New U.K. Gun Law.

[WarpGhost]

Look at Dunblane. Handguns are now a rare weapon used in published violence in Britain.

If we can limit guns further, that can only be a good thing.

They were a rare weapon before the ban, too, so suggesting "now" as if it used to be much worse is very misleading. IIRC, more handguns are used in violence now than before the ban. Not only that, but they're far more easily available to criminals than when there were lots of legal ones sloshing around. Even two-bit petty gangbangers are at most 3 phone calls away from having their metal penis extension. That's not the world the ban envisaged. The only reason we haven't seen an even more knee-jerk reaction in law is because the government actually acknowledged that the ludicrously swift response to Dunblane had failed.

The only reason why we haven't seen firearms crime escalate faster than it already has is nothing to do with a lack of availability of guns; they're worringly easy to get hold of. Its the lack of ammunition for them that is limiting their deployment, a totally unintended consequence of the ban but the actual reason why handguns are still relatively rare (though still increased). Smuggled guns come with one complimentry clip, but its hard to use them for any nefarious purpose with such little ammo. For some reason the police are considerably better at catching ammunition runners than actual firearms dealers.

OTOH, handguns are still sufficiently uncommon that a lot of criminals are actually pooling their resources, working together and lending weapons around, rather just than shooting each other with them. Which I know many people would argue is the preferable setup.

What is more worrying to me is that firearms crimes are now being punished without recourse to a citizens legal rights. People are being locked up for considerable lengths of time without trial in the UK for firearms related offences. The last government, in all their deeply illiberal wisdom, decided to make firearms offences an automatic presumption of guilty with extremely limited scope for ever even being allowed to argue innocence. This is a devastating and supremely worrying overturning of our legal protections as citizens. That puts it right alongside the introduction of juryless trials, indefinite incarcerations and European/US extraditions warrents as attacks on the fundamental notion of a free society.

 

[viranimus]

I dont own a gun. I spent most of my childhood around guns, specifically hunting guns, but living in the US, and hearing about something like this REALLY makes me want to go out and buy a small armories worth.

 

[Wadders]

But what are the prices? I mean if it has gone from £10 to £100 big whoomp. A shoddy gun costs much more than that, and not to talk about the price of the clays and ammo.

The price for an FAC and a shotgun license is the same. £50, then £40 to renew. Its just incredibly hard to get an FAC.

My mistake. Thanks for the correction

Well, despite owning a gun myself, I think that they should definitely re-evaluate the UK gun control situation after those atrocities. I'm not sure if this is the right way to go about it though. They should probably more look at early diagnosis's of mental issues, that's the cause, guns are just a symptom.

The silly thing is that Derek Bird, the (first of the mad gunmen) was a FAC owner. So for the sake of argument: If this law had come in a year ago, he would still have been able to kill 12 people as he did this year because both the guns he owned were on a FAC not a shotgun certificate. Therefore it would have failed entirel to prevent the tragedy. You just cannot legislate for mental health.

While I agree with you, I'm not sure how they could implement control based on mental health. GPs rarely know what's going on inside the heads of their patients any more than the police do, or at least not enough to make a decent judgement on an issue such as this when asked as referees (which they are btw under current law)

Then what? an appointment with a Psychologist before grant of a Certificate? Yeah, cos that's gona come cheap. Unless they were employed by the Police, but that would ramp costs up for the Cops and the prospective certificate holder too, and I cant see the Police spending any more dough than they absolutely have to...

It's a general kneejerk nanny state law that will have next to no effect on anyone apart from those that give kids shotguns.

And only then if they get reported. It's the Con-Lib alliance being ineffectual idiots again.

True stuff. They just need to be seen to be doing something, and to quiet the shocked cries of "something must be done!" from newspapers and the like. Actually solving the problem takes the back seat.

I'm sure they've been trying to change shotgun laws for years...

You were able to hold a shotgun licence at 12. You had to be 18 to buy a shotgun but you were legally able to use one as young as 12.

Yeah, this has been in the pipeline for getting on for 10 years. Just the recent tragedies have brought it forward, as the current government does all it can to continue a healthy tradition of useless knee jerk reactions.

But what are the prices? I mean if it has gone from £10 to £100 big whoomp. A shoddy gun costs much more than that, and not to talk about the price of the clays and ammo.

The price for an FAC and a shotgun license is the same. £50, then £40 to renew. Its just incredibly hard to get an FAC.

What is so incredible hard about getting it? You have to go to a test if you know the differenc species, their mating time and hunting seasons? You have to know how guns work, for simple maintanence. You have to know the laws regarding hunting, storage etc.? And have a clean record (with regards to weapons) to show you're not a menance to society.

I'd tell you in my own words, but why do that when somebody else already wrote it out nicely

http://www.marplerifleandpistolclub.org.uk/general/faccert1.htm

 

[Searlero]

As far as I know, the only people in the UK with shotguns are farmers.

Still, I think that guns laws are tight enough without making them harder. The Cumbria shootings were the first gun massacre we had in this country in along time.

 

[Blueruler182]

"Everyone is to get shot." That's the only gun law I care about.

 

[Wadders]

As far as I know, the only people in the UK with shotguns are farmers.

Still, I think that guns laws are tight enough without making them harder. The Cumbria shootings were the first gun massacre we had in this country in along time.

Well I own a shotgun, and I sure as hell aint a farmer

I use it for Clay shooting (which is great fun) and the occasional bit of Pigeon-bashing when they get too close to the vegetable garden...

But yeah, you're spot on. The gun laws were tight but reasonably so, especialy when compared to some other gun-mad countries. They seemed to be doing pretty well at stopping mad gunmen for a long while. Just once in a while things like this happen. I dont mean to belittle the events and the lives that were lost, but shit happens and you cant really base laws on that.

 

[Deathsong17]

Look at Dunblane. Handguns are now a rare weapon used in published violence in Britain.

If we can limit guns further, that can only be a good thing.

And they were common before?

Kids on the streets all use hollowed out replica handguns these days, which are much worse than regular firearms since they are very prone to misfires. In fact, everyone would be better off if they were using legit handguns. The replicas would mostly die off, most kids would likely be refused many sales and gun enthusiasts would get more options.

Hell, most kids probably wouldn't know how to handle a proper gun.

 

[EMFCRACKSHOT]

But what are the prices? I mean if it has gone from £10 to £100 big whoomp. A shoddy gun costs much more than that, and not to talk about the price of the clays and ammo.

The price for an FAC and a shotgun license is the same. £50, then £40 to renew. Its just incredibly hard to get an FAC.

What is so incredible hard about getting it? You have to go to a test if you know the differenc species, their mating time and hunting seasons? You have to know how guns work, for simple maintanence. You have to know the laws regarding hunting, storage etc.? And have a clean record (with regards to weapons) to show you're not a menance to society.

The Police are just a lot more finicky about who they will give an FAC to. With a Shotgun License, then they need a valid reason not to give one to you, e.g poor mental health or criminal conviction. With an FAC you need to prove to them that you need one. Key word there being need.

 

[Elburzito]

God Damn! We need that law over here. The amount of people who own shotguns for poaching over here is staggering at the moment.

 

[Lord Mountbatten Reborn]

Getting shot with a shotgun is something I'd consider far worse than getting shot with a handgun. I'm surprised this wasn't first on the list after Dunblane. Sure, Hamilton used pistols, but it doesn't take a great leap of the imagination to see him using a shotgun instead.

 

[punkrocker27]

And again I cant help but laugh at the morons who come up with this shit. Im not one of those NRA nuts, but its just ridiculous to think that making it harder to get guns legally will lower crime, if anything, it will make it easier for criminals to take advantage of lawbiding citizens.

Oh yeah, that's why America has such a great gun-crime rate.

OT: Good, as far as I'm concerned.

Right, that's why most homicides are law abiding people. Fail

 

[Malyc]

That's really all I have to say about that.

Although seriously, in some places, it's ridiculous how easy it is to get a gun in America. I mean, you go to a weekly gun show near Pheonix, you spend a couple hundred, you walk away with a good handgun...

Shotguns, on the other hand, we care a little more about, but the government still doesn't care that much. Our government only likes to crack down on illegal weaponry if they're automatics.

About the only thing the american govt gives a shit about is the barrels on rifles/shotguns MUST be at least 18" long. Most gun manufacturers make theirs around 18.5" or longer to minimize the chances of some government official charging someone for a barrel that is too short.

 

[Wadders]

Hell, most kids probably wouldn't know how to handle a proper gun.

Which would make them all the more dangerous.

We have no need for civilian ownership of handguns in the UK imo

But what are the prices? I mean if it has gone from £10 to £100 big whoomp. A shoddy gun costs much more than that, and not to talk about the price of the clays and ammo.

The price for an FAC and a shotgun license is the same. £50, then £40 to renew. Its just incredibly hard to get an FAC.

What is so incredible hard about getting it? You have to go to a test if you know the differenc species, their mating time and hunting seasons? You have to know how guns work, for simple maintanence. You have to know the laws regarding hunting, storage etc.? And have a clean record (with regards to weapons) to show you're not a menance to society.

The Police are just a lot more finicky about who they will give an FAC to. With a Shotgun License, then they need a valid reason not to give one to you, e.g poor mental health or criminal conviction. With an FAC you need to prove to them that you need one. Key word there being need.

They accept if you're a registered member of a Rifle Club, or can prove shooting rights to a peice of land. The 'need' can be anything from pest control, target shooting, deer hunting etc. I'd say it's less of a 'need', more like a valid and acceptable reason. 'Cos lets face it, no-one these days needs a rifle and everyone including the police know that. That shouldnt stop people from owning them though

The hardest part is the getting shooting rights/ aquiring membership of a club though I'd say. Not that I own a FAC so I may be wrong, I'm just going on what I've been told by fellow shooters who do.

 

[The_ModeRazor]

My heart is bleeding for you.
Wait, it doesn't, I sold it for dope and whores.

 

[Woodsey]

And again I cant help but laugh at the morons who come up with this shit. Im not one of those NRA nuts, but its just ridiculous to think that making it harder to get guns legally will lower crime, if anything, it will make it easier for criminals to take advantage of lawbiding citizens.

Oh yeah, that's why America has such a great gun-crime rate.

OT: Good, as far as I'm concerned.

Right, that's why most homicides are law abiding people. Fail

I'll take it you mean the victims of the murders and not the murderers. If the guns weren't so obtainable to begin with then those without the guns wouldn't feel the need to have them, and wouldn't suffer from not having them either.

The fact that you can probably find a gun in almost every home in certain parts of America does not deter gun-violence, it encourages it.

 

[Malyc]

Personally I thought the pre hungerford and dunblane laws were ok for the most part. Thorough background checks for mental health and criminal activity, belong to a shooters club or have the land to shoot on and have secure wall or floor mounted safe to carry the weapon and a seperate safe for ammo, to be checked every couple of years. All firearms & ammo purchases to be recorded. I think that is all that's necessary.

EDIT: On the home defence thing, it's never really been an issue, gun ownership is and always has been very low, even before the ban on handguns and semi auto rifles coming up against an armed householder has never been much of a worry. While you are allowed to use a firearm if you have one to hand it isn't like the US where you can blow away any intruder(as far as I can tell), shooting an unarmed burglar or one that is fleeing, or using excessive force (shooting several times) will probably get you in a lot of trouble.

As far as i know, it is only legal in Minnesota to shoot someone if they are posing a danger to your family: i.e. the intruder is armed. You absolutely CAN NOT shoot someone that is fleeing. That will cause the local police to do everything they can to lock you away for a good long time.
About the excessive force: pretty much every self defence training course that i've heard about tells you to keep putting rounds on target until they drop. I'll be honest, if someone were coming at me with a knife, firearm, baseball bat, or anything else that would hurt if I were hit with it, I'd put every round I needed to into them.

 

[Wadders]

Getting shot with a shotgun is something I'd consider far worse than getting shot with a handgun. I'm surprised this wasn't first on the list after Dunblane. Sure, Hamilton used pistols, but it doesn't take a great leap of the imagination to see him using a shotgun instead.

It's more to do with effective range and concealability, as well as magazine size, as I understand it.

The short range and large size of shotguns (even sawn-offs) makes them hard to conceal, and hard to kill many people at longer distances. The smaller capacity of ammunition means you cant fire off many shots before having to reload.

If I had 2 Colt 1911 handguns chambered in .45 ACP, with a full magazine of 7 rounds in each, plus 1 in the chamber I could hide them in my coat, and do a lot of damage before I had to think about reloading.

A Sawn-off side by side; I got 2 shots at a limited range, and I'd have to be wearing a big fucking coat to even have a hope of hiding it.

 

[iLikeHippos]

First of, I can agree that making the process harder for civilians to acquire guns will not solve crime, but give it a reason to rise in means of theft, robbery and burglary.

I believe they are being highly naive to think the police will be there when all those murders, bank robberies and robberies in general occurs.
Unless you give the people a means to defend themselves from todays scums, they are helpless, and are open for exploitation.

Also, there has always been a black market. You could import guns from other countries where weapon merchandise is produced cheaply and sold to you for perhaps half the price of the original cost.

It's possible, and that is how bank robbers acquire their means of weaponry. Would you really think they'd wait to get analyzed by some stupid test to than rob a bank, having written ID and all?!

Now, to be perfectly honest... I am not a detective, nor a policeman. I ain't even a criminal who have used this service. It's just my personal logistic thinking.

But, if you think about it... The newbies will have a hard time getting started or make something... Impulsive... Unless they've got a foot into the underworld. So that is one point in their direction. But that's it....
Or have I missed something? Please share.

 

[Geekosaurus]

I think they've been fairly generous up to now. Considering we have a zero tolerance approach to gun crime in the UK I'm surprised you're allowed a shotgun at all.

 

[wooty]

I dont mind it myself, it doesnt really affect me, selfish I know, but thats the way I see it.

I do agree with controling them, but its just like the ban on samurai swords or the fact BB guns need to be see through now. We wouldn't need these laws if people didnt act so fucking stupid with them.