Sim G wrote:Have the BASC not had their meeting already and had clarification, hence their statements? There's the UKPSA promoting BSSC, but they already appear behind the curve....?
I'm hoping that's the case - as it would mean 1/3 of the battle is won...
If not, it's frustrating, as it would be evidence that some of our shooting organisations didn't realise those rifles are typically held in two distinct groups - leading to more confusion.
In any case, fingers crossed we can stop this one - no one deserves to lose any of the targeted guns.
mean while, in the USA the several republicans are going to introduce a bill that could outlaw or place heavy restrictions self loading rifles through the backdoor
Last Friday Andrew Mercer (NRA), and Paul Dale (BASC) met with the home office regarding such matters as the club license fees. However they also took the opportunity to raise the issue of the proposed ‘ban’ on .50 and ‘rapid firing’ firearms, in an attempt to establish what exactly is the background to this consultation.
Apparently .50 and lever release firearms have been on the agenda for a while now, the Home Office have taken the opportunity to include these additional firearm controls in the latest raft of prohibitions on acids and the mail order of bladed weapons.
The following points are not set in stone, and until the consultation is open we cannot assume that these are 100% accurate, they may be subject to change.
1. The consultation process will open very soon, possibly next week.
2. The consultation will be short, and the outcome (if this results in changes or a ban) will be enacted as primary legislation (law) in JANUARY 2018.
3. The restriction will apply to anything that is capable of generating a muzzle energy that exceeds 10,000ft/lbs
4. The concern over civilians having access to .50 rifles has been elevated following the theft of a .50 rifle from an RFD, however the Home Office believed that the theft was from a regular shooter. They will be corrected on this matter. The stolen firearm was completely functional, in that it was taken with its bolt.
5. The other primary concern is that of the potential “material destructive” capabilities.
The following observations and comments were raised at the meeting.
· Andrew pointed out that the FCSA is a very well run club, with an excellent safety record. No criminal use in the UK.
· If these rifles are banned, then the compensation payments bill will be very high due to the extraordinary cost of such rifles and associated equipment.
· We do not use section 5 ammunition, we use target ammunition that is not designed to have any destructive capabilities.
· BASC are most upset that this consultation has been announced without any prior warning, as this in contrary to an agreement previously put in place to eliminate any ‘unexpected surprises’.
· The Home Office REALLY doesn’t like lever release firearms.
I spoke with Andrew at length after his meeting. We discussed the above, in particular points 4 and 5.
If the Home Office is concerned that these rifles might fall into the hands of criminals (point 4 above) then we need to provide a solution. The solutions discussed (between the Home Office and the NRA) were as follows:
· Complete ban
· Grandfather rights – i.e. you can keep and use your .50, you can never sell it to another shooter, when you die it gets destroyed.
· Make .50 rifles section 7.3, this was deemed impractical as we travel vast distances between ranges, we have no armoury to store the rifles in at a range.
· Improve home security, separate the bolt and keep this in a separate safe in a separate room. Possibly require a monitored alarm system for the premises. I prefer this option.
The Home Office believe that these are material destruction devices (point 5). This is clearly rubbish when using section 1 ammunition. Andrew advised that to counter this argument we need to state the exact properties of a target projectile, or mil spec ball, impacting on a variety of targets. I have witnessed Amax turning to dust on the surface of a sand backstop, ball ammunition has similar properties. However rather than rely solely on a statement from us, we are calling in an independent ballistic expert, a non-member, and using a private range facility will conduct a series of tests. The evidence gathered will be used to prove our point.
BASC is on our side. However not all shooters are, yet. One worrying development that I leaned of today is that one police force are now reluctant to issue a variation for anything over .300 win mag, even to FCSA members. Hopefully this is just one police force and not a new national trend. Unless the entire shooting community backs this opposition campaign then expect to continue to see a never ending wave of consultations, resulting in the eventual ban of everything we enjoy.
Social media continues to be a huge problem, some outrageous comments being posted, along with photographs of military looking weapons that would scare the hell out of the average Guardian reader. So please don’t get involved in any such online discussions, please don’t post photographs and whatever you do don’t get angry. Everything we do online is being watched, angry folks with guns can expect an unwelcome visit from the law, especially in the current political environment.
As soon as the consultation goes live I’ll send out another email, with advice on how to respond.
So they have given in to this outrage already I see, " Improve home security, separate the bolt and keep this in a separate safe in a separate room. Possibly require a monitored alarm system for the premises. I prefer this option."
Shafted already and the consultation hasn't even started, if we had a decent, pro legal gun owning single organisation it would be challenging the false premise on which these proposals are based not going with what to them seems the lesser of "ban" evils.
The HO seem so sure that gun owners have no teeth that the need for a ban/restriction is obviously already decided as they are not consulting on that just the nature of how they do it, which off course will be "Grandfathered rights" as that will cost them nothing.
Come on Bambi get some
Imperial Good Metric Bad
Analogue Good Digital Bad
Chris Stevenson's email to his members doesn't sound like he cares a jot for lever-release owners, taking the time to tell us how the Home Office dislikes them (in capitals), but not uttering a word of support!
I understand it's not "their" discipline, but I've done my best to support their shooting, I'd like to see some evidence they are supporting mine!
Mikaveli wrote:Chris Stevenson's email to his members doesn't sound like he cares a jot for lever-release owners, taking the time to tell us how the Home Office dislikes them (in capitals), but not uttering a word of support!
I understand it's not "their" discipline, but I've done my best to support their shooting, I'd like to see some evidence they are supporting mine!
That is the divisiveness of disciplines, the issue is fundamental legal gun ownership not with which gun you use to shoot whatever discipline, by having discipline, locations based organisations it will always be that the pertinent point will be missed.
Just a bunch of limp wristed, discipline focussed tw@ts.
Come on Bambi get some
Imperial Good Metric Bad
Analogue Good Digital Bad
dromia wrote:So they have given in to this outrage already I see, " Improve home security, separate the bolt and keep this in a separate safe in a separate room. Possibly require a monitored alarm system for the premises. I prefer this option."
Shafted already and the consultation hasn't even started, if we had a decent, pro legal gun owning single organisation it would be challenging the false premise on which these proposals are based not going with what to them seems the lesser of "ban" evils.
The HO seem so sure that gun owners have no teeth that the need for a ban/restriction is obviously already decided as they are not consulting on that just the nature of how they do it, which off course will be "Grandfathered rights" as that will cost them nothing.
It says 'discussed', not agreed or offered? - Discuss:- take a position & defend it, examine the pros & cons, explore.
The position of 'do nothing' & store with bolt etc in may not be defendable? & many of us do store rifles with bolts out in a separate compartment, even for 22's. Alarms these days are not much more than a mobile phone device & relatively are easy to install & i dont think that undermines counter arguments on grandfather rights, full ban, sect 7 or no compo etc.
I share your frustration at HO / Police & their continual erosion of the sport. But when the consultation starts rather than voice your longstanding & well known dislike of NRA & other NGO's - why not encourage people to make their case, give advice on good case points to make vs ones to avoid & those to refute?
Quality control of Scottish Ethanol. & RDX/HMX
& my fav chemical is :-) 1,3,7-trimethylxanthine.......... used to kill frogs.... but widely consumed & in vast quantities by the French? Eh?
I have no dislike of the NRA and the other organisations, just complete and utter disappointment.
This is based on the historic and continued failure of them to effectively represent legal gun owners. It isn't just my opinion just look at the sorry state of legal gun ownership in this country, the HO and government has historically got everything it wants in relation to legal gun control because there isn't any effective opposition from the sector and the HO knows there isn't. Just look at the cavalier and contemptuous way they treat the organisations. To deny that is to deny reality and join them in burying your head in the backstop sand. Doing the same old ineffectual acquiescent posturing again and again delivers nothing, they refuse to learn from, or even admit to their failures and we suffer as a consequence of their arrogance.
As always personally I will write lobby and do whatever I can to stop this along with many other legal gun owners who care but the reality is that without effective leadership at the national level to mobilise us grass roots shooter then as always we will be shafted.
My disappointment is based on the repeated failures of our "national" organisations to properly represent and champion legal gun ownership in the UK. You have no idea how I ache for the NRA and the others to do things that will support legal gun ownership and challenge the continued erosin of legal gun ownership by the state. However their track record shows us that the opposite is the case. Just more of the same old same old which has failed us in the past and will fail us again.
Don't blame me a messenger for the consummate failings of the NRA and the others, just look at their history/track record on this subject and you won't need me to point it out.
Come on Bambi get some
Imperial Good Metric Bad
Analogue Good Digital Bad
If BASC and the NRA are here to fight our corner then they should be aware that people will stop funding them if they dont fight it robustly and without compromise.
If the shooters stop funding them then they are out of their job and its time they knew it
