http://www.outdoorhub.com/news/uk-poll-finds-brits-want-to-repeal-gun-ban/?utm_source=SilverpopMailing&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=May
Showing posts with label Gun Laws. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Gun Laws. Show all posts
Tuesday, 9 July 2013
UK Handgun Law Repeal ?
There was a recent poll hosted by the Telegraph Newspaper in the United Kingdom and surprisingly the majority voted to repeal the Handgun Ban as detailed in the below article:
http://www.outdoorhub.com/news/uk-poll-finds-brits-want-to-repeal-gun-ban/?utm_source=SilverpopMailing&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=May
http://www.outdoorhub.com/news/uk-poll-finds-brits-want-to-repeal-gun-ban/?utm_source=SilverpopMailing&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=May
Latest News on UK Lead Shot Ban
Here we have some new info. regarding the on-going call for a Lead Shot Ban in the United Kingdom as mentioned on our ''UK Law Watch'' Page (click Here)
Lead is under fire as almost never before as the material of choice for anyone who shoots, whether live quarry or targets.
On the face of it, removing lead from shotgun cartridges and rifle bullets might not seem like a bad idea. We have taken lead out of petrol, out of most paints and out of the pipes through which most of us receive our water. There is no doubt that it is a poison and the case against peppering the countryside with lead pellets is, at least so far as some environmental pressure groups are concerned, overwhelming. Alternatives are available.
The Campaign for Lead Shot is supported by all organisations involved with shooting sports and many land managers, including the Country Land and Business Association.
As the briefing notes with the Campaign for Lead Shot's website explain, those who shoot must make sure they are whiter than white if they want to avoid a ban on lead. "There is a concerted campaign to achieve a total ban on lead shot," it reads. "It is directed by powerful organisations with considerable financial and political resources. Although the current government has no desire to ban lead, politicians will be swayed by evidence and public opinion."
The rules, as they stand, are clear. In England the use of lead shot is banned over all foreshore, over specified Sites of Special Scientific Interest, and for the shooting of all ducks and geese, coot and moorhen – wherever they occur – whether on wetland or not.
It is that last point which has caused the most problems since it means those who shoot pheasant and other game must carry non toxic cartridges with them – which are much more costly than cartridges loaded with lead – if they also want to shoot duck. And, this campaign tacitly acknowledges, not everyone does that at the moment.
When the rules were first introduced some guns would drop a couple of bismuth or other non-toxic cartridges into their pockets to be sure that if they were challenged they could show they had both lead and non-lead options to use. Several even included spent cartridges in a pocket so that if they were challenged when they had a duck or goose in the game bag they could claim it was killed with the lead-free alternative. Few, however, bothered to switch from lead to non-toxic shot when a duck flew over.
Many guns broke the rules because they felt they were ridiculous. "What is the difference," one seasoned game shooter told me, "if I shoot a pheasant with my first lead cartridge and a duck with my second? Both birds are flying over the same field and the lead is going to fall in the same place. What makes it okay to shoot a pheasant with lead and not okay to shoot a duck?"
The answer, of course, is that it makes no difference at all. But the rules are the way they are to ensure that everyone who shoots waterfowl – that are primarily found near water – always uses non-toxic shot. And the extent to which those rules have been broken is all too clear from surveys undertaken by both the Royal Society for the Protection of Birds (RSPB) and Defra.
As the briefing notes for the lead shot campaign makes clear: "When the RSPB purchased shot duck from game dealers in 2002, shortly after legislation was introduced, it found that 70 per cent contained lead shot. A follow up by Defra eight years later showed that 73 per cent of game suppliers still sold duck containing lead.
"In 2010 a report commissioned by Defra revealed that 45 per cent of shooters surveyed did not always comply with the law and a similar percentage of shoot providers failed to make compliance a requirement for guns. That sustained level of illegal shooting is enough to secure a total lead ban."
Guns quote two reasons – price and the need to make clean kills – as the reason to stick with lead. The most effective non-toxic materials can be four or five times the price of lead. Duck hunters have no alternative but pigeon shooters, for example, who might fire off several hundred cartridges in a session, would quickly find their sport unaffordable and pigeon control – vital for crop protection – difficult to maintain.
A box of 25 12-bore cartridges loaded with lead can cost around £6. The same loaded with bismuth or other non-toxic materials, like tungsten, can be over £40. Cheaper materials, like steel, are available and widely used. But because they are less dense than lead they have less energy and, consequently, less killing power. That can result in more birds wounded, and fewer clean kills – a problem that many believe would be magnified if lead were banned for all shooting.
The essence of the campaign to get those who shoot to use non-toxic shot is an acceptance that for waterfowl and over all areas of foreshore and SSSIs it is perfectly justified and must be obeyed. In return for sticking to the law, the shooting groups hope, they will be able to avoid a ban on lead's use for the majority of shooting.
The campaign will be promoted at the CLA Game Fair at Ragley Hall, Warwickshire, which runs from July 19 to July 21.
The campaigners say: " In all other areas of shooting self-regulation works. Think how quickly we crack down on the selfishness or stupidity of others when it comes to safety. We know that breaking the firearms law will lead to harsher regulation.
"Lead is no different. We hold the future in our own hands. Comply with the law, and ensure that others do, and legislation is not an immediate prospect. Flout the law and we could face a ban within the next few years."
( Article from ''thisiscornwall.co.uk'' )
Lead is under fire as almost never before as the material of choice for anyone who shoots, whether live quarry or targets.
On the face of it, removing lead from shotgun cartridges and rifle bullets might not seem like a bad idea. We have taken lead out of petrol, out of most paints and out of the pipes through which most of us receive our water. There is no doubt that it is a poison and the case against peppering the countryside with lead pellets is, at least so far as some environmental pressure groups are concerned, overwhelming. Alternatives are available.
 |
| If a Lead Shot Ban takes place - protests must persist to stop it ! |
But, the shooting community argues, steps already taken to avoid contamination of sensitive areas and water courses in particular, are sufficient and there is a strong suspicion that those most vociferously pursuing efforts for an outright ban are really seeking to undermine all shooting because it is shooting they disagree with, rather than the use of lead shot.The Campaign for Lead Shot is supported by all organisations involved with shooting sports and many land managers, including the Country Land and Business Association.
As the briefing notes with the Campaign for Lead Shot's website explain, those who shoot must make sure they are whiter than white if they want to avoid a ban on lead. "There is a concerted campaign to achieve a total ban on lead shot," it reads. "It is directed by powerful organisations with considerable financial and political resources. Although the current government has no desire to ban lead, politicians will be swayed by evidence and public opinion."
The rules, as they stand, are clear. In England the use of lead shot is banned over all foreshore, over specified Sites of Special Scientific Interest, and for the shooting of all ducks and geese, coot and moorhen – wherever they occur – whether on wetland or not.
It is that last point which has caused the most problems since it means those who shoot pheasant and other game must carry non toxic cartridges with them – which are much more costly than cartridges loaded with lead – if they also want to shoot duck. And, this campaign tacitly acknowledges, not everyone does that at the moment.
When the rules were first introduced some guns would drop a couple of bismuth or other non-toxic cartridges into their pockets to be sure that if they were challenged they could show they had both lead and non-lead options to use. Several even included spent cartridges in a pocket so that if they were challenged when they had a duck or goose in the game bag they could claim it was killed with the lead-free alternative. Few, however, bothered to switch from lead to non-toxic shot when a duck flew over.
Many guns broke the rules because they felt they were ridiculous. "What is the difference," one seasoned game shooter told me, "if I shoot a pheasant with my first lead cartridge and a duck with my second? Both birds are flying over the same field and the lead is going to fall in the same place. What makes it okay to shoot a pheasant with lead and not okay to shoot a duck?"
The answer, of course, is that it makes no difference at all. But the rules are the way they are to ensure that everyone who shoots waterfowl – that are primarily found near water – always uses non-toxic shot. And the extent to which those rules have been broken is all too clear from surveys undertaken by both the Royal Society for the Protection of Birds (RSPB) and Defra.
As the briefing notes for the lead shot campaign makes clear: "When the RSPB purchased shot duck from game dealers in 2002, shortly after legislation was introduced, it found that 70 per cent contained lead shot. A follow up by Defra eight years later showed that 73 per cent of game suppliers still sold duck containing lead.
"In 2010 a report commissioned by Defra revealed that 45 per cent of shooters surveyed did not always comply with the law and a similar percentage of shoot providers failed to make compliance a requirement for guns. That sustained level of illegal shooting is enough to secure a total lead ban."
Guns quote two reasons – price and the need to make clean kills – as the reason to stick with lead. The most effective non-toxic materials can be four or five times the price of lead. Duck hunters have no alternative but pigeon shooters, for example, who might fire off several hundred cartridges in a session, would quickly find their sport unaffordable and pigeon control – vital for crop protection – difficult to maintain.
A box of 25 12-bore cartridges loaded with lead can cost around £6. The same loaded with bismuth or other non-toxic materials, like tungsten, can be over £40. Cheaper materials, like steel, are available and widely used. But because they are less dense than lead they have less energy and, consequently, less killing power. That can result in more birds wounded, and fewer clean kills – a problem that many believe would be magnified if lead were banned for all shooting.
The essence of the campaign to get those who shoot to use non-toxic shot is an acceptance that for waterfowl and over all areas of foreshore and SSSIs it is perfectly justified and must be obeyed. In return for sticking to the law, the shooting groups hope, they will be able to avoid a ban on lead's use for the majority of shooting.
The campaign will be promoted at the CLA Game Fair at Ragley Hall, Warwickshire, which runs from July 19 to July 21.
The campaigners say: " In all other areas of shooting self-regulation works. Think how quickly we crack down on the selfishness or stupidity of others when it comes to safety. We know that breaking the firearms law will lead to harsher regulation.
"Lead is no different. We hold the future in our own hands. Comply with the law, and ensure that others do, and legislation is not an immediate prospect. Flout the law and we could face a ban within the next few years."
( Article from ''thisiscornwall.co.uk'' )
Sunday, 14 April 2013
Gun Control Never Solved Anything
Here is proof that banning something will never solve any problems, refer to the page in Wikipedia Gun Politics in the United Kingdom, here is a small snippet from the extensive and obviously well researched article:
'' After the 1996 atrocity, legislation was introduced in 1997 to prohibit, with some extremely specialised exemptions, pistols of all calibres and "Small firearms" with a barrel length of less than 30 cm or an overall length of less than 60 cm. Subsequently firearm homicides increased in the UK by 89% over the decade to 2009. ''
Why must we sit back and watch our alternative sports be slowly killed off?, why must we be punished for the wrong doings of a very Very small percentage of the population? Disarming citizens is Not the Solution - it is a Birth / God Given Right to Self Defence, no Government or Authority should ever encroach on that! no matter what the ''overall majority'' says
'' After the 1996 atrocity, legislation was introduced in 1997 to prohibit, with some extremely specialised exemptions, pistols of all calibres and "Small firearms" with a barrel length of less than 30 cm or an overall length of less than 60 cm. Subsequently firearm homicides increased in the UK by 89% over the decade to 2009. ''
Why must we sit back and watch our alternative sports be slowly killed off?, why must we be punished for the wrong doings of a very Very small percentage of the population? Disarming citizens is Not the Solution - it is a Birth / God Given Right to Self Defence, no Government or Authority should ever encroach on that! no matter what the ''overall majority'' says
In Favour or Gun control?
Then you're also in favour of
Assault
Robbery
Rape
Murder
and Genocide ....
It's a package deal !
 |
| Gun Control China Execution |
Friday, 22 March 2013
Legal Pistols for UK
We just wanted to show our fellow shooters & Firearms Enthusiasts overseas what is still actually legal in the United Kingdom in terms of Pistols, since we are the Rimfire Blog we will only be showcasing some in .22LR Calibre.
As you can see in the below images, the Pistols have to have an extended barrel (yes, they are not suppressors / moderators) and also a horrible extention connected to the grip thereby extending the length even further!
These are the Pro TSC 1911 .22LR pistols Made in Germany...
Going for around £800 or less, I for one find the pricing and the fact that you still have to (by law) have the ridiculous extentions added on, just makes this too sad to comply with, I'd rather keep shooting rifles, you can pick up a decent brand new .22LR for as low as £175 even in Semi Auto.
Handguns including small calibre such as .22LR were outlawed in 1997 following the 1996 Dunblane Massacre.
Last year there was a petition to reclassify .22LR pistols as Section 1 FAC licences which failed to get enough votes by the public (only 13,000 of the 100,000 needed) It would be a good idea to say that a person wanting a .22LR pistol should have already owned or currently own a .22LR, .22WMR or .17HMR Rifle and have been shooting for no shorter than a year.
As you can see in the below images, the Pistols have to have an extended barrel (yes, they are not suppressors / moderators) and also a horrible extention connected to the grip thereby extending the length even further!
These are the Pro TSC 1911 .22LR pistols Made in Germany...
.bmp) |
| PRO TSC .22LR 1911 Pistols in Tactical and two tone with wooden grip |
.jpg) |
| PRO TSC .22LR 1911 Pistol |
.jpg) |
| PRO TSC .22LR 1911 Pistol - not the various barrel options between the different images above |
Going for around £800 or less, I for one find the pricing and the fact that you still have to (by law) have the ridiculous extentions added on, just makes this too sad to comply with, I'd rather keep shooting rifles, you can pick up a decent brand new .22LR for as low as £175 even in Semi Auto.
Handguns including small calibre such as .22LR were outlawed in 1997 following the 1996 Dunblane Massacre.
Last year there was a petition to reclassify .22LR pistols as Section 1 FAC licences which failed to get enough votes by the public (only 13,000 of the 100,000 needed) It would be a good idea to say that a person wanting a .22LR pistol should have already owned or currently own a .22LR, .22WMR or .17HMR Rifle and have been shooting for no shorter than a year.
Thursday, 7 March 2013
Thank God for the Second Amendment !
Wow, if there's one thing that's great of the USA, it's their Right to Bear Arms ( The Second Amendment ) something Every country needs, in the past few decades we have seen extreme changes in Laws that negatively affect recreational shooters, hunters, sportsmen / women and citizens who believe in the right to self defence. Although I personally believe that we can change that and force the Governments worldwide through People Power to review and change their laws.
When you think, yes, anti gun lobbyists are right to a sense that guns were invented to kill, yet centuries later they turned into a sporting tool where people could hunt, compete or just have fun on a family or father to son day out, now why must good law abiding people have to pay with their liberties just because some government official saw an opportunity to win votes by giving the anti gun lobbyists what they have been moaning for? Why should an entire population of a Nation have restricted or No Ownership rights just because of the odd killing or nutter going beserk with a gun and killing a group of people?
Below here is a great example of how nice it is in the ol USA ... This Mossberg 702, .22LR semi auto with scope, 2 extra magazines + the one supplied & about 300+ rounds of bulk ammo! All for the price of Only £146 ! The rifle features a tip down forend so will appeal to the tactical enthusiasts also with it's synthetic thumbhole pistol grip type stock .... Where can you ever find any deal like this in the UK ?
PS: Relax, it is already sold!
When you think, yes, anti gun lobbyists are right to a sense that guns were invented to kill, yet centuries later they turned into a sporting tool where people could hunt, compete or just have fun on a family or father to son day out, now why must good law abiding people have to pay with their liberties just because some government official saw an opportunity to win votes by giving the anti gun lobbyists what they have been moaning for? Why should an entire population of a Nation have restricted or No Ownership rights just because of the odd killing or nutter going beserk with a gun and killing a group of people?
Below here is a great example of how nice it is in the ol USA ... This Mossberg 702, .22LR semi auto with scope, 2 extra magazines + the one supplied & about 300+ rounds of bulk ammo! All for the price of Only £146 ! The rifle features a tip down forend so will appeal to the tactical enthusiasts also with it's synthetic thumbhole pistol grip type stock .... Where can you ever find any deal like this in the UK ?
PS: Relax, it is already sold!
 |
| Mossberg 702 Plinkster .22LR semi auto with synthetic thumbhole, tactical style tip-down forend |
Sunday, 3 March 2013
Over The Top Gun Control / Laws: Australia
We will be publishing articles or videos on Crazy Gun control and laws from around the world, I was highly surprised to find out that Australia is just as bad as here in the UK with extreme over the top strictness which is said to be to fight crime but statistics always prove later how crime increases when citizens have their firearms forcibly removed, here the guys on the youtube channel Iraqveteran 8888 explain in detail the restrictions in Australia and give their opinion as general gun owning Americans who believe in the right to bear arms and self defence, 14+min video - worth the watch...
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)