Kenny - the only reason for holding a gun that is not a tool is to fufuill violent fantasises. there is no other reason. People will attempt to justify its all about sport but its actually all about killing and blood lust.

There's not a great deal of blood lust in target shooting. Do you feel the same way about fencing and archery?

Kenny - the only reason for holding a gun that is not a tool is to fufuill violent fantasises. there is no other reason. People will attempt to justify its all about sport but its actually all about killing and blood lust.

And yet again you're holding out your opinion as fact. I repeat, I haven't killed anything with my air-rifles, nor do I intend to. Same with shotguns. No blood lust, no Rambo fantasies.

Or do you know something about me that even I don't know?

People will attempt to justify its all about sport but its actually all about killing and blood lust.

There are many disciplines in shooting just like cycling. You can't compare a bi-athlete intentions to one of a big game hunter like you can't compare a bmxer to a tourer.

This is not a troll. Its the unpalatable truth. Gun ownership is all about killing things.

cynic-al - Member
How about guns/ammo used for sport/leisure are held at Police stations, released only when justified (competition, shoot etc), with penalties for late return? Or something like that?

Please... No. After seeing in the news about dodgy coppers (I think it was in Durham, not sure though) selling on seized weapons instead of destroying them a while ago, and now the stuff stolen from police stations, I'd rather have mine at home. Plus, do you really think that they will allow reasonable access to said pieces of property when the owner wants to get to them for, say, pigeon shooting or flighting on an estuary early in the morning? What about rabbiting at night?

In the past when something as unfortunate and tragic as this has happened, the existing laws have been judged enough. Yes, there might be scope for improvement in assessment/identification of holders with depression, but the vast majority of certificate holders are sensible, reasonable people. As has been said before, most shootings happen with illegal firearms, things like this tend to make the news more though.

Restricting/banning pistols had zero effect on their use in crime and murder, and banning privately held firearms full stop will not prevent deaths either.

TJ - I already pointed out to you that the last two 'massacres' were committed by Taxi Drivers

Plus all the other crimes they commit:

http://byfleet.surreyherald.co.uk/2011/07/taxi-driver-convicted-of-west.html
http://london-taxi.co.uk/three-years-for-addison-lee-driver-convicted-of-manslaughter/
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-devon-16300843
http://www.leylandguardian.co.uk/news/local/sex_assault_cab_driver_was_a_killer_1_3861774

Latest Stats:

580k Shotgun Certificates
142k Firearms Certificates
You can assume a fairly high level of holders having both

78K Licences Taxis's
155k Licened Private Hire Vehicles
With a total of 299k Licenced Taxi Drivers

So - fairly similar numbers in the grand scheme of things, yet which group is disproportionally represented in crime and Murder? yep, you got it!

[b]
Clearly the solution to this wave of needless slaughter is that we should ban Taxi Drivers[/b]

So is owning a fishing rod

TJ. I used to shoot. Target shooting. Little pieces of paper. And I've done some clay pigeons too.

Hunted "live" prey once (rabbits). Didn't enjoy it.

Did enjoy shooting though.

I don't seem to fit your neat unifying theory. Perhaps that's cos it's complete b******s?

Gun ownership is all about killing things in my opinion.

FTFY, TJ. Unless, of course, you have some FACTS to back up your assertion. (Rhetorical question, BTW, as you don't)

Of course one could argue that a B&Q store is a veritable armoury; axes, sledgehammers, circular saws etc..if somebody flipped with such a tool then the outcome would be far better than if that person had access to a firearm. You can run away from or tackle an assailant brandishing a petrol strimmer. This is not so easy if said assailant has a semi auto .22 rimfire rifle and a couple of full mag's.

Did you have a relaxing Christmas TJ? 🙄

edlong - Member
seosamh77 - don't suppose you've got any analysis of how many of those were caused by legally / illegally held guns have you?

nah just did a quick google for some numbers out of curiosity. ment to post the link, not a great deal more info

http://www.gun-control-network.org/GF07.htm

Nope. Folk can kill others regardless of whether or not they own a firearm.

Ban hands...!

TJ

Not looking for an argument with you here, but do you feel the same way about archery?

Should my daughter give it up?

If not, what's the difference, apart from a few hundred years?

TandemJeremy - Member
Kenny - the only reason for holding a gun that is not a tool is to fufuill violent fantasises. there is no other reason. People will attempt to justify its all about sport but its actually all about killing and blood lust.

What about sport? Clays, targets?

Derek - and how are you at outrunning Ford Mondeos?

cynic-al - Member
I'm close to TJ on this one.

How about guns/ammo used for sport/leisure are held at Police stations, released only when justified (competition, shoot etc), with penalties for late return? Or something like that?

I too see no need for them to be held at home.

I often find that people like [u]cynic-al suffer from something called envy, you should take into account that not everyone is rich who shoots.

all clearly unfit to hold

Obviously not, if they were issued FACs in the first place. "Acting out my violent fantasies" probably isn't on the form. You have always needed a good reason to own a firearm, and self-defence hasn't been one for 65 years.

How many of these awful occasions where someone murders their families do you really think would be *prevented* were there no private ownership of firearms? Or would they find other means? There are over 600 murders a year, only 40ish a year are gun-related, incredibly few of those involve legally held firearms.

As for sporting use not being valid? You might flip out at the number of armed Olympians coming over this year to compete. I still think it's a disgrace that a country like ours can be considered suitable to host the Olympics when it legislates against it's own citizens practising for an Olympic event.

TandemJeremy - Member
This is not a troll. Its the unpalatable truth. Gun ownership is all about killing things.

Also I've been clay pidgeon shooting before, can't say it really ignited any bloodlust in me.

I have heard some laugfhable stuff on here before from the fantasists but this is ridiculous Guns are for killing - that is their only usage.

Don't forgot cordless drills too!
I bet half you sick bastards have pretend at least once that it was a gun.

TJ that is patently not true, as copious examples above demonstrate!!

And on your logic, as well as archery, I think this year's olympics will need to be free from Javelin events too

What if a farmer has violent fantasies? and kills someone?

That would mean that ALL farmers are dangerous under your logic TJ

I used to do loads of shooting TJ. From the age of 13 onwards. Semi-automatic assault rifles and everything. To my knowledge I've never killed anyone

thegreatape - Member

TJ

Not looking for an argument with you here, but do you feel the same way about archery?

No - two reasons - people don't go out killing animals with longbows so you don't get the blood-lust loons using bows and its much harder to kill multiple people with a longbow although I am sure it would be possible

And on your logic, as well as archery, I think this year's olympics will need to be free from Javelin events too

And the shot putt. Originally based on cannon balls, therefore it's all about blood lust. Violent fantasists, shot putters. The lot of them.

Come to think of it, wasn't the precursor to the internet a military network? Better ban that, it's designed for killing....

I have heard some laugfhable stuff on here before from the fantasists but this is ridiculous Guns are for killing - that is their only usage.

Not true, but as for killing they are an effective way of getting rid of vermin.

For someone who works in the field of mental health, you really know **** all about the issue, don't you TJ

Despite copiuos other evidence to the contrary, I do sometimes wonder whether TJ is proof that mental illness is contagious.

Is this officially a TJ thread?

People will attempt to justify its all about sport but its actually all about killing and blood lust.

edlong - Member

TJ that is patently not true, as copious examples above demonstrate!!

Really? what other USE does a gun have?

Don't forget discus and the hammer as we're banning all these deadly events

BTW - rumour control has it that his licenced 'firearms' as opposed to 'shotguns' were FAC air weapons (ie, more than 12ft lbs ME - by way of comparison a deer rifle puts out at least 1750 ft lbs muzzle energy)

So, that sort of ****s the "armoury of lethal weapons" argument up 😉

I'd put target shooting in the same bracket as darts, bowls, snooker etc it's just a skill based activity that has absolutely nothing to do with killing for the vast majority of those involved. I think saying it is to do with blood lust is really miles wide of the mark.

A shooter with a .22 rimfire in semi auto configuration can deliver 10 bullets, each expending 100+ ft lbs of energy, into a small target within 5 seconds. Some guys at the club I attended bought "banana" magazines. Think AK47 shaped mag's. These can hold 30 rounds which would be blazed off in seconds by the so called responsible, sporting target shooter...

Target shooting, TJ. Only the death of a nicely drawn handful of circles in that instance...

I tried clay pigeon shooting once and I've got to say it was a lot of fun. Clearly I should be locked up before I fulfil my latent fantasy and kill someone.

people don't go out killing animals with longbows so you don't get the blood-lust loons using bows

orly?

http://www.bowhunting.com/
http://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=bow+hunting

Nope. Folk can kill others regardless of whether or not they own a firearm.

Obviously that's true, but guns make it a whole lot easier, no?

Can any of the "pro gun" posters here think of any practical measures that might stop this sort of incident happening in the future?

Pffft, guns for sport, that's what Time Crisis and Laser Quest are for! 😛

I have no interest in guns, but I do want to take up archery. Mainly to fulfil my childhood fantasy of being a bit like an elf, but the less said about that, the better.

Really? what other USE does a gun have?

Here we go. We'll be arguing over the definition of "use" in a moment...

Obviously that's true, but guns make it a whole lot easier, no?

Not necessarily. My hands are always to...er...hand. I have to switch the safety off, cock and squeeze a trigger when using a gun. I could probably punch you before I could shoot you, all being even.

I think rather than licensing an individual to possess firearms, we should perhaps instead licence a property for guns to be held there. That way, no-one would be able to have guns in a residential home, for example (quite frankly there's absolutely no genuine need for any individual to have guns in their home). This would mean that guns would be allowed to be held on a farm, for example, but only there.

Unlike other nations, where guns are legitimately owned as hunting tools, there is no real justification for anyone to own a firearm at a residential location in the UK. If you shoot for sport, you only shoot at a club/location with strict security measures, so why can't the guns stay there?

Keeping guns at specific locations would enable greater monitoring of how many guns there actually are, and who is using them.

How many illegal firearms out there were originally legally owned? Pretty easy for a single gun to slip off the radar and into the wrong hands.

GPS devices fixed permanently to each gun? Owners needing every single weapon they own to be inspected at regular intervals (and their own expense) by authorised inspectors?

Kenny - the only reason for holding a gun that is not a tool is to fufill violent fantasises. there is no other reason. People will attempt to justify its all about sport but its actually all about killing and blood lust.

There is definitely an element of this, sure, but there are also loads of people just into target shooting for sport.

There are people on this forum who definitely shoon't have guns, that's for sure...

(Myself included; I'd have shot hundreds of people if I had guns)

derek_starship - Member
A shooter with a .22 rimfire in semi auto configuration can deliver 10 bullets, each expending 100+ ft lbs of energy, into a small target within 5 seconds. Some guys at the club I attended bought "banana" magazines. Think AK47 shaped mag's. These can hold 30 rounds which would be blazed off in seconds by the so called responsible, sporting target shooter...

TandemJeremy - Member
what other USE does a gun have?

SD-253 - Member
1/ So nutter goes to police station and collects his legaly held shotgun and goes home and blows his wifes head off?
2/ The game keeper who maybe using a shotgun everyday has to go to the police station everyday?
3/ The majority of rural police staion are unmanned for a large parts of the day with no set maning times. This obviously assumes there is one near you.
4/ How could you the return the shotgun if you are shooting in Scotland and live in Cornwall?
5/ IF you don't have car how would you actually collect you gun when the station is 8 miles away?
6/ The police have nothing better to do than act as the amourer for 100s of people per police station?
7/ Arghh the fox is attacking my hens????I know I will nip down the police station and fetch my shootgun?
8/ If you don't "shoot" yourself why should anyone else be allowed to....opps thats your belief cynic-al
I often find that people like [u]cynic-al suffer from something called envy, you should take into account that not everyone is rich who shoots.

1. Could happen, of course, but less likely to be given the gun on his way home to after-pub drinks, when clearly agitated, drunk, without notice etc etc
2. "work" guns exempt
3. Good point, I wasn't presenting the above as a complete solution.
4. When you get home you return the gun, at a guess?
5. Unlikely...and so what? There is no "right" to gun ownership.
6. Paid for be a fee.
7. Again working gun exemption covers this...how many other guns are used for this?
8. See 5 above.

As for making it personal, well it says more about you than me, I have no desire to shoot, despite my establishment/middle class/farming origins.

SD253. You are the one spouting bullshit. Do some research eh? Good lad.

have had shot guns and air rifles and a black powder thing when younger.. legal ownership is not an issue... where the the law needs modifying is where they are kept.. alocked cupboard in the bedroom is not appropriate especially if you come home and find the mrs with the milkman in bed.. guess what you ll reach for first!!

time for managed armouries and ranges for leisure users and walk in safes for licesed home users ie farmers..

this would allow pistols to be available and ensure that movement and ammo were all controlled. there would be no excuse for a gun to be removed from an armoury/ range except for sale or repair then only by the repairer/ purchaser

all this would be paid for by users and the places would literally be like fort knox..

simples..

I have still to see any USE for a gun apart from killing things. Target shooting could easily be done with lazers or similar. the only possible USE for a gun is killing things and most of thaqt will be for the pleasure of killing. I have got the pro hunters on here have admitted hunting is all about the pleasure of killing

No, they shouldn't be outlawed. I own two shotguns and a rifle and haven't killed anyone but I do kill things, and then eat them.

However I do have two large two ton killing machines on the driveway that are part of a group of objects that kill thousands each year. Can we outlaw complete nobbers from having driving licences please?

I think rather than licensing an individual to possess firearms, we should perhaps instead licence a property for guns to be held there. That way, no-one would be able to have guns in a residential home, for example (quite frankly there's absolutely no genuine need for any individual to have guns in their home). This would mean that guns would be allowed to be held on a farm, for example, but only there.

About as sensible as being forced to keep your kitchen knives at the local restaurants, or your mountain bike at the nearest trailcentre.

Unlike other nations, where guns are legitimately owned as hunting tools, there is no real justification for anyone to own a firearm at a residential location in the UK. If you shoot for sport, you only shoot at a club/location with strict security measures, so why can't the guns stay there?

I shoot in the local woods, Should register the woods for me to store my gun? Or leave it with the gamekeeper who all of a sudden would be holding 45+ shotguns

It a load of crap, plenty of innocent gun users who are no problem.

I have still to see any USE for a gun apart from killing things.

[img] [/img]

❓

Can any of the "pro gun" posters here think of any practical measures that might stop this sort of incident happening in the future?

Interesting Question

better community mental health services - maybe walk in clinics where you could get advice or support, or just a listening ear Like you see with Samaritans, Mind etc.

Maybe actually with LESS GP involvement, as people might want to discuss feelings in confidence that they feel unable to broach with their doctor, who they have a 'relationship' with. certianly until as a society we tackle the stigma attached to mental health problems

would probably save a LOT of lives in the grand scheme of things...

I tend to step back from these threads as it usually gets to page three and it just becomes a name calling exercise.......but this really irked me:

Gun ownership is all about killing things

TandemJeremy, i find it hard to believe that you make it through the day without being punched at least once for your pompous and not very well thought through assumptions.

As someone who shot at a high level for more than ten years and progressed from smallbore to fullbore rifle then to pistol shooting, it grates when ill informed keyboard warriors like yourself spout your "sky news" style quotes.

My hobby was taken away from me through no fault of my own, I enjoyed it and spent a lot of money on firearms, ammunition and travelling costs for my hobby. When it all kicked off after Dunblane I was herded into the same "nutter with a gun" bracket as Thomas Hamilton by a baying media and anyone with an opinion. And when the ban took effect, i got a paltry compensation payout from a government who made their changes based on knee-jerk reaction and lies perpetrated by the secretary of the club Thomas Hamilton was a part of because he too had been backed into a corner.

Yes, people who have owned guns legitimately have also committed crimes, but then I think you will also find that the amount of gun crimes committed each year are not by legitimate owners but by criminals who have held them illegally. Now check these figures against what is reported by the news and I think you'll find "farmer goes mental" gets more bums on seats than "black kid kills other black kid in inner city"......sad but true

Gun ownership is not all about killing things, otherwise the Olympic's would hold the 5000m Drive By and the 100m Honour Killing.

I have still to see any USE for a gun apart from killing things

[url= http://www.olympic.org/biathlon ]Olympic Sport - Biathlon [/url]

Are they USING guns??

7. Again working gun exemption covers this...how many other guns are used for this?

What would count as a 'working gun' though?. The nature of rural jobs being have causal rather than full time. I understand your sentiment, but I think too a large extent this would be one of those things that would be incredibly difficult to produce useful further legislation on.

I have still to see any USE for a gun apart from killing things.

I very much doubt you will...

I have still to see any USE for a gun apart from killing things. Target shooting could easily be done with lazers or similar

And mountain biking could all be done at trail centres, all the same, innit 😉

Not necessarily. My hands are always to...er...hand. I have to switch the safety off, cock and squeeze a trigger when using a gun. I could probably punch you before I could shoot you, all being even.

I don't recall seeing any murder rampages being carried out with bare hands...

the 5000m Drive By and the 100m Honour Killing.

Excellent! 🙂

Dogbert - the only USE for guns is killing things - target shooting is a pastime it does not have any utility - and I think that law was absolutely right and proper.

My hobby was taken away from me through no fault of my own, I enjoyed it and spent a lot of money on firearms, ammunition and travelling costs for my hobby. When it all kicked off after Dunblane I was herded into the same "nutter with a gun" bracket as Thomas Hamilton by a baying media and anyone with an opinion. And when the ban took effect, i got a paltry compensation payout from a government who made their changes based on knee-jerk reaction and lies perpetrated by the secretary of the club Thomas Hamilton was a part of because he too had been backed into a corner.

This isn't intended to be antagonistic, but purely from my stance of personal ignorance, but what does air-pistol target shooting not have that firearm target shooting does?

Whats wrong with killing things?

Vegetarian are you TJ 🙄

look - something thats been killed:
[img] [/img]

TJ come shoot some clays, no blood or death.... we even have tea and cake.

Me, 13 minutes ago

Here we go. We'll be arguing over the definition of "use" in a moment...

TJ, just now...

Dogbert - the only USE for guns is killing things - target shooting is a pastime it does not have any utility - and I think that law was absolutely right and proper.

lol I was right. Come on TJ, you can be so transparent sometimes 😆

better community mental health services - maybe walk in clinics where you could get advice or support, or just a listening ear Like you see with Samaritans, Mind etc.

Yeah - but you'd think TJ already had access to that sort of thing, and still he argues.

Zulu-Eleven - Member
BTW - rumour control has it that his licenced 'firearms' as opposed to 'shotguns' were FAC air weapons (ie, more than 12ft lbs ME - by way of comparison a deer rifle puts out at least 1750 ft lbs muzzle energy)

So, that sort of ****s the "armoury of lethal weapons" argument up

POSTED 18 MINUTES AGO # REPORT-POST

I had a FAC rated air rifle (40 ft lbs) and believe you me that was a lethal weapon. Hence Section One status. Muzzle energy levels versus the human body becomes academic very early on.

Don't have the energy to go through all the posts, but my two penneth.

Should gun-ownership be revoked - no. If someone wants to get hold of a weapon to kill someone they will, if they didn't have a gun, the nearest kitchen knife.

There are a lot of legitmate reasons for owning a gun including farming, protection and in my case sport.

Zulku - killing things for the pleasure of killing as you admit you do is wrong - killing things for eating is a different matter.

There haven't actually been that many murder rampages, Ransos, but I'm sure hands were involved somewhere along the line.

But seriously, your argument is similar to the knife issue. Are we to ban those as well with the inclusion of skinning knives ? A few nutjobs go around shooting folk and you would like to see everyone banned for their stupidity/mental/moral issues. Think of the same attitude applied to other aspects of life and in particular things you're involved in and you'll se the flaw in your point of view. Take a ****er of a cyclist that hops on and off the curb, carving up old ladies and ripping kids faces off - ban all cyclists because of them...?

Zulu - killing things for the pleasure of killing as you admit you do is wrong - killing things for eating is a different matter.

Why, do you not gain pleasure from eating meat TJ?

I know shed loads of vegans who don't feel the need to have things killed for them to eat - its just blood lust innit, no necessity involved, just about pleasure.

NAIL ON HEAD by IanMunro. Shooting is great fun. But let's get the power down.

We've reached the point where posters can't be bothered reading what's gone before and are duplicating.

End of thread's useful life I think. Where's the bolt gun?

stilltortopise - I did s**** when I saw your post - however its not my fault people are claiming target shooting has utility 🙂

Dogbert - the only USE for guns is killing things - target shooting is a pastime it does not have any utility - and I think that law was absolutely right and proper.

Cycling's only USE is transport, cycling for anything else is a pastime and does not have a utility

This isn't intended to be antagonistic, but purely from my stance of personal ignorance, but what does air-pistol target shooting not have that firearm target shooting does?

Not antagonistic at all - The type of shooting I took part in could not be replicated by using an air pistol at that time. I'm sure they could now but I'm not going back down the route of taking up a hobby that may have a high risk of being banned, primarily why I didn't take up clay pigeon or go back to smallbore rifle target shooting.

Comparing guns to cars is completely spurious. Please stop.

Cycling's only USE is transport, cycling for anything else is a pastime and does not have a utility

Yup - you get the point.

You could stil have tested your skill with air guns

About as sensible as being forced to keep your kitchen knives at the local restaurants, or your mountain bike at the nearest trailcentre.

Erm, so unless you live on a large property/farm, why would you actually need a firearm in your home?

Crap analogy; you do cooking in your kitchen, you ride your bike from your house. Do you do shooting inside your family home?

Target shooting could easily be done with lazers or similar

He's got a point you know. You could have a blank-firing gun for the sound and feel if you really wanted. Certainly ample technology to do away with the use of bullets in most cases.

I shoot in the local woods, Should register the woods for me to store my gun? Or leave it with the gamekeeper who all of a sudden would be holding 45+ shotguns

Are the woods private land? Then they could be stored in a secure location on that property.

I have got the pro hunters on here have admitted hunting is all about the pleasure of killing

He's got another good point you know. You know some of you are frustrated wannabe Rambos. Given your Keyboard Warriorness, I'd say there's probbly good reason for you [i]not[/i] to own firearms. You can't control yourselves on here, so propbbly not the right sort of people to own firearms. 😐

Sorry, but it's true.

Comparing guns to cars is completely spurious. Please stop.

Why?

They're both fairly innocuous lumps fo metal if used properly fulfil great utility and pleasure, and if used improperly kill can kill people - we don't NEED cars, but we as a society accept them, and they kill a lot more people than guns do!

You're just an argumentative prick, TJ. I wouldn't be so smug given the image you project of yourself around this place.

Boring at best...

Bullshit semi automatics with 5 round magazines maximum

How many megawatts though SD-253? 😉