Page 2 of 4
Posted: 04 Jun 2010, 19:57
by theparadox2010
I have friends who use blank firing guns for re-enactments, be it the wild west, or even upto modern combat, and the safety rules (and laws) that they have to abide by are almost as tight as if the guns where the "live" types, including, notifing the local police were they are being used, registering who keeps/transports the black powder, owning a pyro licence, they also can be "spot checked" to see if any have been changed in any way that may make them "live" and, they always explain about gun saftey, at every show. these guns are legal, this is what you need to own a fake real gun, What happened was terrible, and things need to be looked at, but, most of the gun crime in the uk is carried out by illegal guns. And as already been said, its not the gun that kills, its the nut behind the trigger.
Posted: 05 Jun 2010, 12:58
by stufarq
theparadox2010 wrote:I have friends who use blank firing guns for re-enactments, be it the wild west, or even upto modern combat, and the safety rules (and laws) that they have to abide by are almost as tight as if the guns where the "live" types, including, notifing the local police were they are being used, registering who keeps/transports the black powder, owning a pyro licence, they also can be "spot checked" to see if any have been changed in any way that may make them "live" .
The same is true for theatre, TV and film. However (and this may be true for reenactments too, I'm not sure) a licenced armourer is responsible for them at all times. The weapons can't be used without the armourer present and must always be put away under lock and key when not in use.
Posted: 05 Jun 2010, 13:41
by scotty
I'm a gun owner & a gun user, have been for twenty six years now, I manage and implement upland regeneration ( heather moorland, Britain has 80% of the worlds heather moorland and is rarer than rain forest) & native woodland regeneration. Death is as important in the countryside as life, you can't have the heather moorland or native woodland you see without controlling grazing animals, Rabbits, Hares, Deer, guns are the most practical & humane method, like it or not.
I've just had to renew my Fire Arms & Shotgun licence in the past month and the hoops I've got to jump through are there for good reason. Two References which the Police check up on, I have to consent to the police consulting my Doctor and submit any mental heath issues, they follow up on this too, house security inspection is also carried out.
If I'm lifted by the police drunk one night, I loose my guns, any traffic charges, this includes too many speeding offences, I loose my guns, if I loose my guns I loose my job, if I loose my job I loose my tied house.
This goes for many professional gun users, Forestry Commission Rangers, Gamekeepers, Farmers etc. The RSPB have members of staff with firearms to control Foxes & Crows to protect rare ground nesting birds, it's not all blood thirsty toffs that shoot.
What happened in Cumbria was an unforeseeable tragic accident, more poorly thought knee jerk reactions will only cost time & money for a parliament that can spare neither and will not stop things like this happening in future.
Look at other bad laws implemented at other times, the Dangerous Dogs act, how many Pit Bull Terriers are there?
After Dunblane Pistols were banned, how many people are murdered in the UK with Pistols.
After Hungerford semi automatic weapons were banned, are there no Uzis or Kalashnikov's in the UK?, of course there are.
The Fox Hunting Ban, there are more Packs of Hounds now than there was before the Ban!
Bad Laws don't work, British gun Laws on the whole do, despite the tragedy in Cumbria.
Posted: 07 Jun 2010, 08:51
by markfiend
Well said keef.
moses and anyone else calling for a complete ban: You realise that if we ban all guns now, the UK won't be allowed to hold the 2012 Olympics; there are a number of shooting events. (Obviously, there are other arguments to be made pro and con the Olympics, but still...)
Posted: 07 Jun 2010, 10:27
by moses
markfiend wrote:Well said keef.
moses and anyone else calling for a complete ban: You realise that if we ban all guns now, the UK won't be allowed to hold the 2012 Olympics; there are a number of shooting events. (Obviously, there are other arguments to be made pro and con the Olympics, but still...)
Im not calling for a complete ban, I said I would favour one. I also said that i didn't like the idea of living in a society where a government can have access to guns and not it's citizens.
As for the utterly pointless olympics, I don't think that can be used as a reason to support any arguement about anything.
Turning a weapon of death and destruction into a leisure pursuit toy doesn't make it less of a weapon of destruction and death. We don't need guns of any description for any purpose. Farmers/Shmarmers. And as for saving heather moors (I'd rather save Heather Mills), well if natural selection and enviromental evolution has deemed them unsuitable then no ammount of management (with or without guns) is going to help anything.
Posted: 07 Jun 2010, 11:38
by the_inescapable_truth
moses wrote:
Im not calling for a complete ban, I said I would favour one. I also said that i didn't like the idea of living in a society where a government can have access to guns and not it's citizens.
You trust the government considerably more than I do. That's all I'm saying.
Posted: 07 Jun 2010, 13:11
by Erudite
Much as I'm not a fan of firearms, I'd have to concede that there are legitimate reasons for certain people having access to them.
The bottom line is you can't legislate against psychopaths.
Posted: 07 Jun 2010, 13:51
by nigel d
[quote.
The bottom line is you can't legislate against psychopaths.[/quote]
well said.
this happened on my doorstep. i was stuck at work not knowing for a while if it was any member of my family who walk through egremnont on a regular basis.
cumbria is/was the place of second lowest crime rate in the uk.
never in a month of sundays did any one expect this. the bloke had kept guns for years (15?) so had been through the hoops numerous times.
something just went twing and he lost it. but hte bastard took innocent people with him. then the coward shot hisself.
the media vultures are still here today.
Posted: 07 Jun 2010, 14:19
by moses
the_inescapable_truth wrote:moses wrote:
Im not calling for a complete ban, I said I would favour one. I also said that i didn't like the idea of living in a society where a government can have access to guns and not it's citizens.
You trust the government considerably more than I do. That's all I'm saying.
I don't trust any government, hence what i said
Posted: 07 Jun 2010, 18:36
by Izzy HaveMercy
So it is better to ban firearms and shove them into illegaity where there is no control at all?
I'll pass, thanks.
Next up, banning the kitchen knifes and the scissors because a psychopath used them to stab some people somewhere...
This happens, but people have to BREATHE, count to TEN and THINK, instead of jumping around like headless chicken.
Banning weapons won't solve the problem, in fact, nothing helps against people 'losing it'...
IZ.
Posted: 07 Jun 2010, 19:07
by mh
Izzy HaveMercy wrote:So it is better to ban firearms and shove them into illegaity where there is no control at all?
This.
The solution isn't banning, we should know by now that doesn't work and will only lead to a black market and criminals getting rich(er).
Posted: 08 Jun 2010, 08:22
by moses
mh wrote:Izzy HaveMercy wrote:So it is better to ban firearms and shove them into illegaity where there is no control at all?
This.
The solution isn't banning, we should know by now that doesn't work and will only lead to a black market and criminals getting rich(er).
There has never been a total ban on guns so who is to say it wont work. Do all criminals use guns?
Posted: 08 Jun 2010, 08:40
by markfiend
I know it's not an exact parallel, but we can look at how well alcohol prohibition worked in the States. Or indeed at how well the War On (some) Drugs is working.
I never really thought I'd find myself on an anti-gun-control stance, but while I do have some sympathy for your viewpoint moses (like I say, I don't like guns, I would never own one, I've rarely even seen one) the authoritarian impulse for a ban is IMO unlikely to work.
Posted: 08 Jun 2010, 10:06
by weebleswobble
Hokey religions and ancient weapons are no match for a good blaster at your side, kid.
Posted: 08 Jun 2010, 10:21
by markfiend
As opposed to
an elegant weapon for a more civilized age. 
Posted: 08 Jun 2010, 23:45
by DeWinter
markfiend wrote:I know it's not an exact parallel, but we can look at how well alcohol prohibition worked in the States. Or indeed at how well the War On (some) Drugs is working.
I never really thought I'd find myself on an anti-gun-control stance, but while I do have some sympathy for your viewpoint moses (like I say, I don't like guns, I would never own one, I've rarely even seen one) the authoritarian impulse for a ban is IMO unlikely to work.
Wasn't prohibition along the same lines as current drug policy in Britain? You can consume it but not make or sell it? If they treated purchase as a crime, as they do illegal firearms, maybe they'd be more successful.
Posted: 09 Jun 2010, 04:45
by Garbageman
This is one of the things I have had many heated debates with Americans as they cannot live without guns as a normal part of life.
Being from the UK, my opinion of guns is a very low one as everyday I turn on the local Atlanta news to see at least six shootings a night,which usually ends in numerous fatalities.
Unfortunately,THIS REALLY IS A PART OF EVERDAY LIFE......for all the F#$%^&*d up children of the world I give you Smith and Wesson.
Posted: 09 Jun 2010, 22:01
by theparadox2010
Because the MET shot some guy from brazil (who shouldn't have been here), and he was told to stop or they would shoot, now the police in the uk have even more "risk assement / health and safety" forms than ever, I believe 24 forms before the helicopter is dispatched, so to let an armed officer out, even more.. Maybe, just maybe, it should be more common for the force to carry guns, and, use them if need be. Those who don't do wrong don't need to worry. And, those that do should know that a man with a gun is watching them, ready to use whatever force in needed, not just 10ish years in a cell, that most criminals kind of look forward to, because, here in the UK, the most that will happen in 35 years tops. it may be against their human rights, but, what happened to the rights of the victims?
Posted: 10 Jun 2010, 09:37
by markfiend
theparadox2010 wrote:Those who don't do wrong don't need to worry.
Oh. You were
serious?
Menezes was
legally in the UK when he was killed. He was
not warned by the police before they shot him. And even so, the death penalty for illegal immigration? Get real.
The last thing we need is a bunch of authoritarian assholes with guns wandering the streets. I read far too often of dickhead cops in the States waving their guns around (including one guy who went in with a gun to try to break up a snowball fight this winter
) to want the same happening here.
Posted: 10 Jun 2010, 22:59
by theparadox2010
Ok, so the reports I heard were wrong, I'll admit my mistake, I'm not saying every cop should have a gun, I'm saying if needed, they should be more accessable, But, the sentence should be a little stronger than a cushty jail.
Posted: 11 Jun 2010, 01:06
by stufarq
DeWinter wrote:Wasn't prohibition along the same lines as current drug policy in Britain? You can consume it but not make or sell it?
Which drugs are those? Illegal drugs are illegal to make, sell or consume, although some are legal under very strict conditions (which makes them controlled rather than illegal). Prohibition in America was just that: alcohol was completely illegal to make, sell or consume.
Posted: 11 Jun 2010, 10:09
by DeWinter
stufarq wrote:Which drugs are those? Illegal drugs are illegal to make, sell or consume, although some are legal under very strict conditions (which makes them controlled rather than illegal). Prohibition in America was just that: alcohol was completely illegal to make, sell or consume.
Well, I don't make the mistake of considering Wiki as the font of all knowledge, but looking it up on there it claims it was never illegal to consume or purchase alcohol during prohibition. And I've never heard of anyone being arrested in Britain for being a smackhead. If so, Scu
nthorpe's town centre would be permanently empty and it's police cells perma-full. Dont we go for the clearly not working "harm reduction" policy instead?
Posted: 11 Jun 2010, 10:13
by DeWinter
theparadox2010 wrote:Because the MET shot some guy from brazil (who shouldn't have been here), and he was told to stop or they would shoot, now the police in the uk have even more "risk assement / health and safety" forms than ever, I believe 24 forms before the helicopter is dispatched, so to let an armed officer out, even more.. Maybe, just maybe, it should be more common for the force to carry guns, and, use them if need be. Those who don't do wrong don't need to worry. And, those that do should know that a man with a gun is watching them, ready to use whatever force in needed, not just 10ish years in a cell, that most criminals kind of look forward to, because, here in the UK, the most that will happen in 35 years tops. it may be against their human rights, but, what happened to the rights of the victims?
They mistook De Menezez for someone else. He was here quite legally, they never shouted a warning, he wasn't running, and he didn't vault any turnstiles. All of that was just a set of rather blatant lies put out by the Met. Which, if you think about it, is a hell of a lot scarier and much more unforgivable than a case of mistaken identity under pressure.
Posted: 11 Jun 2010, 14:05
by nigel d
i was going to mention a witty song about Scunthorpe , but every time i try submitting my message i get totally re written and amended.
and i cant remember who sang it any way
SEE I CANT WRITE THE TOWN'S NAME.....YET IT APPEARS ELSEWHERE IN THE THREAD.
Posted: 11 Jun 2010, 14:09
by Quiff Boy
nigel d wrote:i was going to mention a witty song about Scunthorpe , but every time i try submitting my message i get totally re written and amended.
and i cant remember who sang it any way
SEE I CANT WRITE THE TOWN'S NAME.....YET IT APPEARS ELSEWHERE IN THE THREAD.
sorted
it's the swear filters picking up the letters c, u, n and t next to each other
you need to fool it by adding a bit of bbcode in between them
eg: