Poll: UK Gun Laws

[Rroff]

It's really difficult to risk assess people, and to make that regular enough to pick up changes.

For example, Mental Health teams (of all sorts) do not prevent their service users committing homicide/ suicide, even when they are working well and having regular contact.

I'm not against better risk assessment, but it is difficult, and not foolproof.

It is not an easy fix.

Ultimately when it comes to homicide/suicide changes to firearms regulations are going to be marginal at best - we already have fairly robust regulation in that respect which reduces the crossover of people with that intent and having access to firearms and without a gun by and large most of those people will still go through with it at some point one way or another.

 

[Feek]

Is there a limit on the amount of cartridges you can buy/own?

Standard shotgun cartridges, no.

Other ammunition, yes.

For example, I'm allowed to hold / buy up to the following:

.22RF - 1100 / 1000
.38 - 750 / 500
.357 mag - 750 / 500
.44 mag - 750 / 500
7.62/.308 - 600 /500
12 bore slug - 300 / 250

12 bore solid slug is tightly controlled and has to be stored securely in a cabinet, unlike standard shotgun cartridges.

 

[BUDFORCE]

I own 3 guns.

.22lr bolt action CZ457
.22lr semi auto Chiappa M1-22
.44 magnum Ruger M77 bolt action


Id have more but this fiasco I'm having with the Chiappa has delayed trying to get a variation which is frustrating.....

But I will soon apply for another .44magnum, another .22 probably one more as well not decided, maybe a pistol.

I can hold 1000 .22 rounds and 300 .44magnum.

The thing with the .44 magnum rounds is I can make my own and theoretically can store an unlimited amount of power heads primers etc.

The gun laws are strict enough as they are.

 

[Feek]

maybe a pistol.

O RLY? Good luck with that!

 

[BUDFORCE]

O RLY? Good luck with that!

Yeee long barrel or whatever they are.

Don't forget you can get a black powder as well.

 

[BUDFORCE]

One of the guys at the club has something like 40 black powder pistols.

To be fair the police are always hassling him, some of those are high caliber and make a (really) loud bang and would certainly take your head off.

 

[Chris Wilson]

With Ukraine having this war with Russia the place will be awash with illegally acquired weapons soon, and ammunition. From pistols and rifles to rocket launchers and above. A terrorist's dream scenario. A bonanza for quasi well connected criminals.

 

[Rroff]

With Ukraine having this war with Russia the place will be awash with illegally acquired weapons soon, and ammunition. From pistols and rifles to rocket launchers and above. A terrorist's dream scenario. A bonanza for quasi well connected criminals.

The current situation with Ukraine I think is going to have some implications - there seems to be a rise in Russian connected lawlessness where certain elements have even less respect for international law, etc. which is going to trickle into the UK in impact - while a fair bit of that is digital i.e. rise in hacking and spyware, etc. other elements are physical.

 

[Ahleckz]

Seems a bit crass lusting over your guns in a thread started because someone killed his wife and daughter.

Sure, he could have used a knife. But he didn’t. He got his gun from his secure cabinet. Took the time to load it, and then shot people. It wasn’t a spur of the moment killing that could have been done with a knife. There was planning and premeditation here and the gun was the unique thing which allowed this double murder and I really don’t get why he needed it. If we had better laws then these two people would likely still be alive.

 

[potatolord]

Yes, it is tricky, however more opportunities to identify risk is always better.

Your example about suicide doesn't quite fit, though.


The benefit of regulating guns under professional services would mean that most would be stored in their local secure location, taking away the instant access.

A lot mention the perpetrator could utilise other means, they may well do, but non are as cold or quick as firing a gun.

My example was just to illustrate that, even in a heavily regulated sector, it's difficult to identify potentially harmful behaviour changes.

I don't have any objections to changing regulations about storage.

Point taken, but few domestic murders are committed using firearms, so there's little, if anything, to gain here. That's assuming these people wouldn't just go to a claw hammer instead.

 

[potatolord]

Ultimately when it comes to homicide/suicide changes to firearms regulations are going to be marginal at best - we already have fairly robust regulation in that respect which reduces the crossover of people with that intent and having access to firearms and without a gun by and large most of those people will still go through with it at some point one way or another.

Yep, that's more or less what I said further up this thread.

 

[Feek]

Seems a bit crass lusting over your guns in a thread started because someone killed his wife and daughter.

It's a fair point, I've removed the appropriate posts (mine included).

 

[BUDFORCE]

It's a fair point, I've removed the appropriate posts (mine included).

Yup fair enough.

 

[dave28]

this is a very rare case, if a man can do that with a gun then the same person could have used any method.

a man local to me owned a fish and chips take away and put his wife in the hot frying oil and she died so it was murder by sunflower oil.

if this man did not have a gun then he could have used anything, you cant just say he would never have killed if he had no gun

 

[Terminal_Boy]

I loathe the gun culture in America and how it has permeated a lot of western society.

However we have shooting clubs here in the UK and farmers need them for vermin and livestock protection.

Gun clubs for things such as clay pigeon shooting is perfectly reasonable. Or even target shooting. It's a sport and hobby.

Hunting is also perfectly legitimate. I wouldn't want to ban anyone from hunting.

That said part of me feels that the gun should be left locked up at a gun club perhaps with a log of who signs it out etc?

For farmers though there's no reasonable way of banning them from them.

From knowledge it's pretty thorough to get a gun licence with a lot of prerequisites

The U.K. had their NRA several years before the USA did. Gun ownership in the U.K. was fairly widespread and almost completely unregulated until after WW1 when race riots and general unrest led to the 1920 Firearms Act.

 

[shauncr91]

All I see is a load of wannabe Americans. I want to own a gun, so as my right as a civilian, I can.
Bore off.

Give me a legitimate excuse for owning one or a use case where it is needed in this country.
Still waiting.

I use mine for shooting birds and clays.

 

[shauncr91]

Seems a bit crass lusting over your guns in a thread started because someone killed his wife and daughter.

Sure, he could have used a knife. But he didn’t. He got his gun from his secure cabinet. Took the time to load it, and then shot people. It wasn’t a spur of the moment killing that could have been done with a knife. There was planning and premeditation here and the gun was the unique thing which allowed this double murder and I really don’t get why he needed it. If we had better laws then these two people would likely still be alive.

They wouldn't be alive he would've killed them in different ways.

 

[Maple Leaf]

Ultimately when it comes to homicide/suicide changes to firearms regulations are going to be marginal at best - we already have fairly robust regulation in that respect which reduces the crossover of people with that intent and having access to firearms and without a gun by and large most of those people will still go through with it at some point one way or another.

In the end it comes down to how much you value human freedom. Our gun control laws are already among the toughest in the world. The rules on owning pistols in the UK are stricter than those in Russia and they are virtually a dictatorship!

If we prohibited the civilian ownership of firearms to everyone other then registered pest controllers and vets etc, we might save the lives of a small number of people each year due to murders with legally held firearms. However, most murderers would simple use other legally owned implements instead.

 

[Freefaller]

The U.K. had their NRA several years before the USA did. Gun ownership in the U.K. was fairly widespread and almost completely unregulated until after WW1 when race riots and general unrest led to the 1920 Firearms Act.

Yes but it's gone full circle.

 

[Rroff]

Sure, he could have used a knife. But he didn’t. He got his gun from his secure cabinet. Took the time to load it, and then shot people. It wasn’t a spur of the moment killing that could have been done with a knife. There was planning and premeditation here and the gun was the unique thing which allowed this double murder and I really don’t get why he needed it. If we had better laws then these two people would likely still be alive.

That is a twisted up argument really though I see where you are coming from - people often argue against guns on the premise they allow for spur of the moment killings, though more so in the US with being more readily available and to hand. If someone took the time to get a gun from a secured location and load it, etc. then they were pretty set on going through with whatever and without a gun then they'd have used some other method - potentially one which happens a bit of driving intentionally into the path of a large vehicle at speed which then also affects the other vehicle driver and other potential collateral.