Nigel Farage calls for UK gun laws to be relaxed

by Guest Fri Jan 24, 2014 11:10 pm

Nigel Farage calls for UK gun laws to be relaxed
Ukip leader says ban on handguns brought in after Dunblane massacre is 'ludicrous'

Nigel Farage has called for firearm laws to be relaxed, calling the current ban on handguns "ludicrous".

The Ukip leader criticised the "kneejerk" restrictions on handguns imposed after the 1996 Dunblane massacre in which Thomas Hamilton killed 16 schoolchildren and a teacher before shooting himself.

The laws were brought in by Sir John Major, the then Tory prime minister, and extended to a total ban by Tony Blair's Labour government in 1997.

Asked about gun controls, Farage said: "I think proper gun licensing is something we've done in this country responsibly and well for a long time, and I think the kneejerk legislation that Blair brought in that meant that the British Olympic pistol team have to go to France to even practise was just crackers.

"If you criminalise handguns then only the criminals carry the guns. It's really interesting that since Blair brought that piece of law in, gun crime doubled in the next five years in this country."

"I think that we need a proper gun licensing system, which to a large extent I think we already have, and I think the ban on handguns is ludicrous."

Ian Mearns, Labour MP for Gateshead, said the comments were an example of "how extremely dangerous Ukip are".

"Families facing a cost-of-living crisis will find it bizarre that one of Nigel Farage's priorities would be to relax Britain's tough gun controls," he added.

The remarks come after Farage was caught in a storm over his party's 2010 election policies, which he entirely disowned this week and later described as "drivel".

The Ukip leader said he had never read the 486 pages of policy documents that were published alongside Ukip's manifesto in 2010, which included plans to repaint trains in traditional colours, bring in a uniform for taxi drivers, and ban offshore windfarms amid fears they could hurt fish.

After rejecting the entire collection of policies, he told LBC 97.3 that they were put together by Ukip's then policy chief David Campbell Bannerman, who is now a Conservative MEP.

"We had a manifesto – and I'm going to put some inverted commas around it – that was produced in 2010. It was basically a series of policy discussion papers that was put up on the website as a manifesto," he said.

"It was 486 pages long. I'm pleased to say that the idiot that wrote it has now left us and joined the Conservatives. They are very welcome to him.

"Malcolm Pearson, who was leader of Ukip at the time, was picked up in interviews for not knowing the manifesto. Of course he didn't know the manifesto. It was 486 pages of excessive detail.

"Eighteen months ago, I said I wanted the whole lot taken down off the website. We reject the whole thing. We'll start again with a blank sheet of paper. So there's nothing new in that story.

"I didn't read it. It was drivel. 486 pages of drivel. I didn't read it and nor did the party leader."

However, his attempt to distance himself from the documents was undermined on Friday, after it emerged he wrote the foreword to the party's manifesto and helped launch it at an event in London.

A video started circulating of Farage speaking as Ukip's chief spokesman at the launch of the manifesto in Westminster in 2010, promising "straight talking" about the party's policies. The Ukip leader also co-authored the summary 16-page manifesto that now appears to have disappeared from the party's website.

The 2010 policy documents – which also appear to have been blocked – detail plans such as capping the number of foreign players in football teams, bringing back "proper dress" at the theatre, scrapping paid maternity leave, allowing corporal punishment in schools and holding referendums on new places of worship such as mosques.

Other ideas included making the Circle line on the London tube circular again, investigating alleged discrimination against white people at the BBC and teaching schoolchildren more about the role of Arabs and African states in slavery.

Farage's attempt to distance Ukip from its manifesto of four years ago may put him under more scrutiny about what the party stands for in the runup to the May elections.

On Thursday, the usually assured politician floundered on live television as he was asked about the party's proposal to scrap Trident, saying he was not sure where the interviewer had got this suggestion from.

When told it was on the Ukip website, he said: "When it comes to websites, I'm not the expert."

Challenged over a compulsory dress code for taxi drivers, he said: "Do we? News to me."

And asked about a policy to repaint trains in traditional colours, Farage said: "I've never read that. I've no idea what you're talking about."

However, he said it was not "obvious nonsense" that he could cut £90bn of taxes and increase spending by £30bn, even though that would be "ambitious".

http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2014/jan/24/nigel-farage-uk-gun-control-laws-relaxed

Rolling Eyes

by Guest Fri Jan 24, 2014 11:23 pm

Excellent!

Another BigAndy9 proposal.

by Guest Fri Jan 24, 2014 11:26 pm

Doesn't surprise me.

by Guest Fri Jan 24, 2014 11:27 pm

One thing that I DO agree with him on...the hand gun ban was a kneejerk political manoeuvre by a desperate PM ttrying to boost his ratings.

Significantly gun crime DOUBLED in the 5 years following and has remained high ever since.

PROVIDED that licences are issued (as they are at present for many other guns) ONLY to people "of good standing"
and PROVIDED that the police do their job PROPERLY there is no problem.

with ONE exception, ALL gun "catastrophes" that have occurred since and even before the sad events at Dunblaine, were demonstrably due to POLICE FAILURES.

if the current tough laws were properly implemented and used, there would be no hazard from this.

You do realise that licensed gun owners are THE most law abiding citizens going...they have to be, even a relatively minor crime can lose you your license. get too many speeding tickets even....certainly drink driving,
and anything like theft...even the most minor and...thats your license gone....

by Guest Fri Jan 24, 2014 11:29 pm

grumpy old git wrote:One thing that I DO agree with him on...the hand gun ban was a kneejerk political manoeuvre by a desperate PM ttrying to boost his ratings.

Significantly gun crime DOUBLED in the 5 years following and has remained high ever since.

PROVIDED that licences are issued (as they are at present for many other guns) ONLY to people "of good standing"
and PROVIDED that the police do their job PROPERLY there is no problem.

with ONE exception, ALL gun "catastrophes" that have occurred since and even before the sad events at Dunblaine, were demonstrably due to POLICE FAILURES.

if the current tough laws were properly implemented and used, there would be no hazard from this.

You do realise that licensed gun owners are THE most law abiding citizens going...they have to be, even a relatively minor crime can lose you your license. get too many speeding tickets even....certainly drink driving,
and anything like theft...even the most minor and...thats your license gone....

I agree with farmer's having guns to keep rabbits down etc, but they don't need hand guns for that.

by Guest Fri Jan 24, 2014 11:32 pm

Guns are used in thousands of crimes in the US every year!

by Guest Fri Jan 24, 2014 11:38 pm

Also with the requirement for "good reason" for "firearms" (as opposed to shotguns) there is good control on who can and who cant have one

for a "firearm" YOU have to PROVE you have good reason...letter from landowner to say you have his permisssion to shoot his land for pest control...club membership for target shooting, Letters of invite to shoot deer, etc.
It is slightly different for shotguns. There the police have to show that you dont have good reason, but again good reason would be pest control, clay shooting etc.....

So to possess a hand gun all the authorities would have to do is require EVERY applicant to
"be of good character"
"be fit (both physically and mentally) to hold and use"
"and (the hardest test of all) show "good reason" to possess such a gun" and the bar for "good reason" could be set very high to keep the tw*ts away from them.....NO "home or personal defence"

None of this of course would make ANY difference to CRIMINAL useage....the scum balls already have them and in plenty.

by Guest Fri Jan 24, 2014 11:41 pm

Sassy wrote:
grumpy old git wrote:One thing that I DO agree with him on...the hand gun ban was a kneejerk political manoeuvre by a desperate PM ttrying to boost his ratings.

Significantly gun crime DOUBLED in the 5 years following and has remained high ever since.

PROVIDED that licences are issued (as they are at present for many other guns) ONLY to people "of good standing"
and PROVIDED that the police do their job PROPERLY there is no problem.

with ONE exception, ALL gun "catastrophes" that have occurred since and even before the sad events at Dunblaine, were demonstrably due to POLICE FAILURES.

if the current tough laws were properly implemented and used, there would be no hazard from this.

You do realise that licensed gun owners are THE most law abiding citizens going...they have to be, even a relatively minor crime can lose you your license. get too many speeding tickets even....certainly drink driving,
and anything like theft...even the most minor and...thats your license gone....

I agree with farmer's having guns to keep rabbits down etc, but they don't need hand guns for that.

So, just farmers eh? no "other folk"...like me...who do THAT job (and more) for farmers. No clay shooting, a sport enjoyed by 100,s thousands, safely and with no threat to anyone???
As for "not needing hand guns for that ...correct...and THAT would not be "good reason"....but target shooting was enjoyed by a lot (and I mean a lot) of people before that ridiculous ban...

by Guest Fri Jan 24, 2014 11:44 pm

grumpy old git wrote:
Sassy wrote:

I agree with farmer's having guns to keep rabbits down etc, but they don't need hand guns for that.

So, just farmers eh? no "other folk"...like me...who do THAT job (and more) for farmers. No clay shooting, a sport enjoyed by 100,s thousands, safely and with no threat to anyone???
As for "not needing hand guns for that ...correct...and THAT would not be "good reason"....but target shooting was enjoyed by a lot (and I mean a lot) of people before that ridiculous ban...

Farmers/them that live off the land etc, no quibbles with that.

by Clarkson Fri Jan 24, 2014 11:44 pm

It was a bad decision then it is now.

Hello!!!!!!!! bad people dont care about the law!

The only people this law affected was the law abiding olympic shooters.

This was john majors most lefty moment by far.

by Guest Fri Jan 24, 2014 11:44 pm

Sassy wrote:
grumpy old git wrote:

So, just farmers eh? no "other folk"...like me...who do THAT job (and more) for farmers. No clay shooting, a sport enjoyed by 100,s thousands, safely and with no threat to anyone???
As for "not needing hand guns for that ...correct...and THAT would not be "good reason"....but target shooting was enjoyed by a lot (and I mean a lot) of people before that ridiculous ban...

Farmers/them that live off the land etc, no quibbles with that.

and the clay shooters???

by Guest Fri Jan 24, 2014 11:46 pm

Guns are used in thousands of crimes in the US every year.

Forgot to say:

But guns are used to protect people and their property thousands of times more in the US every year!

by Ben Reilly Fri Jan 24, 2014 11:52 pm

BigAndy9 wrote:Guns are used in thousands of crimes in the US every year.

Forgot to say:

But guns are used to protect people and their property thousands of times more in the US every year!

No they're not, that's a huge right-wing myth, based on very faulty statistics.

http://www.saf.org/lawreviews/hemenway1.htm

by Guest Fri Jan 24, 2014 11:53 pm

BigAndy9 wrote:Guns are used in thousands of crimes in the US every year.

Forgot to say:

But guns are used to protect people and their property thousands of times more in the US every year!

I would NOT support the issue of licenses on the basis of "home or personal defence" as good reason.
It is a fact that risk of gun crime to the average person is miniscule, MOST gun crime is gang member on gang member, and where a Civillian" for want of a better tem is hit, it is generally in situations where no matter how many armed people there were about, nothing could be done, and any action taken would invariably result in MORE casualties, as the gung ho morons opened fire without due regard to whats going on around them.

by Guest Fri Jan 24, 2014 11:54 pm

grumpy old git wrote:
Sassy wrote:

Farmers/them that live off the land etc, no quibbles with that.
and the clay shooters???

Yea, but that's not hand guns either.

by Guest Fri Jan 24, 2014 11:55 pm

And what about the target shooters....you do know the British olympic pistol team have to go to france to be able to practice?????

by Guest Fri Jan 24, 2014 11:57 pm

grumpy old git wrote:And what about the target shooters....you do know the British olympic pistol team have to go to france to be able to practice?????

Well thats obviously stupid. However, it's really difficult, because how do you know someone is going to be good with a pistol for contests unless they have one, and why do they need it in the first place to find out? It's a conundrum.

by Guest Fri Jan 24, 2014 11:59 pm

No conundrum ...just plain stupidity...target shooter = "Good reason"

by Guest Sat Jan 25, 2014 12:05 am

grumpy old git wrote:No conundrum ...just plain stupidity...target shooter = "Good reason"

The conundrum is, how they get to know they are good at target shooting lol

by Guest Sat Jan 25, 2014 12:17 am

As he announced this there was an almighty cheer from our cities when Yardies celebrated it like London getting the 2012 games.

by Guest Sat Jan 25, 2014 12:27 am

I don't care either way.
Both sides have valid points.

by ALLAKAKA Sat Jan 25, 2014 12:40 am

Sassy wrote:
Nigel Farage calls for UK gun laws to be relaxed
Ukip leader says ban on handguns brought in after Dunblane massacre is 'ludicrous'

Nigel Farage has called for firearm laws to be relaxed, calling the current ban on handguns "ludicrous".

The Ukip leader criticised the "kneejerk" restrictions on handguns imposed after the 1996 Dunblane massacre in which Thomas Hamilton killed 16 schoolchildren and a teacher before shooting himself.

WHO WERE SHOT WITH A RIFLE THAT MANY PEOPLE STILL HAVE LICENCES FOR.
The laws were brought in by Sir John Major, the then Tory prime minister, and extended to a total ban by Tony Blair's Labour government in 1997.

Asked about gun controls, Farage said: "I think proper gun licensing is something we've done in this country responsibly and well for a long time, and I think the kneejerk legislation that Blair brought in that meant that the British Olympic pistol team have to go to France to even practise was just crackers.

"If you criminalise handguns then only the criminals carry the guns. It's really interesting that since Blair brought that piece of law in, gun crime doubled in the next five years in this country."

"I think that we need a proper gun licensing system, which to a large extent I think we already have, and I think the ban on handguns is ludicrous."

Ian Mearns, Labour MP for Gateshead, said the comments were an example of "how extremely dangerous Ukip are".

"Families facing a cost-of-living crisis will find it bizarre that one of Nigel Farage's priorities would be to relax Britain's tough gun controls," he added.

The remarks come after Farage was caught in a storm over his party's 2010 election policies, which he entirely disowned this week and later described as "drivel".

The Ukip leader said he had never read the 486 pages of policy documents that were published alongside Ukip's manifesto in 2010, which included plans to repaint trains in traditional colours, bring in a uniform for taxi drivers, and ban offshore windfarms amid fears they could hurt fish.

After rejecting the entire collection of policies, he told LBC 97.3 that they were put together by Ukip's then policy chief David Campbell Bannerman, who is now a Conservative MEP.

"We had a manifesto – and I'm going to put some inverted commas around it – that was produced in 2010. It was basically a series of policy discussion papers that was put up on the website as a manifesto," he said.

"It was 486 pages long. I'm pleased to say that the idiot that wrote it has now left us and joined the Conservatives. They are very welcome to him.

"Malcolm Pearson, who was leader of Ukip at the time, was picked up in interviews for not knowing the manifesto. Of course he didn't know the manifesto. It was 486 pages of excessive detail.

"Eighteen months ago, I said I wanted the whole lot taken down off the website. We reject the whole thing. We'll start again with a blank sheet of paper. So there's nothing new in that story.

"I didn't read it. It was drivel. 486 pages of drivel. I didn't read it and nor did the party leader."

However, his attempt to distance himself from the documents was undermined on Friday, after it emerged he wrote the foreword to the party's manifesto and helped launch it at an event in London.

A video started circulating of Farage speaking as Ukip's chief spokesman at the launch of the manifesto in Westminster in 2010, promising "straight talking" about the party's policies. The Ukip leader also co-authored the summary 16-page manifesto that now appears to have disappeared from the party's website.

The 2010 policy documents – which also appear to have been blocked – detail plans such as capping the number of foreign players in football teams, bringing back "proper dress" at the theatre, scrapping paid maternity leave, allowing corporal punishment in schools and holding referendums on new places of worship such as mosques.

Other ideas included making the Circle line on the London tube circular again, investigating alleged discrimination against white people at the BBC and teaching schoolchildren more about the role of Arabs and African states in slavery.

Farage's attempt to distance Ukip from its manifesto of four years ago may put him under more scrutiny about what the party stands for in the runup to the May elections.

On Thursday, the usually assured politician floundered on live television as he was asked about the party's proposal to scrap Trident, saying he was not sure where the interviewer had got this suggestion from.

When told it was on the Ukip website, he said: "When it comes to websites, I'm not the expert."

Challenged over a compulsory dress code for taxi drivers, he said: "Do we? News to me."

And asked about a policy to repaint trains in traditional colours, Farage said: "I've never read that. I've no idea what you're talking about."

However, he said it was not "obvious nonsense" that he could cut £90bn of taxes and increase spending by £30bn, even though that would be "ambitious".

http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2014/jan/24/nigel-farage-uk-gun-control-laws-relaxed

by Guest Sat Jan 25, 2014 9:55 am

Nigel is absolutely spot on with this.

If a person is intending on using a gun in commission of a crime are they going to be stopped by the fact that having the gun is a crime in itself?

It is essential that strict licensing is adhered to obviously but the ban achieved nothing other that to strip many law abiding hobbiests of their past time.

by nicko Sat Jan 25, 2014 11:18 am

when the banning of hand guns came in thousands of licence holders had their guns taken off them. they were told they would be compensated for their loss, many are still waiting others were paid nowhere near the cost of their guns. two hand guns of mine,for which I paid £950 were taken. I received £387 in compensation. when I complained I was told "well they were second hand". this was theft by the government .

by Guest Sat Jan 25, 2014 11:25 am

Here is my list of who will be happy about this:

Nigel Farage calls for UK gun laws to be relaxed Yardies

Nigel Farage calls for UK gun laws to be relaxed Images?q=tbn:ANd9GcQxNiD7s5FYAaNo120QsW991KiKtsAE-JkZOh0XT9IQuaZVp2qJJg

Nigel Farage calls for UK gun laws to be relaxed Oxford-guilty_2562697b

by Guest Sat Jan 25, 2014 11:30 am

Warren Moon wrote:Here is my list of who will be happy about this:

Why will they be happy? Handgun ownership being illegal made no difference to them.

I will tell you who will be happy and bitter at the same time - my partners mother who shoots as a hobby. She and his father used to shoot pistols and his father collected handguns before he died from a heart problem. That collection had to be "sold" to the government when the law changed. If the law is overturned she will at least be able to shoot pistols again (she currently uses small bore rifles) although she will not get her husbands collection back.

by Guest Sat Jan 25, 2014 11:35 am

How many banks or shops has your mother-in-law done over? Then there's the drug turf to patrol and keep clear.

by nicko Sat Jan 25, 2014 11:39 am

I still have a firearms certificate and own a Ruger .22 rifle. I go out some nights in my 4a4 "lamping" rabbits on farmland,with permission I should say.

by Guest Sat Jan 25, 2014 11:46 am

Landmines Nicko - more humane.

by Guest Sat Jan 25, 2014 11:49 am

Warren Moon wrote:How many banks or shops has your mother-in-law done over? Then there's the drug turf to patrol and keep clear.

Other than the fact she is not my mother in law (I only married once and have no intention of repeating the exercise)

You get the point completely without realising it. |Neither she nor her husband never committed a single criminal act and so lost their collection and hobby. Those who do over banks and shops or who deal drugs were and are breaking the law anyway and so did not and do not give a toss about the legality of the weapons they use - they were not affected by the law while ordinary law abiding people were.

Do you know of a single criminal who decided they would not rob the bank or shop because the law said they were no longer allowed to own a gun?

by nicko Sat Jan 25, 2014 11:53 am

warren, rabbits are too light to set off land mines, and there would be nothing left to eat!

by Guest Sat Jan 25, 2014 12:25 pm

There is no reason to owning a gun, guns should be kept by sporting venues, even though I think shooting animals for sport is daft to say the least and is based upon a superiority complex of the need to feel empowered over animals, how brave. You do not seen many go faced to face say with a bear or a lion abroad with a knife, now that would be real sport.

One thing I am proud of in this nation is that we have sensible laws with guns, but even then we could strive to do better

by Guest Sat Jan 25, 2014 2:29 pm

PhilDidge wrote:There is no reason to owning a gun, guns should be kept by sporting venues, even though I think shooting animals for sport is daft to say the least and is based upon a superiority complex of the need to feel empowered over animals, how brave. You do not seen many go faced to face say with a bear or a lion abroad with a knife, now that would be real sport.

One thing I am proud of in this nation is that we have sensible laws with guns, but even then we could strive to do better

According to that argument there is no reason for owning stamps or golf clubs or any one of the thousands of other things hobbiests collect. There is certainly no reason for owning things such as cross bows or bat'leth which are out and out weapons which are legal to collect.

by ALLAKAKA Sat Jan 25, 2014 2:42 pm

35

View
comments

A crooked police officer who took over his 'enforcer' brother’s drug gang was caught with a stash of machine guns, ammunition and cash hidden at his home.

Sergeant Salim Razaq, 33, who had a reputation as a dedicated officer, had already been picked out for promotion.

But his brother Hafiz - known as ‘Big Haf’ or ‘The Enforcer’ - was the feared ‘muscle’ for a local cocaine ring.

When Hafiz was locked up on remand accused of kidnapping a rival in a vicious turf war, his policeman brother plotted to help intimidate a key prosecution witness and hid a deadly cache of weapons and ammunition for him.

Corrupt police sergeant Salim Razaq (left) who took over the drug gang of his brother Hafiz (right) was caught with a stash of machine guns, ammunition and cash hidden at his home
+4

Corrupt police sergeant Salim Razaq (left) who took over the drug gang of his brother Hafiz (right) was caught with a stash of machine guns, ammunition and cash hidden at his home

Today Razaq was jailed for 11 and a half years at Liverpool Crown Court after pleading guilty to perverting the course of justice, possession of firearms and ammunition as well as misconduct in a public office.

Tonight senior police chiefs in Lancashire said they were dismayed Razaq, a trusted officer, could have betrayed the force.

Assistant Chief Constable Andy Cooke said: ‘Salim Razaq was nothing short of a criminal in a police uniform and I am appalled by the fact that a police officer was involved at the level he was in this criminality.’

Judge Henry Globe QC, told the disgraced officer: ‘Your actions have brought potential discredit to the police force.

‘It amounts to a breach of trust, a dereliction of duty and it amounts to extremely serious and persistent criminal offending whilst ostensibly, supposedly upholding criminal justice in your capacity as a serving police officer.

‘The guns were being kept by you to return to gangs who kill, maim, intimidate and terrorise.

machine guns found in home of corrupt police officer
+4

A Sten machine gun (above) and two Uzi machine guns (one pictured below) were found hidden under the stairs at the home of sergeant Razaq

machine guns found in home of corrupt police officer
+4

‘Those who provide a safe hiding place for weapons and ammunition make a significant and distinctive contribution to the use of firearms on the streets and elsewhere. A significant and lengthy sentence is justified.’

The court heard Razaq, who was stationed in Nelson, Lancashire, was regarded as a promising young officer, while his brother was becoming notorious as an enforcer for the Deepdale drugs gang in nearby Preston.

His gang was involved in a feud with the rival Fishwick mob, and in April 2007 suspected associate Mohammed Beg, 22, was snatched from his BMW by a masked gang, held captive for three hours and tortured and beaten.

some of the 228 bullets found at the home of corrupt police sergeant Salim Razaq
+4

When officers raided Razaq's home they found 228 bullets stashed in socks and plastic bags under the garden shed, as well as a bullet-proof jacket and £72,000 in cash

Hafiz, 25, was arrested and sent to prison charged with kidnapping from where his calls to his brother Salim were secretly taped discussing money laundering, witness intimidation and a ‘tick list’ of drug deals.

Officers swooped on the sergeant’s home in March and discovered an armoury of guns and ammunition.

They found a Sten machine gun and two Uzi machine guns hidden under the stairs and 228 bullets stashed in socks and plastic bags under the garden shed, as well as a bullet-proof jacket and £72,000 in cash.

He was thrown out of the force in June after a rarely-used Special Case Hearing procedure was held to fast-track his dismissal.

In mitigation Andrew Menary QC, said: ‘Salim Razaq did not start out as a bad and corrupt police officer. But his problems and his downfall came about because of his divided loyalty.’

Lancashire Police now runs an ‘in-service’ vetting programme so officers were routinely checked to highlight any cause for concern with family members.

His brother, who is already serving a six-year prison term for kidnap, was jailed for three and a half years to run consecutively for perverting the course of justice and conspiracy to transfer criminal property.

The brother’s mother Gulshan Razaq, 58, was given a suspended sentence and a three month curfew for perverting the course of justice.

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1330193/Criminal-policeman-jailed-aiding-brothers-drug-dealing-money-laundering.html#ixzz2rQBimH3L
Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook

by Guest Sat Jan 25, 2014 2:44 pm

Yes, let's relax laws on guns and let people do as they wish and murder others...

The stupidity and Motto of this extreme RW party.

And worryingly some are voting for them.

by ALLAKAKA Sat Jan 25, 2014 2:50 pm

Warren Moon wrote:Here is my list of who will be happy about this:

Gun Laws ? The above shows what you get with Labours policy of relaxing IMMIGRANTION LAWS.

They've killed and ruined more LIVES than guns in the UK.

by Guest Sat Jan 25, 2014 2:53 pm

ALLAKAKA wrote:
Warren Moon wrote:Here is my list of who will be happy about this:

Gun Laws ? The above shows what you get with Labours policy of relaxing IMMIGRANTION LAWS.

They've killed and ruined more LIVES than guns in the UK.

Over how long a period ? And have you got stats over a long period of time to back this up Kaka?

by ALLAKAKA Sat Jan 25, 2014 2:56 pm

Joy Division wrote:
ALLAKAKA wrote:

Gun Laws ? The above shows what you get with Labours policy of relaxing IMMIGRANTION LAWS.

They've killed and ruined more LIVES than guns in the UK.

Over how long a period ? And have you got stats over a long period of time to back this up Kaka?

No problem Div. I can post ALL the news articles and court details.

by Guest Sat Jan 25, 2014 2:56 pm

Joy Division wrote:Yes, let's relax laws on guns and let people do as they wish and murder others...

The stupidity and Motto of this extreme RW party.

And worryingly some are voting for them.

So JD would you like to explain how making hand guns illegal stopped criminals doing as they wished and resulted in nobody being murdered with a handgun since the law changed.

by Fred Moletrousers Sat Jan 25, 2014 3:02 pm

Sassy wrote:
grumpy old git wrote:One thing that I DO agree with him on...the hand gun ban was a kneejerk political manoeuvre by a desperate PM ttrying to boost his ratings.

Significantly gun crime DOUBLED in the 5 years following and has remained high ever since.

PROVIDED that licences are issued (as they are at present for many other guns) ONLY to people "of good standing"
and PROVIDED that the police do their job PROPERLY there is no problem.

with ONE exception, ALL gun "catastrophes" that have occurred since and even before the sad events at Dunblaine, were demonstrably due to POLICE FAILURES.

if the current tough laws were properly implemented and used, there would be no hazard from this.

You do realise that licensed gun owners are THE most law abiding citizens going...they have to be, even a relatively minor crime can lose you your license. get too many speeding tickets even....certainly drink driving,
and anything like theft...even the most minor and...thats your license gone....

I agree with farmer's having guns to keep rabbits down etc, but they don't need hand guns for that.

I once knew an American who shot squirrels with a revolver. I can't hit the little buggers with both barrels of a 12 bore.

by Guest Sat Jan 25, 2014 3:28 pm

sphinx wrote:
PhilDidge wrote:There is no reason to owning a gun, guns should be kept by sporting venues, even though I think shooting animals for sport is daft to say the least and is based upon a superiority complex of the need to feel empowered over animals, how brave. You do not seen many go faced to face say with a bear or a lion abroad with a knife, now that would be real sport.

One thing I am proud of in this nation is that we have sensible laws with guns, but even then we could strive to do better

According to that argument there is no reason for owning stamps or golf clubs or any one of the thousands of other things hobbiests collect. There is certainly no reason for owning things such as cross bows or bat'leth which are out and out weapons which are legal to collect.

Really how do you figure that, because you just made an association to where none exists?
Guns kill, there is a massive difference to owning a Golf club set which intentions are to hit small white balls into a hole on a green.
The reality is the argument to own guns is absurd, why would you want an instrument of death?

by ALLAKAKA Sat Jan 25, 2014 3:49 pm

Let us not forget that infamous quote '' We have Knives and know how to use them ''.

lol!

by Guest Sat Jan 25, 2014 3:51 pm

nicko wrote:warren, rabbits are too light to set off land mines, and there would be nothing left to eat!

Apparently they do mines with a "Hare" trigger. :D

by Guest Sat Jan 25, 2014 3:55 pm

PhilDidge wrote:
sphinx wrote:

According to that argument there is no reason for owning stamps or golf clubs or any one of the thousands of other things hobbiests collect. There is certainly no reason for owning things such as cross bows or bat'leth which are out and out weapons which are legal to collect.

Really how do you figure that, because you just made an association to where none exists?
Guns kill, there is a massive difference to owning a Golf club set which intentions are to hit small white balls into a hole on a green.
The reality is the argument to own guns is absurd, why would you want an instrument of death?

No phil - it might be a cliché but its true - guns dont kill people, people kill people.

It takes a hell of a lot less skill to kills someone with a golf club than it does a gun and yet millions of golf club owning people manage to go their whole lives without so much as attempting to hit another person with them.

Now lets look at crossbows - out and out instruments of death with next to no sporting use - yet it is perfectly legal to own and collect them in the UK.

I presume you own knives? Well they are instruments of death - why do you want to own them?

I do not understand why people want to own collections of used stamps - but I know it somehow brings them pleasure and satisfaction and I accept that.

I do understand the pleasure and satisfaction that come from developing and improving a skill - a difficult skill so I understand that shooting can (and does) bring that satisfaction (this will be what is experienced by the British Olympic pistol shooters who are willing to pay to travel to another country just to be able to practice to get good enough to represent their country on the world stage) I also get the collecting of movie memorabilia and I get appreciation of fine machinery. Any one of those three reasons would be an adequate explanation of why people might like to own "an instrument of death"

I also accept that you and many others do not want to - well I am not going to force you to so why the hell do you have force others not to?

by Guest Sat Jan 25, 2014 4:17 pm

sphinx wrote:
PhilDidge wrote:

Really how do you figure that, because you just made an association to where none exists?
Guns kill, there is a massive difference to owning a Golf club set which intentions are to hit small white balls into a hole on a green.
The reality is the argument to own guns is absurd, why would you want an instrument of death?

No phil - it might be a cliché but its true - guns dont kill people, people kill people.
No Sphinx you just made it up and as seen was complete gobbledygook

It takes a hell of a lot less skill to kills someone with a golf club than it does a gun and yet millions of golf club owning people manage to go their whole lives without so much as attempting to hit another person with them.
Yes but the Golf club was not designed to kill, but to play a sport, the gun is designed to kill, thus your argument here is again absurd, as yes we can all use many instruments to kill people but this is about something completely designed to kill. Cannot believe you came out with that bullshit to defend owning guns

Now lets look at crossbows - out and out instruments of death with next to no sporting use - yet it is perfectly legal to own and collect them in the UK.
Who says I think anyone should own them, I don't, again my view is weapons used for sport should be kept at clubs, so okay you own it but it is stored at a safe facility, not left in the home where as seen children have picked up such weaponry and used on their siblings. So again your point is moot, the crossbow is another weapon designed to kill thus my views are the same with this also

I presume you own knives? Well they are instruments of death - why do you want to own them?
Well this really is clutching at straws now, what kind of knives, the ones designed for food or death? The later again the same, why own even a sword, they are instruments of death, so again a very moot point

I do not understand why people want to own collections of used stamps - but I know it somehow brings them pleasure and satisfaction and I accept that.
Yes but stamps are not designed to kill people, so your argument is absurd I am not saying having hobbies are wrong but why someone would want to own an instrument of death, something you cannot answer

I do understand the pleasure and satisfaction that come from developing and improving a skill - a difficult skill so I understand that shooting can (and does) bring that satisfaction (this will be what is experienced by the British Olympic pistol shooters who are willing to pay to travel to another country just to be able to practice to get good enough to represent their country on the world stage) I also get the collecting of movie memorabilia and I get appreciation of fine machinery. Any one of those three reasons would be an adequate explanation of why people might like to own "an instrument of death"
I am happy for sporting events as stated by clubs where you can do this, so the weaponry can be stored there, you do not have the need to have the weapon stored on your premises, so again you have no argument here to actually own guns i the sense of your own home

I also accept that you and many others do not want to - well I am not going to force you to so why the hell do you have force others not to?

Yes but you failed to answer why people would want to own an instrument of death?

by Guest Sat Jan 25, 2014 4:24 pm

You do realize didge that people are not allowed to own them and keep them in clubs dont you?

You are clutching at straws talking about instruments of death - any item that can be used to kill can be described as an instrument of death - and most items can be used to kill.

Take a gun that has only ever been used to shoot small circles printed on paper with different scores and explain how that is gun is any different from the carving knife in the kitchen draw.

by Guest Sat Jan 25, 2014 4:28 pm

sphinx wrote:You do realize didge that people are not allowed to own them and keep them in clubs dont you?
In this country yes Sphinx, but UKIP want to change this

You are clutching at straws talking about instruments of death - any item that can be used to kill can be described as an instrument of death - and most items can be used to kill.
No there is a big difference between what is created to kill and what has been found by accident that can be used to kill

Take a gun that has only ever been used to shoot small circles printed on paper with different scores and explain how that is gun is any different from the carving knife in the kitchen draw.

I really despair at the last point that has to be the silliest answer you have come out with. A gun that could still be used to shoot people with, a weapon so powerful, you do not even have to be close to a person to kill. A Kitchen Knife whilst also deadly at close range is a also a requirement for the Kitchen, where I fail to see how a shotgun is going to slice up your Sunday roast dinner. Owning weaponry is nothing more then egotistic empowerment, a false belief that a person is strong by owning one

by Guest Sat Jan 25, 2014 4:49 pm

PhilDidge wrote:
sphinx wrote:You do realize didge that people are not allowed to own them and keep them in clubs dont you?
In this country yes Sphinx, but UKIP want to change this

You are clutching at straws talking about instruments of death - any item that can be used to kill can be described as an instrument of death - and most items can be used to kill.
No there is a big difference between what is created to kill and what has been found by accident that can be used to kill

Take a gun that has only ever been used to shoot small circles printed on paper with different scores and explain how that is gun is any different from the carving knife in the kitchen draw.

I really despair at the last point that has to be the silliest answer you have come out with. A gun that could still be used to shoot people with, a weapon so powerful, you do not even have to be close to a person to kill. A Kitchen Knife whilst also deadly at close range is a also a requirement for the Kitchen, where I fail to see how a shotgun is going to slice up your Sunday roast dinner. Owning weaponry is nothing more then egotistic empowerment, a false belief that a person is strong by owning one

So you disapprove of it and look down on it - I feel the same about some behaviours - like for instance boxing (male or female before anyone squawks). I dont try to stop people doing them, watching them, enjoying them.

I am not asking you to keep a gun. I am asking why you want to prevent my partners mum from keeping one.

by Guest Sat Jan 25, 2014 4:54 pm

sphinx wrote:
PhilDidge wrote:

I really despair at the last point that has to be the silliest answer you have come out with. A gun that could still be used to shoot people with, a weapon so powerful, you do not even have to be close to a person to kill. A Kitchen Knife whilst also deadly at close range is a also a requirement for the Kitchen, where I fail to see how a shotgun is going to slice up your Sunday roast dinner. Owning weaponry is nothing more then egotistic empowerment, a false belief that a person is strong by owning one

So you disapprove of it and look down on it - I feel the same about some behaviours - like for instance boxing (male or female before anyone squawks). I dont try to stop people doing them, watching them, enjoying them.

I am not asking you to keep a gun. I am asking why you want to prevent my partners mum from keeping one.

Yes but this argument is about weaponry, not people being boring by train spotting for example, I understand sports where weaponry is used and have no issue with that except when it comes to hunting the only exception for hunting would be necessity to eat.
Weaponry has been designed for one sole purpose, to kill, hence why making view points on other dull past times is very much moot!

by Guest Sat Jan 25, 2014 5:06 pm

PhilDidge wrote:
sphinx wrote:

So you disapprove of it and look down on it - I feel the same about some behaviours - like for instance boxing (male or female before anyone squawks). I dont try to stop people doing them, watching them, enjoying them.

I am not asking you to keep a gun. I am asking why you want to prevent my partners mum from keeping one.

Yes but this argument is about weaponry, not people being boring by train spotting for example, I understand sports where weaponry is used and have no issue with that except when it comes to hunting the only exception for hunting would be necessity to eat.
Weaponry has been designed for one sole purpose, to kill, hence why making view points on other dull past times is very much moot!

Again this is your view - why does that give you the right to stop others from doing something they enjoy that hurts no-one?

by Sponsored content