Corbyn gun control

[ChesterP]

in all fairness to the Conservative party they were in power when two of the worst shootings in the uk happened. Very little they could have done under such weight of public opionon. I wouldn’t say they actively targeting shooters they just had to act in light of incidents. Had those incidents never happened it’s unlikely we would have been in the situation we are now.

The difference is Corbyn, Sturgeon et al view shooting as class warfare and will be way more harmful.

A agree with that.

No conclusions about the Tories can be drawn in relation to who's more restrictive, Tories or Labour in this case, because the simple truth was that they had little choice being in power at the time. Had labour been in power, they almost certainly would have done the same, or worse. Didn't take them long to ban fox hunting or hunting with dogs; Their premise is pretty anti-blood sport compared with the Tories, and they're not that far removed from the SNP in that respect.

 

[JTO]

The last communist boss of Romania liked shooting, but I'm not sure anyone else was allowed to.

 

[enfieldspares]

I dont know why the concern over gun ownership, we are at about the minimum we could possably be, but I presonaly wouldn't mind military replica guns banned and can see why that could be considered as a next step.

Gun Control and the Salami Sausage: How does one eat a salami sausage Chasey? Slice by slice. You never really notice it's getting less and less. Until suddenly...and you never realised it at the time..but it's ALL gone. It is why the American NRA have an absolutist position on any gun laws. Same as our NRA should have done but, craven and self-serving, as long as it didn't affect what they did they didn't really care.

Yesterday's civilian market BSA made Lee-Enfield SMLE was the 1920's "military replica gun". I see no objection to people being able to learn to use or keep at home such things or the modern era's civilian, self loading, centrefire SLR, AR-15 or (God knows why) SA80. I have to take my son to France to teach him how to shoot a pistol!

Next time there's a war get the members of the Gun Control Network to do the fighting. As if the Government don't want to trust me with such things at home then don't expect me to volunteer to join up and carry one on behalf of that same Government if ever the proverbial ever hits the fan again. It's an insult.

 

[Essexsussex]

Phesent shooting possably but I haven't got a single posh person in my 18 strong syndicate. Most are manual workers

Chasey - this highlights the problem as I see it - this isn't understood by the masses, therefore if there were a bill to ban pheasant (or let's say driven shooting of reared game), the general metropolitan public will assume that they are taking sport away from rich toffs. We all know that there is a good cross section across all our sports.

This makes the case that this isn't a simple left / right issue, but more a rural (a much depleting population) v urban dweller issue. Simply I think Tories are more supported in rural areas (except where there were mass employment type jobs such as mining or steelworks not connected to an urban centre) and therefore are more careful with policies that affect our sports. Of course I have no evidence to support my theory but I think it makes sense...

 

[enfieldspares]

No conclusions about the Tories can be drawn in relation to who's more restrictive, Tories or Labour in this case, because the simple truth was that they had little choice being in power at the time.

Hungerford was a centrefire self-loading rifle. Dunblane was a pistol and, at the end, a revolver. I don't recall either time a multi-shot self-loading or pump action shotgun like a Remington 870, Browning Auto-5, Winchester 1200, Etc., etc. being used by either nutter. Nor a stalking rifle and its ammunition. Yet unrestricted magazine shot guns were moved to s1 by the Tory Government on the back of one of those events and expanding rifle bullets to s5 on the back of the other.

Ryan seventeen and Hamilton seventeen. The Tory Government, egged on by it's authoritarian coterie in the Home Office, banned what it banned because it had wanted an excuse to do so for decades and saw this as a chance to do so. It was simply that.

Why? Because the same Home Office that deals with firearms deals with planning for the imposition of martial law in the event of nuclear war or environmental disaster. And had long realised that the new popularity of shooting, especially handguns, would eventually see, perhaps, a swell of popular ownership. Pistol shooting was a massive growth sport in the late 1970s and throughout the 1980s and 1990s.

Derek Bird killed twelve. Yet in 2010 the Home Office didn't wish to ban magazine fed .22 Rimfire rifles so it didn't press the Government to do it. 1988, 1996, 2010 were nothing to do with reasoned responses to misuse of licensed firearms, they were all to do with the Home Office's agenda that saw and still sees centrefire multishot weapons of ANY description as a threat to any envisaged future imposition of martial law.

 

[enfieldspares]

Simply I think Tories are more supported in rural areas..

Humbug! They are all bloomin' stockbrokers, merchant bankers, capital managers or city types. I live in a rural constituency, safe Tory seat, current bloke is a good MP but he doesn't own a gun and he doesn't shoot. 'Cos I asked his PA when he first stood in 2015.

 

[Essexsussex]

Humbug! They are all bloomin' stockbrokers, merchant bankers, capital managers or city types. I live in a rural constituency, safe Tory seat, current bloke is a good MP but he doesn't own a gun and he doesn't shoot. 'Cos I asked his PA when he first stood in 2015.

But that was my point - I think most rural constituencies are Tory controlled - I didn't say Tory MPs are rural. Point being they are more likely to support a rural way of life as they are more likely to retain their rural votes (such as people like you, who are rural and are in their constituencies).

 

[Roro]

I believe the current bugbear with the leftie/crusty/islington brigade is grouse shooting for some bizzare reason.

 

[Roro]

I dont know why the concern over gun ownership, we are at about the minimum we could possably be, but I presonaly wouldn't mind military replica guns banned and can see why that could be considered as a next step.

ATB

Sorry, cannot support this. What is the difference between a ruger 10/22 with a blue barrel and walnut stock vs a ruger 10/22 in a cheap ar15 plastic chassis ? One is no more dealdly than the other as they are essentially the same. We had this rubbish in ireland a few years ago, when the game shooters (led by buffoons in tweed knickerbockers with over priced side by sides) attempted to get rid of pistol shooting, if their guns were left alone. I would never condone saving my own sport by throwing someone else under the bus.

 

[Eddie P]

Sorry, cannot support this. What is the difference between a ruger 10/22 with a blue barrel and walnut stock vs a ruger 10/22 in a cheap ar15 plastic chassis ? One is no more dealdly than the other as they are essentially the same. We had this rubbish in ireland a few years ago, when the game shooters (led by buffoons in tweed knickerbockers with over priced side by sides) attempted to get rid of pistol shooting, if their guns were left alone. I would never condone saving my own sport by throwing someone else under the bus.

Except footballers, they can go under the bus. But then again if they trip over their boot laces they make out that they have been hit by a bus, so maybe we wouldn't be able to tell the difference.

 

[enfieldspares]

I would never condone saving my own sport by throwing someone else under the bus.

+1. But you'd not have fitted in well with the fox hunting lobby in the English Shires Roro or the Home Counties! Lamping with rifles, snaring, trapping, fox drives with shot guns all chucked under the bus at one time or another by the houndsports lobby to justify their pastime.

 

[ChesterP]

Hungerford was a centrefire self-loading rifle. Dunblane was a pistol and, at the end, a revolver. I don't recall either time a multi-shot self-loading or pump action shotgun like a Remington 870, Browning Auto-5, Winchester 1200, Etc., etc. being used by either nutter. Nor a stalking rifle and its ammunition. Yet unrestricted magazine shot guns were moved to s1 by the Tory Government on the back of one of those events and expanding rifle bullets to s5 on the back of the other.

Ryan seventeen and Hamilton seventeen. The Tory Government, egged on by it's authoritarian coterie in the Home Office, banned what it banned because it had wanted an excuse to do so for decades and saw this as a chance to do so. It was simply that.

Why? Because the same Home Office that deals with firearms deals with planning for the imposition of martial law in the event of nuclear war or environmental disaster. And had long realised that the new popularity of shooting, especially handguns, would eventually see, perhaps, a swell of popular ownership. Pistol shooting was a massive growth sport in the late 1970s and throughout the 1980s and 1990s.

Derek Bird killed twelve. Yet in 2010 the Home Office didn't wish to ban magazine fed .22 Rimfire rifles so it didn't press the Government to do it. 1988, 1996, 2010 were nothing to do with reasoned responses to misuse of licensed firearms, they were all to do with the Home Office's agenda that saw and still sees centrefire multishot weapons of ANY description as a threat to any envisaged future imposition of martial law.

That is certainly part of it and was the very reason for the first firearms act coming into play after the initial Act covering pistols. Lots of soldiers returning from the Great War and a population previously encouraged to arm itself with all manner of firearms in case of home invasion. It soon became obvious that there was a perceived threat against any required imposition of martial law, and indeed from any popular uprising against the government of the day. Nothing much has really changed except the concern these days is more general gun crime reasoning.

It goes to reinforce the point that it doesn't really matter which government is in play at any one time as the HO dictate recommended changes in Law, enacted by Parliament. Labour though do have a more pronounced anti-bloodsport lobby within their ranks and as such, are the more dangerous to our sport and freedom to hunt, which ultimately will have a knock on effect on conservation and environmental balance from a land management POV. They're just too blinkered to see that.

 

[Roro]

+1. But you'd not have fitted in well with the fox hunting lobby in the English Shires Roro or the Home Counties! Lamping with rifles, snaring, trapping, fox drives with shot guns all chucked under the bus at one time or another by the houndsports lobby to justify their pastime.

About 30 years ago i was still at school, but used to travel to a relations place in the country on the weekends and summer hol's, he'd just bought it as he was a horse trainer supposidly. I was shooting mad, loved shooting bunnys with a .22, but when i first visited there was not a rabbit to be seen for miles, but the place was literally walking with foxes.

So, life gives you lemons, make lemonade, i bought a .22 hornet and started knocking off foxes left, right and centre. Immediately the ruckus started with the local horsey set. The area was covered by a hunt, and they did not like the idea of chasing fresh air one bit. One evening i was in an area with the rifle i had never been before, and found a very overgrown field, with a small derelict cottage. The place was crawling with foxes. I found a gate, over which someone was tipping sacks of dead battery hens. Turns out the field was owned by a big-wig in the hunt.

So i am under no illusion as to the hunts and what they get up to, and i used to be laughing when someone from a hunt would be on a televison debate saying hounds were the ideal method to control foxes.

 

[User00035]

To say nothing of the damage they do to deer management when they go tearing through woods which they have been expressly told they do not have permission to ride through, driving all the deer out onto neighbouring ground where no meaningful management is practised and everything on four legs gets shot.

 

[Roro]

To say nothing of the damage they do to deer management when they go tearing through woods which they have been expressly told they do not have permission to ride through, driving all the deer out onto neighbouring ground where no meaningful management is practised and everything on four legs gets shot.

Oh, i seen a farmer who had banned the hunt from his land for their total disregard for his livestock, getting extremely heated with the master of the hunt after they had ploughed through his farmyard and fields yet again. It was the sniggering dismissal of his concerns that got him to boil over. The farm was his livelihood, being trespassed on and treated with contempt by people, not even from the area.

 

[Chasey]

Sorry, cannot support this. What is the difference between a ruger 10/22 with a blue barrel and walnut stock vs a ruger 10/22 in a cheap ar15 plastic chassis ? One is no more dealdly than the other as they are essentially the same. We had this rubbish in ireland a few years ago, when the game shooters (led by buffoons in tweed knickerbockers with over priced side by sides) attempted to get rid of pistol shooting, if their guns were left alone. I would never condone saving my own sport by throwing someone else under the bus.

Ownership of a gun in this country has to be associated with a purpose

Hunting or target shooting

Where does a 10/22 designed to look like a ZK 22 Bull pup come into this?

I love my sport and I respect target shooting and one day I see a picture of a ZK 22 Bull pup being shown on TV as the reason we need to ban all firearms access

I am always a little suspiscious of people who like that Rambo type design for a sporting firearm

Id like to see the back of them in order to protect our sport or the future

Is it me or does a classic hunting rifel design or even a modern hunting rifel design (Blaser Profesional for example) not eminate a sense of conservative ownership where as a AK47 look alike projects a sense of a nutter with a gun who really secretly wants to do a live version of call of duty

Anyway we digress

I think we are at nearly the minimum legal gun ownership in the UK

 

[Lupus]

If you think banning the way a firearm looks will secure the future of shooting sports I'm afraid you are a deluded fool. People who are anti shooting/gun care not what they look like. As far as they're concerned all guns kill and one privately owned gun is one too many. Once the black rifles are gone what's next, 'sniper rifles' maybe? And how do you define those? High velocity centrefire with a telescopic sight perhaps? Oh, wait a minute......

Wolfie

 

[old keeper]

So looking at the present pretty dire situation, regardless of party (if possible) who would you want in power if you had a choice, not parties, individuals. Can't think of any offhand!

 

[enfieldspares]

Is it me or does a classic hunting rifel design or even a modern hunting rifel design (Blaser Profesional for example) not eminate a sense of conservative ownership where as a AK47 look alike projects a sense of a nutter with a gun who really secretly wants to do a live version of call of duty

When Beesley invented his sidelock self-opener (Purdey's "house design" since the 1890s in essence) people used to hammer guns said that it was "ugly"and like a "spaniel with no ears". Others railed against it as, combining true self-opening with ejectors, it tripled the owners rate of fire compared to the familiar non-ejector hammer gun.

So, once upon a time Chasey your classic English "best" gun whether by Purdey, or like my own, by Boss, easy-opening, with ejectors and Robertson's 1909 patented single trigger, was not at all conservative but distinctly radical.

And your classic Holland & Holland stalking rifle? This is built on, no more no less, than on Paul Mauser's (then revolutionary) military battle rifle design that in the final years of the 19th Century had reached its acme in his Mauser Model 98 pattern. That these used military weapons have no doubt. When you stripped out the bolt on my .280 there, on the root of the bolt handle, was the Hitler's eagle and hooked cross.

I'm old enough to remember when on a formal driven day an over and under gun was thought out of place and when going to the hill with a rifle with a telescopic sight clamped to it was somehow verging on "unsporting" and "not giving the deer a chance". A horrible, nasty, military sniper's thing...not appropriate for a stalker's weapon.

What black "plastic fantastic" rifles ownership is, is simply someone who enjoying their shooting with what is, like Mauser's 1898 in its day, or Beesley's Purdey or Robertson's Boss the current acme of that type of firearm type.

No more nor less than wanting to own the latest wi-fi sound system, the latest coated, anti-reflective Swarovski binoculars, the most modern carbon fibre fly rod. Yes there is an enjoyment in using "old" stuff but there is also enjoyment in using the latest development of any thing or object to see just how much reliable, functional, cutting edge it is than what came before.

That "wow" when you realise that it's a better sound, a superior, sharper, clearer picture, a longer more effortless cast and a perfect presentation of the fly. That "Wow...I've just done this...I've never been able to do hear that, see that, deliver that with my old XXX, YYY or ZZZ." Or a better functioning, more accurate, more reliable more perfect gun. There is a pleasure, to some, in owning the latest, newest, mousetrap in the shop...especially if it is different to what everybody else takes to the range.

 

[Pedro]

"So looking at the present pretty dire situation, regardless of party (if possible) who would you want in power if you had a choice, not parties, individuals. Can't think of any offhand! "

I think I'd have Michael Parkinson as Prime Minister. He'd look after the old folk (at least we would get a free pen anyway). Foreign Secretary would still be Boris. Not that he's any good, but because he's bonkers and no foreigner takes him seriously. Home Secretary would be me. I'd sort out firearms legislation and the Police. I think I'd have enfieldspares as under secretary to sort out firearms legislation. I'd have my youngest son as Chancellor of the Exchequer, who is rubbish with money, so I could tell him how much I want for doing my stuff and he'd just give it to me. His credit rating is probably zero, so the deficit could only go down as he couldn't borrow any more. Open to suggestions for Health Secretary, but it'd have to be someone good to put the NHS back up there.