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

ordnance wrote: Posts already have answered why they would like handguns, for target shooting just like rifle target shooting, clay pigeon shooting. Are these answer not good enough for you.?

Probably not a good enough reason any more. At least 2 major events in the last 30 years displaced the public's trust in the ability of the shooting community to actually be trusted owning pistols. Yes - we have rifles. shotguns etc - and plenty of opportunities to shoot them competitively so why on earth do you guys want handguns back as well? The real reason - not the politically correct reason? If we can't answer that convincingly then we may as well forget it.

ordnance wrote:Maybe it other shooting enthusiasts need convincing about people owning handguns , before worrying about the rest of the population.

Not really sure what you mean but its the other way around -its the rest of the population worrying about us owning guns when we are constantly using them to go on mad rampages and kill people. Like it or loath it that's the perception many people have of shooters. Its a hard one to forget given the circumstances of what happened. And numerous incidents in the USA do not help us out in this regard - it just cements the notion that the restrictions the UK has on certain types of gun ownership is actually the correct one.

I am not sure what you mean by that, I shoot handguns because I enjoy it , and use my own equipment.

You can shoot IPSC comps in this country with air pistols. Its the only way to do IPSC pistol unless you have a go at the odd one or two LBR/LBP events that get put one now and again.

The point being that if we are using IPSC as a reason for valid use of competition pistol shooting we probably need to make sure we know what the acronym stands for at least.

nfrancis wrote:

ordnance wrote:

ordnance wrote:Maybe it other shooting enthusiasts need convincing about people owning handguns , before worrying about the rest of the population.

Not really sure what you mean but its the other way around -its the rest of the population worrying about us owning guns when we are constantly using them to go on mad rampages and kill people. Like it or loath it that's the perception many people have of shooters. Its a hard one to forget given the circumstances of what happened. And numerous incidents in the USA do not help us out in this regard - it just cements the notion that the restrictions the UK has on certain types of gun ownership is actually the correct one.

But until we've gotten rid of the self-serving, insular and cancerous shooters who will stab us in the back to save their own discipline for a little longer we'll never convince anyone.
The simple answer is that we're entitled to shoot and compete how we like, with what we like. The same as the majority of other hobbies and sports in this "free" country.
But this thread is not about why nfrancis doesn't like anything that's not GR, it's about the legislation and repealing.
I think those restrictions would be more acceptable without slipping all the extra powers to the SofS, who, it seems, could just go and ban pistol shooting again if it suited him/her.

personally Neil, would be more worried if a nutter tried to go on a shooting spree with a gallery rifle than a rimfire target pistol or a 6 shot revolver. all the arguments you are applying to pistols could also be applied to gallery type rifles, so tread lightly. if I was going to debate this I would advocate a removal of the current 12/24 rule because as it it doesn't give a person anymore "Firepower" but opens up a lot more international competitions than are currently available. the whole concelablity argument goes out the window due to the wide spread ownership of Hack Saws anyway. I also find that the average non shooter tends to be less intimidated by the thought of people owning revolvers (e.g LBR, BP or any other type)than by glocks or anything, infact most people I know tend to think that revolvers are all still legal.

It really is quite simple. Neil is scared. Neil is scared if too much attention is drawn to the shooting sports because of "gun owners", he will lose his shooting. He sees firearms enthuisiasts as a threat to his staus quo and the last thing he wants is some RKBA/Call of Duty/Tactical Walter/Historic Old Fart or what ever to rock that boat...

Firstly, an argumant can just as easily be put forward to destroy your sport, Neil. Don't take some sanctimonious, moral high ground. You are not the acceptable face as far as the "authorities" and antis are concerned and you're doing nothing more than coming across as a narrow minded, mealy mouthed, spiteful ba$tard.

Secondly, I wouldn't be extolling the virtues of gallery rifle as the panacea to "replacement pistols". You really think even if you name the comps Bianchi and 1500 that they are a patch from when we used pistols? No. And Phoenix? Will never, ever be a Pistol AD weekend. And yes, as an ex-pistol shooter I have tried GR. Was invited along a number of years ago by a friend. Never shot it before, but lo and behold, seemed to be populated by middle aged men wearing too tight a t-shirts, lamenting the loss of pistols whilst seeing how much beer they could get down their necks!!

So here we are again, just like the semi auto full bore rifle ban and the pistol ban, of which I went through both, we have an NRA lead on GR telling us not to rock the boat about something he's not interested in. Alright Jack?!

Personally, I would rather lose every cartridge gun in my cabinet and turn to shotguns, then air weapons, then bows and then darts if that's the cost of fighting unjust firearms law, than sit and wring my hands in case I get noticed because the "other bloke" is shouting....

So really, I don't think you've done yourself, your sport or your organisation any service here at all. And to think the NRA could possibly sink lower in some people's estimations than it already has. Either lead, follow or get the fvck out of the way....

Simon,
(One very grumpy and pi$$ed off firearms ENTHUSIAST..... with a dodgy knee!)

Demonic69 wrote:But until we've gotten rid of the self-serving, insular and cancerous shooters who will stab us in the back to save their own discipline for a little longer we'll never convince anyone.

This.


Of 'compromises', I wouldn't be happy having to store them, rusting away, in a centralised armoury. The Police wouldn't want that either for 'mass theft' reasons. I wouldn't bother buying one if that was imposed.

Limited magazines? Proven b*****ks in the States. A mass shooter would just buy more magazines.

Straight pull? (Is that even possible?). "Workable", perhaps ~ but enjoyable? No.

We're already trusted to own firearms, some which could kill at 1k+. What difference does a pistol make?

Violence is from the heart, not the barrel.

A possible 'sensible' proposal could be put forward that you have to have been a member of a shooting club and a very regular attendee for, say, two years before being granted handguns.

...or we could just look at Northern Ireland to see how RIDICULOUS the GB handgun ban is...

You can shoot IPSC comps in this country with air pistols. Its the only way to do IPSC pistol unless you have a go at the odd one or two LBR/LBP events that get put one now and again.

You would find there would be a lot more IPSC and similar competitions if full bore or .22 handguns were allowed. I do know what IPSC stands for i owned a CZ 75 IPSC handgun , I sold it as I didn't like .40 calibre.

Not really sure what you mean but its the other way around -its the rest of the population worrying about us owning guns when we are constantly using them to go on mad rampages and kill people.

In the last rampage a .22 rifle and shotgun were used. How do you convince people that .22 rifles and shotguns should be allowed in civilian hands.

Maybe we should ban .22 and shotguns?...

They're next, by the way.

nfrancis wrote:
-its the rest of the population worrying about us owning guns when we are constantly using them to go on mad rampages and kill people.

tell me, how often have you been sat in your local having a pint an overhearing people talking about them "Nasty shooters, just want to kill us all" infact is there any evidence UKIP support has dropped after Farage said what he did?
fact is, I think to many shooters think that shooting plays a bigger role in society than it really does, I don't think the vast majority of people would really care if pistols were made section 1 again, and I think only a miniscule number would let it affect the way they vote. most people just don't give a toss either way, so long as they can watch there football, x factor ect there happy..

nfrancis wrote:

dromia wrote:Nfrancis you are fully entitled to your opinion on this however anti shooting and gun ownership it may be.

I do have a question for you about your views on this, I understand that you have a position of responsibility in the gallery rifle organisation and as such have input to the NRA. I trust that if and when you put your view forwards around these tables that you are very clear that they are your own unique opinions which have not been tested for support by the shooting community?

From the responses to your posts on the subject here it would seem that your divisive opinions have little traction amongst sensible shooters, who understand the reality of firearms legislation as applied to us.

There isn't a Gallery Rifle Organization. The Gallery Rifle & Pistol discipline has representation on the NRA Council as an officially recognized NRA discipline. As such, NRA members who list the GR&P discipline as their primary one can vote for a representative to sit on NRA General Council to deal with all matters GR&P. From an NRA Council point of view I am simply one of numerous discipline reps. When the NPA folded the NRA took on what is now GR&P. It nearly didn't happen but it did and people can now shoot GR nationally and internationally.

Outside of the arguably insular world of the NRA the Gallery Rifle Community is essentially a chunk of whats left of the old Pistol Shooting Community. I'm shooting the same competitions with the same people now using GR and LBR etc as I did ~20 years ago using pistol.

The questions I pose are very mild and obvious ones the likes of which my MP, neighbor or work colleague, all of which are very sensible people (and non-shooters), would simply pose to me if I suggested to them the law should be changed to allow me to own pistols again.

If sensible shooters don't know how to handle these questions from within their own communities above and beyond labeling such people 'antis' then we are probably not going to get much past first base in this arena. If you seriously think I'm 'anti' because I ask or post a few (seemingly) politically incorrect opinions I can't help that.

To progress in any of this the shooting community has to be able to address these issues. That have to present themselves sensibly, consistently and rationally. And they have to respect the fact that the vast majority of people in this country don't particularly like or understand guns and why people want to own them.

Nfrancis as you make no effort to give clarity that your posts are supposed to be educational and speculating about the nay sayers arguments then you shouldn't be surprised that your posts are interpreted as being anti gun.

I also think that you have a negative approach to how firearms legislation should be approached on behalf of shooters, rather than dancing to the fatuous anti arguments that you are postulating we should be setting that agenda round responsible and meaningful gun ownership issues, not being reactive and explaining ourselves through diversionary aunt sally's.