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

Huntervixen,

As Adam says, a solid new Shooting organization, that is Social media savvy and can go on the PR offensive, looking after our interests

Erm isn't that what I've been saying all along? Also let me tell you mate from experience, although it's a part of it, it'll take more than "Social media savvy to accomplish anything with the government and the antis. I also disagree with giving up anything to them, give them an inch and they'll want the whole mile and more. You have to understand friend that there are people out there who don't want you to have any firearms at all and that includes elements of the media who will do anything, and say anything to make that happen.

I also asked you a couple of questions a while back, still looking forward to reading your answers. You're on here giving your opinion which is a good thing, but what are you and your club members going to do about it.

Blu

"tougher rules to prevent people with a history of drug or alcohol abuse, mental illness and violence – especially domestic violence – from acquiring firearms licenses"

Anybody on here seriously have a problem with this?

H/man

Hauptman wrote:"tougher rules to prevent people with a history of drug or alcohol abuse, mental illness and violence – especially domestic violence – from acquiring firearms licenses"

Anybody on here seriously have a problem with this?

H/man

No but, its labour...
The claim they want to bring in the biggest change since 1997
I can easily see them including a ban on all semi autos+ pump action (.22 and shotgun)
Mags over 10 rds, and muzzle loading pistols.
Maybe even a "military style assault weapons" ban for straight pulls.
Even more alarming to me is that they want to up he prices to "Cover the cost of gun crime"
if it was to cover the cost of issuing licences, fine, but why should I pay for crime I didn't commit....

I thought we already had to "prove suitability" by belonging to a club or providing info on land we shoot on?

The rules are already in place.

Like many things legislated for in this country it isn't the system it is the poor implementation of the system that causes problems. However those implementing aren't going to admit to be at fault when something goes wrong so the system gets blamed, politicians think they will get votes by "toughening" things and then nothing changes as it isn't implemented properly either.

Bird, Hamilton and all the other perpetrators of firearms outrages, all had know histories that weren't acted upon by those entrusted with implementing the system but instead of blaming those in position and holding them to account, innocent shooters get shafted and the same failures are left to implement an even more involved and poorly thought out system that will only deter more shooters from continuing with shooting. If those licensing authorities whose laxness helped make those tragedies happen put more time and energy into doing their job instead of looking for ways to shrug their responsibilities then we would all be "safer".

dromia wrote:The rules are already in place.

Like many things legislated for in this country it isn't the system it is the poor implementation of the system that causes problems. However those implementing aren't going to admit to be at fault when something goes wrong so the system gets blamed, politicians think they will get votes by "toughening" things and then nothing changes as it isn't implemented properly either.

Bird, Hamilton and all the other perpetrators of firearms outrages, all had know histories that weren't acted upon by those entrusted with implementing the system but instead of blaming those in position and holding them to account, innocent shooters get shafted and the same failures are left to implement an even more involved and poorly thought out system that will only deter more shooters from continuing with shooting. If those licensing authorities whose laxness helped make those tragedies happen put more time and energy into doing their job instead of looking for ways to shrug their responsibilities then we would all be "safer".

Labour don't give a toss.

They don't care one jot about the facts. For Labour it's all about emotional desperation and trying to buy votes with promises that they cannot afford to keep. Dead Millipede's promise to cap fuel bills? - utter bo...cks. But he will try if he gets in and it will end up being subsidised by the taxpayer as they borrow to pay off the companies.

The rhetoric and spin is starting now of the election. Watch in coming months as Labour make promise after promise in an attempt to persuade the stupid people of the UK that they're the best option for this country.

Trust me - what those idiots have planned over the coming months is going to astonish you. The asshattery is just beginning.

Socialism is a mental illness.

To my mind, we've had the "collective" approach of attempting to appeal to the logic of the argument, but that has failed before, several times and will fail again. "The Super Shooting Body" will matter nothing when up against the government. We've even tried the courts where it was stalled and stalled again until they knew we had run out of money...

Individuals. Those that not only oppose, but look to destroy us, we have to target. Put their very position in jeopardy. The subject that started this thread, Diana Johnson, said previously that "shooting was assured under Labour", then she comes up with "legislation as far reaching as the handgun ban"....

Well, she has nailed her colours to the mast. This is a low level MP, in a Yorkshire constituency where she only has a majority of 641! That is 1.9% of those that voted, not the electorate. That is tiny. Out of 650 MP's she is 30th from the bottom.

She needs to feel threatened. She needs to feel our pressure. She needs to believe that her career as an MP is on thin ice and we are the ones that pose that risk.

Within 5 minutes I've found eight shooting clubs within 20 miles of her seat.

Half a dozen gun shops and two cartridge manufacturers, Hull Cartridge Co and Gamebore!

So, how many people employed in these places? What do these contribute to the economy of Hull? Now on a slow news day, the local channels pick this up, how do you reckon she would respond? Would her 641 majority appear even thinner? Perhaps this is the tact the existing organisations should take? You see where I'm coming from...