Sex God
Is it time for changes to the country's already stringent gun laws after this tradgic case?
Join the most popular community of UK swingers now
Login
UK Gun Laws
Is it time for changes to the country's already stringent gun laws after this tradgic case?
No I dont think so either, there are probably 1000`s of people who responsibly own a firemarm in this country who would never use it in this way.
This guy had for want of a better word a "brain fart" and tragically took it out on not only his own family and friends but complete strangers, this doesn`t mean everyone with a gun will do this also. Look at all the youths that are killing each other with guns and knives that they aquire illegally.
Its like the people who watch horror then go out and kill people because they feel influenced by them, these people are unstable in the first place, we all watch them but we don`t all go out and re-enact them
This guy had for want of a better word a "brain fart" and tragically took it out on not only his own family and friends but complete strangers, this doesn`t mean everyone with a gun will do this also. Look at all the youths that are killing each other with guns and knives that they aquire illegally.
Its like the people who watch horror then go out and kill people because they feel influenced by them, these people are unstable in the first place, we all watch them but we don`t all go out and re-enact them
Yes without any shadow of a doubt.
We are in ENGLAND not the USA, there is no reason whatsoever for a normal person to have a gun.
It is all well and good spouting that the gun laws are fine as they are....not to the people killed and all the family and friends left behind to pick up the pieces they are not.
I used to know someone who belonged to a gun club, so held a license so was able to take his guns into his home. Yes they were locked away....so what?
There is no need to bring the guns home into a two up two down house, in a residential street. Want a gun then fine, but leave it along with the ammunition at the gun club.
I know this kind of crime is rare but with such a weapon as these I think you just cannot take anything for granted. How long will it be before another license holder does the same thing? Because it will happen again.
There is NO need at all to come home with these kinds of weapons.
No knee jerk reaction this time is good, but the laws have to be so tight, that a gun holder has to squeak whilst walking.
Guns in the wrong hands are lethal, and this is going to happen again.....leave the guns at the gun club....no weapons to be left in any residential area. I am not saying this will illiminate every nutcase out there, but it may just stop another nutter from going on a killing spree on a UK street.
We are in ENGLAND not the USA, there is no reason whatsoever for a normal person to have a gun.
It is all well and good spouting that the gun laws are fine as they are....not to the people killed and all the family and friends left behind to pick up the pieces they are not.
I used to know someone who belonged to a gun club, so held a license so was able to take his guns into his home. Yes they were locked away....so what?
There is no need to bring the guns home into a two up two down house, in a residential street. Want a gun then fine, but leave it along with the ammunition at the gun club.
I know this kind of crime is rare but with such a weapon as these I think you just cannot take anything for granted. How long will it be before another license holder does the same thing? Because it will happen again.
There is NO need at all to come home with these kinds of weapons.
No knee jerk reaction this time is good, but the laws have to be so tight, that a gun holder has to squeak whilst walking.
Guns in the wrong hands are lethal, and this is going to happen again.....leave the guns at the gun club....no weapons to be left in any residential area. I am not saying this will illiminate every nutcase out there, but it may just stop another nutter from going on a killing spree on a UK street.
Sex God
Quote by kentswingers777
Yes without any shadow of a doubt.
We are in ENGLAND not the USA, there is no reason whatsoever for a normal person to have a gun.
It is all well and good spouting that the gun laws are fine as they are....not to the people killed and all the family and friends left behind to pick up the pieces they are not.
I used to know someone who belonged to a gun club, so held a license so was able to take his guns into his home. Yes they were locked away....so what?
There is no need to bring the guns home into a two up two down house, in a residential street. Want a gun then fine, but leave it along with the ammunition at the gun club.
I know this kind of crime is rare but with such a weapon as these I think you just cannot take anything for granted. How long will it be before another license holder does the same thing? Because it will happen again.
There is NO need at all to come home with these kinds of weapons.
No knee jerk reaction this time is good, but the laws have to be so tight, that a gun holder has to squeak whilst walking.
Guns in the wrong hands are lethal, and this is going to happen again.....leave the guns at the gun club....no weapons to be left in any residential area. I am not saying this will illiminate every nutcase out there, but it may just stop another nutter from going on a killing spree on a UK street.
so is a kitchen knife buddy :scared:
Mod
These events are rare, fortunately very rare. However people are killed/murdered on a regular basis throughout the UK but the weapons are illegal weapons, so why penalise the law abiding citizens who responsibly use firearms just because of an exceptionally bad, but rare event?
Let's look at a different, although true, event. A guy decides he's going to commit suicide, so he gets into his car and deliberately drives into another car at speed. He survived, but the innocent occupants of the other car didn't. Do we decide that, because he used a car as the weapon that we heavily restrict who can drive?
Another scenario. Both you and me, Kenty, ride powerful motorbikes, and of course we both ride within the national speed limits at all times, don't we? However it has been known that some bikers will ride slightly quicker than is legal. If because of their actions they kill someone, do we ban all bikes? where do we draw the line on these things?
I've often heard the expression 'As long as it saves at least one life, it will be worth it' - but if that was true we would stop everybody doing everything, because there are so many dangers in everyday life that it would be completely impossible to legislate all the dangers out of it.
So for me, I would say by all means look at the current regulations and look at this particular case, but make sure they keep the perspective right on any changes.
Mal
Let's look at a different, although true, event. A guy decides he's going to commit suicide, so he gets into his car and deliberately drives into another car at speed. He survived, but the innocent occupants of the other car didn't. Do we decide that, because he used a car as the weapon that we heavily restrict who can drive?
Another scenario. Both you and me, Kenty, ride powerful motorbikes, and of course we both ride within the national speed limits at all times, don't we? However it has been known that some bikers will ride slightly quicker than is legal. If because of their actions they kill someone, do we ban all bikes? where do we draw the line on these things?
I've often heard the expression 'As long as it saves at least one life, it will be worth it' - but if that was true we would stop everybody doing everything, because there are so many dangers in everyday life that it would be completely impossible to legislate all the dangers out of it.
So for me, I would say by all means look at the current regulations and look at this particular case, but make sure they keep the perspective right on any changes.
Mal
Sex God
Quote by kentswingers777
Yes without any shadow of a doubt.
We are in ENGLAND not the USA, there is no reason whatsoever for a normal person to have a gun.
It is all well and good spouting that the gun laws are fine as they are....not to the people killed and all the family and friends left behind to pick up the pieces they are not.
I used to know someone who belonged to a gun club, so held a license so was able to take his guns into his home. Yes they were locked away....so what?
There is no need to bring the guns home into a two up two down house, in a residential street. Want a gun then fine, but leave it along with the ammunition at the gun club.
I know this kind of crime is rare but with such a weapon as these I think you just cannot take anything for granted. How long will it be before another license holder does the same thing? Because it will happen again.
There is NO need at all to come home with these kinds of weapons.
No knee jerk reaction this time is good, but the laws have to be so tight, that a gun holder has to squeak whilst walking.
Guns in the wrong hands are lethal, and this is going to happen again.....leave the guns at the gun club....no weapons to be left in any residential area. I am not saying this will illiminate every nutcase out there, but it may just stop another nutter from going on a killing spree on a UK street.
Most shotguns and firearms would be used over farmland and not at any designated club, would you penalise these people?
There are so many things dangerous in the wrong hands, so are we to ban them all?
Handguns were used in 4,275 offences during 2008-09, a rise of 2% on 2007-08, yet we have a ban on handguns, a legitimate sport destroyed but criminals continue theirs
Sex God
Quote by Mal
These events are rare, fortunately very rare. However people are killed/murdered on a regular basis throughout the UK but the weapons are illegal weapons, so why penalise the law abiding citizens who responsibly use firearms just because of an exceptionally bad, but rare event?
Let's look at a different, although true, event. A guy decides he's going to commit suicide, so he gets into his car and deliberately drives into another car at speed. He survived, but the innocent occupants of the other car didn't. Do we decide that, because he used a car as the weapon that we heavily restrict who can drive?
Another scenario. Both you and me, Kenty, ride powerful motorbikes, and of course we both ride within the national speed limits at all times, don't we? However it has been known that some bikers will ride slightly quicker than is legal. If because of their actions they kill someone, do we ban all bikes? where do we draw the line on these things?
I've often heard the expression 'As long as it saves at least one life, it will be worth it' - but if that was true we would stop everybody doing everything, because there are so many dangers in everyday life that it would be completely impossible to legislate all the dangers out of it.
So for me, I would say by all means look at the current regulations and look at this particular case, but make sure they keep the perspective right on any changes.
Mal
:thumbup:
This story keeps raising its ugly head
None of us would like to see that, but they are dangerous weapons in the wrong hands :wink:
Quote by Bluefish2009
These events are rare, fortunately very rare. However people are killed/murdered on a regular basis throughout the UK but the weapons are illegal weapons, so why penalise the law abiding citizens who responsibly use firearms just because of an exceptionally bad, but rare event?
Let's look at a different, although true, event. A guy decides he's going to commit suicide, so he gets into his car and deliberately drives into another car at speed. He survived, but the innocent occupants of the other car didn't. Do we decide that, because he used a car as the weapon that we heavily restrict who can drive?
Another scenario. Both you and me, Kenty, ride powerful motorbikes, and of course we both ride within the national speed limits at all times, don't we? However it has been known that some bikers will ride slightly quicker than is legal. If because of their actions they kill someone, do we ban all bikes? where do we draw the line on these things?
I've often heard the expression 'As long as it saves at least one life, it will be worth it' - but if that was true we would stop everybody doing everything, because there are so many dangers in everyday life that it would be completely impossible to legislate all the dangers out of it.
So for me, I would say by all means look at the current regulations and look at this particular case, but make sure they keep the perspective right on any changes.
Mal
:thumbup:
This story keeps raising its ugly head
None of us would like to see that, but they are dangerous weapons in the wrong hands :wink:
I am not a biker but to limit a vehicle may not be the best answer. When I went through my driving lessons I always remember that my instructor banged into me that there are three ways to avoid an accident. Brake, steer or accelerate (even if this breaks the road speed limit). To limit any vehicle could take away the third option.....that could make it more dangerous.
However, I don't know how the technology would work so do not know if my observations are valid or not
Dave_Notts
I still cannot see any reason why a normal member of the public joins a gun club, and as long as there is adequate " security " is allowed to take those guns home.
Is there any purpose in this and in many instances there are children in the house.
Is there any reason at all why guns should not be kept at the gun club, under strict security?
Why would you possibly want to take a gun and the ammunition into a family home?
Is there any purpose in this and in many instances there are children in the house.
Is there any reason at all why guns should not be kept at the gun club, under strict security?
Why would you possibly want to take a gun and the ammunition into a family home?
Quote by Mal
These events are rare, fortunately very rare. However people are killed/murdered on a regular basis throughout the UK but the weapons are illegal weapons, so why penalise the law abiding citizens who responsibly use firearms just because of an exceptionally bad, but rare event?
Let's look at a different, although true, event. A guy decides he's going to commit suicide, so he gets into his car and deliberately drives into another car at speed. He survived, but the innocent occupants of the other car didn't. Do we decide that, because he used a car as the weapon that we heavily restrict who can drive?
Another scenario. Both you and me, Kenty, ride powerful motorbikes, and of course we both ride within the national speed limits at all times, don't we? However it has been known that some bikers will ride slightly quicker than is legal. If because of their actions they kill someone, do we ban all bikes? where do we draw the line on these things?
I've often heard the expression 'As long as it saves at least one life, it will be worth it' - but if that was true we would stop everybody doing everything, because there are so many dangers in everyday life that it would be completely impossible to legislate all the dangers out of it.
So for me, I would say by all means look at the current regulations and look at this particular case, but make sure they keep the perspective right on any changes.
Mal
Well I do. :wink:
Of course I ride to the national speed limits Mal, I always abide by the rules even on here.:giggle:
Once upon a time people made the kind of jokes/remarks to airport staff that nowadays would trigger off a massive security drama that would land the culprit in deep trouble.
Will everyone now be on a 'Nutter' alert, Picking up on everyday remarks they hear such as 'I'll murder him/her for this or that'?
I do feel people should fine tune their radars to pick up on the signs that might point towards someone they know who is behaving out of character, however slight.
Maybe you might just make the difference between someone being able to bleed off pressure before they do harm to themselves or someone else.
Ten years ago i missed the 'signs' that a mate was giving out and it was a shock to hear that he had committed suicide.
He was the type of person that (on the face of it)had it all and everything to live for.
Being a proud and independent man he hid it well but on reflection there were signs that everyone who knew him missed.
I,like many, have learned that this kind of hindsight is a cruel torment to live with,even now.
It never hurts to be a bit more perceptive but what you should never do is nothing about it once you suspect a problem.
Sometimes all you have to do is listen so they can vent off the pressure. the trick is to get them to 'open up'.
Will everyone now be on a 'Nutter' alert, Picking up on everyday remarks they hear such as 'I'll murder him/her for this or that'?
I do feel people should fine tune their radars to pick up on the signs that might point towards someone they know who is behaving out of character, however slight.
Maybe you might just make the difference between someone being able to bleed off pressure before they do harm to themselves or someone else.
Ten years ago i missed the 'signs' that a mate was giving out and it was a shock to hear that he had committed suicide.
He was the type of person that (on the face of it)had it all and everything to live for.
Being a proud and independent man he hid it well but on reflection there were signs that everyone who knew him missed.
I,like many, have learned that this kind of hindsight is a cruel torment to live with,even now.
It never hurts to be a bit more perceptive but what you should never do is nothing about it once you suspect a problem.
Sometimes all you have to do is listen so they can vent off the pressure. the trick is to get them to 'open up'.
People that I know who own firearms lock them away in cabinets and lock the amo seperately.
Lets not forget that this happened because of the situation the guy was in, whose to say he would not of used another weapon, a knife for example to do what he did, he was not rational at the time of these events
As usual people dont think things thru and just say lets ban it all.
A young guy was killed on the road not far from where I live, so should we ban cars, planes crash so should we not fly, boats sink so should we not cross the water, these take many lives too.
Situations happen that no one can foretell, that is what makes tradgedies (spelling?).
Lets not forget that this happened because of the situation the guy was in, whose to say he would not of used another weapon, a knife for example to do what he did, he was not rational at the time of these events
As usual people dont think things thru and just say lets ban it all.
A young guy was killed on the road not far from where I live, so should we ban cars, planes crash so should we not fly, boats sink so should we not cross the water, these take many lives too.
Situations happen that no one can foretell, that is what makes tradgedies (spelling?).
People who own firearms HAVE to lock them AND the ammunition.
If they do not have secure storage then they will not be allowed to have them.
When transporting them they have to be carried securely.
I think the security precautions are more than adequate, the rest is up to the police.
If they do not have secure storage then they will not be allowed to have them.
When transporting them they have to be carried securely.
The Firearms Act 1968 requires a certificate to be granted provided that the applicant is not prohibited from possessing firearms and that the chief officer of police is satisfied that he is fit to be entrusted with them.
Individuals who have been sentenced to a term of imprisonment of 3 years or more are prohibited from possessing firearms. In addition, those who have been sentenced to a term of less than 3 years may not be allowed to possess firearms until 5 years have elapsed from their date of release.
Even if a person has not themselves been convicted of an offence for which they have served a term of imprisonment, convictions or cautions for crimes involving violence, dishonesty or a disregard for public safety will be taken into consideration in the assessment of their suitability to possess firearms, as will any association with known criminals.
Intemperate habits will call into question a person’s suitability to possess firearms. Such habits may range from violent and aggressive behaviour to intemperate use of alcohol, although it will usually be a pattern of behaviour that triggers concern rather than a one-off incident.
Licensing officers will pay particular attention to any history of mental illness that an applicant may have. As part of the application process, you are required to provide the name and address of your GP and to give authority for them to provide the police with details of your medical history. The police will only seek this information in cases where there is some specific doubt or concern that they may have.
Applicants for firearm certificates and those seeking their renewal are expected to have proper regard for the safe-keeping and handling of firearms, and they are also expected to be prepared to co-operate with the licensing authorities.
The responsibility safely to store firearms and ammunition is normally discharged by installing a firearms security cabinet. All modern cabinets conform to BS7558, which is the approved standard of security that meets Home Office guidelines. Ammunition should be stored in a separate lockable container, and most gun cabinets designed for Section 1 firearms have integral ammunition containers.
Additional security measures may be required if you possess a large number of firearms, if you live in an area with a high risk of burglary or if the building is regularly unoccupied, and these might include the fitting of window locks or the use of alarm systems. An enquiry officer from the firearms licensing team will normally visit your home as part of the application process, and they will be able to advise.
I think the security precautions are more than adequate, the rest is up to the police.
Sex God
Quote by kentswingers777
Yes without any shadow of a doubt.
We are in ENGLAND not the USA, there is no reason whatsoever for a normal person to have a gun.
I don't agree that the gun laws should be changed.
I'm a bit puzzled about your comment above though Kenty - what difference does it make, what country we are in?
In the USA you have a constitutional right to have a gun, in England you do not. That is why I used the USA as an example.
I think it is a poor arguement to keep harping on about this accident or that accident, and then say " do we ban this or that as well "?
Why are people so opposed to people who have guns that use them solely at gun clubs,to not be allowed to take them home?
Why is it not a much better practice to leave your gun at the gun club where surely they will be in a much safer environment?
Did anyone actually see this guys house and the surrounding area?
Are people really telling me that it was safe and secure and perfectly ok to bring those kinds of weapons back to that house? Come on.....a gun is a much more dangerous weapon than any other. he could not have inflicted the damage he has now done with a knife.
I would bring in laws where guns should be kept at the gun club, and not to be taken into a family home.
In certain states in the USA IF someone broke into your home you would be allowed to use your gun, those laws do not exist over here, ask Tony Martin. To take a weapon like some of these home, into a terrace house in a residential area is madness.
Leave the gun at the gun club....where is the problem with that?
I think it is a poor arguement to keep harping on about this accident or that accident, and then say " do we ban this or that as well "?
Why are people so opposed to people who have guns that use them solely at gun clubs,to not be allowed to take them home?
Why is it not a much better practice to leave your gun at the gun club where surely they will be in a much safer environment?
Did anyone actually see this guys house and the surrounding area?
Are people really telling me that it was safe and secure and perfectly ok to bring those kinds of weapons back to that house? Come on.....a gun is a much more dangerous weapon than any other. he could not have inflicted the damage he has now done with a knife.
I would bring in laws where guns should be kept at the gun club, and not to be taken into a family home.
In certain states in the USA IF someone broke into your home you would be allowed to use your gun, those laws do not exist over here, ask Tony Martin. To take a weapon like some of these home, into a terrace house in a residential area is madness.
Leave the gun at the gun club....where is the problem with that?
Sex God
the gun clubs not open when i go wildfowling at 3am in the morning and not open when i get home from a driven shoot at 9 pm 
i also believe it is every englishmans right to bear arms going back some 4oo years
i also believe it is every englishmans right to bear arms going back some 4oo years
Sex God
Quote by kentswingers777
In the USA you have a constitutional right to have a gun, in England you do not. That is why I used the USA as an example.
I think it is a poor arguement to keep harping on about this accident or that accident, and then say " do we ban this or that as well "?
Why are people so opposed to people who have guns that use them solely at gun clubs,to not be allowed to take them home?
Why is it not a much better practice to leave your gun at the gun club where surely they will be in a much safer environment?
Did anyone actually see this guys house and the surrounding area?
Are people really telling me that it was safe and secure and perfectly ok to bring those kinds of weapons back to that house? Come on.....a gun is a much more dangerous weapon than any other. he could not have inflicted the damage he has now done with a knife.
I would bring in laws where guns should be kept at the gun club, and not to be taken into a family home.
In certain states in the USA IF someone broke into your home you would be allowed to use your gun, those laws do not exist over here, ask Tony Martin. To take a weapon like some of these home, into a terrace house in a residential area is madness.
Leave the gun at the gun club....where is the problem with that?
I have to be honest Kenty, I don't think it is a poor argument, I feel it is a fare comparison. Why should any one be able to choose which dangerous activity should be curtailed more than another.
Why should a farmer have to keep his gun at a gun club?
Why should anyone have to do that, thats like saying you should only ride your bike on a track and not on the open road because one day you just might cause a huge pile up that kills or injures people.
Kenty can I ask where you think the Crossbow Killer should of kept his crossbow? in the crossbow club?
Where should Peter Sutcliffe have kept his hammer for killing those women? in the hammer club?
Not everyone in the world is a mass murderer, this man was outraged at the world, his family and friends that is what drove him to do the things he did, not just because he had a gun.
Why should anyone have to do that, thats like saying you should only ride your bike on a track and not on the open road because one day you just might cause a huge pile up that kills or injures people.
Kenty can I ask where you think the Crossbow Killer should of kept his crossbow? in the crossbow club?
Where should Peter Sutcliffe have kept his hammer for killing those women? in the hammer club?
Not everyone in the world is a mass murderer, this man was outraged at the world, his family and friends that is what drove him to do the things he did, not just because he had a gun.
Ask Health and Safety about that one Blue. They have curtailed many things over the years on the pretext of safety.
Many things that I used to take for granted in my younger years have been curtailed by H and S incessant rules and regulations.
The compensation madness has also put a stop to a lot of things that people used to do everyday.
Like our local school who shut for the day last year, just in case of snow. Or when there was a hint of snow schools up and down the country shut. Never used to happen in the days when i went to school. There are hundreds of other things as mad as that.
I am a hater of the Big Brother nanny state bollocks we hear and see all the time, but on this occasion I can see no justification at all, to bring a deadly weapon into a family home.
Can anyone answer the question as to why someone is allowed to bring an automatic weapon into a family house in a residential area? As opposed to leaving it at the gun club under much safer security than you can surely get at your house?
Many things that I used to take for granted in my younger years have been curtailed by H and S incessant rules and regulations.
The compensation madness has also put a stop to a lot of things that people used to do everyday.
Like our local school who shut for the day last year, just in case of snow. Or when there was a hint of snow schools up and down the country shut. Never used to happen in the days when i went to school. There are hundreds of other things as mad as that.
I am a hater of the Big Brother nanny state bollocks we hear and see all the time, but on this occasion I can see no justification at all, to bring a deadly weapon into a family home.
Can anyone answer the question as to why someone is allowed to bring an automatic weapon into a family house in a residential area? As opposed to leaving it at the gun club under much safer security than you can surely get at your house?
Quote by mrs-bmw
Why should a farmer have to keep his gun at a gun club?
Why should anyone have to do that, thats like saying you should only ride your bike on a track and not on the open road because one day you just might cause a huge pile up that kills or injures people.
Kenty can I ask where you think the Crossbow Killer should of kept his crossbow? in the crossbow club?
Where should Peter Sutcliffe have kept his hammer for killing those women? in the hammer club?
Not everyone in the world is a mass murderer, this man was outraged at the world, his family and friends that is what drove him to do the things he did, not just because he had a gun.
There of course are a few exceptions bmw and maybe a farmer should be one of them. I do not know all the answers if I did I would be a rich man...oh sorry I am.
I think the bike comment is a bit of a silly arguement, but the crossbow killer is a good example. Another deadly weapon that has no need to be at someones home.
Sutcliffe would have been caught much sooner had the police have done their job properly but yes a hammer is a weapon that kills and one that you cannot possibly ban but....a gun such as this case killed how many? Also because of pure luck those other 20 odd people could also have died bringing it to a much higher level than any other weapon I can think of.
Sutcliffe killed 13 women over how many years? Yet this man killed almost as many in two hours, and could have been so many more.
This mans mental state is obviously a huge factor in this but had laws have been in place where his guns would have been kept at the club, he would surely not have been able to inflict the slaughter he has now done?
No easy answers at all to this but as I have said many times, there is no need for a normal member of the public to have weapons such as this in a residential area, and certainly not in their home with in many cases young children there.
Quote by kentswingers777
Ask Health and Safety about that one Blue. They have curtailed many things over the years on the pretext of safety.
:rotflmao::rotflmao::rotflmao::rotflmao::rotflmao:You have stated this before and I will ask the same question that I did the first time.
What have they banned? The one that springs to mind is asbestos, but apart from that and a few carcinogenic or mutagenic chemicals I cannot think of much. Be specific Kenty, and please do not point me to a link, just name them.
Dave_Notts
Quote by kentswingers777
This mans mental state is obviously a huge factor in this but had laws have been in place where his guns would have been kept at the club, he would surely not have been able to inflict the slaughter he has now done?
Back on topic
This is a good point. I truly believe that if his gun was kept in the gun club, the first death would have been at the gun club. If someone was in such a state of mind to carry out this evil then it would not have mattered where his gun was kept.
Dave_Notts
Master of Sex
Quote by kentswingers777
Can anyone answer the question as to why someone is allowed to bring an automatic weapon into a family house in a residential area?
They aren't.
Sex God
Quote by Jewlnmart
Can anyone answer the question as to why someone is allowed to bring an automatic weapon into a family house in a residential area?
They aren't.
As Jewlnmart has stated, sadly no one is permitted an automatic weapon in their home any more.
A firearm has to have each round manual placed into the chamber, normally by a bolt action and a shotgun is not aloud more than three shots before you must manually reload.
Sex God
Quote by kentswingers777
Why should a farmer have to keep his gun at a gun club?
Why should anyone have to do that, thats like saying you should only ride your bike on a track and not on the open road because one day you just might cause a huge pile up that kills or injures people.
Kenty can I ask where you think the Crossbow Killer should of kept his crossbow? in the crossbow club?
Where should Peter Sutcliffe have kept his hammer for killing those women? in the hammer club?
Not everyone in the world is a mass murderer, this man was outraged at the world, his family and friends that is what drove him to do the things he did, not just because he had a gun.
There of course are a few exceptions bmw and maybe a farmer should be one of them. I do not know all the answers if I did I would be a rich man...oh sorry I am.
I think the bike comment is a bit of a silly arguement, but the crossbow killer is a good example. Another deadly weapon that has no need to be at someones home.
Sutcliffe would have been caught much sooner had the police have done their job properly but yes a hammer is a weapon that kills and one that you cannot possibly ban but....a gun such as this case killed how many? Also because of pure luck those other 20 odd people could also have died bringing it to a much higher level than any other weapon I can think of.
Sutcliffe killed 13 women over how many years? Yet this man killed almost as many in two hours, and could have been so many more.
This mans mental state is obviously a huge factor in this but had laws have been in place where his guns would have been kept at the club, he would surely not have been able to inflict the slaughter he has now done?
No easy answers at all to this but as I have said many times, there is no need for a normal member of the public to have weapons such as this in a residential area, and certainly not in their home with in many cases young children there.
Again I must say, why is it silly? Let us take people on bikes who drive beyond the law with them, How many deaths are annually caused by their driving without due care and attention. We could also say, who needs to keep a bike at home, only those who have that as their only mode of transport. No one else really needs one!
Sex God
Before I was born, my Mums sister (Margaret) married a man, they had three young children. Over the early years of their marriage they struggled to make ends meet. So to help them out they moved back in with Margaret’s parents (My Grandparents) . They continued to struggle and this affected their relationship. On the 20th August 1961, four years before my birth, after an argument, in the kitchen, he shot Margaret in the back with a shotgun, and killed her; he then walked out the back door, across the field, turned the shotgun on him self. He also died the same day. They left three young children, my Grandparents brought up the two boys and my parents brought up the girl.
I was born in 1965; we lived in the house next door to my Grandparents where the above incident happened. Although in my youth, I new nothing of this. Although the two houses were semi detached, they felt more like one big house, so the two boys and the girl and I, all grew up as brothers and sisters. I had a wonderful and privileged childhood.
When I was in my teens my grandfather took me out on my first shooting trip with a small shotgun. Over many years he taught me and the other grandchildren how to use, respect, and look after guns.
The reason I boar you with this story, is, I feel there are many ways he could have reacted to the tragedy of loosing his daughter, but his choice was to continue to keep guns and to educate the younger members of the family on how to respect and use them correctly. It maybe down to my Grandfather Teachings and foresight, that I see things in a different light to Kenty. He still saw guns as a tool to do a job and as an accessory for pleasurable past times.
Back to the OP
I believe he (Bird) used a shotgun and a .22 rifle, I don’t know if there are any gun clubs for shotguns? In the circle’s I move in, people use shotguns for pest control, driven shoots, rough shooting or clay pigeon shooting. Again the .22 rifle (A firearm) is used mainly for pest control. I am not sure weather there are any gun clubs for these types of weapons? But if there are, keeping them there would be very impractical and probably make the ownership of these guns pointless.
This would mean the loss of jobs for so many
I was born in 1965; we lived in the house next door to my Grandparents where the above incident happened. Although in my youth, I new nothing of this. Although the two houses were semi detached, they felt more like one big house, so the two boys and the girl and I, all grew up as brothers and sisters. I had a wonderful and privileged childhood.
When I was in my teens my grandfather took me out on my first shooting trip with a small shotgun. Over many years he taught me and the other grandchildren how to use, respect, and look after guns.
The reason I boar you with this story, is, I feel there are many ways he could have reacted to the tragedy of loosing his daughter, but his choice was to continue to keep guns and to educate the younger members of the family on how to respect and use them correctly. It maybe down to my Grandfather Teachings and foresight, that I see things in a different light to Kenty. He still saw guns as a tool to do a job and as an accessory for pleasurable past times.
Back to the OP
I believe he (Bird) used a shotgun and a .22 rifle, I don’t know if there are any gun clubs for shotguns? In the circle’s I move in, people use shotguns for pest control, driven shoots, rough shooting or clay pigeon shooting. Again the .22 rifle (A firearm) is used mainly for pest control. I am not sure weather there are any gun clubs for these types of weapons? But if there are, keeping them there would be very impractical and probably make the ownership of these guns pointless.
This would mean the loss of jobs for so many
Sex God
Quote by Dave__Notts
This mans mental state is obviously a huge factor in this but had laws have been in place where his guns would have been kept at the club, he would surely not have been able to inflict the slaughter he has now done?
Back on topic
This is a good point. I truly believe that if his gun was kept in the gun club, the first death would have been at the gun club. If someone was in such a state of mind to carry out this evil then it would not have mattered where his gun was kept.
Dave_Notts
:thumbup:
I was have had guns around me for a good part of my life, and have never been a member of a gun club. I recall cleaning them when I was a child, having gun safety taught me. I handled guns as part of work. Now I do not need them, but many do need guns to control vermin. Those guns can only be held under lock and key in a private home. It would be impossible to make effective use of them if they were kept at a club.
Having a gun locked in a club house, just means that it is fetch from the club, not the locked gun cabinet in the keepers house. It is still obtainable.
Most deaths result from illegally held guns. Illegal guns have increased since hand guns were banded. So a lot of good that did.
While the latest deaths are tragic, banning guns will not stop killings. The only restriction that would possible be of use would be to ban convicted criminals, and this I support.
Travis
Having a gun locked in a club house, just means that it is fetch from the club, not the locked gun cabinet in the keepers house. It is still obtainable.
Most deaths result from illegally held guns. Illegal guns have increased since hand guns were banded. So a lot of good that did.
While the latest deaths are tragic, banning guns will not stop killings. The only restriction that would possible be of use would be to ban convicted criminals, and this I support.
Travis
Sex God
I personally favour the straight or cut-throat razor....I find it leaves a nice neat wound and can at a push be used to dismember your victim to aid in the discreet disposal of the corpse
