Significant incident Plymouth

C.R.A.Z.Y said:
Ban all guns for recreational use imho.
Click to expand...
i personally don't think there's any need to go to that extreme. for those that want to shoot for pleasure the gun club is a perfectly acceptable option.

C.R.A.Z.Y said:
That's not the same, people who shoot burglars have significant pre-warning and time to prepare!
Some lunatic hell bent on killing walking down the street with a weapon loaded and ready to go is MUCH harder to react to
Click to expand...
not necessarily. a burglar who's made it in to the house unheard and just appears in the bedroom beside you while your gun is safely locked in the gun cabinet? the lunatic walking down the street, from the relative safety of your home you could retrieve your gun and ready yourself to react.
in reality though, you'll not be much use in either scenario without significant training.
 
Mason- said:
I don't believe that either. We have incredibly strict gun laws as it is, we have very low gun related incidents. I think a lot of the reactions here are over the top and are throwing the baby out with the bathwater. The vast majority of people in Great Britain (excluding NI) who have shotguns have them for valid reasons, Rural/farming related + for sport. I think that people should be free to do those things. I don't think that putting guns in storage at shooting clubs will really do much to lower gun crime, nor would it prevent incidents such as this. I think that more regular checking of people with shotgun licenses is a better deterrent. I think if anyone gets referred to the police for any reason (no matter how minor) and they have a license then the firearms officer should look into them. By the sounds of it, this guy was a bit of a nutter, and if reports are believed he had been reported to the NHS for mental health help. In this scenario his guns should have been confiscated. They weren't. That's a failing.
Click to expand...


It's a failing that wouldn't happen if they weren't legal.

If the system fails and the system only exists to facilitate sport/entertainment it can be done away with.

Don't want them banned?

Hen you nee to make the system more robust.

If you can't and day deaths are an inevitable consequence then meh majority safety rules
 
wordy said:
Thats a good point, the articles about them (incels) on the BBC seems to only interested in labelling them. Theres no mention of the obvious mental health problems these young men have, no mention of any charities for them to contact, etc.

We are constantly told about the pressures young women have around their looks and how they need supporting, and the myriad of support available to them. Yet when young men feel depressed about theirs they are simply vilified in the national press with no mention of any support available to them, or ways to break out the downwards spiral they are trapped in.
Click to expand...


What obvious mental health problem?

They are sane, what diagnosis do you think fits them?
 
Chuk_Chuk said:
6 people died in the uk
or
0.000008571% of the poulation
or
0.06% of the total number of people that died in July (11573 - https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopula...glandandwalesprovisional/weekending30july2021)

Seems like "very few" people died and now everyone wants new legislation.

Good old stats abuse, works both ways.

For the record in this instance i just think framing it as a percentage of the population is just abusing stats to try and justify your argument. The population of the country is irrelevant.
Click to expand...


Or nearly 1% of the total murders per year?

I wasn't justifying anything i was pointing out gun owners are a tiny minority and not the majority as th other poster was claiming.


A tiny percentage would be affected by banning guns
 
Tefal said:
A tiny percentage would be affected by banning guns
Click to expand...
You can flip that and say an extremely large percentage of people would not be affected by keeping the laws as they are.

Gun homicides are extremely rare, this is just a knee-jerk reaction.

You are 20 times more likely to die from falling down stairs than from firearm homicide. 6 times more likely to die from inhaling food. 60 times more likely to die from a traffic accident... I could go on...
 
C.R.A.Z.Y said:
:rolleyes:
People like you really need to stop watching Hollywood films!
Even if he was armed the probability of him being able to un-holster remove safety take aim and kill before being shot is vanishingly small!
Click to expand...

There are videos online that show passers by have opened fire on an armed criminal.

Hollywood films? Well, I would like a big cowboy hat ;)

Though you guys make a good case, similar to knife crime, the more people armed with them for protection the more likely you are to need one.

But unless there is a complete lockdown on all weapons then there is always going to be people with guns. Guns are always going to be around.
 
Longbow said:
You can flip that and say an extremely large percentage of people would not be affected by keeping the laws as they are.
Click to expand...

Some people are frothing for a knee jerk reaction.

We accept the reality of deaths happening through malice and accident as part of the widespread use of motor vehicles as an example against the mindless line of any deaths being too many.

An extremely rare shooting occurs and there's flurry to penalise the small population of legal gun owners because ???
 
Tefal said:
Chuk_Chuk said:
According to the goverment there over 500,000 firearm licenses as of 2019. I don't think that qualifies as "very few"

https://assets.publishing.service.g...ificates-england-wales-2018-2019-hosb0919.pdf
Click to expand...

0.16% of the 30million working age population?

Less than 0.1% of the voting population?
Click to expand...

Your calculations are a bit off.

732,233 firearm and shotgun certificates in England and Wales (2019) with 591,302 certificate holders.

Based on the number of certificate holders:

~36m people of working age (say 18-65) - 1.64%

~47m people of voting age - 1.26%
 
Tefal said:
It's a failing that wouldn't happen if they weren't legal.

If the system fails and the system only exists to facilitate sport/entertainment it can be done away with.

Don't want them banned?

Hen you nee to make the system more robust.

If you can't and day deaths are an inevitable consequence then meh majority safety rules
Click to expand...
See this post:
https://www.overclockers.co.uk/forums/posts/35031183/

It’s completely over the top reaction to ban them all. 500,000 firearms license in the UK. That’s 500,000 who have guns and don’t go around shooting people. Not including the people who shoot regularly without a license or go on clay pigeon shooting days as an event day.

How many freedoms do people have to give up for the actions of mentally ill nutters.

“You don’t need guns to have fun take up another sport”.

You ride bikes don’t you? You don’t need a bike to get around, get the bus/train use a car, they’re much safer.

It’s a silly argument. It’s over the top.
 
robgmun said:
This is why I find people like hurfdurf so toxic and infuriating. He gallops into every thread and white knights every time in a horrendously cringe-worthy fashion whereas it's the men that need support and guidance, that is the true and only way to reduce misogyny and promote healthy positive attitudes to the opposite sex. This is why I champion people like Jordan Peterson who really gives good guidance to how men should handle themselves. Once you pass the liberal hand wringing over him and realize he's not alt-right at all then you realize he says is vitally important.

If this guy followed him instead of hanging around 4chan getting increasingly mentally ill this probably wouldn't have happened.
Click to expand...

Ah yes, we should do more to support and cuddle racists and misogynists. That’ll work. Those proud boys and Nazis are the way they are not because they are bad people, but because they simply don’t get enough love and affection.

Education and support for men is important, but so is stamping out and not accepting racism. WW2 wasn’t won in the debate school or via the theory of ideas.
 
I keep reading people flip flopping between Firearms License (FAC) and Shotgun Certificate (SGC) when they are talking about this as if they are equivalent and that just isn't the case.

Both require the filling of a Form 201, both require and interview with a Firearms Enquiry Officer (FEO) and both need a letter from your GP saying that you are of sound mind and fit to hold a license/cert.

Similarities stop there.

A Shotgun Certificate requires one referee on the form. No prior experience or training with a shotgun is required. You do not need to be a member of a club or regularly go shooting, or even have ever been shooting - you can essentially have one just because you want one and the onus is on the police to tell you why you cant have one. Depending on the police force you may or may not have to store it in a safe, some forces still allow a clamp on the trigger and a chain to secure in a cupboard. Ammunition is not limited and does not have to stored in a safe. A shotgun certificate allows the purchase of shells from birdshot up to 9mm buckshot, a certificate is not required to be in possession of this ammunition (literally anyone can keep it at home on a shelf). Once a shotgun certificate has been issued the owner can buy as many shotguns as they like provided they do not go over their storage limitations set out by the issuing force. Shotgun certificate holders can lend each other their guns for up to 72 hours without notifying the police. People without a shotgun certificate are permitted to use a shotgun without their own license so long as they are supervised by someone with one. You can shoot where you like provided the shot does not pass the boundary of your land and you are at least 50ft away from the nearest public highway. There were approximately 600,000 SGC holders in the UK on the last count.

A Firearms License requires two referees on the form. You need to be a member of and completed the prohibition period of a home office approved club, typically 3-6 months and completed their training program and allowed them to vet you as an individual to help support your application. Members of the club are encouraged to monitor each other for mental stability and to report to the police if they notice anything alarming - this is effective constant peer review monitoring that is missing from shotgun shooting. You will apply for specific firearm slots on the license, by type and calibre and you may or may not be awarded these based on the individual recommendation of the FEO. The onus is on you to prove to the police why you need a license. You must use each firearm in your possession at least 3 times a year or the police will deem that you do not have a need to be in possession of said firearm and will take it from you. You may only use the firearm at the locations prescribed on the firearm license, typically just the range you are a member of. Ammunition is limited and listed on the firearm license, it is illegal to be in possession of more of it than what is written on the license. Ammunition must be safely stored in a separate safe to the firearms, which must also be in a safe. Any changing of hands of a firearm must be recorded and the police notified immediately. People without a firearms certificate may not use a firearm without being a member of a club where it is being shot with the exception of .22 rifles under section 11.2. ANY behaviour that shows that you are not an outstanding member of society will lead to a firearms license being revoked, people were losing their licenses during Covid for breaching lockdown rules, people have had their licenses revoked for posting inappropriate YouTube video using their firearms. Demolition Ranch would have lost his license within weeks if he were British. At last count there were 150,000 FAC holders in the UK, most of these will likely have a shotgun certificate too, since you easily meet the requirements having jumped through the FAC hoops anyway.

To sum up - Shotgun certificate, fairly easy to obtain and keep, laws on gun and ammunition ownership fairly relaxed. Firearms Licence, very hard to obtain and keep, laws on gun and ammunition ownership very strict. The fact that one is a certificate and one is a license should highlight how differently the law sees these things.

Please don't confuse the two just because they both involve 'guns'. Its a bit like making restrictions tougher for licensed car owners because some yob on an unlicensed E-scooter hit someone on the pavement just because they are both vehicles.


I do know the most likely outcome however - mass outrage from an ignorant public to make firearms licensing tougher will mean more restrictions for firearms owners by politicians looking for an easy win. Meanwhile shotgun certification, enjoyed by the elite and privileged (who wants pesky regulations and laws in the way when you have lady such and such over for a bit of grouse shooting on your estate), will see no changes.
 
hurfdurf said:
Ah yes, we should do more to support and cuddle racists and misogynists. That’ll work. Those proud boys and Nazis are the way they are not because they are bad people, but because they simply don’t get enough love and affection.

Education and support for men is important, but so is stamping out and not accepting racism. WW2 wasn’t won in the debate school or via the theory of ideas.
Click to expand...
So what’s your solution then? Get the UK army and Red Army to flatten their houses and then hold trials in Nurembourg for them? Or maybe something needs to be done to help young men from falling down this road?
 
hurfdurf said:
Ah yes, we should do more to support and cuddle racists and misogynists. That’ll work. Those proud boys and Nazis are the way they are not because they are bad people, but because they simply don’t get enough love and affection.

Education and support for men is important, but so is stamping out and not accepting racism. WW2 wasn’t won in the debate school or via the theory of ideas.
Click to expand...

Nah, give them something better to believe in.

Don't make martyrs of them. You aren't ever going to kill the ideas through actual killing as you seem to be implying here.
 
C.R.A.Z.Y said:
Ban all guns for recreational use imho.
If you like target practise and shooting then get a good air rifle!

''overwhelming majority to suffer''
lol
Very few people have firearms licence
Click to expand...

Id love to see you hit a clay pigeon with an air rifle, that would be pretty amazing.
 
Mason- said:
See this post:
https://www.overclockers.co.uk/forums/posts/35031183/

It’s completely over the top reaction to ban them all. 500,000 firearms license in the UK. That’s 500,000 who have guns and don’t go around shooting people. Not including the people who shoot regularly without a license or go on clay pigeon shooting days as an event day.

How many freedoms do people have to give up for the actions of mentally ill nutters.

“You don’t need guns to have fun take up another sport”.

You ride bikes don’t you? You don’t need a bike to get around, get the bus/train use a car, they’re much safer.

It’s a silly argument. It’s over the top.
Click to expand...

Matt Easton did a good video on it a little while ago, regarding weapons bans in general. He's mainly interested in swords, but the same principle applies to all weapons. The example he used was pets. Nobody needs a pet and pets cause a lot of harm. Quite a few people are killed by pets. A lot of environmental harm is caused by pets. But that was just the example he uses for a wider argument. I think he does a good job of a summary. The video is only 9 minutes long.

 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom