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

Remember one thing. The Home Secretary has called for a public consultation on these issues. The last firearms consultation on firearms law had the largest response ever to the process. Shooting organisations stated that individuals should not respond and allow them to reply on our behalf. People didn't.

Don't run out of steam. If you have a conservative MP tell them you will no longer vote for them and will actively encourage and campaign for Labour. That's what, as a life long Conservative, I have just emailed my MP and Ms Rudd...

Sim G wrote:Remember one thing. The Home Secretary has called for a public consultation on these issues. The last firearms consultation on firearms law had the largest response ever to the process. Shooting organisations stated that individuals should not respond and allow them to reply on our behalf. People didn't.

Don't run out of steam. If you have a conservative MP tell them you will no longer vote for them and will actively encourage and campaign for Labour. That's what, as a life long Conservative, I have just emailed my MP and Ms Rudd...

I assume that the shooting organisations that represent us will mount some sort of legal challenge if the consultation does not go our way?
I've also contacted my local conservative MP. If I don't get a satisfactory response, I too, will also tell her that with a heavy heart, that she can no longer count on my vote.

I honestly don't think that the big organisations will put their all behind this. I believe they will mount a token effort, but ultimately with such a specialised section that is being attacked, the numbers aren't in it and even after everything we've been through as shooters, there are still some that are currently spouting "no one needs these sorts of rifles"!

Some good pints in those pasosts.

Mikaveli; Unlike the States, as firearm owners we are thoroughly regulated with stringent controls on use, access and levels of ownership.

I'd take that out as it is factuallly incorrect. There's thousands of laws both State and Federal on firearms purchase, ownership, transportation, storage, safety and use in the USA. No one can legislate against committing crime, all that's being proposed in the UK is the hypocrisy of creating more crime to fight crime. The law abiding i.e YOU are being punished as usual.

Throwing acid at people or shooting them (dead or not) was a crime last time I looked, pretty sure Sim can confirm this. What's missing is meaningful punishment for those who commit REAL crimes with either. Having one round too many is NOT a real crime in my book. Once again a tragedy is being exploited, yet HM Gov has had ample time to deal with Acid attacks in particular, but hey - never let a good tragedy go to waste eh!

Comments noted re how the various Associations may well sell out .50 bmg owners, that's pathetic and sad. All this talk of NEED - "who needs a .50, .308 etc."? It's not "need" it should be want. Buying a gun, knife or acid in itself should not be a crime, commiting crime with it should be heavily punished. Unlikely anyone would mail order an expensive knife then use it to commit crime, again Sim will know more about that.

On the basis of "need": by their logic why does anyone need two cars, 10 golf clubs, or two or three kids - or even ONE for that matter?

All this talk of MARS rifles yet no one is looking at .22 semi auto's being targetted???

All smoke and mirrors and at the end of the day the public will be no safer - just some people may well lose VERY expensive 50 cal rifles and a hobby for no reason save ignorance, political window dressing and hysteria. Oh and stupid "Mine is better" attitudes within a sport that is heading for the chop because you do NOT stand together as ONE group.

Chuck wrote:Some good pints in those pasosts.

Mikaveli; Unlike the States, as firearm owners we are thoroughly regulated with stringent controls on use, access and levels of ownership.

I'd take that out as it is factuallly incorrect.

Maybe so - but I'm not sure you're quoting me... I don’t remember ever saying that - where have you taken that quote from?

Well, I have written to my MP ( Tory ) for what its worth. Voiced my concerns and my reasoning. Asked for clarification of the vague "rapid firing" term.

As an aside, I notice they also want to redefine flick knives - my money is on them defining all those "assisted opening" knives as flick knives !

NRA Initial response is up
http://www.nra.org.uk/common/asp/conten ... RA&id=2101

I got a reply from my local police force and was told that they couldn't reply to the consultation when it was worded in such a vague way, they are waiting for clarification before they reply.

"Rapid firing rifles" first thing I think of is semi auto .22lrs which would include LB pistols.

Mikaveli wrote:

Chuck wrote:Some good pints in those pasosts.

Mikaveli; Unlike the States, as firearm owners we are thoroughly regulated with stringent controls on use, access and levels of ownership.

I'd take that out as it is factuallly incorrect.

Maybe so - but I'm not sure you're quoting me... I don’t remember ever saying that - where have you taken that quote from?

I think that quote was taken from me. It's a very broad statement about the US controls of firearms. The point I was making is that we have a much more restrictive licensing process than the majority of the states. I understand there are various US laws from the ownership of automatics to obtaining moderators but I think we can all agree the US (broadly speaking) is a more liberal environment in regards to firearms ownership.