Should Laws Regarding Gun Ownership Be Tightened Up?

[psynuk 10]

It doesn't give a citation.

 

ere you go love,,

 

http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1968/27/part/I/crossheading/prohibition-of-certain-weapons-and-control-of-arms-traffic

 

"Weapons subject to general prohibition

(1)

"A person commits an offence if,.... he has in his possession, or purchases or acquires, or manufactures, sells or transfers—

.

.

.

(b)

any weapon of whatever description designed or adapted for the discharge of any noxious liquid, gas or other thing"

[Obelix 11]

ere you go love,,

 

http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1968/27/part/I/crossheading/prohibition-of-certain-weapons-and-control-of-arms-traffic

 

"Weapons subject to general prohibition

(1)

"A person commits an offence if,.... he has in his possession, or purchases or acquires, or manufactures, sells or transfers—

.

.

.

(b)

any weapon of whatever description designed or adapted for the discharge of any noxious liquid, gas or other thing"

 

And as I said above, I'm not sure that a flamethrower is covered by that legislation. S5 weapons firing gas canisters or shells like dragonsbreath zirconium rounds are well known and prohibited but a flamethrower can be legally used in agriculture without requiring a permit from the Secretary of State (which is the only way to hold a S5 weapon)

[psynuk 10]

I'm not certain, but apparently that's the legislation that's used to prohibit flamethrowers.

Like most things though if your using it and no-ones bothered then nothings going to happen. But if the police turn up to seize it they'd quote that at you and there'd be little argument to be had at the time that would be effective with them.

You can buy 'similar' in bnq they're weedburners with a little propane tank like a bigger version of a plumbers torch. If you start wielding it in meadowhall then the police are going to feel your collar.

ditto for this

[Obelix 11]

None of the firearms acts ban them though which is what we are talking about. They are less controlled than a knife - you don't even need good cause to carry one.

 

Since they apparently are not banned, the police can't turn up to seize it as they would have no grounds to.

 

If find it surprising that flamethrowers are not controlled somehow but it appears that it's not through the firearms act.

[Bonzo77 13]

I'm saying if you try to take away the 300 million guns legally held by Americans, a lot of them are going to be highly resentful at both the Federal government and the police in general for doing so, just to appease a few liberals in coastal states, and you are going to get some violent altercations in the process. Not that I think the whole thing is even remotely feasible to start with.

 

The UK and Australia are very different countries to the US. You can't change the culture of a country through legislation. The latter has to reflect the former, not the other way round.

 

I can't believe anyone would think that banning guns would actually stop gun crime. Guess what? Gun crime is already illegal. That's why it's a crime.

 

Crazy!?! Flip this argument round and onto drugs instead. How flawed would your argument sound then?

[buck 11]

You make it sound like there's absolutely nothing that can be done!? Like the best thing we can do is ignore it and hope it never happens again?!

Come up with a sensible and doable alternative to what's been said so far in this thread, and I will agree or disagree with pleasure, but to repeatedly say we have a problem does nothing. We know we do. Your circumstance can never match ours. It is much easier within the confines of your geography and history. You also had some sensible people in the latter part of the 19th Century who saw a problem and fixed it then. I'm not sure you'd be as well off as you were without those people. What we're trying to come up with now is how to deal with the number of attacks by young men who are certifiable murderous suicidals. There have been occasional cases in the past but not frequent as now. There are relatives and friends of some who have either been afraid or neglectful to inform on them. I think they will try to make it a felony in the future, but I see it as hard to address.

 

---------- Post added 07-10-2015 at 12:00 ----------

 

QED. You're a quitter in a nation of scardey cat quitters.

Take a trip to Normandy and the cemetery at Omaha Beach. There are plenty of scardey cat quitters there. Take flowers, the relatives back home in the US will thank you. You don't even have to go that far. Find the little memorial in Endcliffe Park to ten US airmen who lost their lives when their B17 crashed because the pilots veered away from landing on the park to save the lives of a few kids playing football. You, of course, have probably never heard of this.

[Halibut 12]

What changes to existing regulations would you recommend ?

 

Changes that would mean fewer people had easy access to arms and ammunition.

 

---------- Post added 07-10-2015 at 19:40 ----------

 

Mine are already registered but I'll tell my buddy Tank of the LA Crips to have his registered at his local police station and watch him die laughing

 

---------- Post added 07-10-2015 at 16:21 ----------

 

 

All that good post of yours is wasted buck old buddy very sorry to say When Jeremy Corbyn becomes PM they'll teach them that the US wasn't even in the war and Russia and Britain won it all by themselves

 

---------- Post added 07-10-2015 at 16:28 ----------

 

 

Hey Rambo I have a 105 mm WW2 howitzer plus Wehrmacht issue Panzerfaust, a dozen potato mashers, three canisters of Zyklon B and an MG42 in my garage. Got all the ammo too Can you advise legal or not?

 

Yet again that totally blase and fatuous attitude; Harley grins and makes what he thinks are funny remarks that completely avoid the point, while steadfastly ignoring the bloodstains and weeping that besmirch America.

[Happ Hazzard 10]

Changes that would mean fewer people had easy access to arms and ammunition.

But it wouldn't work. Changing laws on alcohol didn't mean fewer people had easy access to alcohol. Changing laws on drugs didn't mean fewer people had access to drugs. So why would it work with guns? The demand would still be there and as long as there is demand, there would be people eager to make money by fulfilling that demand. And it would be completely unregulated. Criminals will sell guns to anyone with the money to buy them.

[buck 11]

Changes that would mean fewer people had easy access to arms and ammunition.

 

---------- Post added 07-10-2015 at 19:40 ----------

 

 

Yet again that totally blase and fatuous attitude; Harley grins and makes what he thinks are funny remarks that completely avoid the point, while steadfastly ignoring the bloodstains and weeping that besmirch America.

But as usual, Halibut, you weep crocodile tears for our victims and do nothing more

than say "something must be done", while many of us cry real tears at the loss of friends and children we never got a chance to know. Offer up something constructive, and show at least a little concern for those you are offending. That goes for some others on this thread too.

[cassity 10]

But as usual, Halibut, you weep crocodile tears for our victims and do nothing more

than say "something must be done", while many of us cry real tears at the loss of friends and children we never got a chance to know. Offer up something constructive, and show at least a little concern for those you are offending. That goes for some others on this thread too.

 

Where's the vomit bucket?

 

More patronizing claptrap from the claptrap master himself. When did you last cry real tears for victims? Those kids gunned down are as far removed from you as they are for halibut, but because he's on the other side of the ocean he isn't entitled to emotion, empathy or concern. The thing is with the likes of you and Wild Bill Hiccup is you think you own those sentiments based on a decision you made when you moved to the States.

 

Many on this and other threads have made suggestions..you don't like the suggestions simply because of who makes them, not because of any content within them. I haven't heard one suggestion from you other than tell other SF'rs to shut up it's our problem.

[taxman 12]

But as usual, Halibut, you weep crocodile tears for our victims and do nothing more

than say "something must be done", while many of us cry real tears at the loss of friends and children we never got a chance to know. Offer up something constructive, and show at least a little concern for those you are offending. That goes for some others on this thread too.

 

Well do something about it then

 

Crying tears and praying to God hasn't helped so far has it?

[Happ Hazzard 10]

Crazy!?! Flip this argument round and onto drugs instead. How flawed would your argument sound then?

Isn't it commonly believed that the "war on drugs" has failed and resulted in more people taking drugs than were previously? How would a "war on guns" go any differently?