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

breacher wrote:If we are talking about the "dangers" of an individual being able to "walk in off the streets" etc

Lets not forget that the same individual can "walk in off the street" and hire a car / van / truck.......or fill a can with petrol etc etc etc

No we aint, its a euphamism for making sure that responsible people have good reason to have legal access to fireams. The car/van/truck argument does not wash any more because that is an act of terrorism, and is potentially a much easier route while avoiding being scoped.

The HO has to minimise the risk to the public by trying to prevent legal firearms falling into the wrong hands, be those criminal, supid, or just plain mad. What is the problem with that?

Sadly, they have soem odd and underhand ways of going about it.

Moreover, while we are banging on about various percieved loopholes and work rounds, lets pack it in eh? The authorities have as big a problem working out the various laws without us shining spotlights on the flaws that need sealing up.

Saw the St Leonards thing in the news today - that will probably be used as another reason for a clampdown.......

Chuck wrote:
What if the Government actually stopped letting the useful idiots / problems in to begin with?

Academic. Many of them are home grown or are not a risk to start with. Few people who have an FAC are regarded as a risk or they would not pass initial grant. Its what path they take next that matters and how that is monitored.

As regards the car/knife/truck argument, again it does not wash. This bill regards the LEGAL ownership of high muzzle energy rifles and lever release rifles. I only know of .50 cals being used cross border in NI, and using one properly is not for the un skilled or entirely practical. We know that, the HO probably know that, but they see it as a risk and have homed in on the "What ifs" which, right or wrong, is their job. Risk management. Cars and trucks are just another risk and not an alternative. They have no bearing on what a crim might do with a stolen rifle or what might happen is someone goes tonto with one.

Our job is to stick together and show the other side of the argument. sadly this appears beyond the various organisations as they just dont have the clout, but trying to justify holding any firearm by simply pointing out that there are plenty of other options for the would be terrorist will not diminish the risk these rifles pose as percieved by the HO.

Since the whole .50 cal argument seems to be about access, I thought extra security was a good call. I cant comment on the lever release but either way they have a place and should be supported by us all.

Of all the shoots I have been to, I would suggest that the FCSA shoots were the most secure and posed least risk as they were.

The third reading of the Bill has now been rescheduled for Monday 22nd October.

They just keep coming at us......

It seems the 50 Cal Ban has become a political football
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/20 ... rifles-ban

It also seems the West midlands police and crime commissioner:David Jamieson is not a fan.
"Such weapons have no place in this country to be the possession of non-military personnel,” Jamieson wrote to Sir Geoffrey Clifton-Brown. He also added “You will be aware it was .50 calibre rifles which were used by the IRA to murder British soldiers and members of the Royal Ulster Constabulary in the 1990s. I can see no reasonable explanation for any member of the public to own such a weapon.”

I met David Jamieson this summer at a WW1 living history event, he seemed fine with my small collection of historic military firearms held on a section 1 certificate. I took a picture.

He also added “You will be aware it was Aldi kitchen knives which were used by terrorists to murder British civilians and members of the Police Force in the last few years. I can see no reasonable explanation for any member of the public to own such a weapon.”

FIFY

Posted at 19:4019:40
Offensive Weapons Bill debate cancelled
House of Commons

Parliament

Plans to debate the Offensive Weapons Bill - which was dropped last week - have now been dropped again, after the motion was not moved.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/uk-poli ... s-45941834

Nice summary of where things stand. It is by no means a done deal:

https://www.politicshome.com/news/uk/ho ... it-purpose