Minority ruining it for the majority... again
-
I was taught that one never draws a gun without the intent to use it, and to never point it at anything I didn't intend to shoot. Even brandishing a weapon in a threatening manner without justification is a serious breach of safety, and the fact that it is air powered makes no difference. Banning any gun, however, is pointless and stupid. Banning idiots from owning them is far more sensible, and punishing those who misuse them is entirely appropriate. This Signature is Temporarily Out of Order
I'll append that with what I was taught. Never show aggressively a gun unless you are going to aim it at someone. Never aim/point a gun unless you are going to pull the trigger. Never pull the trigger unless you are going wound someone. Never wound someone when you have the opportunity to finish them off. Never terminate a life unless you are prepared to do similar to the life's supporters. (friend's family, brothers in arms). I have no trouble with people owning guns, but people waving them around deserve to be cut down. Regardz Colin J Davies
Sonork ID 100.9197:Colin
You are the intrepid one, always willing to leap into the fray! A serious character flaw, I might add, but entertaining. Said by Roger Wright about me.
-
Robert Edward Caldecott wrote: Nope. The massacre at Dunblane occurred on 13th March 1996 - over a year before New Labour came to power. You're right. My mistake. I'm wondering where the hell I got that from :) I'm sure it was only a couple of weeks ago I was hearing about the five year anniversary - must have been something else. Robert Edward Caldecott wrote: Not significant enough I'm afraid. There is still a massive stigma about gun ownership, even in the criminal fraternity - I know because I unfortunately have a career criminal in the family. The most common weapon of choice for armed robbers is a sawn-off shotgun, which, though very difficult to obtain legally, is still a weapon that anyone determined enough can probably source. A sawn-off shotgun is and always has been impossible to obtain legally. The problem is that even a handgun is something that someone determined enough can source and I don't understand how there can be a stigma about handguns and not about sawn-off shotguns which rarely create a clean kill, which one would think should be the aim of anyone willing to kill. This just makes no sense. Robert Edward Caldecott wrote: I would argue that we have And you would base that assumption on what statistics? The stats I have show no significant decrease in handgun related crime from 96-00 and a marked increase during 00-01. If you have something more convincing than the national crime statistics, please present them but you can't make something true by "arguing" it. Robert Edward Caldecott wrote: What would you like to see then? Legal private ownership of hand guns? Arming the police? Neither would affect the crime rate. Evidence, here and abroad, suggests otherwise. Robert Edward Caldecott wrote: You ask any criminal - even a petty thief - if they would carry a gun if the police were armed and the answer is nearly always the same - they WOULD BE MORE LIKELY TO GO OUT ARMED. The problem is that many of them go out armed already and have very little fear that when they break into a house someone's going to be sat there with their own line of defense. I understand where you're coming from, I was bought up in a middle-class area, I live in one now. But I've also lived in places where Saturday night is just "the night when someone else got shot" and every noise at night could be an armed burglar
A sawn-off shotgun is and always has been impossible to obtain legally. Indeed, but a shotgun can still be obtained legally, though it isn't easy. Most criminals who use a SOG will have obtained it from someone who stole it from a legal owner. Evidence, here and abroad, suggests otherwise. Where? The UK is in a position where there is still a relatively small proportion of criminals going out armed. I cannot see how relaxing gun-control laws or arming the police is going to do anything but make the problem worse. Arming the police would be a disaster, I assure you. Like I said, ask any criminal. Do you want to live in a society where the average car thief has a gun stuck in his pocket just because the police have? Not me Paul. But the answer is education and regulation But firearms WHERE heavily regulated after Hungerford Paul - and it still didn't stop Dunblane from happenning. A total ban is the only solution. We will never know if the laws have prevented another massacre but I'm sure they have helped... and a marked increase during 00-01 Yep, they did. And do you know where the main increase occurred? With fucking Yardies in London where carrying a weapon is seen as some kind of fucking status symbol. A big problem, but not one that will be helped by any relaxation in the gun laws. Plus, there has been an influx of illegally imported East European firearms - ex Warsaw Pact hardware - something that needs to be addressed. I will say it again - if the police were armed then MORE CRIMINALS WOULD CARRY GUNS. Sorry to labour the point, but it is a damn good reason the leave things they way they are. Yes, if you know the right people and the right places to go then you can get your hands on a handgun for a few hundred quid. My point is that most criminals do not choose this path because of stigma attached. Also, since Hungerford/Dunblane there are armed police units in every major town - and any criminal that brandishes a cucumber in a plastic bag at them is likely to be shot dead. Once you arm the average Bobby and re-introduce the concept of armed civilians then we'll all be packing heat which is a recipe for disaster. Look at how many American kids are shot every year - often by playing with the contents of their parents gun cupboard. Do you really thing we should follow their lead? t'll be a long time before we see senisible drug laws and censorship laws in this country too Now you're talk
-
Another wanker has just made the district news for brandishing a cheap £17 "springer" bb gun in public. This makes two high profile cases in as many weeks (the first of which made the national news). District police are now asking people to hand in all their bb guns voluntarily. :(( As the owner of alomost $3,500 worth of high-end airsoft weaponry (AEGs and gas guns) there is no way in hell I will be giving them up now or when they make it illegal to own them - which they will do, mark my words, as long as these fucking idiots are allowed to own them. This will not only inconvienience me but cost retailers and sites around the country well into the hundreds of thousands of pounds. If you are in the UK and dont want to see the hobby and increasingly popular sport of hundreds and hundreds of people in this country going the same way as hand guns, write to your local police force and lobby them to ban the sale of bb guns to minors. They may be classed as toys, but there appearance alone should qualify them as dangerous weapons, and they should fall under the same legal restrictions as knifes. (I say legal as many retailers - quite rightly - self regulate the sale of these cheaper toys to children, but sadly not all). Personally I think the ARUs should shoot the little bastards if they are stupid enough to jepordise their lives and the public opinion of our sport. :mad:
David Wulff http://www.davidwulff.co.uk
I'm not schizophrenic, are we.
Stuff like this always irritates me. A while back there was a knife amnesty getting people to give up their big knives. Of course, most of us will be able to walk into our kitchens and grab a huge knife that'd be far more deadly. Banning knifes wouldn't work, as there are plenty of legitimate uses for them. I always carry my penknife. I've never been stopped and searched, but If I was, I'd argue that I wouldn't spend £70 on a good quality swiss army knife with assorted gadgets (that I use regularly in my job, taking computers apart) if I just wanted a weapon. £70 could buy a fantastically scary knife if I wanted one. I doubt anyone would care though ("he has sharp metal thing. he must be bad. arrest him") If someone runs amock with a rolling pin, would the police hold a rolling pin amnesty? -- Help me! I'm turning into a grapefruit!
-
Stuff like this always irritates me. A while back there was a knife amnesty getting people to give up their big knives. Of course, most of us will be able to walk into our kitchens and grab a huge knife that'd be far more deadly. Banning knifes wouldn't work, as there are plenty of legitimate uses for them. I always carry my penknife. I've never been stopped and searched, but If I was, I'd argue that I wouldn't spend £70 on a good quality swiss army knife with assorted gadgets (that I use regularly in my job, taking computers apart) if I just wanted a weapon. £70 could buy a fantastically scary knife if I wanted one. I doubt anyone would care though ("he has sharp metal thing. he must be bad. arrest him") If someone runs amock with a rolling pin, would the police hold a rolling pin amnesty? -- Help me! I'm turning into a grapefruit!
What if one guy bites another to death? Are we going to let gov't put our teeth off? Tomasz Sowinski -- http://www.shooltz.com
Free your mind and your ass will follow.
-
What if one guy bites another to death? Are we going to let gov't put our teeth off? Tomasz Sowinski -- http://www.shooltz.com
Free your mind and your ass will follow.
What if an opera singer hit exactly the right pitch to make someone's brain explode. Would the police have a vocal chord amnesty? We can keep this up all day -- Help me! I'm turning into a grapefruit!
-
benjymous wrote: We can keep this up all day Abolutely. What if somebody hears Britney Spears' song and barfs his internal organs out of the body? Will they introduce a ban on teen pop stars? Tomasz Sowinski -- http://www.shooltz.com
Free your mind and your ass will follow.
-
What if an opera singer hit exactly the right pitch to make someone's brain explode. Would the police have a vocal chord amnesty? We can keep this up all day -- Help me! I'm turning into a grapefruit!
benjymous wrote: We can keep this up all day Abolutely. What if somebody hears Britney Spears' song and barfs his internal organs out of the body? Will they introduce a ban on teen pop stars? Tomasz Sowinski -- http://www.shooltz.com
Free your mind and your ass will follow.
-
A sawn-off shotgun is and always has been impossible to obtain legally. Indeed, but a shotgun can still be obtained legally, though it isn't easy. Most criminals who use a SOG will have obtained it from someone who stole it from a legal owner. Evidence, here and abroad, suggests otherwise. Where? The UK is in a position where there is still a relatively small proportion of criminals going out armed. I cannot see how relaxing gun-control laws or arming the police is going to do anything but make the problem worse. Arming the police would be a disaster, I assure you. Like I said, ask any criminal. Do you want to live in a society where the average car thief has a gun stuck in his pocket just because the police have? Not me Paul. But the answer is education and regulation But firearms WHERE heavily regulated after Hungerford Paul - and it still didn't stop Dunblane from happenning. A total ban is the only solution. We will never know if the laws have prevented another massacre but I'm sure they have helped... and a marked increase during 00-01 Yep, they did. And do you know where the main increase occurred? With fucking Yardies in London where carrying a weapon is seen as some kind of fucking status symbol. A big problem, but not one that will be helped by any relaxation in the gun laws. Plus, there has been an influx of illegally imported East European firearms - ex Warsaw Pact hardware - something that needs to be addressed. I will say it again - if the police were armed then MORE CRIMINALS WOULD CARRY GUNS. Sorry to labour the point, but it is a damn good reason the leave things they way they are. Yes, if you know the right people and the right places to go then you can get your hands on a handgun for a few hundred quid. My point is that most criminals do not choose this path because of stigma attached. Also, since Hungerford/Dunblane there are armed police units in every major town - and any criminal that brandishes a cucumber in a plastic bag at them is likely to be shot dead. Once you arm the average Bobby and re-introduce the concept of armed civilians then we'll all be packing heat which is a recipe for disaster. Look at how many American kids are shot every year - often by playing with the contents of their parents gun cupboard. Do you really thing we should follow their lead? t'll be a long time before we see senisible drug laws and censorship laws in this country too Now you're talk
Robert Edward Caldecott wrote: Indeed, but a shotgun can still be obtained legally, though it isn't easy. Most criminals who use a SOG will have obtained it from someone who stole it from a legal owner. That's true and you're right that this is much cheaper than getting your hands on a handgun. But it's not exactly reassuring me. I'd rather get shot by a psycho with a pistol than a psycho with a sawn-off any day of the week. And this, frankly, is why there's a stigma attached to handguns in the criminal fraternity: If you have a handgun you obviously know the right people and have the right money. If you own a sawn-off shotgun, you're just an idiot. Robert Edward Caldecott wrote: Where? The UK is in a position where there is still a relatively small proportion of criminals going out armed. Okay, here's the article I was looking for earlier... http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,59866,00.html[^] We are a solid case study for why gun-control laws should not be introduced anywhere. Robert Edward Caldecott wrote: Arming the police would be a disaster, I assure you. Like I said, ask any criminal. Do you want to live in a society where the average car thief has a gun stuck in his pocket just because the police have? I'm more interested in arming the populace than just the police. Even the odds between perpetrator and victim. Robert Edward Caldecott wrote: A total ban is the only solution. If a total ban were possible, I would agree with you. But guns have always been here, it's impossible to get them out. The cost to stop smuggling completely would be too horrific to consider. Unfortunately, it can't be done and the next best thing is to make sure that not only criminals carry guns. Robert Edward Caldecott wrote: Yep, they did. And do you know where the main increase occurred? With f***ing Yardies in London where carrying a weapon is seen as some kind of f***ing status symbol. Exactly! And do you think it would still be a status symbol if everyone had one? Robert Edward Caldecott wrote: Look at how many American kids are shot every year - ... Do you really thing we should follow their lead? Not following their lead, but improving
-
benjymous wrote: We can keep this up all day Abolutely. What if somebody hears Britney Spears' song and barfs his internal organs out of the body? Will they introduce a ban on teen pop stars? Tomasz Sowinski -- http://www.shooltz.com
Free your mind and your ass will follow.
ROFL! :laugh::laugh::laugh: Paul
-
benjymous wrote: We can keep this up all day Abolutely. What if somebody hears Britney Spears' song and barfs his internal organs out of the body? Will they introduce a ban on teen pop stars? Tomasz Sowinski -- http://www.shooltz.com
Free your mind and your ass will follow.
Tomasz Sowinski wrote: Abolutely. What if somebody hears Britney Spears' song and barfs his internal organs out of the body? Will they introduce a ban on teen pop stars? That deserves serious scientific study. Anyway... What if someone used an oxygen cylinder to inflate kittens? Would they ban kittens? -- Help me! I'm turning into a grapefruit!
-
Tomasz Sowinski wrote: What if somebody hears Britney Spears' song and barfs his internal organs out of the body? That keeps on happenning to me. Foul temptress. :)
Faith. Believing in something you *know* isn't true.
Robert Edward Caldecott wrote: That keeps on happenning to me. Oops! She did it again :) Tomasz Sowinski -- http://www.shooltz.com
Free your mind and your ass will follow.
-
Tomasz Sowinski wrote: Abolutely. What if somebody hears Britney Spears' song and barfs his internal organs out of the body? Will they introduce a ban on teen pop stars? That deserves serious scientific study. Anyway... What if someone used an oxygen cylinder to inflate kittens? Would they ban kittens? -- Help me! I'm turning into a grapefruit!
benjymous wrote: What if someone used an oxygen cylinder to inflate kittens? Would they ban kittens? No, they would ban oxygen :) What if schoolbus drowns in the river? Would they ban schoolbuses? Tomasz Sowinski -- http://www.shooltz.com
Free your mind and your ass will follow.
-
benjymous wrote: What if someone used an oxygen cylinder to inflate kittens? Would they ban kittens? No, they would ban oxygen :) What if schoolbus drowns in the river? Would they ban schoolbuses? Tomasz Sowinski -- http://www.shooltz.com
Free your mind and your ass will follow.
I think banning rivers would be easier -- Help me! I'm turning into a grapefruit!
-
I think banning rivers would be easier -- Help me! I'm turning into a grapefruit!
The final question: What if somebody turns into a grapefruit? Tomasz Sowinski -- http://www.shooltz.com
Free your mind and your ass will follow.
-
The final question: What if somebody turns into a grapefruit? Tomasz Sowinski -- http://www.shooltz.com
Free your mind and your ass will follow.
You'd have to ban full moons ;P -- Help me! I'm turning into a grapefruit!
-
Robert Edward Caldecott wrote: Indeed, but a shotgun can still be obtained legally, though it isn't easy. Most criminals who use a SOG will have obtained it from someone who stole it from a legal owner. That's true and you're right that this is much cheaper than getting your hands on a handgun. But it's not exactly reassuring me. I'd rather get shot by a psycho with a pistol than a psycho with a sawn-off any day of the week. And this, frankly, is why there's a stigma attached to handguns in the criminal fraternity: If you have a handgun you obviously know the right people and have the right money. If you own a sawn-off shotgun, you're just an idiot. Robert Edward Caldecott wrote: Where? The UK is in a position where there is still a relatively small proportion of criminals going out armed. Okay, here's the article I was looking for earlier... http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,59866,00.html[^] We are a solid case study for why gun-control laws should not be introduced anywhere. Robert Edward Caldecott wrote: Arming the police would be a disaster, I assure you. Like I said, ask any criminal. Do you want to live in a society where the average car thief has a gun stuck in his pocket just because the police have? I'm more interested in arming the populace than just the police. Even the odds between perpetrator and victim. Robert Edward Caldecott wrote: A total ban is the only solution. If a total ban were possible, I would agree with you. But guns have always been here, it's impossible to get them out. The cost to stop smuggling completely would be too horrific to consider. Unfortunately, it can't be done and the next best thing is to make sure that not only criminals carry guns. Robert Edward Caldecott wrote: Yep, they did. And do you know where the main increase occurred? With f***ing Yardies in London where carrying a weapon is seen as some kind of f***ing status symbol. Exactly! And do you think it would still be a status symbol if everyone had one? Robert Edward Caldecott wrote: Look at how many American kids are shot every year - ... Do you really thing we should follow their lead? Not following their lead, but improving
pdriley wrote: I'm actually impressed by the way the government is relaxing the laws without anyone noticing, by simply not enforcing them. There are websites in the UK now that sell adult DVDs and the government seems to be taking the approach that if they just do nothing then everything will be fine but if they try to slap a proscription order on it Why though? Pornography (hard and soft) is legal in the UK, as it is in most other countries. The only stuff that is illegal is the sick stuff.
8
SIMON WALTON
SONORK ID 100.10024 -
pdriley wrote: I'm actually impressed by the way the government is relaxing the laws without anyone noticing, by simply not enforcing them. There are websites in the UK now that sell adult DVDs and the government seems to be taking the approach that if they just do nothing then everything will be fine but if they try to slap a proscription order on it Why though? Pornography (hard and soft) is legal in the UK, as it is in most other countries. The only stuff that is illegal is the sick stuff.
8
SIMON WALTON
SONORK ID 100.10024Simon Walton wrote: Why though? Pornography (hard and soft) is legal in the UK, as it is in most other countries. The only stuff that is illegal is the sick stuff. Not strictly true. It's legal to own and legal to buy, but selling it has always been dodgy ground, anyone who's tried to do so in the past has been slapped with a proscription order, effectively banning them from advertising in any way, including appearing on shop shelf. (this is what killed the old Red Hot TV - they couldn't even have their decoder cards in shops) It's illegal to host a web site in the UK that contains any pornographic content but it's kind of difficult to stop people using US hosts and US search engines to advertise, so the proscription order would effectively get them nowhere. The only thing they could do is crack down on imports to the company that sells them which to date they've opted not to do. Paul
-
Robert Edward Caldecott wrote: Indeed, but a shotgun can still be obtained legally, though it isn't easy. Most criminals who use a SOG will have obtained it from someone who stole it from a legal owner. That's true and you're right that this is much cheaper than getting your hands on a handgun. But it's not exactly reassuring me. I'd rather get shot by a psycho with a pistol than a psycho with a sawn-off any day of the week. And this, frankly, is why there's a stigma attached to handguns in the criminal fraternity: If you have a handgun you obviously know the right people and have the right money. If you own a sawn-off shotgun, you're just an idiot. Robert Edward Caldecott wrote: Where? The UK is in a position where there is still a relatively small proportion of criminals going out armed. Okay, here's the article I was looking for earlier... http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,59866,00.html[^] We are a solid case study for why gun-control laws should not be introduced anywhere. Robert Edward Caldecott wrote: Arming the police would be a disaster, I assure you. Like I said, ask any criminal. Do you want to live in a society where the average car thief has a gun stuck in his pocket just because the police have? I'm more interested in arming the populace than just the police. Even the odds between perpetrator and victim. Robert Edward Caldecott wrote: A total ban is the only solution. If a total ban were possible, I would agree with you. But guns have always been here, it's impossible to get them out. The cost to stop smuggling completely would be too horrific to consider. Unfortunately, it can't be done and the next best thing is to make sure that not only criminals carry guns. Robert Edward Caldecott wrote: Yep, they did. And do you know where the main increase occurred? With f***ing Yardies in London where carrying a weapon is seen as some kind of f***ing status symbol. Exactly! And do you think it would still be a status symbol if everyone had one? Robert Edward Caldecott wrote: Look at how many American kids are shot every year - ... Do you really thing we should follow their lead? Not following their lead, but improving
OK, I'll make this quick - like you, I have work to do... pdriley wrote: We are a solid case study for why gun-control laws should not be introduced anywhere. This article contains the following: The rise in English crime has coincided with the growth of governmental intrusiveness where firearms are concerned. This is bullshit. To link a rise in crime in England with strict gun laws is very poor journalism. Rising crime is caused by many factors - the main one being drugs related crime (theft, muggings, etc.). What a joke - I'll tell you now Paul, one of the reasons more criminals don't carry guns is that if caught, the penalty will be VERY stiff indeed. Relaxing the laws on gun ownership would NOT help. pdriley wrote: Even the odds between perpetrator and victim. Oh pur-lease!!! Let's all walk around armed - that'll stop those damn heroin addicts from trying to steal my car! ha ha ha. Unbelievable. It would simply result in more people being shot - and every pettyy criminal in the land would pack heat. Great. pdriley wrote: Exactly! And do you think it would still be a status symbol if everyone had one? Yes, in fact the problem would be worse because instead of packing an Uzi, you'd have Yardie gangs driving around in a car with a boot full of automatic machine guns, etc. It would be a vicious spiral of gangs trying to get even more powerful weapons. The Yardie thing is a bit different, as there is this cultural fondness for gangland members having weapons in Jamaica - a good reason not to make gun ownership anymore socially acceptable! I wouldn't want to live in an armed society and I think I speak for the majority of people in the UK. Comparing us to the States will never work either as they have the Constitutional question to deal with. As for your other points on censorshjip/drugs ... YAY! Total agreement from this opionated old bastard!
Faith. Believing in something you *know* isn't true.
-
David Wulff wrote: Dear god! I hope you had an under the limit rifle for your friends sake, else I should be asking if he is still limping! I was teasing. It was a weedy little thing - it stung him and he got me back with his. I was 16 for f***s sake. We've all done stupid things, especially when in our teens. David Wulff wrote: it's called common sense and it does help to reduce accidents. Very patronizing! Lighten up for Petes sake!
Faith. Believing in something you *know* isn't true.
All the more reason to ban minors from even operating air guns, bb guns, etc, unsupervised. Yes teenagers make perfectly innocent mistakes - heck I've made most of them in the book myself, and writen the apendicies - but by removing the ability to operate any form of gun unsupervised would have prevented your "accident" from ever happening. Being stupid enough to do something like that doesn't have any reflection on the person (I'm sure you'd never do anything like that now), but in all honesty that is exactly what is turning the public against us, and when you get a few loud mouthed wankers marching round Whitehall the politians will end up discussing a ban, and bingo... heavy or total restrictions on air guns, with bb guns shortly following. BTW, obviously air gun laws are not hard enough at the moment then, as 14-17 year olds are not allowed to operate air guns without a post 21 year old present. In this case penalties must be introduced - even it if it just a visit from the local ARU to explain the sever stupidity of abusing guns. I would expect that is enough to have an affect on most teenagers.
David Wulff http://www.davidwulff.co.uk
I'm not schizophrenic, are we.
-
OK, I'll make this quick - like you, I have work to do... pdriley wrote: We are a solid case study for why gun-control laws should not be introduced anywhere. This article contains the following: The rise in English crime has coincided with the growth of governmental intrusiveness where firearms are concerned. This is bullshit. To link a rise in crime in England with strict gun laws is very poor journalism. Rising crime is caused by many factors - the main one being drugs related crime (theft, muggings, etc.). What a joke - I'll tell you now Paul, one of the reasons more criminals don't carry guns is that if caught, the penalty will be VERY stiff indeed. Relaxing the laws on gun ownership would NOT help. pdriley wrote: Even the odds between perpetrator and victim. Oh pur-lease!!! Let's all walk around armed - that'll stop those damn heroin addicts from trying to steal my car! ha ha ha. Unbelievable. It would simply result in more people being shot - and every pettyy criminal in the land would pack heat. Great. pdriley wrote: Exactly! And do you think it would still be a status symbol if everyone had one? Yes, in fact the problem would be worse because instead of packing an Uzi, you'd have Yardie gangs driving around in a car with a boot full of automatic machine guns, etc. It would be a vicious spiral of gangs trying to get even more powerful weapons. The Yardie thing is a bit different, as there is this cultural fondness for gangland members having weapons in Jamaica - a good reason not to make gun ownership anymore socially acceptable! I wouldn't want to live in an armed society and I think I speak for the majority of people in the UK. Comparing us to the States will never work either as they have the Constitutional question to deal with. As for your other points on censorshjip/drugs ... YAY! Total agreement from this opionated old bastard!
Faith. Believing in something you *know* isn't true.
Robert Edward Caldecott wrote: This is bullshit. To link a rise in crime in England with strict gun laws is very poor journalism. Yeah, but it does only say "coincides". You're right that there are many factors but there is very little evidence that banning guns significantly reduces crime, there is at least some evidence that it either makes no difference or worsens the problem. Robert Edward Caldecott wrote: What a joke - I'll tell you now Paul, one of the reasons more criminals don't carry guns is that if caught, the penalty will be VERY stiff indeed. Again, you're thinking about areas where you've lived. You should try the rougher places on the out-skirts of major cities. Where I used to live nobody worried one bit about the penalties. Robert Edward Caldecott wrote: and every pettyy criminal in the land would pack heat. Great. That didn't happen before the ban was introduced, why would it happen now if the ban were lifted? One of the problems with this country is that we react to assumptions with no basic evidence. Whenever I see Blair and his government coming up with a new knee-jerk reaction to something, I'm always reminded of the little wooden mice in Bagpuss, running round squeaking "we will fix it, we will fix it". :) Robert Edward Caldecott wrote: I think I speak for the majority of people in the UK In polls I've seen, it's either 60-40 anti-guns or 50-50. But again, as we've established, people are generally stupid. I really don't care what the majority think is right, I care what case studies and evidence suggest is right. Paul