Bxls guns grab letter

[bradaz11]

got a reply


Thank you for your email regarding the proposed new firearms restrictions
addressed to Stuart Agnew MEP. He has asked me to reply to you on his
behalf.

UKIP MEPs were elected on a platform of withdrawal from the EU and thus have
no mandate for supporting EU legislative proposals and would not, therefore,
support this legislation. The danger with these proposals is that they are
a kneejerk reaction to what happened in Paris that may end up penalising the
law abiding while not affecting the terrorists. Furthermore, firearms are
already well regulated in this country.

The UKIP MEPs are opposed, as a matter of principle, to unelected members of
the European Commission being the sole originators of all new EU
legislation, much of which is binding upon the British people. They regard
this matter as none of the EU's business and will vote against the final
legislation. However, they will consider their position on any proposed
amendments.

It should be a matter for our elected Government and Parliament at
Westminster, not the unelected European Commission in Brussels. However, do
bear in mind that there are 751 MEPs and the UK has just 72. Many of the
latter are EU supporters and will not vote against the Commission. Another
problem we have to face is that many member state countries are net
beneficiaries of EU largesse (taxpayers' money) and will rarely vote against
the Commission i.e. bite the hand that feeds them. It is a deeply
undemocratic and unsatisfactory system and is one of the many reasons why
UKIP MEPs campaign so hard for UK withdrawal.

UKIP was created in 1993 to campaign for our country's freedom from the EU
and we will continue to campaign for exactly that outcome.

Best wishes,

Stuart Gulleford
Political Advisor to Stuart Agnew MEP

Office of Stuart Agnew MEP



so basically they are opposing it on principal, as should all UKIP MEP's...?

[froggy]

Reply from one of the 8 London MEP

Dear Yves,
Thank you for your email.
Most of the Commission’s recent proposals were set out earlier this year as part of the European Agenda on Security, including plans to review EU firearms legislation (Directive 91/477 on control of the acquisition and possession of weapons, as amended by Directive 2008/51).
The European Parliament’s Internal Market and Consumer Protection (IMCO) Committee will be responsible for reviewing this legislation, and I have brought your concerns to the attention of my Green colleagues on that Committee.
For your information, the members of IMCO are all listed on the European Parliament’s website: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/committee ... mbers.html?
You can also follow the progress of the file online at: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/oeil/popu ... OD%29&l=en
Thank you again for writing to me about this issue. Please let me know if you would like to receive further email updates about my work as London's (***) MEP.

my reply :

Dear (***),
Thanks very much for your prompt reply .

While I strongly support the initial objectives of the commission concerning the criminal conversion of deactivated weapons as well as welcoming measures to combat the unacceptable trafficking of war weapons for terrorist use, I can only question the fallacious move to deprive law-abiding sportsmen of their highly controlled & secured semi-automatic guns needed to compete in various disciples and that, I remind you, have never been used by the terrorists.

Further more, I understand that police resources are currently stretched to their limits. If the public safety is indeed the main priority of the proposal, the legislator should fully understand the pointless & unacceptable burden to go after civilian sporting guns of a type that have not been used in terror attacks that will only distract the various Law Enforcing Agencies from their core mission which is fighting crime & indiscriminate terror. I trust you must share my concern that the sportsmen as well as the public at large will find the consequences of such a waste of resources especially inacceptable at a time when they are most needed.

I would very much appreciate your personal views on the points raised in my initial letter & present response.

On a different matter I, of course, would welcome email updates about your work as London's (***) MEP. May, as a fervent supporter of green issues, also take the opportunity of this email to share with you my greatest expectations for the forthcoming COP 21 climate change Paris conference and wish all the participants the best in bringing a much awaited response to what remains the other major threat to our common good.

Yours sincerely,

[daman]

Lol, Froggy - I just logged in to post that I had a reply. It's the exact same as yours

Have to say I'm surprised that of the 8 london MEPs the only one who bothered to respond is from a notoriously anti-gun party.

[IsleShoot]

I've had four replies so far.

Catherine Bearder MEP South East
Diane James MEP South East
Anneliese Dodds MEP South East
Richard Ashworth MEP South East

Bearder & James where pretty non-commital about anything so I haven't bothered posting but I'd say Ashworth is measured where as Dodds is a sensationalist fool who thinks a fireman with military service is the man to listen to!

Dodds response:

Thank you for your e-mail outlining your concerns regarding the proposed alterations to the EU Firearms Directive.

The Parisian terror attacks, where over 120 people were killed by firearms, was always going to provoke heightened security measures, including increased scrutiny and regulation of firearms. As you are aware, the European Commission have announced their proposed changes to the EU Firearms Directive, the main piece of EU-wide legislation that governs the use and regulation of firearms.

These amendments, as I’m sure you’re aware, aim to reduce security threats from firearms, making it increasingly difficult to acquire firearms, especially deactivated ones. The European Commission has proposed implementing stricter conditions for the online acquisition of firearms, aiming to prohibit the acquisition of firearms or munitions through the internet, and to restrict ownership of blank firing weapons due to their ability to be turned into firearms. There will also be further restrictions to the use and circulation of deactivated firearms, and citizens, as you have rightly pointed out, will not be allowed to own some of the most dangerous firearms, including Kalashnikovs, used during the Parisian shootings.

Under current laws, citizens can own Category A weapons if they have been deactivated. Deactivated firearms, in this current climate, could pose a huge threat to the safety of European citizens. As I’m sure you’re aware, those who know how to reactivate them could do some serious damage to people.

I can appreciate that guns with the same calibre chamber can look very different cosmetically, that guns with larger calibres can sometimes look more innocuous than a gun with a smaller calibre chamber, and how harmful a gun is down to the intent of the users. The majority of gun owners are, of course, perfectly law-abiding, and it is not the intent of the European Commission to limit their freedoms and right to use a licensed and activated firearm.

However, currently, there are heightened security threats within Europe, and at the moment, there is a feeling of distinct unease across the globe. This is especially true within Paris, and could be seen at La Place de la Republique, when mourners were gathering to pay their respects three days after the terror attacks. Here, the sounds of firecrackers were mistaken for the sound of gunfire, and flowers and candles were crushed as people ran in fear of another attack. Thankfully this was a false alarm. However, as European citizens, we must do all we can to assuage people’s fears and unease during this time. Banning weapons that resemble the appearance of category A weapons to the naked and untrained eye will help to do this.

The Commissioners, Elzbieta Bienkowska, and Dimitris Avramopoulos, do have experience with firearms, as they have lots of military experience. Before entering the European Commission, Avramopoulos has represented Greece in Vienna at the Conference for Security and Co-operation in Europe. In November 2011, he was appointed the Greek Minister for National Defence within the coalition government of Lucas Papademos. Bienkowska also has military experience, winning the Gold Fire Service medal, or indeed, the ‘Medal of Merit for National Defence.’ As I’m sure you’re aware, this is a medal awarded to people who have done work to strengthen the Polish military.

The European Firearms Directive will also help to give guidance to the UK’s own gun-law reforms. Our most recent gun law is the Firearms Act, which was drafted in 1968. There are many problems with this act, including a lack of definition over key terms, e.g. ‘lethal barrelled weapon’, ambiguities within the act, especially concerning deactivated weapons, and the act has also failed to keep pace with modern technology. There is a complete lack of coherence within the Firearms Act, with 34 separate acts contained within the current UK firearm legislation. The European Firearms Directive, if accepted by the European Parliament, will help to provide a direction for the expected reforms of the Firearms Act, in addition to the recent views expressed within the recent conference organised by the government’s law reform advisers.

The weapons used within the Parisian terrorist attacks were obtained on the black market. I can appreciate your comments and concerns that the proposed alterations to the European Firearms Directive will only serve to penalise law-abiding citizens. Shooting does contribute vast amounts of money to the economy, particularly within Britain, where £2 billion a year is generated through shooting and shooting-related activities. These are concerns that many constituents have aired with me, and I have passed both yours and their concerns to Claude Moraes MEP, chair of the European Parliament civil liberties, justice and home affairs committee.

However, the Commission has also announced that it would be developing an action plan against the illegal trafficking of weapons and explosives. Recently, the amount of weapons on the black market has risen at a rapid rate (double digit percentages) for several years, and EU countries need to work together to crack down on these markets. Within this action plan, a range of issues aim to be tackled, including the illegal purchase of weapons on the black market, the control of illegal weapons and explosives in the internal market (especially from the Balkan countries or ex-war zones), and organised crime. It is also the Commission’s aim to propose actions to support Member States’ activities, building on the Action Plan on illicit trafficking in firearms between the EU and the Western Balkans.

In this context, the European Firearms Directive is part of a package aiming to tackle the proliferation of firearms across the European Union. The aim of the European Commission is not to inhibit and limit the hobbies and interests of its citizens; the aim is to protect and safeguard their citizens.

It is also important to note that these proposals have not yet been confirmed and accepted by the European Parliament and the European Council. The proposals will have its first reading in the European Parliament soon. Here, the directive will be debated, and amendments can be drafted. Both the EU Parliament and the Commission have to agree on the contents of the bill. If this is not the case, then the bill is sent for a 2nd reading. In this way, both the European Parliament and the European Commission will work together and come to a conclusion that a great many citizens of the European Union will be happy with.

Thanks again for getting in touch; I would like to invite you to please take a moment to complete my online constituent's survey here http://www.AnnelieseDoddsMEP.uk/survey. If you're interested in keeping updated on my work, both here in the South East and in the European Parliament, you can sign-up for my report back e-newsletter here http://www.AnnelieseDoddsMEP.uk/e_newsletter.

With best wishes,
Yours sincerely

Anneliese Dodds MEP

Ashworths response:

Thank you for confirming your address and contacting Richard Ashworth MEP. Mr Ashworth has read your email and has asked me to reply on his behalf.

On the 18th November the European Commission announced measures which concern firearms in the EU. The revision of the Firearms Directive is composed of four facets; to make it more difficult to acquire firearms in the European Union, better track legally held firearms, strengthen cooperation between Member States, and ensure that deactivated firearms are rendered inoperable. Conservatives in the European Parliament agree on the need for a new Directive; but believe there does need to be wider consideration of some of the proposals.

The proposals concerning firearms have been foreseen since the European Security Agenda which was adopted in April 2015, but have been accelerated as a result of the tragic attacks in Paris. In light of the threats posed by terrorism it is necessary for Europe to work closely together in matters of national-security and counter-terrorism.

Mr Ashworth believes the responsibility for ensuring internal security is first and foremost with Member States. However there are many cross-border challenges that defy the capacity of individual countries to act alone and require EU support to build trust and facilitate cooperation, exchange of information and joint action.

The use of firearms by criminal and terrorist organisations poses a great security threat to citizens, as we have witnessed on several occasions this year. These tragic events call for a stronger, coordinated European approach to control the use of weapons and fight against trafficking of firearms, as well as to combat crime and terrorism.

The Home Secretary, the Rt Hon Theresa May MP, reiterated these concerns and support for a more coordinated approach in a statement to the House of Commons following the attacks in Paris. On Friday 20th November, Mrs May attended an extraordinary meeting of the European Justice and Home Affairs Council, where she pressed for the need of greater information-sharing, passenger name records, and action on firearms.

The main provisions of the Firearms Directive are:

• Common standards of classification, which will consist of four categories
o Category A - fully automatic weapons and military weapons: cannot be owned by private persons unless deactivated;
o Category B - repeating or semi-automatic arms: can be owned by private persons subject to authorisation;
o Category C - less dangerous repeating and semi-automatic firearms and single shot firearms used mainly by hunters: can be owned by private persons subject to declaration;
o Category D - other firearms: can be owned by private persons and are not subject to authorisation or declaration.

• Marking and traceability: Member States need to ensure that any firearm or part placed on the market has been marked and registered, and they need to have national computerised data-filing systems in place to strengthen traceability of firearms.

• Deactivation: Member States are obliged to introduce national procedures for the deactivation of firearms which render the weapons permanently inoperable, to be verified by a competent authority. Permanently deactivated arms are no longer considered arms and can be held by private persons and freely move within the internal market.

There is clear evidence that criminals and terrorists can and do make use of the lack of common standards on deactivating firearms, the lack of a common system for marking firearm components, the poor control on internet sales, and the lack of common definition for “essential components”. Conservatives in the European Parliament agree on the need for a new Directive, and welcome many of the measures proposed by the Commission; but there does need to be wider consideration of some of the proposals, such as the de facto ban firearms which are now included in the category B7.

Semi-automatic rifles that “resemble” military weapons are widely used in some of the most popular forms of shooting sports, hunting and especially practical shooting (IPSC) and its derivatives. In some member states, they are widely owned and used for active reservists. Thus, a very large number of such weapons are currently owned by civilians in the EU. Conservatives in the European Parliament believe it is important to be careful that the EU does not ban the use of all firearms for sporting and reservist activities, and indirectly affect the national defence doctrines in some Member States.

It is essential that the legislation that is being adopted actually creates more security. Furthermore the new rules and restrictions must be areas where there are loopholes, and making sure that this Directive corrects the implementation failures of the last the firearms package.

The proposed revision of the Firearms Directive will now be passed to the European Parliament and Council for adoption. It is at this point that Members of the European Parliament can scrutinised the proposal to ensure it is both effective and balance.

Thank you again for contacting Richard Ashworth MEP.


Kind regards,

Simon Saunders
Office of Richard Ashworth MEP
Conservative MEP for South East England

[Yossarian]

Dodds: "Banning weapons that resemble the appearance of category A weapons to the naked and untrained eye will help to do this."

Is this seriously their rationale? Don't jump on me because I'm a new shooter and only shoot target, but would it be fair to say the vast majority of Black 22 semi autos are used for target rather than hunting? If that's the case then the "untrained eye" of the public should hardly be in a position to ever see them in the first place or am I missing something? Or maybe the legislators are if they think there's hundreds of guys wandering around open land hunting with ARs?

[Chuck]

It's an EXCUSE (pathetic at best), not a REASON.

Their rationale is just idiotic nonsense but that's liberals and handwringers for you. They have been terrorised and YOu the lawabiding innocent are being PUNISHED for the actions of people who were by all accounts, under scrutiny. Ban something because of how it LOOKS, heck they'll be doing that with people soon (oh wait they used to do that not so long ago! )

You have to wonder how convenient all of this is given the no doubt THOUSANDS of terroists in the EU and UK right now. More toit than the Paris attack because when another one happens it WILL happen. Stealing your property and RIGHTS is NOT going to stop it, ever!

[rcaudwell]

Thankyou, will be sending later. Even if your MP/MEP is anti-gun, worth sending, if enough voters express an opinion one way it`s not unheard of for MPs to suddenly change their views on an issue

[froggy]

+1 rcaudwell


Dear (***),

Please find attached a well researched article regarding the provenance of the weapons used by the terrorists.
http://uk.reuters.com/article/2015/11/2 ... 9820151128

It demonstrates clearly that going after some civilian semi-automatic rifles held by law abiding citizens is a rather futile distraction. The real problem lies with well organised criminal gangs that supply war grade weapons at prices much cheaper than, after much police controls, I can buy my sporting rifle.

Therefore, may I urge you not to be fooled into supporting a pointless window dressing measure but instead demand real action to prevent those war weapons to cross our borders.

Best regards,
Yves

A little up-date I sent to the MEP that had the politeness to reply to me . Do read the article, it is very interesting ...