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

Alpha1 wrote:If you are a law abiding gun owner then you don't have anything to worry about.

I thought that back in 1997.

The fact that you are on a database had nothing to do with 1997.?

Alpha1 wrote:The fact that you are on a database had nothing to do with 1997.?

Actually it did in terms of how they could ban ! Because of firearm registration they knew which fac holders had handguns Thus they could legislate a ban with ease! Had there been no registration they would of found it a lot harder to ban them and that would call in to question such law that might be unforceable !

Alpha1 wrote:The fact that you are on a database had nothing to do with 1997.?

Joe covered it just fine. I might add that I don't even have a parking ticket or a speeding fine to my name - much less having ever been involved in any crime that would warrant taking my legally owned property - yet it happened.

They took mine as well. It was nothing to do with the fact I had a FAC it was the Government at the time who decided on a total ban of hand guns. If you think this data base is a new thing you are very naïve.

Alpha1 wrote:They took mine as well. It was nothing to do with the fact I had a FAC it was the Government at the time who decided on a total ban of hand guns. If you think this data base is a new thing you are very naïve.

Naive now, am I?
I worked for TVP CID back in the eighties - I'm under no illusion as to the issues of databases (and they are so much more comprehensive now they are digital). Just knowing someone who has fallen foul of the law would get you on the list of known associates - regardless of how squeaky clean a person might be.

That they know everything you have and where it is kept means your possession of it is very tenuous indeed.

It wasn't me that claimed "If you are a law abiding gun owner then you don't have anything to worry about."

Have you not seen the EU firearm legislation proposal threads yet?

Absolute sicking and traitorous legislation fulled by a media and sheep panic freezi ! I read that the Tory government resistance banning but caved in !
Not only we were punished for the actions of ONE man, but dunblane was totally preventable had the senior officer hadn't overuled twice ? Recommendations to revoke by other officers ! Funny how the media never report that !

joe wrote:Absolute sicking and traitorous legislation fulled by a media and sheep panic freezi ! I read that the Tory government resistance banning but caved in !
Not only we were punished for the actions of ONE man, but dunblane was totally preventable had the senior officer hadn't overuled twice ? Recommendations to revoke by other officers ! Funny how the media never report that !

The country decided that never again would a person with a legally held handgun, would be able to walk into a school and murder a teacher and 15 of her five year old pupils, that's why the ban came in. There were only 60000 of us who owned handguns on mainland Britain and the numbers amounted to feck all whilst one party was attempting to hang on to power and another party were trying to take power.

The Tories didn't "cave in" per se, they just tabled lots of ideas that might have appeased the antis at the same time leaving the sport with some assemblance. It didn't happen as the first thing Tony Blair did when he became Prime Minister was to enact the Firearms Amendment Act 1997 (No2).

And the government don't need legislation to actually ban something. There were around 70000 Brockock type air guns manufactured. No one knew who had them, but the VCR Act 2006 banned them. About 4000 were surrendered of put on ticket and all that is happening is that the remainder ar being swept up slow time.

The only advantage the appalling 97 Act has given us is that the government are a little more restrained when it comes to knee-jerk legislation. Derek Bird murders attest to that.

Sim G wrote:

joe wrote:Absolute sicking and traitorous legislation fulled by a media and sheep panic freezi ! I read that the Tory government resistance banning but caved in !
Not only we were punished for the actions of ONE man, but dunblane was totally preventable had the senior officer hadn't overuled twice ? Recommendations to revoke by other officers ! Funny how the media never report that !

The country decided that never again would a person with a legally held handgun, would be able to walk into a school and murder a teacher and 15 of her five year old pupils, that's why the ban came in. There were only 60000 of us who owned handguns on mainland Britain and the numbers amounted to feck all whilst one party was attempting to hang on to power and another party were trying to take power.

The Tories didn't "cave in" per se, they just tabled lots of ideas that might have appeased the antis at the same time leaving the sport with some assemblance. It didn't happen as the first thing Tony Blair did when he became Prime Minister was to enact the Firearms Amendment Act 1997 (No2).

And the government don't need legislation to actually ban something. There were around 70000 Brockock type air guns manufactured. No one knew who had them, but the VCR Act 2006 banned them. About 4000 were surrendered of put on ticket and all that is happening is that the remainder ar being swept up slow time.

The only advantage the appalling 97 Act has given us is that the government are a little more restrained when it comes to knee-jerk legislation. Derek Bird murders attest to that.

I wouldn't say that the country decided ! It's was the media and snow drop that decided !
But I suppose you are right in a way as had it been put to a vote nationwide, then i suspect the public would have voted overwhelmingly, ban

joe wrote: I wouldn't say that the country decided ! It's was the media and snow drop that decided !
But I suppose you are right in a way as had it been put to a vote nationwide, then i suspect the public would have voted overwhelmingly, ban

Not necessarily. At the time of the inquiry Prince Philip, during an interview on BBC radio, bravely voiced the opinion that: "... people and not weapons were the danger... If a cricketer, for instance, suddenly decided to go into a school and batter a lot of people to death with a cricket bat - which he could do very easily - I mean, are you going to ban cricket bats?... I sympathize desperately with the people of Dunblane, but I’m not altogether convinced that it’s the best system to somehow shift the blame onto a very large and peaceable part of the community in trying to make yourself feel better.”

The tabloids, Snowdrop, the usual lefty TV talking heads all went mental at this however, media polls conducted shortly after the Prince’s statement (BBC, Radio Five, Sky News Poll and GMTV Breakfast Poll) returned results showing that between 68% and 75% of people surveyed agreed with the Prince.