Guns. Is it time to ban them ALL without a licence?

I peronally have no problem with guns for (most) sporting use but...

- The sad tale of the cat killed by an air rifle is discussed in another thread. (http://www.sheffieldforum.co.uk/showthread.php?postid=161757#post161757)

- A few weeks ago, I was having a beer in the HaHa bar in town and watched as a group of youths passed the window, one of them brandishing a pistol to his mates. Now I expect it was a BB gun, but it looked like a real life pistol. I called 999.

- Children and others being fired at with air rifles.

The list goes on....

I would like to see all guns banned because if no-one has them, then no-one needs them.

But unfortunately, I know this is a naive view.....

So, I instead voted for licencing all guns, then at least you can keep some track of who has got what and why.

Won't stop the baddies though, they always find a way

Anyone know what the current law is on air guns? Is there a minimum age limit? Are they allowed to be carried in public? Spook?

The reason I ask was that mrs max was practising her driving skills up at Lightwood and there were several kids on motorbikes and a quad bike and one of them had an air rifle. They didn't actually fire it but it was at the back of our minds that they very well might have.

I voted for licensing all guns rather than banning them as I remember having an air gun in my youth.

However, I would ban hunting rifles as I don't see the need to hunt animals when we have supermarkets.

I don't really know much about guns and laws on them. I thought all guns were banned :loopy:

I would not want situations like we have in the US where they are free for all.

Moon

Originally posted by max
Anyone know what the current law is on air guns? Is there a minimum age limit? Are they allowed to be carried in public? Spook?

The reason I ask was that mrs max was practising her driving skills up at Lightwood and there were several kids on motorbikes and a quad bike and one of them had an air rifle. They didn't actually fire it but it was at the back of our minds that they very well might have.


Air guns. I think it is illegal for someone under sixteen to be in possesion of or use unless under the supervision of an adult in properly organised target practice. Vague idea that it's also illegal to use one within 50 yards of a public highway.

guns don't kill people, rappers do :D

I though it was rappers! (or wappers? if you listen to the song)

Originally posted by LoopyLou
I though it was rappers! (or wappers? if you listen to the song)

So it is :D Not quite woken up yet ;)

As an ex shooter myself (I shot pistol, rifle and shotgun - some competatively so I have a resonable spread of experiencethere!) I would say all gun whether fire-arms or air weapons should be licensed. But I do think that the banning of pistols was yet another knee jerk response to the headlines in the tabloids and has done absolutely nothing to stop gun-crime. (Assault weapons are quite another kettle of fish - I don't think they have any place in a civilised society and I'm quite happy that they were banned.)

However I do think we also need to look carefully at our society - most of europe has considerably laxer gun laws than the UK - and in some cases laxer than the US - however how often do you hear of shooting sprees on the continent as compared to the US/UK?

As Michael Moore pointed out, Canada has similarly high levels of gun ownership as the USA, but gun crime of all kinds is higher in the USA.

Gun ownership levels do not appear to have any actual influence on gun crime levels.

What you are actually trying to fight against is a "gun nut" mentality, ingrained by a diet of media in which the gun is the friend, defender, penile extension, and stick of power that holds enemies at bay.

Guns are more widely available and cheaper than ever before.
Why? A question best aimed (pun intended) at the lovely people who make so much money producing and selling them. What we are seeing in europe after the end of the cold war and the civil wars in the balkans, is traffic in unlicensed arms increasing as militias are demobbed.

But seeing as air rifles can be 'tuned' to deliver muzzle energies well in excess of a 5.56mm short round (1" .22 cartridge) they should be subject to the same licensing as firearms. I believe this should also apply to crossbows too.

And EDN, you do get plenty of shooting sprees in Europe, not markedly fewer than the UK...

air rifles above a certain power already have to be licensed as do all other firearms, the few that you can now legally own.

I'd support licensing all air rifles, but at the same time think that restricting handguns was a pointless political bit of maneuvering to win votes and should be reversed.

And the poll is blatantly biased in order to support the view of the person posting it.

Originally posted by Cyclone
air rifles above a certain power already have to be licensed as do all other firearms

Yes, but you can't tell from an air rifle, just by looking it it whether the muzzle energy is in excess of 162 million ergs (or 16.25 joules or 12 ft lbs or whatever) or not, and hence whether it requires FAC rating.

I could buy an air rifle tomorrow, fit it with a bonzer spring, or a precharged pneumatic with a few tweaks, pick some ptfe skirted ammo and I'd have and FAC rated firearm without even having to produce a driving licence. Not only that, but a pre charged pneu is also comparitively silent.

As far as handguns are concerned, pistols are by far and away the most dangerous type of commonly available firearm. Hideously inaccurate, easy to swing and point thoughtlessly in one hand, easily concealed and in many cases semi automatic. Now if people want to fire these weapons at a range belonging to a gun club, I have no problem with that, but there is no need for that handgun to live anywhere but the gun club. Likewise the ammunition.

Better still, keep the ammunition and the guns completely separately, as we always did in our house, guns in the armoury, ammo in the safe.

And the poll is badly skewed, as well as missing out the nature of state gun law in the US...

it was already a requirement to keep the guns and ammunition in seperate secure units when stored at home or at a gun club.

The main reason for storage at home is to allow them to be cleaned and maintained there, and for people who would use more than one range. Otherwise i agree that they could stay at a club.

I'd support the licensing of all guns, and also have a stiff 'gun education' programme that people who wish to shoot go through.

I'd also allow the licensed ownership of handguns, but nothing automatic or semi-automatic. Banning handguns hasn't prevented gun crime; it might not have occurred to the Home Office that villains rarely worry about whether they're breaking a law by having an illegal gun.

I'd insist on a theory and practice examination, the latter being based around the safe handling of a weapon. If you fail, you can't re-sit for 6 months. Licenses to be issued only to people over 21, and for yunger shooters both the shooter and a 'designated adult' have to sit and pass the examinations. Licensing to be renewed on a yearly basis.

Illegal ownership of a gun to be punished by confiscation and heavy fine. Extend the definition of 'gun' to include air rifles and spring loaded guns.

Joe

Originally posted by JoePritchard
Banning handguns hasn't prevented gun crime; it might not have occurred to the Home Office that villains rarely worry about whether they're breaking a law by having an illegal gun.


I thought banning hand guns was brought in following Dunblane and Hungerford where the killers were registered gun owners using licensed weapons.

Originally posted by max
I thought banning hand guns was brought in following Dunblane and Hungerford where the killers were registered gun owners using licensed weapons.

I believe Hungerford led to the banning of automatic weapons (a good move as far as I'm concerned!). Dunblane lead to the banning of handguns - but the police had tried to remove the gentleman in questions licence and firearms numerous times but been blocked from doing so...

Originally posted by Moon Maiden
I don't really know much about guns and laws on them. I thought all guns were banned :loopy:

I would not want situations like we have in the US where they are free for all.

Moon

it is said that 1/4 of adult americans own a gun..... scary huh?

Originally posted by ianmitchell
it is said that 1/4 of adult americans own a gun..... scary huh?

That few??? I remember reading when the Americans went into the compound full of 'heavilly armed' Branch Davidians they actually had less guns per person than is the average in Texas!

Originally posted by Cyclone
And the poll is blatantly biased in order to support the view of the person posting it. I don't understand why you feel that :confused:

most of that was how the law already worked. You had to pass a practical and safety exam to join a gun club and had to be a paid up practising member of a club to purchase/license a weapon.
Banning semi-automatic handguns would be all of them. Semi-automatic just means that it's 1 squeeze one shot.

Virtually all of gun crime is committed with unlicensed weapons, dunblane was a failure of the system to be applied, not a failure in the way the system was supposed to work. And if he hadn't had a gun, whos to say he wouldn't have used that deadly weapon than many of us own and driven through the school yard at play time...

Licensing is already reviewed on a yeary basis with the minimum being ongoing membership and attendance at a club. I think it's over 18's rather than 21's though for ownership.

Illegal ownership of a gun has much heavier penalties already than you suggested...

Tony - It's biased because you have 2 options for increasing the law, but the 1 option present for loosening it is phrased in such a way as to cast it in a negative light, and is also an extreme rather than moderate relaxation.
There is no option for my actual position which is to relax it back to the state pre 97, with the caveat of including air rifles as licensed weapons.

Originally posted by JoePritchard
I'd support the licensing of all guns, and also have a stiff 'gun education' programme that people who wish to shoot go through.

I'd also allow the licensed ownership of handguns, but nothing automatic or semi-automatic. Banning handguns hasn't prevented gun crime; it might not have occurred to the Home Office that villains rarely worry about whether they're breaking a law by having an illegal gun.

I'd insist on a theory and practice examination, the latter being based around the safe handling of a weapon. If you fail, you can't re-sit for 6 months. Licenses to be issued only to people over 21, and for yunger shooters both the shooter and a 'designated adult' have to sit and pass the examinations. Licensing to be renewed on a yearly basis.

Illegal ownership of a gun to be punished by confiscation and heavy fine. Extend the definition of 'gun' to include air rifles and spring loaded guns.

Joe

Originally posted by Cyclone
Tony - It's biased because you have 2 options for increasing the law, but the 1 option present for loosening it is phrased in such a way as to cast it in a negative light, and is also an extreme rather than moderate relaxation.
There is no option for my actual position which is to relax it back to the state pre 97, with the caveat of including air rifles as licensed weapons.

You've lost me EDN. :confused: If I've understood you, you would be in favour of the option to 'Heavily licence ALL guns'. What other option would you have included?

Licensing is different to banning. The subject of bans is as you rightly say a little more complex than the options above, and that's why you can say it in the thread. I don't see any bias, but I do have an opinion, which is the same as the majority. I don't agree with the blanket banning of handguns either BTW.

Originally posted by Tony
You've lost me EDN. :confused: If I've understood you, you would be in favour of the option to 'Heavily licence ALL guns'. What other option would you have included?

I am in favour of that - but then again this quote isn't from me ;)

Durrr!! Sorry EDN.. I meant Cyclone! Aplogies to you too ;)

Originally posted by Tony
Durrr!! Sorry EDN.. I meant Cyclone! Aplogies to you too ;)

Thats OK - I'll just chalk it up to senility ;)

I still say it's biased. If I'd wanted to vote for a relaxation of the law, the only option is

"Gun laws should be lifted - anyone should have them like the USA"

which is extreme and draws a parallel with somewhere with a gun problem.

The poll is presented in a way to sway people towards voting for either of the two ALL questions. They even draw your attention by having ALL in caps... No wonder that most of the voting has gone that way.

Well what sort of relaxation would you mean?

You've obviously got a lot more knowledge that I have on the subject Cyclone, but I can assure you that there is no intention to sway voting, or to imply that the USA has a problem. It's merely an illustration of what it meant. Is there a better country to cite? Anyway, how could I post a poll to relax the law - relax it to what?

But, perhaps that very illustration is why so many people are against guns or the ready freedom to have guns in the poll? It's not bias, its just true. Fewer gun controls equals kiddies in playgrounds with pistols.

use canada or switzerland as an example, far higher level of gun ownership than the uk, but a lower level of gun crime.

When you right a question or poll it's very easy to skew the results by putting emphasis on certain questions, often just by the way you word them. It's probably not deliberate.

Relaxation to what isn't the issue, it's just missing an option when it has 2 stronger alternatives and only 1 extremely weaker alternative than the current situation.

The USA clearly does have a problem anyway, the problem is with the people and society though, not with the liberal possesion of weapons. If they didn't have guns, they'd use knives, if they didn't have knives they'd use cars or big bits of wood.

I'll admit to having an interest in the subject, I used to shoot using my dads and brothers pistols when i accompanied them as a guest to the range. I couldn't afford membership or a gun of my own, so i never took it further. They both lost out on a harmless hobby when the government overreacted to one psycho and banned all handguns. And it clearly had no effect as gun crime has continued to rise (it's actually risen faster since the ban than before).

Well I don't know about Canada, but in Switzerland its not really gun 'ownership' its that everyone is in the military reserve, so they keep the weapons at home. The big difference is that they are trained to use them properly.

As for the USA, well they are a lost cause, but removing guns from the newly emerging Homo Slouchus Trailerthal species would be a start. ;)

Canada has high levels of gun ownership but much fewer fire-arm homicides than the states. Most of europe and scandinavia also have comparatively high levels of gun ownership - however I'm not sure how many of these countries have some form of military service (anyone?) which seems (to a niave eye anyway!) to cut down on gun crime via proper training.

The use of firearms seems to be a cultural thing though at least as much if not more than an availability thing. I'm in favour of licensing guns of all types so you at least get some level of vetting and a built in cooling off period before geeing your hands on a projectile weapon.

Anyone know what the current law is on air guns? Is there a minimum age limit? Are they allowed to be carried in public? Spook?

The reason I ask was that mrs max was practising her driving skills up at Lightwood and there were several kids on motorbikes and a quad bike and one of them had an air rifle. They didn't actually fire it but it was at the back of our minds that they very well might have.

I voted for licensing all guns rather than banning them as I remember having an air gun in my youth.

However, I would ban hunting rifles as I don't see the need to hunt animals when we have supermarkets.
THe current age limit on air rifles is 14

THe current age limit on air rifles is 14
I believe you are mistaken, I may be wrong, but I thought the law originally states you had to be an adult to buy one, but then could give it as a gift to anyone aged over 14, but was then changed to say you had to be 17 to buy or be in possession of one.

I believe you are mistaken, I may be wrong, but I thought the law originally states you had to be an adult to buy one, but then could give it as a gift to anyone aged over 14, but was then changed to say you had to be 17 to buy or be in possession of one.

17 was the last I heard.

I believe Hungerford led to the banning of automatic weapons (a good move as far as I'm concerned!). Dunblane lead to the banning of handguns - but the police had tried to remove the gentleman in questions licence and firearms numerous times but been blocked from doing so...

It was a good move alright, see how its eliminated gun crime :hihi:

This government has put more effort into the banning of cigarettes.

I believe someone over 18 can buy a rifle but it is lega l for any child above 14 to use an air rifle with adult supervision.

I think that firearms should be available to anyone who doesn't want one. If someone want to own a pistol then this should disqualify them from ownership on the basis that someone who likes pistols isn't a fit person to own one.

Silly remarks aside, I didn't know that there was a problem with air rifles or rather I didn't know it was any worse than it had ever been. I can't see any problem with having very strict licensing, starage and ownership laws for any kind of dangerour weapon (or even any anti social device such as an off road bike or jet ski) since those genuine people who are really committed to a sport will jump through the hoops and it will put off those who are doing it for a temporary "craze".

i thought guns were heavily licensed anyway?

If guns were outlawed, only outlaws would have guns!

Guns don't kill people. Rappers do.

Guns don't kill people. Rappers do.

You mean wappers.

i might be wrong ,but i was led to believe that if the laws governing guns had been adhered to, the tragedeys of hungerford & dunblane would not have happened. niether men was in a gun club the one in dunblane had been caught with an illegal firearm & had not had his licence revoked which should have happened also the 2 pc ,s that interviewed him told the chief inspector not to let him have a licence but the warning fell on deaf ears