HALODIN]

I don't see why the cost couldn't be rolled in to the application fee and carried out in the private sector. In the grand scheme of how much a rifle costs throughout it's lifetime, the cost to the licence holder would be trivial IMO.

There will be more mass shootings in the UK, it's just a question of when and if there's a way to head this off at the pass and preserve innocent lives and our existing shooting rights, then I'll support it 100%.

That's your point of view and that's fine. Apart form the issues I have mentioned, I think it would be unworkable. Where would you start new applicants, take here for example there are around 60 thousand firearms certificate holders here. And in England And Wales There were 141,775 firearm certificates on issue on 31 March 2010, an increase of 2% compared with the end of March 2009
• 580,653 shotgun certificates were on issue on 31 March 2010, 1% up
• Those certificates cover a total of 1.8m guns. Get them all to have some of psychiatric test, who would pay for it and who would do it. I doubt the NHS could coupe with such numbers. It already takes long enough to get a firearms certificate, wait on the NHS to do a psychiatric test on every certificate holder and new applicants and it could take years.

[Ares590]

You have been shooting one year and you have a firearms licence. You must be a very law abiding person to join a club do a 6 month probation period then get granted a firearms certificate in one year. I am impressed.

Is it unusual to have a firearms cert after one year?
Im in largely the same boat, ive had my licence 7 months now but I got it a year Give or take a few weeks. from when I consider myself to have taken up shooting as a hobby.
or was that sarcastic? hard to tell online.

[Sim G]

There will be more mass shootings in the UK, it's just a question of when and if there's a way to head this off at the pass and preserve innocent lives and our existing shooting rights, then I'll support it 100%.

So you'd support a total ban on everything? That's what GCN believe is required to prevent another mass shooting and even if it saves just one life, it would be worth it. So that's a stance you could take?

Firstly, there is nothing any government can do to prevent another mass shooting. They can limit the possibility/probability, but they will never prevent it.

Secondly, there is no half way with firearms legislation. We've tried all of the negotiation and appeasement and gave still had two gun bans. Some of us never want that again and w know softly softly will not save us, we gave to meet it head on forcibly.

[ordnance]

There will be more mass shootings in the UK, it's just a question of when and if there's a way to head this off at the pass and preserve innocent lives and our existing shooting rights, then I'll support it 100%.

If that is the case no amount of psychiatric tests will stop it. From all accounts Ted Bundy was a charming intelligent nice individual, and would have no problem passing a psychiatric test. We know how that ended. As I have already said people can tell psychiatric doctors what they want to hear, there is no blood test for psychiatric illness. You really need to think things through before posting.

[dromia]

There were mass murders before the invention of firearms and there will be mass murders if firearms are taken away.

This whole argument revolves around the obfuscated irrelevance that the weapons used to kill and maim are the perpetrators.

Governments and societal victims like anti gun proponents do so because they cannot, for differing reasons, allow them selves to live with the fact that you cannot make the world a totally safe place through legislation.

They cannot and do not want to accept that people cause these tragedies and you can never legislate for that so one way or another these atrocities will continue.

Because the gun debate revolves around such an irrational and irrelevant premise that means that trying to engage meaningfully with it it is a total waste of time as the pro gun, individual responsibility view point can never be accepted.

Faffing around discussing gun types, magazine capacities, need, disciplines etc. etc. is a total waste of time. What the nation needs is full on championing for the recognition of individual and communal responsibility for the actions of people and groups instead of individuals and communities abrogating those responsibilities to government which is in no way equipped to deliver on this. Unfortunately when government get given power by the people they are reluctant to give it up which only fuels this vicious circle of irrelevance.

Our "national" bodies contribute to this chimera of a debate by ignoring this fundamental issue of personal responsibility and engage as weak supplicants looking for crumbs from the legislators table to justify there own sad existences.

Until we have unifying national body that champions the crux of the issue then firearms ownership will ultimately die in the UK

Firearms UK at least seems to be making the right noises but whether they will garner sufficient support and be able to find leverage remains to be seen.

As regards UKIP, out of all the parties the few "policies" they do have they accord with my views more than the others who have had their chances in office and look at the shambles they have us in. For me anyone that talks sensibly about firearms ownership is likely to talk sensibly about other things too, as a shooter UKIP will get my vote.

[Demonic69]

You really need to think things through before posting.

Let's not start with base insults shall we? The gcn only need to look on these forums for enough material to push for a ban you lot are downright hostile when someone's opinion doesn't match your own.
Halodin has simply expressed an opinion, if you disagree explain why, you might change his mind.

SimG, that's clearly not what he said, you should be a politician. Suggesting a psychological evaluation is in no way supporting a full ban is it? Would you say no to an evaluation if it were the only way to save your sport? What about if it were the only way to get handguns back?

Alpha1, FAC in 7-9 months is about the minimum. 6 months to become a full cub member, then however long it takes to issue. How long have you been shooting, haven't learned the rules yet? ;-)

[ordnance]

Let's not start with base insults shall we? The gcn only need to look on these forums for enough material to push for a ban you lot are downright hostile when someone's opinion doesn't match your own

You think what I said was an insult, you must be easy insulted in your part of the world. Its a request think before posting.

What about if it were the only way to get handguns back?

Maybe you could answer my question, what sort of evaluation , what would be the criteria what condition makes someone unsuitable to own firearms. A mental evaluation is only relevant in that moment of time , peoples mental health can change in a moment. Bereavement marital break up , or for no reason at all. Example Dr Harold Shipman , nice guy by all accounts could easily have passed a mental test . The think before you think is because it would be unworkable and make no difference. Why the distinction between handguns and other firearms. A shotgun can be just as deadly.

[Demonic69]

You think what I said was an insult, you must be easy insulted in your part of the world. Its a request think before posting.

Not particularly, though insinuating someone doesn't think before they post is an insult my book. I believe in debate, not winning arguments by ridicule.

Maybe you could answer my question, what sort of evaluation , what would be the criteria what condition makes someone unsuitable to own firearms. A mental evaluation is only relevant in that moment of time , peoples mental health can change in a moment. Bereavement marital break up , or for no reason at all. Example Dr Harold Shipman , nice guy by all accounts could easily have passed a mental test . The think before you think is because it would be unworkable and make no difference. Why the distinction between handguns and other firearms. A shotgun can be just as deadly.

Whatever convinces the antis would work for me, they're the ones that need to be appeased. Most of them wouldn't do their homework, which is clear based on their current opinions that banning guns reduces gun crime.
There are standard tests which, while they could be faked, could provide some sense of security to the eternally terrified.
Some of the nutcases who have been mentioned previously wouldn't bother with firearms, they're too clever to go on a one way shooting spree, they can do what they do without getting caught or worrying about psychological evaluations.

Let it be noted that I'm against any more hoops or restrictions being placed shooters, I'd just like to think we could come to a compromise if we could get access to a greater selection of shooting disciplines.

We all know most shooters are law abiding and responsible, and that restrictive legislature is ludicrous, what we need is a way to convince the general public that we're not all spree killers in the making.