Tossers come up with another moronic idea

Banning `replica firearms` is a jolly good idea

  • Anyone remaining in the UK have only themselves to blame when they are eventually given life for whi

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Oh yes I should say so, the streets will be safe again

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Utter boll0cks by another bunch of cretins

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • Total voters
    0

Cutaway

LE
Kit Reviewer
#1
http://newsbox.msn.co.uk/article.as...ortlive&ks=0&mc=0&ml=ma&lc=en&ae=windows-1252

Reuters said:
New bill aims to tackle violent crime

LONDON (Reuters) - The government unveiled a raft of new measures to tackle violent offences on Wednesday, with plans to tackle imitation firearms, knife crime and alcohol-related disorder.

The Violent Crime Reduction Bill aims to make it an offence to make or sell imitation guns that could be mistaken for the real thing, along with tougher sentences for those caught with imitation firearms.

The age limit for buying knives would be raised from 16 to 18 under the proposals and headteachers and staff would be given the power to search pupils for weapons.

Latest figures have shown a significant upward trend in the number of reported violent crimes, with a increase in the number of gun offences and an enormous rise in use of imitation guns.

High-profile cases, such as the deaths of teenage friends Charlene Ellis and Letisha Shakespeare who were gunned down outside a New Year party in Birmingham in 2003, has led to demands that action was taken to clamp down on firearms.

The new bill would allow police to suspend alcohol sales in pubs for up to 48 hours if they are found to be selling it to under 18s, and would create Alcohol Disorder Zones which would require licensed premises to pay towards the cost of alcohol-related problems on Britain's streets.

Additionally, the police would get powers to ban troublemakers from areas or bars for up to 2 years under "Drinking Banning Orders" while individuals "at risk" of carrying out alcohol-related disorder could be banned from specific areas for 48 hours.

"There is increasing public concern around relatively low-level crime and anti-social behaviour escalating to more serious offences because people are under the influence of alcohol or carrying weapons," Home Office minister Hazel Blears said.

"Outlawing the manufacture and sale of imitation firearms, clamping down on binge and underage drinking and ensuring knives are less accessible will help to tackle this."
I note that the idea of using the existing laws doesn't seem to have occurred to any of the 'enlightened' mob that clamour for this expensive drivel.

Is 'cnuts' too strong a word ?
 
#2
it beggers belief doesn't it.
 
#3
I thought the banning of firearms years ago after the Dunblane incident was going to solve this...

Good show, the UK is proving the NRA in US right, banning firearms and weapons does not reduce crime 8O
 
#4
i do not beleive that either of their girls were gunned down with air guns, this is not where the problem lies. I daresay that in many occasion when immitation guns have been mistaken for the real deal, is when curtain twiching grandmothers, with the fear of good put in them by the daily mail. Suspect little timmy at the corner of the street with his super soaker to be a modern rival for Dick Turpin.

These kind of situations could be solved if a bit of comen sense prevailed. Plus i know coppers love any chance to get all syked up about any oppotunity to show off their skills.
 
#5
What sort of sad tosser needs an imitation firearm anyway? Deacts for historical interest I can understand, airsoft I can understand (just), but an imitation Browning, M16 or HK?

Why?
 

Cutaway

LE
Kit Reviewer
#6
Awol said:
What sort of sad tosser needs an imitation firearm anyway? Deacts for historical interest I can understand, airsoft I can understand (just), but an imitation Browning, M16 or HK?

Why?
True, I have neither imitations nor deacts, they just don't interest me.
But I'm more concerned with this ridiculous banning mentality that has pervaded a once great nation.

Sometime in the future whatever turns your crank may be the next thing that they ban.
 
#7
ctauch said:
IGood show, the UK is proving the NRA in US right, banning "firearms and weapons" does not reduce crime 8O
When did the U.S.A. ban firearms and weapons? Did I miss the overturning of the Second Amendment? And are other weapons besides firearms part of this banning too, as the above statement indicates? Does that include pepper spray and baseball bats? If so, would it be it to "reduce crime," or to reduce violent crime resulting in fatalities? Gun violence/fatality stats in the UK are still ridiculously low compared to the States, even versus population, so isn't that comparing apples to oranges anyway?

Back on topic...I would be interested to know if armed robberies in the UK have increased or stayed the same with the manufacturing of replicas. If anyone has a study or info they could link me to, that would be great.

(Surely Granny isn't supposed to know whether it's a replica, or even a paintball gun, pointed at her in an armed robbery? Super Soakers are orange and green, after all. :twisted:)
 

Cutaway

LE
Kit Reviewer
#8
TankiesYank said:
......

(Surely Granny isn't supposed to know whether it's a replica, or even a paintball gun, pointed at her in an armed robbery? Super Soakers are orange and green, after all. :twisted:)
In the UK, at least since 1968, the sentence for using a replica firearm in a crime has been the same as using a real one.

Regardless of the victim being able to recognise a 'weapon' as being real or not, the goblins would go down for the same stretch.

So this new law is really a sack of crap - unlike so many of the hundreds of others St Tony has had dreamt up... :roll:
 
#9
Don't worry Tankies, the USA is still bristling with millions of civilian weapons all ready to blat the shitt out of any bird/insect/dust that dares to invade your property...
 
#10
TankiesYank said:
ctauch said:
IGood show, the UK is proving the NRA in US right, banning "firearms and weapons" does not reduce crime 8O
When did the U.S.A. ban firearms and weapons? Did I miss the overturning of the Second Amendment? And are other weapons besides firearms part of this banning too, as the above statement indicates? Does that include pepper spray and baseball bats? If so, would it be it to "reduce crime," or to reduce violent crime resulting in fatalities? Gun violence/fatality stats in the UK are still ridiculously low compared to the States, even versus population, so isn't that comparing apples to oranges anyway?

Back on topic...I would be interested to know if armed robberies in the UK have increased or stayed the same with the manufacturing of replicas. If anyone has a study or info they could link me to, that would be great.

(Surely Granny isn't supposed to know whether it's a replica, or even a paintball gun, pointed at her in an armed robbery? Super Soakers are orange and green, after all. :twisted:)
TY you seem a bit thick so I will slow it down...My point was that gun control doesn't work, clearly sarcasm is lost on you. The UK may have a lower rate of gun violence per capita when compared to the US but the over all crime rate in the UK is far higher; such as home invasions, robbery, etc... Fact of the matter; States in the US that allow concealed carry and have less gun control have lower overall crime rates then States that have extreme gun control.
 
#11
TankiesYank said:
ctauch said:
IGood show, the UK is proving the NRA in US right, banning "firearms and weapons" does not reduce crime 8O
When did the U.S.A. ban firearms and weapons? Did I miss the overturning of the Second Amendment?
I could be wrong (& in some ways I hope I am as I’m uncomfortable with being on the same wavelength as the crazy Septic :wink: ) but I think that ctauch was referring to the NRA’s argument against the assertion that a ban on firearms would reduce crime, rather than suggesting that the US had banned firearms!
 
#12
I Worked this out a little while ago.

If the populations of the UK and the US where the same, you'd be 14 tiems more likley to be mugged, or robbed, if you where in the UK.

On the flip side of the coin you're 52 tiems more likley to be raped and/or murdered in the US.
 
#13
ctauch said:
TY you seem a bit thick so I will slow it down...My point was that gun control doesn't work, clearly sarcasm is lost on you. The UK may have a lower rate of gun violence per capita when compared to the US but the over all crime rate in the UK is far higher; such as home invasions, robbery, etc... Fact of the matter; States in the US that allow concealed carry and have less gun control have lower overall crime rates then States that have extreme gun control.
ctauch: A little personal there, but fair enough, I jumped with both feet.

I've been called a lot of things in my life but "thick" has never been one of them. The reason I missed your "sarcasm" is because it appeared that you were simply stating an opinion. If there was subtlety intended there, then you're right, it just flew over mah poor little ole head.

My version of sarcasm was in addressing your blanket statement as it stood:

1. We've never had a gun ban in the States (and never will) so any statement about whether or not it would work as a violent-crime deterrent or aggravator is theory. Laws do vary from state to state, but you can purchase a gun virtually anywhere, which hardly constitutes a ban.

2. Facts - there's an interesting one. The saying in my biz goes, "Marketers use statistics like a drunk uses a lamppost — not for illumination, but for support." So being naturally cynical about any analysis that's been commissioned by either the NRA or, for example, the Center for Handgun Control, I've been combing the net for violent-crime stats that use the same metrics across the board by unbiased parties.

The DOJ has some interesting stuff on their website from a national basis (overall decline in everything from '93 to '03, that's good news), but hardly anything you can draw a conclusion from. Most of the other research varies by field so drastically (different time periods such as 3 vs. 5 years, etc., state/state vs. population vs. county/county, etc.), never mind different gun laws per state, that it's virtually impossible for a reader to make an apples-to-apples comparison. Hence my reluctance to accept that freely dispensed guns are truly the answer to yobbish crime in America, or the UK. Or, frankly, that it might not prevent certain types of crime now and then: random bashings, store robberies, etc. It all comes down to the individual gun carrier's sense of responsibility and knowledge, doesn't it? Are we all that responsible, or smart?

On the other hand (sort of a virtual olive branch, I suppose) one stat did jump out at me from the DOJ website: in a state prison offender survey in 1997, 80% of the guns used in violent crime were obtained from a family member/friend, a street buy, or otherwise illegally. Only something like 14% were actually purchased through registered channels. My gut tells me that this stat hasn't varied much...and in that sense the NRA is right, tighter registration laws are irrelevant because the people that are buying the guns at registered locations aren't the ones using them in crime. :? Clearly something needs to be done on the offender end!

Careening back to topic: I read somewhere — can't source it, sorry — that England is experiencing an increase in illegal weapon traffic via the Balkans and Northern Ireland. It will be interesting to see what's shown as a result of greater firearm circulation in an already rather violent society. Hey, sort of like ours!
 
#14
DozyBint said:
(& in some ways I hope I am as I’m uncomfortable with being on the same wavelength as the crazy Septic :wink: )
Heh. Have indeed been called "batsh!t-crazy" before (but let's not talk about my last performance review). Come along on my wavelength, DB, it's a unique little place! :D
 

Mr Happy

LE
Moderator
#15
ctauch said:
Fact of the matter; States in the US that allow concealed carry and have less gun control have lower overall crime rates then States that have extreme gun control.
That's like saying there's more underage sex in Devon than North Yorkshire because the girls there wear shorter skirts... Nothing to do with weather then??? The rural vs. city environment, attitudes of the area, employment prospects or whatever, ITS ALL DOWN TO THE SKIRTS GODDAMN IT!
 
#16
ctauch said:
TY you seem a bit thick so I will slow it down...My point was that gun control doesn't work, clearly sarcasm is lost on you. The UK may have a lower rate of gun violence per capita when compared to the US but the over all crime rate in the UK is far higher; such as home invasions, robbery, etc... Fact of the matter; States in the US that allow concealed carry and have less gun control have lower overall crime rates then States that have extreme gun control.

Can you tell me where you got your evidence to suggest that the UK has a higher crime rate than the USA? Because I think that's a bit of an exaggeration!

I can see why people are getting annoyed at 'yet another ban'. But I can see why it's also a good idea, especially as its coming more from the police than it is from the government. I mean, why would anyone need a replica gun? Or a massive great knife?

Also, I think that people on this board will take an exception to this law, mainly because everyone hear knows how to sensibly and safely hold and use a firearm. Unfortunatly, the people who actually own these weapons are usually pretty sad, and don't know how to use them safely. Probably because they're stupid. Why would anyone want to go walking around town with a massive knife in their pocket?
 
E

error_unknown

Guest
#17
tsar_Nikolas said:
I can see why people are getting annoyed at 'yet another ban'. But I can see why it's also a good idea, especially as its coming more from the police than it is from the government. I mean, why would anyone need a replica gun? Or a massive great knife?
All a bit serious here... however, a couple of points.

'Why would anyone need a replica gun... or a big knife?' Actually, beyond the basics of survival, why does anyone need anything? Turn this around: who are we, as the people or the state, to say what an individual should or shouldn't own, provided it isn't an unnacceptable danger to others.

Knives may well be a problem but they can't actually be banned and restricting sales to under 18s will have zero effect. Under 18 chavs are probably clever enough to realise that they can either nick their mum's breadknife or get an over 18 to buy them that Rambo combat blade they've always wanted.

As for replica firearms. These aren't weapons, they're lumps of metal and plastic which look like them. Yes, it is possible to convert some of them so that it might be possible to fire one or two rounds from them before they fall apart but the idea is being insidiously presented that you can covert one of these toys into a fully-functional combat weapon: you can't. I suspect I would be able to make something more robust and functional after a quick trip to my local B&Q.

As Cutaway has already mentioned, it is completely illegal to use a replica firearm in committing an offence and you get the same jail time as you would for using a real one, so why do we need an additional ban? Anyway, how are they going to define replica weapons? The fact of the matter is that a table leg can look sufficiently weapon-like to get you shot by the Rozzers these days. Go to any film set and you will see that the great majority of guns being carried by extras and so on are actually made of painted rubber but certainly look real enough to frighten a little old lady out of her pension money: will these be banned? If I made a 'replica' out of a couple of bits of wood and painted it black, would that be illegal?

The fact of the matter is that this is a ludicrous proposal designed to mask the fact that this government lacks the will to do anything worthwhile to fight crime.
 
#18
TN - I keep a large chopper in my pocket wherever I go. In reference to knives and replica firearms - you're right. They're unneccesary, for anything. But the anti-feeling here is more about the principle; Bliar's Britain has evolved as a climate where things get banned on the call of a couple of fruitcakes on GMTV, and the next thing you know, the police actually take notice because 'ban' crimes are easy to solve, and they fill Bliar's target nicely. Knee-jerk banning tends not to go any further than the (innocent) man on t'street - IE the ban on handguns. As mentioned above, gun crime has risen over here, despite Bliar's stroke of genius persecuting all those who target shoot with pistols.

I've lost faith in this f*cking country anyway- they voted for the big-eared arrsehole, now they will have to deal with the fact he has another four years to destroy the country. We are reaping what they sowed, and Sarnain is not happy.
 
#19
There is truly a change in the philosophy of English law. While it used to be that a person could do anything that was not specifically forbidden we are descending a slippery slope towards the continental system where a person may only do what the state specifically permits.

This may seem to be semantics but it changes completely the subject's relationship with the government, police etc (see the ID card thread for some comment on this).
 
#20
tsar_Nikolas said:
I can see why people are getting annoyed at 'yet another ban'. But I can see why it's also a good idea, especially as its coming more from the police than it is from the government. I mean, why would anyone need a replica gun? Or a massive great knife?
Define "replica". Cap gun? Water pistol? Both might be mistaken in bad light by a short-sighted firearms officer who's been told that person X has an Irish accent and a sawn-off shotgun in a bag. "It's OK, he was carrying an illegal replica".

Carrying a knife was already illegal; offensive weapon, and all that. "Ban combat knives" FFS, most murders are done with ordinary kitchen knives, so why bother? Someone who shoots at kiddies with an air rifle is already committing an offence, so why bother? Why not just use the existing legislation?

What offends most people is that these are clear examples of "crowd-pleasing" / "knee-jerk" legislation by a government. The tabloids stir up a story; Ministers pledge that "something must be done"; and MPs get to have their photo taken with the petition organisers, and splashed all over the local/national rag.

It's an easy way to appear if you are "listening to the wishes of the people", so the Politicians like it. The tabloid rag that stirs it up gets to claim "it was the Daily Rag wot done it", so the Third Estate like it. Knee-jerk stuff, and bad legislation as a result.

Remember the Dangerous Dogs Act? Or the pistol ban? That's a great example - 0.22 single shot ISSF free pistols (only good for putting holes in paper) banned; Colt .45 six shooter in black powder not banned. It's not even consistent, and we spent a billion pounds of taxpayers' cash on it. Even Nimrod AWACS was cheaper than that.

As for "ah, well, the police want it, it must be OK" the example of the pistol ban comes back; the Police still have no national firearms registration scheme, nearly a decade after the Cullen recommendation to do so.

Whoops, got carried away there, <rant mode off>
 

Similar threads

Latest Threads

Top