imlach

...but not for an airgun, which is what this thread is about, had you read it properly

DanTheMan

"After Dunblane, the police and politicians lapsed into their default position: it's your fault. We couldn't do anything about him, so we'll do something about you. You had your mobile nicked? You must be mad taking it out. Why not just keep it inside nice and safe on the telephone table? Had your car radio pinched? You shouldn't have left it in the car. House burgled? You should have had laser alarms and window bars installed. You did have laser alarms and window bars but they waited till you were home, kicked the door in and beat you up? You should have an armour-plated door and digital retinal-scan technology. It's your fault, always. The monumentally useless British police, with greater manpower per capita on higher rates of pay and with far more lavish resources than the Americans, haven't had an original idea in decades, so they cling ever more fiercely to their core ideology: the best way to deal with criminals is to impose ever greater restrictions and inconveniences on the law-abiding."

....restrictions is another word for licensing.

DanTheMan

my last post also covers air weapons, you can only license the law abiding air rifle owners, not the criminals.

ajm

Good post. And licensing is another word for "banning for everyone except those who jump through hoops".

As per my earlier post, its time to leave decent folks be and tackle the root cause!

imlach

Hmm....funny, everyone that wants grown-up firearms seems prepared to go through the checks...

So, licensing is a way of banning everyone is it? Just like your driving licence.

DanTheMan

Actually the thread is titled "Airguns banned" and the subject was that SCAC brocock type air weapons have actually been banned from sale/transfer and current owners are now subjected to FAC restrictions, so to legally own these airguns you need a FAC.

ajm

As have I. The shooting community agrees to these checks on the basis that the government will be satisfied that the people using the weapons are competent. Then one nutter goes on the rampage and suddenly our licences and checks aren't good enough and our sport is banned for everyone.

It happened with self loading centrefire rifles, it happened with handguns and no doubt it will happen again with something else.

If we agree to licensing airguns what guarantee do we have that the next oik that shoots a swan with an air rifle will result in the revocation of those licenses and the banning of airguns for the lawful?

In the meantime the blackmarket is still rife and gun crime continues to climb. Isn't it time the goverment focused on getting the real armed criminals, the yobs with airguns, the nutters without making the rest of us suffer?

And don't joke about driving licences.... having a driving license is a partial ban... they have all your details and its a daily fight to stop them taking it off you and making it a total ban!

DanTheMan

ajm - you can see a strong similarity with driving licenses and firearm licenses, some people abide by the rules which is fine, however the criminal element will drive without a license and shoot without a license, so I suppose regardless of the severity of the restriction imposed by the license, it will have absolutely no effect on the criminal element.

imlach

So you'd both be happier if there was no requirement for a driving licence then and ANYONE could drive a car?

If that was the case, we'd have FAR more incompetent drivers on the roads. As it is, the majority of budding drivers are deterred to drive until they have a proper licence. Yes, obviously some still choose to drive, but this is on a much smaller scale.

I would have thought the same with airguns & *******/pesky kids/chavs.

ajm

Exactly... the "everything is banned unless you have a licence" model just doesn't work. It inconveniences the lawful, and the lawless are left to get on with it, because the assumption is that now "whatever" is banned there cannot be a problem.

imlach

That is rubbish.
As I said, if there was no concept of a licence for driving, then the roads would surely be FAR more dangerous...as it is, the majority are deterred from driving without a licence.

ajm

No, the answer is a compromise, and always has been a compromise. Except that the shooters are doing much more of the giving than they should be. The government has just gone and banned another set of guns and effectively criminalised loads of owners of these guns. But where is the comittment to go and seek out the real perpetrators who caused this ban, the people turning Brocock air pistols into firearms? There is none. They are happy with their ban and they assume the problem is fixed.

Wrong. Those people will just start getting guns from elsewhere, and the thousands of people that have lost out have done so for nothing.

DanTheMan

imlach - the point is that you can license what you want and the law abiding public will comply with the law HOWEVER the criminal will by his very nature ignore the law, because thats what he does, thats what makes him a criminal.

Submachineguns were banned 1937, however this did not stop the gangsters using them in the recent Birmingham shootings - can you see what we are getting at here ?

imlach

I understand the point you are making, and have agreed on here already as regards "serious" criminals. That is quite clear cut. You'll never stop a "serious" criminal from obtaining whatever tool he requires for his crime.
I use the word "serious" with reservations, as I realise that grading criminals is not an easy thing to do. A pesky kid shooting an airgun off irresponsibly is still technically a criminal, but I hope you get my drift.

Anyway, as I have repeatedly said, my issues are with the chavs/pesky kids/numpties who seem to currently have easy access to airguns due to their widespread & legal availability.

ie, they are easily available, and given the "impression" around that the pellets are not lethal, they get their kicks from using them in bad ways. If these airguns were not so readily available and you required a licence to buy/own/use one, then the chavs/pesky kids/numpties may have their access to them reduced. I don't think they'd go out of their way to get one in many cases.

To allow someone to walk off the street into a shop and purchase an air-rifle or airgun with absolutely NO proof of being able to operate one safely seems NUTS!

I also imagine most "serious" criminals would not use an airgun, but a firearm (if that is how they are distinguished?).

ajm

LOL! I started to type yet another response, but I have run out of resolve. Instead I'm just going have another glass of wine and bookmark this thread to call up in the future when they ban airguns!

imlach

Hehe.....glasses raised.

Slainthe!

DanTheMan

absolutely

Jiggerypokery

*clink*
Bye folks!