shakey jake
Well-Known Member
signed but i think all ive done is add to the carbon footprint, this gove doesnt care what people with money think( not saying we are all rich but we arent the dross stealing benefits, i assume)
Are we really this daft?!?
- Thread starter gixer1
- Start date
I think many forget that the Shotgun needs no provable good reason , when it comes down to is - This is the first big step to bring in a harsher licencing on who can start shooting .
every government likes to leave a legacy to show how good they were and meddling in firearms law to show how tough they were on crime is an easy win for them, regardless if it actually makes a difference to public safety or the detrimental impact it has on the life of those directly affected.
Governments lack the balls to say actually no more legislation is not needed, the issue is not with the gun owners or guns but the Police resources and qualifications needed to ensure the current legislation is properly and professionally
implemented.
we continue to slide down the slippery slope getting ever closer to the bottom.
Governments lack the balls to say actually no more legislation is not needed, the issue is not with the gun owners or guns but the Police resources and qualifications needed to ensure the current legislation is properly and professionally
implemented.
we continue to slide down the slippery slope getting ever closer to the bottom.
ALL THE WAY DOWN THE SLIPPERY SLOPE: GUN PROHIBITION IN ENGLAND AND SOME LESSONS FOR CIVIL LIBERTIES IN AMERICA
Constitutional Commentary; All the Way Down the Slippery Slope: Gun Prohibition in England and Some Lessons for Civil Liberties in America, by Joseph Olson and David Kopel.
guncite.com
Bo Diddley
Well-Known Member
.This. The proposal must be contested but looking at the numbers of signatures on the petition its clear the vast majority of shooters cant be arsed, never mind the wider public. Said it before, apathy is what will be the end of private firearms ownership in the uk
They are doing…
Norfolk Deer Search
Well-Known Member
Signatures increased by 50% in two days - let's see if that rate of increase continues.
But shorter than the phrase “not considered at all” I guess.
Norfolk Deer Search
Well-Known Member
The problem is when you’re dealing with the government they can do what they like when they like and they do not have to take a blind bit of notice of a silly petition!
What you all forget is if the government wanted to they could ban all privately own shotguns and Firearms within a click of their fingers and there is NAF all we can do about it!
So in that respect the way I see is keep your head down keep cracking on!
In the brunt of things, we are an insignificant number of people with the vote.
Spanj said Q "looking at the numbers of signatures on the petition its clear the vast majority of shooters cant be arsed, never mind the wider public." UQ.
Sadly that is the state of play in Aus as well. "Someone will do something" is a common attitude amongst the shooting community. Unless/until we have a constitution clause like the Americans have...aka...the right to bear arms...our governments will continue to savage us...and we'll never have that.
We also need an organization like the American NRA to meet governments head on and not give an inch. Can't see that happening either. Basically us firearm people are the last of a dying breed.
Sadly that is the state of play in Aus as well. "Someone will do something" is a common attitude amongst the shooting community. Unless/until we have a constitution clause like the Americans have...aka...the right to bear arms...our governments will continue to savage us...and we'll never have that.
We also need an organization like the American NRA to meet governments head on and not give an inch. Can't see that happening either. Basically us firearm people are the last of a dying breed.
Stevie/P
Well-Known Member
The way Europe is heading with Russia will probably mean a total reversal on citizens being restricted with firearms won’t belong before governments insist we must bear arms in defence of freedom and democracy now how ironic is that.
Bo Diddley
Well-Known Member
Wouldn't that be nice, training like the Scandinavian countries.
I often think that the aristocracy…. Royals, House of Lords and the connections to major shooting estates is the only real reason that us mere peasants haven’t already had our toys removed. I reckon a certain top level of cover is the only thing keeping a limit on where the government gets to push shooting legislation before it hurts certain members of the elite….
Sadly thats we have done over the years, and where has that got us? be that fox hunting with hounds or pistols. or semi auto cf.
Then what fishing next?
At least let’s go down with a fight, we owe that to the next generation.
Norfolk Deer Search
Well-Known Member
Whilst I agree in theory, but in the sense practicality they can do whatever they like they can take the whole lot away from us ban the lot and there’s absolutely bugger all we can do about it. We are an insignificant voting number sooner you lot to get your head around that the better.
Last edited:
Jim Hutton
Well-Known Member
If its anything like the pistol ban in the 90's when no matter how many letters MPs received or Marches we went on it still took place. I think those that believe it is a foregone conclusion are likely to be proven right.
I don’t think we’re in the same place as with the pistol ban, if we were, this would have been done and dusted long ago.
The media demand to ‘do something’ coupled with it being election time made handguns a big political issue. There’s next to no media attention on this with it being over 4 years on.
Looking at some figures, SGC holders are c0.75% of the population. On top of that, you’ll have FAC holders that don’t hold SGCs, air gunners and people involved in shooting who don’t shoot themselves, beaters, pickets up etc. I’d wager that the ‘shooting community’ is more than 1% of the population and perhaps more like 1.5%.
To give some context, gay/lesbian/bi were 3.8% at the last census and trans/non-binary less then 0.2%. I’m making that comparison purely to show that, even with relatively low numbers, these groups have considerable political influence, so to say we have no influence (or more correctly cannot have any) due to numbers is pure defeatism.
I imagine if you asked the ‘man on the street’ (or a politician) what proportion of the population are involved in shooting, you’d get a much lower number. Conversely, you might well get higher numbers for other minorities, owing to the noise they make.
We’re as much to blame for this an anyone else, a combination of believing a low profile is safest and extreme cynicism (to the point of almost welcoming restrictions as martyrdom) must have contributed to a view that shooters are a safe group to ignore.
Refusing to engage with any opposition to these restrictions because it’s ’pointless as they’ve made up their minds’ simply adds to the doom loop - we do nothing so they ignore us, so more of us think engagement is a waste of time, so do nothing.
This really is a big deal and the surest way to be certain the govt will do as it pleases is to sit back and let it.
The media demand to ‘do something’ coupled with it being election time made handguns a big political issue. There’s next to no media attention on this with it being over 4 years on.
Looking at some figures, SGC holders are c0.75% of the population. On top of that, you’ll have FAC holders that don’t hold SGCs, air gunners and people involved in shooting who don’t shoot themselves, beaters, pickets up etc. I’d wager that the ‘shooting community’ is more than 1% of the population and perhaps more like 1.5%.
To give some context, gay/lesbian/bi were 3.8% at the last census and trans/non-binary less then 0.2%. I’m making that comparison purely to show that, even with relatively low numbers, these groups have considerable political influence, so to say we have no influence (or more correctly cannot have any) due to numbers is pure defeatism.
I imagine if you asked the ‘man on the street’ (or a politician) what proportion of the population are involved in shooting, you’d get a much lower number. Conversely, you might well get higher numbers for other minorities, owing to the noise they make.
We’re as much to blame for this an anyone else, a combination of believing a low profile is safest and extreme cynicism (to the point of almost welcoming restrictions as martyrdom) must have contributed to a view that shooters are a safe group to ignore.
Refusing to engage with any opposition to these restrictions because it’s ’pointless as they’ve made up their minds’ simply adds to the doom loop - we do nothing so they ignore us, so more of us think engagement is a waste of time, so do nothing.
This really is a big deal and the surest way to be certain the govt will do as it pleases is to sit back and let it.
Similar threads
