The UK's Finest Independent Forum for Shooters and Gun Owners. Est 2010.

"Lots of people make a lot of money from guns, and they're very rarely bought by people who are perfectly sane and just want to live in peace and quiet."

Actually it's the complete opposite! Gun owners tend to be betetr educted, better paid and more intolerant of injustice than non gun owners so I read somewhere.

POLL till not loading! Funny that eh!

As usual for an article by the mainstream press loads of inaccurate statements and downright mistakes that will never get corrected.

Starting off the article with a bit about Tony Martin and it went off the rails! Tony Martin did not have legally held firearms! Even a trip to Wikpedia would of told this journalist as such, he didn't have a firearms certificate. He did in the past have a Shotgun certificate but that had been revoked in 1994 when he shot at somebody scrumping for apples in Orchard. The poor oik who had the misfortune to decide and burgle Tony Martins farm house was shot with an illegally held pump action shotgun. He also points out about how Tony Martin was portrayed as an innocent trying to defend himself garnering much sympathy with the public. An image entirely down to the press who failed to report his previous incident or that he shot somebody with an illegally held firearm. No as far as the press was concerned Tony Martin was a salt of the earth farmer type just trying to make his way.

You know the image: a twee farm with an old tractor and Landrover outside, the well worn but lovingly kept farm house with a coal fired stove in the corner of the kitchen with a fruit pie cooking and a sheep dog tucked up under the table.

The truth: Tony Martin was a paranoid loaner with no background in farming who had inherited a farm. That farm was in ruin with the farm house a wreck. The roof literally falling in and Tony would sleep on a mattress for weeks on end in his unwashed clothes. The farm was actually a fruit farm with a few orchards that by all accounts were in ruin and certainly not an effective business.

I am not defending the oik who burgled him but the press portrayal of Tony Martin was totally out of keeping with the reality and to have them still say that he somehow legally possessed the gun he killed a man with beggars belief!

As for the other notorious UK shooters as has been repeatedly pointed out by those within the sport there was massive failings in police licencing that has been yet again pushed on the table.

Lastly in respect of Oscar Pistorious, South Africa is a different country with a very different situation on the ground. UK legislation should not be influenced by events in another country. As far as I can make out Oscar would of had trouble getting his licence in the UK but what is the point on dwelling on a foreign policing and licencing issue.

85%!!
Surely that's a good feeling? sign92

Fedaykin wrote:The poor oik who had the misfortune to decide and burgle Tony Martins farm house

I wouldnt call a thief having travelled many miles to burgle a poor oik, he made his own decision to do something ilegal & it went wrong. Goes wrong for some victims to.

Interesting information about Tony Martin though.

David

After Martin shot Fearon and Barras he left the scene, holing up in a B&B, in a different county for three days under a false name...

88% No.

That's worked out well for them, hasn't it? :55:

Racalman wrote:88% No.

That's worked out well for them, hasn't it? :55:

Now up to 89% ...

Some points.

"Fleet Street Fox" is a pseudonym for Susie Boniface. She's a freelance but she writes mainly (exclusively) for the Mirror.

Suing for defamation - not a hope. An IPSO complaint on the grounds of factual inaccuracies, however, is more than likely to result in her getting a metaphorical kicking, bearing in mind the new press regulator is itching for cases to show that it has teeth and anyone with access to Wikipedia can see that Boniface has bungled even the most basic of facts here.

Like most digital outfits, the Mirror makes money from display advertising. Every time you click on that you're a) contributing to their web stats going through the roof, meaning they're more likely to commission similar gun-bashing articles b) helping them earn money by serving adverts to you and c) falling into the cunning trap that they've set based on a) and b).

Should I write to them telling them I didn't look at any of their adverts or anything else on their website and haven't read any of their crap since 1998!

Gaz wrote:Some points.

"Fleet Street Fox" is a pseudonym for Susie Boniface. She's a freelance but she writes mainly (exclusively) for the Mirror.

Suing for defamation - not a hope. An IPSO complaint on the grounds of factual inaccuracies, however, is more than likely to result in her getting a metaphorical kicking, bearing in mind the new press regulator is itching for cases to show that it has teeth and anyone with access to Wikipedia can see that Boniface has bungled even the most basic of facts here.

Like most digital outfits, the Mirror makes money from display advertising. Every time you click on that you're a) contributing to their web stats going through the roof, meaning they're more likely to commission similar gun-bashing articles b) helping them earn money by serving adverts to you and c) falling into the cunning trap that they've set based on a) and b).

Ad Block Plus Baby!..... F*** their profits. I wouldn't pay for it on the street, I am not subsidising their drivel on the internet either...!