UKIP Firearms Policy

[subvers10n]

Just heard back from the Conservatives, this is their response, a polite but pointless.... "Our plans for the Firearm act will be announced in our forthcoming manifesto.".

Is it just me, or does that sound a bit worrying...? emrolleyes

[meles meles]

No party ever lives up to its manifesto...

(We're hoping to acquire loads of manifestos to power our stove...)

[Chuck]

It means if they are struggling they will demonise the law abiding in a cheap vote stunt - just like they always do.

badger has it nailed, they never live up to GOOD promises, only the bad stuff they spin as good!

[meles meles]

We're tempted to risk a vote for UKIP: we've tried labour, Liberal and Conservative over the years and been mightily disappointed. UKIP have yet to show themselves as rogues and vagabonds, and appear otherwise at the moment...

[shugie]

They won't reply with anything other than 'no changes planned'. I pressed them on it publicly a while back.

Let's get them elected first and we can remind them of their support of liberty later. smile2

I'm rather suspicious of UKIP when it comes to liberty. I'm inclined to trust them very slightly less than the Tories on this.

[waterford103]

A reply from UKIP , doesn't fill me with hope !

The party thinks there should be proper and sensible gun licensing in place. We certainly do not want to see any move towards the way gun licensing is done in America. However for those who require hand guns for pest control (farmers) and sport there should be stringent licensing that undergoes constant renewal. The fact that the UK Olympic shooting team had to go to France to train is what Nigel was questioning especially.

Most guns used by criminals are unlicensed and traded on the black market. That should be a police priority. Having thorough hand gun licensing for those people who require firearms for professional or professional leisure reasons would not impact on the circulation of firearms among criminals. I do hope that that clarifies things. I can assure you that we certainly are not advocating a form of free-for-all with gun use and ownership.
Kind Regards
Alan Bigwood
UKIP Head Office

[meles meles]

It would seem to us that the reply is a guarded response that tries to take neither a position for nor against guns: exactly the sort of reply one might give if one had no idea who was asking the question but were wary of it being from, say, a journalist in search of a story or an anti- seeking to elicit a reply they could then use to attack the party.

[Mr_Logic]

Given the guarded nature of that response, I think it is actually quite encouraging. That said, that he feels the need to presume the question is asked with an anti-shooting agenda in mind is worrying.

[Chuck]

We certainly do not want to see any move towards the way gun licensing is done in America.

:cool2: :cool2: WHY?

What's wrong with the US system.You are law abiding citizen (subject here) you WANT a gun - you go to store, they do a background check and you get one if yoiu are clean..what's not to want. Convicted felons are banned from owning firearms, just like here.

Crininals don't give a rats about laws so why should WE not have the same rights and freedoms as our US counterparts. Leave self defence out of it, why can we NOT have any firearm we want for sporting / recreational use?

They want to legalise Marijuana but criminalise handguns or full-bore semi autos.

[Mr_Logic]

Chuck the USA firearms policy is too lax. There are ways to improve it without stopping people owning firearms, or treading on their constitutional rights. However, opinions are so polarised that effective firrasrms measures become impossible - either they are a slippery slope or they don't go anywhere near dar enough, depending on your point of view.

The US system would not work here because it is impossible to get past this anti-gun nation. Better to try for something achievable and acceptable.