[Closed] Private ownership of firearms

But they could drive a car through a crowded High St, no?
Where there's a will, there's a way.

No.

It's not the same.

You can't drive a car into a building and hole up there once the cops are after you, and you can't drive around a wooded island running people over.

Guns are really the only covert, portable and lethal at range weapons.

In other news - the bloke accused of shooting someone with an illegal firearm in manchester announced to court that his name was 'psycho stapleton'

http://www.metro.co.uk/news/886177-man-accused-of-anuj-bidve-killing-calls-himself-psycho-stapleton-in-court

Clearly he was also 'mentally unstable' - perhaps they should have banned gim from owning a gun too?

Whats our resident mental [comma] health professional's opinion?

In other news - the bloke accused of shooting someone with an illegal firearm in manchester announced to court that his name was 'psycho stapleton'

Jury please disregard Zulubitty's comments. More irrelevance and bluster. Jeez, stick to the point man.

I am not a mental health professional

However how you can claim this guy was not mentally unstable is quite amazing. he killed 3 people. The police had warnings but gave him his guns back.

Ah well - I have stuff to do now.

I am not a mental health professional

Sorry - I missed the comma 😉

TJ - I think you've actually managed to professionally embarass yourself here - do you really think that someone suffering from depression is 'clearly mentally unstable' - is that really how you view your patients?

I think it is significant that the seemingly increasingly common massacre type events couldn't take place without guns.

Someone may be able to stab or gas their immediate family, but they can't walk into the middle of Hungerford or onto an island and take out tens of people that way.

You're completely correct. If you look at Breivik, he planned this for ages, planted bombs, and even went to the Czech Republic to buy illegal weapons. I don't care what legislation you put in place, there's no way you'd have stopped this massacre from happening.

Bottom line: the number of people killed with legally held weapons in the UK is tiny. If we can tighten that up a little (I've made some suggestions earlier), then that's great. But to think that we'd prevent the awful incidents like Dunblane, Utoya, Colombine, Hungerford through more stringent controls over legal weapons is unrealistic, I'm afraid.

Has this moved on to be a sensible debate yet, or is it still the usual drivel? Are we still arguing about whether using a gun for target shooting is a use or not? Is TJ still deploying his usual tactics? Have we started focusing on whether we need to look at the causes of why people murder rather than the tools they use to do it?

LHS - Member

"after all most of those birds can and are reared for shooting"

I've only been pheasant shooting a few times in the UK and they certainly weren't cage reared.

You should look into this a bit more. 6 times ( at least) of the UK population of wild pheasants are shot each year according to defra. the vast majority of pheasants shot are farmed for shooting, They are kept in pens until a few weeks before the start of the shooting season.

interesting statement TJ, let's try replacing "gun" with "car"

TandemJeremy - Member
zulu - they knew he was mentally unstable and he killed 3 other people - of course he should never have had his [s]guns[/s][b]car[/b] returned to him.

so long as people are allowed to keep [s]guns[/s][b]cars[/b] at home then these incidents will continue. Its not that the system works in the main but failed in this case its that the system clearly does not work or else we would not see repeated killings with legally held [s]guns[/s][b]cars[/b].

It has happened before and it will continue to happen so long as people are allowed to keep [s]guns and ammunition[/s][b]cars[/b] at home.

If yo think the freedom to own [s]guns[/s][b]cars[/b] means multiple deaths every year is a price worth paying ten so be it. I do not. I believe the rights of people not to be killed by [s]guns[/s][b]cars[/b] far outweighs the right to hold [s]guns[/s][b]cars[/b]- except as said for the very few people who need [s]guns[/s][b]cars[/b]to shoot vermin.

I prefer the right to life over the right to [s]shoot[/s] [b]drive[/b].

how many more people are killed by cars than guns in our society?

both driving and shooting involve the handling of dangerous equipment and are licensed activities, killing people with one is more socially accepted than by the other

All this case demonstrates is that any system is as strong as it's weakest link. The control of firearms is far higher than that for driving and consequently deaths through legally held firearms are few. I imagine the system will be reviewed, lessons learnt and further controls imposed.

meanwhile you can run over and kill a cyclist and get community service http://road.cc/content/news/28728-driver-who-pleaded-guilty-killing-time-trialling-cyclists-walks-free-court

Bottom line: the number of people killed with legally held weapons in the UK is tiny. If we can tighten that up a little (I've made some suggestions earlier), then that's great. But to think that we'd prevent the awful incidents like Dunblane, Utoya, Colombine, Hungerford through more stringent controls over legal weapons is unrealistic, I'm afraid.

^^This^^

how many more people are killed by cars than guns in our society?

Spurious, spurious, spurious. This has been done and binned. And yet, someone keeps coming back for more. Jeez. 🙄

Dunblane couldn't happen now because of the controls, hungerford was a legally held gun.

Of course if it was no longer legal to hold guns at home then shootings with legally held guns would not happen.

DD - 'cos the pro gun argument is so thin. Its basically I like guns and shooting things and its my right to do so.

Ah well - I have stuff to do now.

Really? It appears not.

They are kept in pens until a few weeks before the start of the shooting season

And this is worse than factory farming how?

And this is worse than factory farming how?

More STWers in "sticking to the point" difficulties.

One more then I really must go 🙂

so here we have another shooting tragedy.

http://www.****/news/article-1376850/Calum-Murray-accidentally-kills-girlfriend-Sophie-Taylor-turns-gun-himself.html

Of course if it was no longer legal to hold guns at home then shootings with legally held guns would not happen.

Really? Thats a fair old leap there TJ

what would stop someone from pre planning a killing, like Hungerford, Dunblane and Whitehaven?

Sort of shot your own fox there haven't you?

I see you've gone all quiet on the 'castigating anyone with depression as being mentally unstable' front...

so here we have another shooting tragedy.

But by your own admission, his gun was not a problem, as it was held for professional pest control reasons, so fulfilled the utility argument, even though it was an accident...

More STWers in "sticking to the point" difficulties.

More STWers in "sticking to the point" difficulties

The point is valid - I would rather kill my own food rather than have food raised from factory farming. It is better for me and the animals. Hence the reason to own a gun.

TJ is dismissing the need for any private gun ownership which I disagree with.

The point is valid

No it's not. Defend your gun-love and don't be getting into factory farming.

Defend your gun-love and don't be getting into factory farming.

I just did 🙄

Come on Darcy it's one or the other. CHOOSE!

Guns or factory farming, which is it?

Spurious, spurious, spurious. This has been done and binned. And yet, someone keeps coming back for more. Jeez

why is it spurious? both are about the licensed use of potentially dangerous equipment. There conditions placed on the licensee in both cases and health issues could see the withdrawl of either licence

personally I don't have a firearm, don't really see the need to have one and don't anticpate shooting at anything in the future. I don't have a problem with an effective system of licenced ownership to enable the use of firearms in safe environments for sport, pleasure or business (legal of course 😉 )

Its basically I like guns and shooting things and its my right to do so.

Which is actually a very strong argument, and can be applied to pretty much any activity, from religious worship to football to cinema going to whatever. As a society we decide where to draw the line - a small minority of football fans are thugs, should we ban football? A small minority of priests are child-molesters, should we ban religious worship?
Personally I think the gun-owning line is about in the right place, maybe a few more controls could be added (see nickf's post above for example) but outright banning is, imo, an authoritarian measure which does little for security, and a lot against liberty.

why is it spurious? both are about the licensed use of potentially dangerous equipment

A gun isn't potentially dangerous, it's intentionally dangerous.

Guns or factory farming, which is it?

Organically reared pheasants shot with lasers?

why is it spurious?

I dunno, try reading back through the thread - it's kinda about gun ownership, not car ownership. A car is not manufactured as a weapon. Really, if you can't get beyond this first point...

A gun isn't potentially dangerous, it's intentionally dangerous.

Oooh, I loikes dat. Zulu will be along in a minute to instruct you on how safe guns actually are. Whereas mental health professionals on tandems are likely to kill without warning.

Mental health professionals on tandems are likely to kill without warning.

This, somes it up perfectly.

Organically reared pheasants shot with lasers?

I know this was a good attempt to dodge an answer, but lasers are better than guns how?

I know this was a good attempt to dodge an answer, but lasers are better than guns how?

😆

I remember at some point in the thread, the gun-lovers were asked why target shooting couldn't be done with lasers...I was simply referring to that. 🙂

I know this was a good attempt to dodge an answer, but lasers are better than guns how?

WOOOOOSH

WOOOOOSH

so here we have another shooting tragedy.

very sad, just like those people who kill their unseen child while parking the car on the drive or the pensioner who recently killed his wife by crushing her against the garage door.
accidents happen, they are all avoidable but to err is human.

you are human aren't you TJ? i do have my suspicions that you are a korean spam-bot released to cause angst and paranoia on the u.k's internet.

Was shooting people an accident? Did he just err?

A gun isn't potentially dangerous, it's intentionally dangerous.

so are cars that can do more than the national speed limit.

do you really think that someone suffering from depression is 'clearly mentally unstable'

so what you are saying is he was mentally stable and shot three people with legally owned firearms .....so we cannot even trust the non mentally ill with guns..I hear your plea brother I hear your plea

how many more people are killed by cars than guns in our society?

You mean in the uk or world wide? Given the wars we have fought I would go for guns by about 8 million worlwide I donnu hundreds of millions more …whats your best guess? Probably more cars than guns as well but hey good point

both driving and shooting involve the handling of dangerous equipment and are licensed activities, killing people with one is more socially accepted than by the other

It is because one is an accident and the other is using a device designed to kill - yiou have spotted that accidently killing someoen by error or omission is viewed as worse than going on a gun rampage .do you disagree ?

It is a chalk and cheese comparison a guns sole design purpose is to kill and maim a car can do this [ as can any inappropriately handled implement] where as a gun does it when handled properly

Why do armies not equip their soldiers with cars ?
It is a really stupid point to keep labouring.

Of course if it was no longer legal to hold guns at home then shootings with legally held guns would not happen.

nothing but they would not be able to use a legally held gun as that would be illegal

both are about the licensed use of potentially dangerous equipment.

I could kill with a potato masher[ might take some time like but I could] but I would let a child play with one …how about a loaded gun ….no more dangerous as they bioth kill …jessus this is a daft point to keep labouring and gets re hashed every few pages

very sad, just like those people who kill their unseen child while parking the car on the drive or the pensioner who recently killed his wife by crushing her against the garage door.
accidents happen, they are all avoidable but to err is human.

he went on agun rampage to comapre this to accidently killing a loved one in an accident is just stupid.

No one is arguing a car is not at all dangerous and that they do not result in deaths but that does not make them more dangerous than guns or we would give them to armies to defend themselves

If I was going to kill someone, I wouldn't shoot them. That would be daft.

I'd recruit a lot of friends, all dress up like a Napoleonic theme night in a gay club, get a load of horses and a pack of rabid hounds. Then we'd charge after my victim, making as much noise as possible with bugles and stuff, before setting the hounds on them to tear them limb from limb.

This would be just as illegal as shooting people, but apparently the police don't give a flying **** about you doing it, and just turn a blind eye.

so are cars that can do more than the national speed limit.

Best stick to making the tea or whatever it is you do between posting (or is it the other way round?).

A gun isn't potentially dangerous, it's intentionally dangerous.

so are cars that can do more than the national speed limit.

Its a good point, and rather well put 😀

you are a korean spam-bot

😀

Its a good point, and rather well put

Struggling again bitty?

My neighbour has guns.

He has owned them all this life.

He hunts, and provides local restuarants and, ahem, his neighbours, with fantastic meat.
I'm glad he has them. I don't need one.
He is very serious about ownership, safety, and keeping his nose clean.

Top bloke.
So he gets to keep his guns, imo.

erm

Was shooting people an accident? Did he just err?

i wasn't there but i guess he went apeshit?

so are cars that can do more than the national speed limit.

No not really, no.

Best stick to making the tea or whatever it is you do between posting (or is it the other way round?).

usually polishing my bowie knife or reading guns & ammo back issues.

usually polishing my bowie knife or reading guns & ammo back issues.

As I'd thought. 😐

No not really, no.

speeding kills more people than guns in the u.k.
speeding is a selfish pursuit of no benefit.
ban speeding and the ability to speed.
save lives.

speeding kills more people than guns in the u.k.
speeding is a selfish pursuit of no benefit.
ban speeding and the ability to speed.
save lives.

Do yourself a favour and read JY's last post.

MrSmith - Member

Was shooting people an accident? Did he just err?

i wasn't there but i guess he went apeshit?

So where is the equivalence with a car accident?

speeding is a selfish pursuit of no benefit.

yes those bastard ambulances rushing around for no real purpose and those fire engines eh What is that all about selfish deangerous bastards doing nothing for no one

Deary me this thread gets new height of hyperbole even without TJ

Again we all know cars are dangerous but a gun is designed to hurt/kill/maim it has no other purpose..you can point ot other things that can potetnially kill but this wont ever make guns safe

I bet cars have killed more people than nuclear weapons so perhaps we should remove cars from Iran and give them nukes .. can you see yet what a daft argument it is to make re cars and danger

So where is the equivalence with a car accident?

death.

i think the word 'accident' is a bit of a misnomer, it's as if using the word takes the blame from the driver who's not looking/speeding/drunk/using a mobile/daydreaming etc and causes death.
collision is much better and accident should be used for events not caused by the drivers actions like tyre blowouts or mechanical failure.

I bet cars have killed more people than nuclear weapons so perhaps we should remove cars from Iran and give them nukes

😆

yes those bastard ambulances rushing around for no real purpose and those fire engines eh What is that all about selfish deangerous bastards doing nothing for no one

it's obvious, like the army being allowed to legally kill, the emergency services can speed.

Again we all know cars are dangerous but a gun is designed to hurt/kill/maim it has no other purpose..you can point ot other things that can potetnially kill but this wont ever make guns safe

banning guns will not make people drive safely either.

MrSmith I was referring to:

MrSmith - Member

"so here we have another shooting tragedy."

very sad, just like those people who kill their unseen child while parking the car on the drive or the pensioner who recently killed his wife by crushing her against the garage door.
[b]accidents happen, they are all avoidable but to err is human.[/b]

Which is why I asked if you thought the shooting was an accident. And you don't, so what the flying fig are you banging on about?

Keep hold of those straws btw, not many left.

Keep hold of those straws btw, not many left.

you make it sound like Chipps is going to come along and deliver the final verdict and maybe ban firearms.

it's a forum about bikes and shit not the house of lords/commons.
if you really give that much of a toss write to your M.P.

if you really give that much of a toss write to your M.P.

Jack Straw?

I could kill with a potato masher[ might take some time like but I could]

It would be time well spent if correctly targeted 🙄

Again we all know cars a re dangerous but a gun uis designed to hurt/kill/maim [u]legally[/u] it has no other purpose..you can point ot othe rthings that can potetnially kill but this wont ever make guns safe

MrSmith - Member

"Keep hold of those straws btw, not many left."

you make it sound like Chipps is going to come along and deliver the final verdict and maybe ban firearms.

it's a forum about bikes and shit not the house of lords/commons.
if you really give that much of a toss write to your M.P.

And they're gone!

http://www.****/news/article-2017535/Mother-crashed-car-intentionally-kill-daughters-row-husband.html

http://www.bostonstandard.co.uk/news/crime/man_deliberately_plunged_car_into_river_1_3338208

http://www.newstoday.co.uk/3162/2011/10/five-year-old-girls-death-was-avoidable/

http://www.hexhamcourant.co.uk/feud-woman-drove-car-into-man-twice-1.331096?referrerPath=home/2.3307

http://www.dailypost.co.uk/news/north-wales-news/2011/12/07/man-tried-to-kill-ex-wife-by-hitting-her-with-his-car-in-wrexham-55578-29908661/

http://www.****/news/article-181497/Man-gets-life-police-deaths.html

http://www.lancashiretelegraph.co.uk/news/rossendale/whitworth/9040461.Rossendale_man_who_drove_into_nightclub_crowd_jailed/

http://www.harlowstar.co.uk/News/MOTORIST-WHO-DROVE-INTO-CROWD-JAILED-FOR-15-MONTHS.htm

Bitty's still struggling.

I've only just come on this thread, looked boring so wondering how it got to 20 pages. Summary anyone? Why does it appear to be on car crashes now?

Also,

Why does it appear to be on car crashes now?

it is a car crash. thankfully nobody dies

Why does it appear to be on car crashes now?

Because defending guns is too difficult.

It's beyond strawman now:

[img] [/img]

Quite an interesting thread (once past the squabbling) for someone who does probably a couple of dozen of FAC and SGC applications/renewals each year. I got one licence revoked recently, and am in the process of doing so for another, for various reasons. It's not an exact science unfortunately. I am inclined to agree that 5 years is too long between renewals.

Why does it appear to be on car crashes now?

Because the violent fantasists couldn't justify their violent fantasies about survivalist weekends spent a huntin' and a trappin' and a shootin' so thought it might be a good idea to compare cars to guns. I hope that they really don't have guns tbh if that's the kind of thought processes they experience. 😐

This thread is a car crash.

And they're gone!

Yes! you won. well done you.
here's a box for the last word

But cars are a tool for getting from A to B, with the occasional side effect of killing people.

Guns are a tool for killing people, with the side effect of sending people from A to the morgue.

I wouldn't mind owning a glock though.

It is because one is an accident and the other is using a device designed to kill - yiou have spotted that accidently killing someoen by error or omission is viewed as worse than going on a gun rampage .do you disagree ?

It is a chalk and cheese comparison a guns sole design purpose is to kill and maim a car can do this [ as can any inappropriately handled implement] where as a gun does it when handled properly

No a gun is not potentially dangerous it is only dangerous….

he went on agun rampage to comapre this to accidently killing a loved one in an accident is just stupid.

mr smith you must be trolling on this page alone there are two examples of you contradicting yourself [ of cours eyou will denyy it I know] or you cannot form a logical argument either way what is the point debating this some more with you - that is rhetorical btw

RM they want to point out that cars are dangerous [ which no one is denying] as they seem to think this maikes guns safe..see if they accet my argument 😀

Good call Zulu cars are lethal and guns and nukes are safe so Iran then we need to give them those harmless nukes and guns as well as they are both less dangerous lets arms people and deprive them of cars...its the only way to save lives

Because the violent fantasists couldn't justify their violent fantasies about survivalist weekends spent a huntin' and a trappin' and a shootin' so thought it might be a good idea to compare cars to guns. I hope that they really don't have guns tbh if that's the kind of thought processes they experience.

I fantasise about a full nights sleep and more time to ride the bike 😉

had thought about target archery as a de-stresser as I've somewhere to practice close by, but I'll probably get accused of Rambo or Robin Hood fantasies 🙄

guns? never wanted one.

Junky, wouldn't it be a reasonable proposition that, if we policed car ownership/licencing on the same basis as firearms, there would be a significant reduction in road deaths?

History of alcohol problems, depression or self harm - we remove your driving licence.

sound reasonable?

RM they want to point out that cars are dangerous [ which no one is denying] as they seem to think this maikes guns safe..see if they accet my argument

And both sides have been arguing this for 15 pages or something?

[img] [/img]

I'm out.

PS:

History of alcohol problems, depression or self harm - we remove your driving licence.

sound reasonable?

Only if there's a correlation between the two (those problems and car crashes).

sound reasonable?

No.

I'd go so far as to say it sounds completely thick which even by your standards in the latter part of this thread, is pushing things.

Nice links Zulu, did you not notice:

[url] http://www.****/news/article-2017535/Mother-crashed-car-intentionally-kill-daughters-row-husband.html [/url]

According to ABC, the children were brought to a local hospital and treated for [b]minor injuries that included cuts and bruises.[/b]

[url] http://www.bostonstandard.co.uk/news/crime/man_deliberately_plunged_car_into_river_1_3338208 [/url]

Gareth Nolan, of Woad Farm Road, was found by emergency services clinging to a rope in the water in the early hours of Thursday morning

[url] http://www.hexhamcourant.co.uk/feud-woman-drove-car-into-man-twice-1.331096?referrerPath=home/2.3307 [/url]

Mr Robinson suffered [b]scratches and abrasions to his arms, and swelling to both legs just below the knees[/b], where the bumper had hit him, Mr Nance said.

[url] http://www.dailypost.co.uk/news/north-wales-news/2011/12/07/man-tried-to-kill-ex-wife-by-hitting-her-with-his-car-in-wrexham-55578-29908661/ [/url]

A MAN [b]tried[/b] to kill his ex-wife by driving his car onto a pavement and hitting her.

...

But miraculously she escaped with [b]bruising and swelling[/b], Mold crown court heard.

[url] http://www.lancashiretelegraph.co.uk/news/rossendale/whitworth/9040461.Rossendale_man_who_drove_into_nightclub_crowd_jailed/ [/url]

Revellers were ‘knocked down like skittles’ as they fled in terror from Lee Anthony Bradley, 26, as he sped along the pavement in a Saab 93, Bolton Crown Court heard.

Seven women and seven men were taken to hospital with injuries following the incident last October outside a strip of bars and clubs in Packer Street, Rochdale.

The court heard that it was a “miracle” [b]no one was killed.[/b]

[url] http://www.harlowstar.co.uk/News/MOTORIST-WHO-DROVE-INTO-CROWD-JAILED-FOR-15-MONTHS.htm [/url]

Collins deliberately drove her Ford Ka into a group of people standing on a green at the junction with St John's Road, [b]injuring several teenag-ers including two young men who sustained broken legs[/b]. She drove away and abandoned the car.

Quite inefficient as weapons, as your links show.

Quite inefficient as weapons, as your links show.

lack of target practice. should have used a bigger weapon.

[img] [/img]

lots of stuff are banned like cock fighting, badger baiting, hare coursing and dog fights .....folk liked those as hobbies too -

and lots of people still do it as they refuse to doth there caps to people like you!

Because the violent fantasists couldn't justify their violent fantasies about survivalist weekends spent a huntin' and a trappin' and a shootin' so thought it might be a good idea to compare cars to guns

im a survivalist, and id eat you!! yum yum..