Air pistols & guns. Time for them to be licensed?

[melthebell]

No ... there is no evidence. Just as there is no correlation between using a kitchen knife to make a sandwich and the desire to go out and stab someone.

 

theres a complete difference in making a sandwich and killing someone to shooting a gun and shooting a gun

[TimeTravelle]

Perhaps there is room for a 'light firearms' licence that doesn't involves the rigmarole of a full licence. I'm sure that more qualified people than me could come up with some criteria that would suit. What sort of things might you suggest if it were to be introduced?

 

It doesn't seem right that a 14 year old can buy a £4 gun and pellets from a market stall in Whitby does it?

 

Sorry Tony, hadn't seen this! It would still involve processing applications and that's where the man-hours get tied up. I suppose in the days of old you could perhaps get it over the counter of the Post Office, but as they're being closed right, left and centre who knows.

 

Also, more importantly, 14 year old cannot buy a gun -- it is illegal to for him to purchase one at this age and illegal to sell one to someone this age. If you know it's happening, please do tell the police.

[TimeTravelle]

theres a complete difference in making a sandwich and killing someone to shooting a gun and shooting a gun

 

Sorry mate ... if you could say that again in clear English. I think the real thing that offends people who enjoy the sport of shooting air rifles (and there are many, many people around who do, they just don't go on Gun Pride marches through London) is that participants are drawn from all walks of life. The ones I meet are are intelligent, honest individuals and upstanding members of society.

 

If you really want to find out more about it, PM me and I'd be happy to show you what's involved.

[melthebell]

Sorry mate ... if you could say that again in clear English.

 

ill say it slowly

 

to me somebody making a sandwich DOESNT think ooh i fancy stabbing somebody with this knife cos its a beautiful knife.

BUT

i suppose some people could start using air pistols to shoot things and think ooh i like this, would love to shoot a proper handgun one day.

 

i was just thinking if there was any data for such actions or if there should be.

im sure most people dont grow up with a love, knowledge, able to use handguns WITHOUT proper training OR using air pistols in your youth

[mrteabag]

i have to agree with you mel i started as a youngster with air weapons and wanted to fire a real firearm.

now i have land and have shot a 410 shotgun and loads of rimfire rifles but wouldnt give up my air weapon for the world if i had to choose which gun i had to shoot it would be my air weapon

loads more fun

[TimeTravelle]

ill say it slowly

 

to me somebody making a sandwich DOESNT think ooh i fancy stabbing somebody with this knife cos its a beautiful knife.

BUT

i suppose some people could start using air pistols to shoot things and think ooh i like this, would love to shoot a proper handgun one day.

 

1. Exactly. Just as someone shooting an air rifle in a field doesn't make them want to go out and acquire an illegal firearm.

 

2. But just look at the people -- and particularly the kids -- who have these illegal weapons ... they're part of this gang culture most of them who's mindset is infiltrated by rap "artists" who seem to enjoy writing lyrics glamourising shooting people.

 

3. Air pistols were used much more by kids in the 1940s (the Webley Junior and Senior pistols were legendary). Were they couraged to get a real shooher because they felt the air pistol was boring. Evidence suggests not really.

[melthebell]

1. Exactly. Just as someone shooting an air rifle in a field doesn't make them want to go out and acquire an illegal firearm.

 

2. But just look at the people -- and particularly the kids -- who have these illegal weapons ... they're part of this gang culture most of them who's mindset is infiltrated by rap "artists" who seem to enjoy writing lyrics glamourising shooting people.

 

3. Air pistols were used much more by kids in the 1940s (the Webley Junior and Senior pistols were legendary). Were they couraged to get a real shooher because they felt the air pistol was boring. Evidence suggests not really.

 

thats what im asking, is there / should there be evidence, either way?

i think we come from 2 completely different sides tbh and will never agree, you love it and will swear blind it doesnt.

 

i did used to shoot my dads air rifle now and again but havent been interested in em for about 27 years.

 

as for rap.............ive been into rap a long time and its never made me want to go out and get a gun, there must be other underlying factors.

u still havent answered my questions on whether people who use illegal handguns must have trained / been used to guns previously, i dont believe the spray method as being valid, unless its a shotgun or ak47

handguns you need handling experience, and i think youd have more chance of being busted firing hand guns in fields in training rather than air pistols?

 

tbh it seems theres a bit of propaganda going on with all the people in favour of keeping things as they stand, where on the other hand i couldnt give a **** what happens to em tbh, i just agreed in principle cos we have to do something to stop a rising tide of gun crime (and i know its not the only step)

[TimeTravelle]

handguns you need handling experience, and i think youd have more chance of being busted firing hand guns in fields in training rather than air pistols?

 

tbh it seems theres a bit of propaganda going on with all the people in favour of keeping things as they stand, where on the other hand i couldnt give a **** what happens to em tbh, i just agreed in principle cos we have to do something to stop a rising tide of gun crime (and i know its not the only step)

 

1. I don't think you need that much experience because point the illegal handgun, holding it tight and pulling the trigger invariably does its harm. It's not like a more complicated assault rifle or something. They are -- unfortunately -- very easy to shoot.

 

2. I hope you've at least been a bit enlightened about the debate from "the other side" and at least considered some of the arguments about how extra legislation won't stop those who already ignore existing laws on firearms. My real point is that we really have to get tough with those who flout existing regulations but the authorities already seem unable or unwilling to tackle it. There is nothing more in the world I'd like to see in this debate than those who flout the law being subject to the full force of it.

 

Edit: 21 posts already ... I might join in the discussions on the other subjects here (not talking about guns!), looks an interesting site

[Dungbeetle]

Then, a month or so later, someone gets shot by a yob, criminal or hoody, using an unlicenced & therefore illegal air gun. Let's say this person has been blinded, or worse, so the government bans all guns, air, rimfire, centerfire & shot guns. The next month someone else gets injured or killed with the illegal use of a gun. A gun that has been banned, i.e. any gun.What do you do now? The banning of the guns has stopped responsible people using them. But it hasn't stopped criminals & the like using them. This is proved by the fact that since the ban on handguns after Dunblane, GUN CRIME INVOLVING HANDGUNS HAS INCREASED 60%!.

Many posters have already mentioned that it’s pointless introducing newer, more Draconian laws when the laws already in place are adequate, as long as they are enforced by the Police with full backing by the Home Office.

 

Dunblane, terrible though it was, exemplifies this. Hamilton had committed a previous firearms offence for possession of an unlicensed rifle – on that basis alone, he should never have been permitted a certificate.

Later, the shooting fraternity, and his club, had recommended to the local firearms officer that his license not be renewed, on the grounds that they thought he was unsafe. The firearms officer in turn recommended his certificate be revoked, but the Chief Constable of Strathclyde Police overturned the recommendation – because Hamilton was a highly active ‘professional complainer’ and he didn’t want to deal with the fallout from Hamilton if he took his FAC away.

 

Dunblane only happened because existing laws were not applied by Strathclyde Police. Hamilton should not, under law at the time, have had pistols at all.

 

Banning handguns after Dunblane served no purpose other than for the government to appease a group of campaigners who wanted, for reasons of pure ignorance, to ban guns.

[evildrneil]

Okay, so let’s start a petition to licence golf clubs, especially those dangerous irons – they could do a lot of damage to someone’s cranium. The same analogy using your logic holds true: if you’re not a member of a golf club and therefore you can’t show that you have somewhere safe to use one, then you shouldn’t really have one, let alone a full set.

 

Can’t afford the annual membership at your local golf and country club? Tough. Don’t go often enough to warrant spending that amount of money every year? Tough: at least lives will be saved.

 

And why should anyone need a car with an engine capacity larger than 1 litre? After all, a car is only useful to get one from A to B: anything larger will surely only tempt drivers to exceed the speed limit and risk injuring or killing other people? Do you want to own a Porsche? Then prove you need one by providing a racing licence prior to purchase.

 

See where this thin end of the wedge is leading? It’s all about freedom of choice, and doing what you enjoy doing, for goodness’ sake.

 

Please don’t resort to sophistry: put forward a compelling argument why airguns should be licensed: I’d dearly love to hear one.

 

Helibish: You are quite obviously clueless on the subject matter at hand. I invite you to read and comprehend your own sig in the context of this debate, or did you mean to type “punish the breed not the deed?”

 

It's quite a simple concept really - a golf club is primarily to hit golf balls with but could be adapted to hurt people as could well pretty much any tool from a toothpick to a sledge hammer. A weapon on the other hand is designed to produce some destructive effect in whatever you fire it at without adaption and has no other use. To claim that if weapons are to be licensed in any way then all objects that could plausibly be used to hurt someone is sophistry of the type you are demanding people avoid!!!

 

Even if weapons were to be licensed (which I don't see happening to be honest - our dear govt is more likely to just ban them outright!) I don't see why it should restrict the enjoyment of the average shooter as they will be able to show a reason for having a weapon and will have somewhere to shoot them. Perhaps you would like to supply a counter-argument to this without your earlier sophistry?