• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

UK gun owners want their pistol rights restored.

Jerry

Jerry

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 28, 2006
Messages
51,123
Reaction score
15,259
Location
United States
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
Changing attitudes to firearms
David FrostJune 25, 2014

"...What is also worrying is that as a society we are getting more remote from the responsible use of guns. When I left school, virtually every male in the country was familiar with firearms and their use. They’d fought in the war, done National Service or, like me, learned at school. Fewer schools now have a Combined Cadet Force though the Government plans to increase their number. Nobody thought it unusual when we teenagers slung a service .303 over our shoulders and cycled off to the nearby range on the South Downs once a week. Goodness, what a to-do there’d be now! In any case, since 1988, civilians have been banned from using the current service rifle.

The armed forces are at their lowest numbers since the end of the Napoleonic wars, two centuries ago, and less than half the size of the forces we were able to mobilise in August 1914. As a proportion of the population, servicemen and even the wider shooting public just don’t feature on the radar. With 91,000 “partners”, John Lewis staff exceed the combined strength of the Royal Navy and Royal Air Force and will soon dwarf the Army too. The vast majority of civilians do not know anyone currently in the armed forces or anyone who uses guns for work or recreation. The responsible use of firearms is simply not understood by the wider public. ..."


Allow the ownership and use of .22 calibre Rimfire pistols for sporting purposes in England, Wales and Scotland.
We the undersigned respectfully petition the Government to amend the Firearms Acts to allow the ownership and use of .22 calibre Rimfire pistols for competitive sporting purposes in England, Wales and Scotland.

We the undersigned therefore request that the Government:

1. Repeal the Firearms (Amendment) (No. 2) Act 1997
2. Amend the Firearms (Amendment) Act 1997 such that the following sections remain repealed:
a. Section 12, 1(c)
b. Section 13

Prior to the 1997 Firearms(Amendment) (No 2) Act (which prohibited .22 calibre pistols), under the constraints of the Section 1 of the 1968 Firearms Act, competitors could legally purchase, own and use .22 calibre pistols for target shooting competition up to and including Olympic level at approved clubs.

We ask that the sport of target pistol shooting be once more permitted under the existing Section 1 Licencing scheme, thus allowing a much loved and all inclusive sporting discipline to flourish once more.
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
Hardly any Brits actually want to see gun laws loosened.

These are a very tiny minority of folks.

It's not a priority for British society, it's not a priority for the British Government and the general attitude of the British people is that it's a non-issue.
 
Eh, that petition says it only had 21,019 signatures. I don't take that as representative of a strong movement.



You could probably get more signatures on a petition to declare the moon landing a fake.
 
Jetboogieman said:
Hardly any Brits actually want to see gun laws loosened.

These are a very tiny minority of folks.

It's not a priority for British society, it's not a priority for the British Government and the general attitude of the British people is that it's a non-issue.
Click to expand...
I know.
 
Mr Person said:
Eh, that petition says it only had 21,019 signatures. I don't take that as representative of a strong movement.
Click to expand...
And the petition is closed. That's not the point.
 
Mr Person said:
Eh, that petition says it only had 21,019 signatures. I don't take that as representative of a strong movement.



You could probably get more signatures on a petition to declare the moon landing a fake.
Click to expand...

nor was the gay rights marriage movement at one point either. Its sad that people have to petition their government for a right that never should have been abridged in the first place. governments that don't trust their citizens to own the same weapons the police have are governments not worthy of trust nor respect
 
TurtleDude said:
nor was the gay rights marriage movement at one point either. Its sad that people have to petition their government for a right that never should have been abridged in the first place. governments that don't trust their citizens to own the same weapons the police have are governments not worthy of trust nor respect
Click to expand...

Why do you respect that not everyone's definition of freedom in the world includes access to guns :shrug:

You have them and that's fine, the law of the land has been defined as such.

But it's not every countries national desire to have such a right... Yeah that leaves out a few enthusiasts such as those in the petition... But that's just not how the British People see the issue... Because it is as little an issue to the British people as the issue of Sunderlands possible relegation is to Americans :2razz:
 
Jetboogieman said:
Why do you respect that not everyone's definition of freedom in the world includes access to guns :shrug:

You have them and that's fine, the law of the land has been defined as such.

But it's not every countries national desire to have such a right... Yeah that leaves out a few enthusiasts such as those in the petition... But that's just not how the British People see the issue... Because it is as little an issue to the British people as the issue of Sunderlands possible relegation is to Americans :2razz:
Click to expand...

On that you are totally wrong. The citizens of UK are INDOCTRINATED into the provably false belief guns cause something. Any government that would deprive citizens of property for no good reason other than its fear of armed citizens objecting to bad policy and laws is not a good government but of the worst kind. Lying deceitful and having hidden agendas. Freedom is not living under such a government that is afraid the people may object and being restricted by such a government.

The US government governs with the CONSENT of the people. It would dearly love to break free of that restriction so that it can RULE like other governments.

UK citizens are not free. Deluded yes, free no.

Try reading this

Fear and Loathing in Whitehall:
Bolshevism and the Firearms Act of 1920
By Clayton Cramer

http://www.dvc.org.uk/dunblane/clayton_1.pdf

In the Commons, M.P. Bennet argued the same point:
[T]hat the distinctive difference between a freeman and a slave was a right to possess arms,
not so much... for the purpose of defending his property as his liberty. Neither could he do, if
deprived of those arms, in the hour of danger."[9]

The absence of laws regulating handgun ownership might be evidence that private ownership in Britain was
rare as the nineteenth century waned. The literature of the period, however, shows that handguns as defensive
weapons were considered an ordinary part of British life.
 
Last edited:
Jetboogieman said:
Why do you respect that not everyone's definition of freedom in the world includes access to guns :shrug:

You have them and that's fine, the law of the land has been defined as such.

But it's not every countries national desire to have such a right... Yeah that leaves out a few enthusiasts such as those in the petition... But that's just not how the British People see the issue... Because it is as little an issue to the British people as the issue of Sunderlands possible relegation is to Americans :2razz:
Click to expand...

In some societies women are treated like slaves. IN many Sub-saharan African nations, if you are a member of the wrong "tribe" or ethnic groups you are treated like crap. when i went to Kenya, I met a man herding cattle dressed in a sari carrying a spear who spoke perfect English. he had an Oxford education with high honors but because he was not Kikuyu he couldn't get a well paying job in Nairobi so he lived fairly free as the head of his Masai village.

many sheep don't mind living in pens because that's all they know
 
Mr Person said:
Eh, that petition says it only had 21,019 signatures. I don't take that as representative of a strong movement.

You could probably get more signatures on a petition to declare the moon landing a fake.
Click to expand...

What are you trying to say government and gun control propaganda have been successful because that is the only logical explanation.
 
Jetboogieman said:
Hardly any Brits actually want to see gun laws loosened.
Click to expand...

The only ones who do are the members of idiotic firearm organisations currently begging for less restrictions or easier requirements. It is the standard firearm organisation response. Lick authorities boots, force acceptance of the laws and beg because they are now good boys and girls.

These are a very tiny minority of folks.
Click to expand...

Nobody supports cowards. The only guys with any brains or sense are those who simply want to toss a very very stupid and equally useless law.

It's not a priority for British society, it's not a priority for the British Government and the general attitude of the British people is that it's a non-issue.
Click to expand...

Who is going to make it an issue is the question. If mainstream firearm organisations correctly informed their members as to the fact one must comply with crap laws and fight for the removal instead of preaching and forcing acceptance things may be different. However cowards do not fight, the collaborate and beg.

If Zuma is involved you would know the same situation occurs in you own country where you can observe first hand the cowardice of firearm organisations. Their only desire is to collaborate and beg, any mention of objection will be fought and removed as a threat.
 
TurtleDude said:
many sheep don't mind living in pens because that's all they know
Click to expand...

Just because people in other countries don't see it exactly the same as you do, doesn't make them sheeple at all :shrug:

It's amazing you insist that if people don't see guns as a right, they don't believe in freedom and there's no budging on that and people should respect, strike that, accept that belief as fact.

But you just cannot bring yourself to respect that many other countries just do not see it that way and neither do they care, it just doesn't factor into their politics in many countries at all.

Guns do not = Freedom IMHO, it's a legal right in the US and that's fine, but philosophically I don't see it that way, and let's be honest here, it's not like gun owners, or the governments "fear" of gun owners has stopped the government smashing the constitution to pieces in other areas, from civil forfeiture, to illegal wiretaps which are 1000% against the constitution and all the other goodies that came out of the War on Drugs and War on Terror seem to be A-Ok for most people, or at least low enough on their radar not to raise hell about it...

But as soon as it's a conversation about guns, or any kind of regulation no matter how mundane, it's the end of the world.

Now I ask you, really, really try to make a good point here.

Because honestly, how it usually goes is that if someone doesn't come in here, with tears streaming down their face while a flute rendition of "March of the Republic" plays in the background, recounting the epic tail of brave patriots securing the freedom of the people against tyranny, they're shot to pieces.
 
Jetboogieman said:
Just because people in other countries don't see it exactly the same as you do, doesn't make them sheeple at all :shrug:

It's amazing you insist that if people don't see guns as a right, they don't believe in freedom and there's no budging on that and people should respect, strike that, accept that belief as fact.

But you just cannot bring yourself to respect that many other countries just do not see it that way and neither do they care, it just doesn't factor into their politics in many countries at all.

Guns do not = Freedom IMHO, it's a legal right in the US and that's fine, but philosophically I don't see it that way, and let's be honest here, it's not like gun owners, or the governments "fear" of gun owners has stopped the government smashing the constitution to pieces in other areas, from civil forfeiture, to illegal wiretaps which are 1000% against the constitution and all the other goodies that came out of the War on Drugs and War on Terror seem to be A-Ok for most people, or at least low enough on their radar not to raise hell about it...

But as soon as it's a conversation about guns, or any kind of regulation no matter how mundane, it's the end of the world.

Now I ask you, really, really try to make a good point here.

Because honestly, how it usually goes is that if someone doesn't come in here, with tears streaming down their face while a flute rendition of "March of the Republic" plays in the background, recounting the epic tail of brave patriots securing the freedom of the people against tyranny, they're shot to pieces.
Click to expand...

those who ignore history are doomed to repeat it
 
TurtleDude said:
disarmed people are the victims in most of the government led massacres in modern history
Click to expand...

facepalm.jpg~c200


abandon-thread011.gif
 
Have Brits ever asked themselves WHY they are not allowed to own guns, me thinks not.
 
Jetboogieman said:
facepalm.jpg~c200


abandon-thread011.gif
Click to expand...

have you ever say spent 30 seconds or more wondering why some governments are afraid to let their citizens have the same arms the police are given?
 
Jetboogieman said:
Why do you respect that not everyone's definition of freedom in the world includes access to guns :shrug:
Click to expand...

I do not support the notion that human rights are subject to democratic processes, regardless of the nation involved. Governments which do not respect human rights are fundamentally illegitimate.
 
Crimefree said:
The only ones who do are the members of idiotic firearm organisations currently begging for less restrictions or easier requirements. It is the standard firearm organisation response. Lick authorities boots, force acceptance of the laws and beg because they are now good boys and girls.



Nobody supports cowards. The only guys with any brains or sense are those who simply want to toss a very very stupid and equally useless law.



Who is going to make it an issue is the question. If mainstream firearm organisations correctly informed their members as to the fact one must comply with crap laws and fight for the removal instead of preaching and forcing acceptance things may be different. However cowards do not fight, the collaborate and beg.

If Zuma is involved you would know the same situation occurs in you own country where you can observe first hand the cowardice of firearm organisations. Their only desire is to collaborate and beg, any mention of objection will be fought and removed as a threat.
Click to expand...

There are no mainstream firearm organisations here. Shotguns are the main pest control/hunting weapon, since apart from deer in the Highlands of Scotland, the biggest animals are grey squirrel and game birds. Handguns are a non-issue. Nobody wants guns except the "cowards" you mention, who probably number less than 100 at the most.
 
Jetboogieman said:
Just because people in other countries don't see it exactly the same as you do, doesn't make them sheeple at all :shrug:

It's amazing you insist that if people don't see guns as a right, they don't believe in freedom and there's no budging on that and people should respect, strike that, accept that belief as fact.

But you just cannot bring yourself to respect that many other countries just do not see it that way and neither do they care, it just doesn't factor into their politics in many countries at all.

Guns do not = Freedom IMHO, it's a legal right in the US and that's fine, but philosophically I don't see it that way, and let's be honest here, it's not like gun owners, or the governments "fear" of gun owners has stopped the government smashing the constitution to pieces in other areas, from civil forfeiture, to illegal wiretaps which are 1000% against the constitution and all the other goodies that came out of the War on Drugs and War on Terror seem to be A-Ok for most people, or at least low enough on their radar not to raise hell about it...

But as soon as it's a conversation about guns, or any kind of regulation no matter how mundane, it's the end of the world.

Now I ask you, really, really try to make a good point here.

Because honestly, how it usually goes is that if someone doesn't come in here, with tears streaming down their face while a flute rendition of "March of the Republic" plays in the background, recounting the epic tail of brave patriots securing the freedom of the people against tyranny, they're shot to pieces.
Click to expand...

What the people believe they are and what they are are two different things. Government has absolutely no rational reason to prevent people owning guns other than government is afraid of people with guns.

People who are deprived of the symbol of freedom for no reason are not FREE. Had you bothered to counter that point rather than go on a diatribe of personal crap you may have had some credibility.

Had you actually understood the US constitution and bill of rights you would know that no right is given it is simply affirmed. ie These rights were pre-existing and are now protected. Self-defence is a natural right of every living creature on this earth. Why is man an exception that man must not defend against those who come to deprive, rob and kill an that includes governments?

The example governments have set cannot be ignored. 262million they have killed, their own citizens. That is six times more than all the wars.

SHEEPLE believe they are FREE. it is quite obvious to anyone else they are no better that serfs and slaves.
 
Last edited:
Manc Skipper said:
There are no mainstream firearm organisations here. Shotguns are the main pest control/hunting weapon, since apart from deer in the Highlands of Scotland, the biggest animals are grey squirrel and game birds. Handguns are a non-issue. Nobody wants guns except the "cowards" you mention, who probably number less than 100 at the most.
Click to expand...

Have you forgotten how many gun makers the UK one had all forced out of business by oppressiveness laws and a people quite used to firearm ownership for hunting and shooting. Yes shotguns were used in birding and vermin control as well as sport and it was and still is the main shooting activity but IT WAS NOT THE ONLY ONE. Your attempt to down play this is dishonest.

Cowards do not except the responsibility of defending themselves. What would you say the proportion of cowards who refuse to do that and expect government to do it for them as against those who accept defence is a natural right and want the ability to do so is?

Apparently you do not know what a coward is. People who beg government becasue they are afraid to object. People who would rather be serfs and slaves than free citizens.

Just because government lets you grow your own vegetables does not mean you are free. Martin Luther King.
 
A coward spends his life in fear of something that will never happen, arms himself for comfort, and drunkenly shoots a random woman in a cinema.
 
Manc Skipper said:
A coward spends his life in fear of something that will never happen, arms himself for comfort, and drunkenly shoots a random woman in a cinema.
Click to expand...

You are totally wrong with the never happen on both counts and there are 262million dead bodies to make a liar out of you.

noun
noun: coward; plural noun: cowards

1. a person who lacks the courage to do or endure dangerous or unpleasant things.
synonyms: weakling, milksop, namby-pamby, mouse; informal chicken, scaredy-cat, yellow-belly, sissy, baby, candy-ass, milquetoast
"the cowards were the first to give up"

I think that describes gun control advocates to a "T"

The very fact you had to use falsity and back it up with a personal comment is enough to relegate your comments into the emotional class of the deluded and indoctrinated.

Of course gun control advocates don't think they are cowards but they are. It is they who refuse to takes responsibility for their safety and that of their family. Nothing proves that cowardice better than that and their desire to force others to be like them.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom