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

I have firmly grasped the can of worms and torn its lid off with this thread...

I read the Firearms (Amendment) Acts of 1997 the other evening, as a prelim to getting yet another petition up to bring back pistols. (I'm not writing it myself - just giving my thoughts to people who are)

When we talk of repealing the No.2 Act in order to bring back .22 pistols, as a stepping-stone to better things later on, we tend to assume that this means we'll get .22 pistols on section 1 as we do any other firearm.

This isn't actually the case. Repealing the No.2 Act would result in a whole load of new restrictions which were written into the original 1997 act but never put into force because of how quickly that act was overwritten.

Here's the thing: would you accept more restrictions in return for pistols? Or should we push for pistols to become section 1 without any extra frippery?

Depends what the restrictions are I guess !

It has to be section 1, there is no logic for it to be otherwise or we do our argument a disservice.

It also gives the frippery as a fall back.

If other restrictions mean keeping firearms at a designated place then no thanks!

What specifically are you referring to and what makes you think that repealing one ammendment automatically envokes restrictions not originally enacted?

As an aside, I do not believe that a "repeal" is the way forward. What we need is a whole new drafted Firearms Act. I believe the case for at least rim fire pistols being being returned to S1 status is very strong. But as you may have discovered with your OP, some things would turn out not so good for other categories I fear...

At least a new Act would allow those today to lobby for legislation regarding their sport, not as it was 45 years ago.

With the current hiatus in the US any new act might well try to ban hi-cap mags, anything with bayonet lugs etc just as they tried over there. I believe that we're better off as we are and should try to get the current act amended but then it depends on what disciplines you shoot. I shoot milsurps a lot and feat that they would be taken from me.

Gaz wrote:Here's the thing: would you accept more restrictions in return for pistols? Or should we push for pistols to become section 1 without any extra frippery?

So what do you want pistols back for? What would you do with them that you can't do now if you took shooting up as a sport?

That's the first question I'd be asking if I was your local MP, neighbor or work colleague you were proffering this idea to?

What would be the answer?

Rather than a repeal, it may be more effective and timely to go for a Regulatory Reform Bill (or something similar)

I believe there was one on the back burner that was starting to gain support when that psycho Derek Bird went off on his heinous killing spree in Cumbria. This immediately dropped the Bill back onto the back burner, understandably.

Might be worth having a char with BASC - I think they know a bit more about it.

nfrancis wrote:

Gaz wrote:Here's the thing: would you accept more restrictions in return for pistols? Or should we push for pistols to become section 1 without any extra frippery?

So what do you want pistols back for? What would you do with them that you can't do now if you took shooting up as a sport?

That's the first question I'd be asking if I was your local MP, neighbor or work colleague you were proffering this idea to?

What would be the answer?

err shoot targets with a pistol ?(not the same skillset as shooting a rifle and the two are neither mutually exclusive nor inclusive, they are different facets of a sport) and if put in the same position could you come up with a more telling argument to defend your hobby?

kennyc wrote: err shoot targets with a pistol ?(not the same skillset as shooting a rifle and the two are neither mutually exclusive nor inclusive, they are different facets of a sport) and if put in the same position could you come up with a more telling argument to defend your hobby?

Hmm - shoot Air Pistol or .22 free - both available now without any changes in the law. They will test the skillset you describe - as will LBR or LBP or BP pistols to a similar extent. And with the former you can even run for Olympic competitions - the most politically correct shooting you can get.

Why do we need to change the law when we all have access to numerous types of firearms to practice your chosen sport?

Not yet convinced my MP, neighbor or work colleague here - I know cos I've tried :-(