You dead right Ian!!! It is unfortunate that much of the public know bugger all about guns or what we have to do, or be so as to be able to own one. As you know, I am a firm believer in training in the use of firearms of any sort, this should be coupled with the licensing of any firearm as far as I'm concerned. There is simply no use for a great many firearms unless you are in the forces, the general public knows sod all about the difference between a 12G shotgun and an AK47, to many people they are all just guns. That is why the governing bodies of all shooting sports should be educating the general public, a PR job I guess!
Yet Another E-Petition Needs Support
- Thread starter Guerini Guy
- Start date
Help Support Clay, Trap, Skeet Shooting Forum:
As to the definition of gun types I probably didn't explain myself too well. Whilst I said that I can't see any logic that says gun X poses a greater risk to society than gun Y, I was referring to sporting guns only.
I am however quite happy to leave guns that are designed specifically for killing humans entirely to the military.
I am however quite happy to leave guns that are designed specifically for killing humans entirely to the military.
RobertBeard
Moderator
Taurus Long Barreled Revolver incorporating long barrel and rear stalk cum wrist support
Pardini .22 free pistol - capable of use in Olympic 50 metre free pistol competition
Pardini .22 free pistol - capable of use in Olympic 50 metre free pistol competition
Last edited by a moderator:
Taurus looks nice Robert! If I remember rightly they are a Brazilian S&W copy. I tried a few of their revolvers in the old days and they handled well. :nyam:
AndyH
Active member
I agree with Robert in that there should be a line and certain types of firearm should be restricted from public ownership. As gun-owners, if we can promote a sense of social responsibility alongside gun ownership, then the anti-gun lobby will look ever more extreme and we will come across as moderate and not gun-nuts like many Americans.
My dad and I used to shoot pistol, before the ban, in Malvern and enjoyed it a lot. It would be good to have a modification to the law to allow single shot .22 pistol for competition/target shooting, even if we had to store them at a club.
Here's a .22 lr Semi Auto long barelled pistol legal for UK shooting, based on the 1911:
http://www.valmontfirearms.co.uk/LBPistols.html
My dad and I used to shoot pistol, before the ban, in Malvern and enjoyed it a lot. It would be good to have a modification to the law to allow single shot .22 pistol for competition/target shooting, even if we had to store them at a club.
Here's a .22 lr Semi Auto long barelled pistol legal for UK shooting, based on the 1911:
http://www.valmontfirearms.co.uk/LBPistols.html
Guerini Guy
Well-known member
I don't understand why there is this hang up about what is used in the Commonwealth and Olympic Games? Why is that even relevant?
After all, there are many shooters even on this forum who own shotguns and only shoot Sporting targets. Well Sporting is not a Commonwealth or Olympic discipline, so should all these people have their guns taken away? Its a really silly argument in my opinion.
There are many shooting sports that are not represented at such sporting events, but they are every bit as relevant to the people who shoot and enjoy them. Like I said, Practical Rifle is a fantastic sport, of course currently not shot here because of the gun restriction, but in Europe it is extremely popular. I have shot it in Europe and its a hell of a lot of fun. Practical Pistol was also a growing discipline in UK before the handgun ban, in fact one year the World Championships were held at Bisley, and Practical Shotgun is still shot very regularly around UK, but none of the "Practical" disciplines are featured at the Commonwealth or Olympic Games.
If a legitimate type of gun is required to shoot a legitimate target sport, then those guns should be made available to licensed law abiding citizens.
By definition, fully auto and machine type guns have low accuracy and therefore could never be required to be used in any legitimate target shooting discipline.
Once again, thanks to those who have signed.
After all, there are many shooters even on this forum who own shotguns and only shoot Sporting targets. Well Sporting is not a Commonwealth or Olympic discipline, so should all these people have their guns taken away? Its a really silly argument in my opinion.
There are many shooting sports that are not represented at such sporting events, but they are every bit as relevant to the people who shoot and enjoy them. Like I said, Practical Rifle is a fantastic sport, of course currently not shot here because of the gun restriction, but in Europe it is extremely popular. I have shot it in Europe and its a hell of a lot of fun. Practical Pistol was also a growing discipline in UK before the handgun ban, in fact one year the World Championships were held at Bisley, and Practical Shotgun is still shot very regularly around UK, but none of the "Practical" disciplines are featured at the Commonwealth or Olympic Games.
If a legitimate type of gun is required to shoot a legitimate target sport, then those guns should be made available to licensed law abiding citizens.
By definition, fully auto and machine type guns have low accuracy and therefore could never be required to be used in any legitimate target shooting discipline.
Once again, thanks to those who have signed.
ips
Well-known member
- Joined
- Jul 19, 2012
- Messages
- 15,642
Sporting and skeet guns are of little use to me so I cant see the point in them, so as far as I am concerned you can ban anything with chokes less than 3/4 & full.
There are lots of things I dont see the point of, football for one but you cant ban something just because you are not personally interested.
There are lots of things I dont see the point of, football for one but you cant ban something just because you are not personally interested.
RobertBeard
Moderator
Whilst I have some sympathy with Guerini Guy there appears to be an active Practical Rifle following in the UK that have adapted to the ban back in 1988.
Practical Rifle came into being due to the adoption of self loading rifles by the military and previously there was Service Rifle.
There is no reason why practical rifle cannot be carried out with bolt action rifles or using small-bore semi-autos like the Ruger. Not as exciting no doubt but a way of the event enduring but without using what is undoubtedly a gun designed for the military with a firepower that would cause chaos and death in the wrong hands.
Given semi-autos there would no doubt be some bright spark who could convert them to fully auto i.e. machine guns.
To protect the rest of the sport I have to say that I am against them but that is just my personal opinion.
Practical Rifle came into being due to the adoption of self loading rifles by the military and previously there was Service Rifle.
There is no reason why practical rifle cannot be carried out with bolt action rifles or using small-bore semi-autos like the Ruger. Not as exciting no doubt but a way of the event enduring but without using what is undoubtedly a gun designed for the military with a firepower that would cause chaos and death in the wrong hands.
Given semi-autos there would no doubt be some bright spark who could convert them to fully auto i.e. machine guns.
To protect the rest of the sport I have to say that I am against them but that is just my personal opinion.
ips
Well-known member
- Joined
- Jul 19, 2012
- Messages
- 15,642
Bit like a 40' truck then ?
Ban them as well after all you could do the same job with a smaller truck like a 7 1/2 ton that would do much less harm in the hands of a nutter than a ruddy great big one. Although if a nutter got his mate to drive another smallish truck then they could do the same damage as the one big truck ................... makes you think dont it ?
Were will it all end.
I say again responsible propperly licenced adult shooters should be able to own and shoot pretty much what they want.
If we had enjoyed a massive reduction in gun crime since the ban then maybe it could be justified however as far as I know this is not the case.
RobertBeard
Moderator
Quote "I say again responsible properly licenced adult shooters should be able to own and shoot pretty much what they want."
You are of course quite correct in that there an almost infinite number of things that can be used to cause death and destruction but some are essential to daily life and commerce and others, like guns in the eyes of the antis and the silent majority, are not.
You are also probably right about gun crime.
There are learned works that argue that gun crime is less where there are legitimately held guns as they act as a deterrent. A burglar is much more likely to burgle a house where he knows there is no gun for fear of getting shot. Even in America it has been said that all the massacres to date have taken place at these no gun zones that they have over there so again there is no deterrent.
That all said there is no way that we will be allowed what we want - a line has to be drawn somewhere so I suggest that we be realistic at where it should be drawn. My line is already way too far above what we have now or will ever be again!
The important thing is to stick together or we will be divided and conquered as I have said before. We must change our minds and have one shooting body, agree some common ground and stand together in the face of any further legislation or limitation on our use of guns for sport.
You are of course quite correct in that there an almost infinite number of things that can be used to cause death and destruction but some are essential to daily life and commerce and others, like guns in the eyes of the antis and the silent majority, are not.
You are also probably right about gun crime.
There are learned works that argue that gun crime is less where there are legitimately held guns as they act as a deterrent. A burglar is much more likely to burgle a house where he knows there is no gun for fear of getting shot. Even in America it has been said that all the massacres to date have taken place at these no gun zones that they have over there so again there is no deterrent.
That all said there is no way that we will be allowed what we want - a line has to be drawn somewhere so I suggest that we be realistic at where it should be drawn. My line is already way too far above what we have now or will ever be again!
The important thing is to stick together or we will be divided and conquered as I have said before. We must change our minds and have one shooting body, agree some common ground and stand together in the face of any further legislation or limitation on our use of guns for sport.
ips
Well-known member
- Joined
- Jul 19, 2012
- Messages
- 15,642
It is an old saying "guns dont kill, people kill" it is a very true statement and in my mind the only way to avoid "people" killing (at least with guns) is to implement a well run licencing criteria. This I believe we allready have in place however there have been a few very unfortunate occasions were licensed shooters have crossed the line of sanity. It is of course conjecture that these people would have used other means available other than guns but one can assume going off the level of similar incidents with machete's and samurai swords (readily available) that it is a viable argument and therefore we can conclude that (a) you can never avoid someone losing there sanity and commiting terrible acts with numerour types of weapon ( b ) the licencing body failed in some way. ( c ) both
Either way it seems very unfair to me to stop someone enjoying a legitimate pass time of there choice in an attempt to avoid the unavoidable. The public are not that naive not to realise that 99.9999 % of gun crime is carried out by unlicenced criminals with illegally procured guns. My belief is that there only concern is that unsuitable people are not given the opportunity of possesing legally held guns. All weapons should therefore be controlled / licensed and I would include airguns, bows and swords (other than competitive fencing swords of course which are "foiled" ie blunt, FYI practice / none electric swords are classed as "steam" and they have a rubber point)
Either way it seems very unfair to me to stop someone enjoying a legitimate pass time of there choice in an attempt to avoid the unavoidable. The public are not that naive not to realise that 99.9999 % of gun crime is carried out by unlicenced criminals with illegally procured guns. My belief is that there only concern is that unsuitable people are not given the opportunity of possesing legally held guns. All weapons should therefore be controlled / licensed and I would include airguns, bows and swords (other than competitive fencing swords of course which are "foiled" ie blunt, FYI practice / none electric swords are classed as "steam" and they have a rubber point)
Last edited by a moderator:
Guerini Guy
Well-known member
"Apart from the humane despatch of animals, pistol's have no use as far as i'm concerned, so get rid for good"
That is just the sort of narrow minded comment you would expect to hear from the anti gun brigade, and an absolute proof of how the shooting community in general did not stand together to back the pistol shooters at the time of the ban.
Perhaps if your shotguns were made illegal and pistols were still allowed, your comments regarding the repeal of a ban wouldn't be quite so smug ?
Just saying !
That is just the sort of narrow minded comment you would expect to hear from the anti gun brigade, and an absolute proof of how the shooting community in general did not stand together to back the pistol shooters at the time of the ban.
Perhaps if your shotguns were made illegal and pistols were still allowed, your comments regarding the repeal of a ban wouldn't be quite so smug ?
Just saying !
