Possiblity of new firearms act in the UK

The #1 community for Gun Owners in Indiana

Member Benefits:

  • Fewer Ads!
  • Discuss all aspects of firearm ownership
  • Discuss anti-gun legislation
  • Buy, sell, and trade in the classified section
  • Chat with Local gun shops, ranges, trainers & other businesses
  • Discover free outdoor shooting areas
  • View up to date on firearm-related events
  • Share photos & video with other members
  • ...and so much more!
  • Mark-of-Scotland

    Marksman
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Hello everyone and welcome to my first thread.

    Personally i want to try and enable new firearms rules and regulations in the UK regarding the sale, ownership and legal use of a variety of Firearms in the UK.

    As the law currently stands here Firearms are not actually legally banned but they are regulated out of the possession and use of about 99% of the population which results in a De Facto ban.

    A brief summary of UK firearm regulations is this:
    Handguns:
    Handguns are generally permitted only for a small number of people in official positions. I am unsure about the legality of mentioning which people these are so i will not elaborate on this matter.

    Handguns for the general public are only permitted for those who have passed strict criteria, have obtained a license which is almost impossible to obtain due to the complexity and narrow field (in metaphorical terms of width it's not so much a field as it is a tightrope) of lawful requirement and must be registered, kept in a locked container in ONE location only (you cannot move handguns from range to range if you wish to switch ranges you must leave your guns behind) which is a firing range used for police training. It cannot under any circumstances be kept in your home or other private property.

    Rifles and Shotguns:
    Shotguns and Rifles are permitted for pest control only and can only be used as such by licensed and qualified individuals who have obtained shooting rights on private property (after obtaining a firearm shooting rights are the hardest thing o get and the easiest thing to lose)

    Shotguns must have a barrel length of over 24 inches and be incapable of holding 3 rounds or more.
    Rifles must be bolt action or if semi-automatic is legally permitted be unable to hold more than 3 rounds (one in the chamber two in the Magazine).

    Even with these restrictions the most commonly permitted ammunition is .22 rimfire.

    Air Rifles:
    As of august 2012 it is illegal to purchase or make a gift of an air rifle if or to a person under 18, not a full member (full membership in most clubs often requires a year or more of frequent attendance and participation in club activities as the guest of a current full member) of an established and reputable air rifle club.

    Ammunition:
    Shotgun ammunition is ironically not restricted very much. Basically no Exotic ammo. There is no limit on the amount you can own and you don't actually have to have a valid shotgun license to purchase it.

    All other ammunition.
    Possession of ammunition is forbidden without proper licence and often carries a higher punishment than illegal possession of a firearm (using the logic that the ammunition is meant for killing but the firearm itself might be owned because it looks pretty or something i assume. It makes no sense at all). The type, brand and calibre of the ammunition must be declared and there is severe limitations on the number of individual rounds an individual is allowed to own in all locations, I.E. Let us say the limit is 100 rounds of .22 rimfire. This means that an individual may only have 100 rounds either in his home or divided among properties where he is legally allowed to shoot. He cannot have 100 rounds in each location.

    License:
    Granting of a license is subject to strict rules including but not limited to Personal background checks

    Medical reports stating you have no history or possible propensity towards mental health issues no matter what the issues may be.

    Medical reports stating you are in a reasonable state of health. (terminally ill or otherwise unhealthy people are refused)

    Criminal background check to look for ANY criminal offense even as minor as a speeding ticket. This check is required to search juvenile records as well.

    The location where you live (if you live in a poor or "bad" neighborhood then no gun for you)

    Medical Reports regarding the physical and mental state of health of friends, family (up to three generations back) and co-workers of the applicant.

    All of these details are available by written request to people in the UK wishing to study or otherwise use the data regarding firearms in the UK. they are NOT published online.

    Aside from that an applicants political status is also taken into consideration. People with no political history are OK but those involved in political parties or who are political activists have a tougher time. In general if you support any of the three main parties you have nothing to worry about because they are all pretty much the same. If your party or political ideology is in any way against current government policy you will most likely be banned from owning for life and have your application rejected and yes these political checks also extend to friends, relatives and co-workers.

    I myself am banned for life from owning a firearms license as are my family members (who are not known opponents of my former party) for my previous membership of a Legally registered British Political Party. My family are all either anti-gun or have no interest in guns at all anyway.

    This summary is a mixture of both legal requirements and De Facto accepted practice.

    I apologize for the sheer wall of text.

    Now after reading that what would you say would be the best or most practical way to rectify the situation and what new rules do you think should be implemented.

    Remember I'm trying to scrap current rules and regulations and replace with a new and more logical set so it would help to think of it as being a clean slate with which to start with.
     

    Liberty1911

    Shooter
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Nov 25, 2012
    1,722
    38
    Good luck, seriously. But I think you'll have a better chance of Scottish independence. Saor Alba.
     

    Mark-of-Scotland

    Marksman
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Good luck, seriously. But I think you'll have a better chance of Scottish independence. Saor Alba.

    Haha Saor Alba, Alba gu Bràth indeed. This is the last place i expected to find someone with any knowledge of the old language. Very impressed.

    Hey you never know. With the horrific anti-English hatred espoused by the Scottish National Party we might gain better gun laws in Scotland after independence simply to defend ourselves from what they will say is the coming English invasion. Or we might get gun laws if independence fails and conscription after that so that the SNP can lead us into war with England...I've never seen a party with so much naked hatred as the SNP. I can honestly see them engaging in hostilities with England if they lose and it terrifies me.

    Either way I don't want gun laws for those ends. Violence is a horrible way to get what you want.
     

    Titanium_Frost

    Grandmaster
    Rating - 100%
    33   0   0
    Feb 6, 2011
    7,608
    83
    Southwestern Indiana
    Your sig line is not going to resonate very much with Americans on this sight...

    We pretty much did EXACTLY that in 1775 and it worked pretty damn good for a while, fairly good for a long while after that and this last century we really ****ed it up, but there is always hope!
     

    Titanium_Frost

    Grandmaster
    Rating - 100%
    33   0   0
    Feb 6, 2011
    7,608
    83
    Southwestern Indiana
    Using violence to Force the government you want? No better than the one you have.


    I'm sorry but this really got to me today. If you aren't willing to fight, kill, and perhaps DIE for freedom you don't deserve it and you certainly won't earn it!

    The only one who ever gave freedom was Jesus Christ and he DIED for it.
     

    Mark-of-Scotland

    Marksman
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Your sig line is not going to resonate very much with Americans on this sight...

    We pretty much did EXACTLY that in 1775 and it worked pretty damn good for a while, fairly good for a long while after that and this last century we really ****ed it up, but there is always hope!

    Sorry. It references the activist groups I encounter often who promote violence as a means of suppressing those who don't agree with them or their world view. They claim that the government we live under oppresses them and they in turn want to implement their own form of government and to that end they use violence to suppress those who fight against them or challenge their ideas. I don't handle hypocrisy well.

    I'm sorry but this really got to me today. If you aren't willing to fight, kill, and perhaps DIE for freedom you don't deserve it and you certainly won't earn it!

    The only one who ever gave freedom was Jesus Christ and he DIED for it.

    See above response.
    My meaning was not clear and so i offer my apologies for any offense caused as it was not my intention to offend and i shall change the sig immediately. The point i was trying to make was that one cannot fight to be free from oppression and in turn oppress others and then claim to be better than the system they have replaced. You cannot replace one oppression with another.

    What's the mood in Parliament over there? Any sympathetic legislators?

    Not a single one that would have the spine to admit it publicly but the votes are all private anyway.

    They way things are going though we may get one or two very soon who will definitely make it a major issue and bring it up every chance they get.
    We just missed out on getting a pro-gun candidate elected recently but it was very very close. Less than 50 votes i believe but i will have to check that. I think that if the party had been given the full amount of time to mount an election campaign then we could have secured it but the establishment noticed growing support in the area, flooded the area with anti-party propaganda and activities/protests (which isn't at all unusual so nothing was thought about it as we were so far away from election time) then called a snap by-election leaving the party with only 2 weeks to campaign an entire constituency.
     

    Kirk Freeman

    Grandmaster
    Rating - 100%
    9   0   0
    Mar 9, 2008
    48,025
    113
    Lafayette, Indiana
    I've never seen a party with so much naked hatred as the SNP.

    Well, there was the Welsh Nationalist Movement of the 1970s.;):D

    I can honestly see them engaging in hostilities with England if they lose and it terrifies me.

    Not going to happen no matter how many Famous Grouse filled hooligans speechify at the soccer game at the pub. It's only empty-handed talk. The rhetoric is a good sign, it means they will do nothing.

    England paid good money for that rock under the Queen's chair. It is not giving it back.:D
     

    thebishopp

    Expert
    Rating - 100%
    2   0   0
    Nov 26, 2010
    1,286
    38
    Indiana
    I'm with TF and Liberty on this one. You guys are pretty much screwed. I wish I was wrong but I don't think you all will ever see the kind of change in your firearms laws (or other infringements upon your liberties) without any type of "violent" action.

    "It is unfortunate, that the efforts of mankind to recover the freedom of which they have been so long deprived, will be accompanied with violence, with errors, & even with crimes. But while we weep over the means, we must pray for the end." - Jefferson


    Good luck though, and I mean that with utmost sincerity.

    Oh and I forgot: Welcome to INGO!
     

    cosermann

    Grandmaster
    Rating - 100%
    14   0   0
    Aug 15, 2008
    8,389
    113
    If you're able to make any headway at all, I suspect it will be little by little over the course of many years; probably your lifetime. I don't think a wholesale scrap and replace strategy has any significant chance of success.

    Whether you find that discouraging or energizing depends on your temperament.

    Is there any sense among the people or in Parliament that the strict controls have actually led to an increase in violent crime?
     

    Mark-of-Scotland

    Marksman
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Well, there was the Welsh Nationalist Movement of the 1970s.;):D
    I think they merged into or became Plaid Cymru the largest welsh nationalist party in wales. I'll ask the Welshie at work. He'll be surprised someone outside of wales knows anything about welsh history haha

    Not going to happen no matter how many Famous Grouse filled hooligans speechify at the soccer game at the pub. It's only empty-handed talk. The rhetoric is a good sign, it means they will do nothing.

    England paid good money for that rock under the Queen's chair. It is not giving it back.:D
    You'd be surprised. I know a number of SNP members and it's more than just rhetoric it's sheer unadulterated hatred. The politicians engage in rhetoric while the members and supporters spew forth vitriol.

    I'm with TF and Liberty on this one. You guys are pretty much screwed. I wish I was wrong but I don't think you all will ever see the kind of change in your firearms laws (or other infringements upon your liberties) without any type of "violent" action.

    "It is unfortunate, that the efforts of mankind to recover the freedom of which they have been so long deprived, will be accompanied with violence, with errors, & even with crimes. But while we weep over the means, we must pray for the end." - Jefferson


    Good luck though, and I mean that with utmost sincerity.

    Oh and I forgot: Welcome to INGO!

    Surprisingly if you throw something fast, often and hard enough at our politicians close to an election they cave and give you what you want. It's after that they try and u-turn and take it away again but they would face severe opposition with this. A population realizing that for the first time in 15 years it has the ability to protect itself and feel safer walking the streets being told that they have to go back to being defenseless and scared. I don't think even our corrupt politicians wish to face the sort of PR disaster such a decision would create.

    But as i said, hit them close to an election and they WILL cave.
    After the issue has been forced by law to be debated in parliament it will gather significant media attention such as our previous attempt to re-establish capital punishment. That didn't even make it to the debate and it already had nationwide media coverage.

    on a side note I noticed death before dishonour under your name so I'm just wondering if your a fan of the Boston band or the Album by Scottish Oi band The Exploited.
     

    Mark-of-Scotland

    Marksman
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    If you're able to make any headway at all, I suspect it will be little by little over the course of many years; probably your lifetime.
    When i first decided to get involved in politics i knew I'd never see the government i want in my lifetime but i wasn't thinking about myself. It's the same with this. I may not see it in my lifetime but as with my politics I'm not doing it for me personally. I'm doing it for my children and my grandchildren because i don't want them to grow up in the world that i did. I don't want them to walk the streets terrified and i don't want them to be left living under a government that rewards the criminal for their behavior and demonizes the civilian for daring to defend himself. I might not be able to achieve anything or if i do it might be of no real significance but i have got to at least try otherwise what sort of a man, indeed what sort of a father would i be if i chose to allow my children to grow up in a world that I myself find to be intolerable without doing everything i can to make it a better place for them.

    I don't think a wholesale scrap and replace strategy has any significant chance of success.

    Whether you find that discouraging or energizing depends on your temperament.

    Is there any sense among the people or in Parliament that the strict controls have actually led to an increase in violent crime?

    Personally i don't hold with the wholesale scrap and replace thing myself but unfortunately it's the best way to do what i think is the most important part of the entire process Grab public attention.

    Most people cannot (or don't want to try) to understand the current laws and i don't blame them because they are incredibly complex and the public don't consider them to have any impact o their life because they have went so long without guns being a part of life.

    If they were offered a chance to wipe the slate clean and replace it with clear cut, easy to understand laws and rules then i think the majority of the public will support it.

    If there are any who understand the fact that the restrictions have led to increase in crime then they would not admit it publicly as it would be career suicide.
     
    Last edited:

    GodFearinGunTotin

    Super Moderator
    Staff member
    Moderator
    Site Supporter
    Rating - 100%
    1   0   0
    Mar 22, 2011
    50,930
    113
    Mitchell
    I don't pretend to claim any sort of expertise in your laws or politics. But in the US, change on such controversial issues are brought about a couple of ways: the first I find unpredictable and often quite repulsive--activist courts stepping in, finding excuses in our constitution to legislate change from the bench. The better way is to change the public's attitude towards the issue.

    Up until a 10-20 years ago, gun control advocates were virtually unstoppable. But slowly, over time, people's attitudes towards firearms have changed. Today, there is scant mention of gun control amongst the liberal candidates running for office...they've learned that being supportive of gun bans, tighter regulations, etc. is an electoral loser.

    Welcome to INGO by the way!
     

    Mark-of-Scotland

    Marksman
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    I don't pretend to claim any sort of expertise in your laws or politics. But in the US, change on such controversial issues are brought about a couple of ways: the first I find unpredictable and often quite repulsive--activist courts stepping in, finding excuses in our constitution to legislate change from the bench. The better way is to change the public's attitude towards the issue.

    Up until a 10-20 years ago, gun control advocates were virtually unstoppable. But slowly, over time, people's attitudes towards firearms have changed. Today, there is scant mention of gun control amongst the liberal candidates running for office...they've learned that being supportive of gun bans, tighter regulations, etc. is an electoral loser.

    Welcome to INGO by the way!

    I don't claim any expertise in American gun law either. That's why I'm here after all.

    My preferred method would be for Activists to be out educating the public and making the odd dramatic (such as hanging a banner in a public place) gesture to grab attention and giving more people the chance to hear our message.

    Activism and education. That's the key to a well balanced society in my opinion.
     

    netsecurity

    Shooter
    Rating - 100%
    22   0   0
    Oct 14, 2011
    4,201
    48
    Hancock County
    The worst thing of all is that you have been denied the right to self preservation (self defense). I would look to the Channel Islands, serving as both legal precedence and practical model.

    Is your Conservative Party a proponent of fixing gun laws? If not, your best bet is to probably to make them take a stand, but then again, the liberals rule Scotland even more than in England don't they?

    Nanny welfare states have lots of strings attached to their handouts, and gun control is almost always their first priority. Heck, imagine a bunch of people collecting welfare and roaming the streets all day. They will inevitably commit crime or get into trouble of some sort with all that idle time, so guns in their hands really could be disastrous. So if you really want less gun control, you need to do away with the nanny state...
     
    Last edited:

    netsecurity

    Shooter
    Rating - 100%
    22   0   0
    Oct 14, 2011
    4,201
    48
    Hancock County
    I can think of one way to provoke change maybe. Find a loophole, exploit it, and get others to do the same, create a peaceful movement to indulge in this small piece of gun related freedom. When enough people do it, the government will jump in and try to shut down the movement, making their actions illegal, closing the loophole. This should be met with outrage. The outrage should become protests, loud, boisterous, yet peaceful protests, drawing attention to the cause, and in turn putting the entire issue of gun control back on the table.

    Like someone else said, you'd have to do it right before a major election to get the news. And some people would have to risk going to jail, perhaps even spend their nest egg defending themselves in court while trying to exploit this loophole.
     

    Mark-of-Scotland

    Marksman
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    The worst thing of all is that you have been denied the right to self preservation (self defense). I would look to the Channel Islands, serving as both legal precedence and practical model.

    Thank you.

    Is your Conservative Party a proponent of fixing gun laws? If not, your best bet is to probably to make them take a stand, but then again, the liberals rule Scotland even more than in England don't they?
    Look at this political map of Scotland.
    5695771642_6867db0679_z.jpg


    Yellow is The Scottish Nationalist Party, Blue is Scottish Conservatives and red is the Scottish Labour Party. These make up the three main parties in Scotland (with the liberal democrats making up the third main party in England). The SNP is a liberal anti-gun party with a lot of focus on the rights of criminals. The Scottish conservatives are near the border because they do not care in the slightest about anyone in Scotland unless they are rich (I wish to god that this was not true but it is.) The conservative party in Britain has for almost 300 years used Scotland as testing grounds for all sorts o social and economic sanctions and cut backs. In Scotland it is unfortunately very common to hear people say that given the choice they would choose Hitler over a conservative leader. The conservative party is also anti-gun for everyone who does not own land. The Scottish Labour as well as the main Labour party (the upper echelons of it anyway) in England is made up of mostly ex members of the communist party of Great Britain and the young communist league. One of our high ranking Labour officials actually had a bust of Stalin on his desk. I don't feel i need to inform you that they are also anti-gun for obvious reasons.

    Nanny welfare states have lots of strings attached to their handouts, and gun control is almost always their first priority. Heck, imagine a bunch of people collecting welfare and roaming the streets all day. They will inevitably commit crime or get into trouble of some sort with all that idle time. So if you really want less gun control, you need to do away with the nanny state...

    I've been involved in getting rid of the nanny state for years. It's actually the only good thing that a Conservative party government has done. Though i feel it's gone about doing it the wrong way this Conservative government has severely cut welfare payouts to everyone forcing those who claim them while being able to work to go out and get a job. i only hope that after a while they will start paying the full amounts back to those who genuinely need them.
     

    Mark-of-Scotland

    Marksman
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    I can think of one way to provoke change maybe. Find a loophole, exploit it, and get others to do the same, create a peaceful movement to indulge in this small piece of gun related freedom. When enough people do it, the government will jump in and try to shut down the movement, making their actions illegal, closing the loophole. This should be met with outrage. The outrage should become protests, loud, boisterous, yet peaceful protests, drawing attention to the cause, and in turn putting the entire issue of gun control back on the table.
    The only loophole i know of is to attach a silencer and stock to a handgun to the point where it exceeds 24 inches (2ft) in length and is therefore not classified as a handgun anymore but instead will come under shotgun or rifle. Possibly the most ridiculous thing I've ever heard but there you go.
    The only pistols which are legal and unlicensed are antique muzzle loaders with a big old bag of black powder on your belt. Personally i feel any gun lover would have serious moral issues about attaching a silencer and stock to an antique pistol.

    Like someone else said, you'd have to do it right before a major election to get the news.
    That was me lol.

    And some people would have to risk going to jail, perhaps even spend their nest egg defending themselves in court while trying to exploit this loophole.

    Hmm suggestion. Find a secret pro-gun member of parliament to do that and they will put court fees down as "expenses"
     

    Liberty1911

    Shooter
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Nov 25, 2012
    1,722
    38
    T

    Yellow is The Scottish Nationalist Party, Blue is Scottish Conservatives and red is the Scottish Labour Party. These make up the three main parties in Scotland (with the liberal democrats making up the third main party in England). The SNP is a liberal anti-gun party with a lot of focus on the rights of criminals. The Scottish conservatives are near the border because they do not care in the slightest about anyone in Scotland unless they are rich (I wish to god that this was not true but it is.) The conservative party in Britain has for almost 300 years used Scotland as testing grounds for all sorts o social and economic sanctions and cut backs. In Scotland it is unfortunately very common to hear people say that given the choice they would choose Hitler over a conservative leader. The conservative party is also anti-gun for everyone who does not own land. The Scottish Labour as well as the main Labour party (the upper echelons of it anyway) in England is made up of mostly ex members of the communist party of Great Britain and the young communist league. One of our high ranking Labour officials actually had a bust of Stalin on his desk. I don't feel i need to inform you that they are also anti-gun for obvious reasons.

    Wow. I wouldn't have guesses the SNP would be liberal. Sorry to say this but it sounds like you're doomed.

    This would be like the the 3 main parties of the US being the Green Party, Socialist Party, and Democratic Party.
     
    Top Bottom