Shooting in Cumbria UK


#1

Another “lone gun nut” went on a rampage in Cumbria in a small fishing/ farming community today. twelve dead and twenty five in hospital. The gunman shot himslf in woods.
In Britain these things are almost inevetably followed by massive campaigns to ban guns. The antis are well organised and have been waiting for such an event knowing it had to come eventually.
Frankly, there’s not much left to ban/ restrict now and I fear this may be the final straw that leads to a total ban on guns in civilian hands. That of course will have implications for UK cartridge collecting as well.

The politicians will have to do something, they can’t be seen not to and with a new coalition government in power they will be eager to appease public opinion.

The only thing that might be a factor would be the massive cost in compensation they would have to pay out. With a big spending deficit already they might balk at the cost. On the other hand they might impose a ban without compensation like they did for assault rifles.


#2

Nothing good can come of this, and it will almost certainly result in more restrictions on law abiding people. At the very least I can see shotguns being upgraded to “section 1” firearms, where you would need a “good reason” to own each one.

Something else I had thought that they might do before this happened is make the cost of a gun license so expensive that most people simply cannot afford it. However, this would conveniently leave royalty etc. still able to have their pheasant shooting parties.


#3

The cost method of restricting gun ownership is very devisive. Clubs go to the wall for lack of members, as happened after the handgun ban. Shops go down the tubes too because less money is being spent by fewer shooters and the suppliers stop importing guns and ammunition because there isn’t the demand. So the whole infrastructure collapses.


#4

What is the present requirement for shotgun ownership in the UK?


#5

Americans should pay close attention to what happens now in the UK.

At some point in the future, there will be a horrific murder spree in the U.S. and our politicians are likewise well prepared to institute anti-gun and anti-ammunition restrictions as tight as they can get passed. Like so many recent [bad!] laws passed, they will be “emergencies” and details hidden from view and glossed over. The news media coverage will be all one sided against “evil gun/ammunition owners” and omit any rational objections to whatever schemes are being pushed.

Be afraid. Very afraid!

Unless you are a criminal, they ignore all the silly gun laws anyway.


#6

I don’t know if it’s true but on an italian newspaper today was written that the man used a rifle ( or a shotgun : in italian “fucile” means rifle and shotgun) and A PISTOL …

so every anti-gun action should be useless since pistols had already been banned in the UK …

( and that means that the man used an illegal gun …maybe the rifle was illegal owned too)


#7

No there was not a pistol. Apparantly he used a .22 rifle and a shotgun. Both were his own and licenced to him. Fairly common in a rural community like that even in Britain.
The first person he shot was his own brother, the second was the family lawyer. Apparantly there was a dispute over his father’s will. His father had recently died and since the brothers address was a farm I guess the cause of the grievence is fairly obvious.
Then he went to where he worked and shot two collegues, one died and one survived. There had been problems at work as well so they say.
After that the shootings were random although all but one victim was approximately his own age and in a small community like that they might not have been totally random. Could have been old grudges going back decades, its too soon to say.


#8
  • It’s always the same story: a crazy guy kills people at random using a gun (or guns). A sad and bad event like this is always covered by the media with the clear intent of asking for more anti-gun laws. I just wish people could be informed more often by the media about how many people die for nothing each day on highways and roads or in hospitals because of the doctors and nurses … Liviu 06/03/10

#9

Anti-gun advocates love an incident like this. I truly believe they wish for them to happen as each one gives them another argument for gun bans, forgetting that in the United States at least, less than 1/10th of one percent of the guns held by civilians EVER “get into trouble.”

If you took the same people and ask them to push for unrelenting and STRICT enforcement of speed limits and other traffic laws, after a fifteen car crash that killed five or six (or more) pelople, they would be against it, because they know they would have to comply with the laws then. They don’t care about taking away your hobby, your right to self defense, or even your job (which happened to me when our gun shop closed because of all the San Francsco and California BS over guns, because they don’t own a gun anyway (or do and figure they are too powerful to worry about the law, as in the case with celebraties and politicians, many of who have armed body guards) so what do they care about your rights?

Well, preaching to the choir. The Progressive Left is alive and well in America, so I guess we can talk among ourselves all we want and nothing will change.

John Moss


#10

If they pass more legislation to ban guns, then the UK will just have “stabbing rampages” like they have in gun-free China. Or maybe cricket-bat rampages?


#11

And after the ban of cricket-bats there will be wooden stick rampages, and after the ban of …

Will those bloody ban-idiots ever learn that there is [color=#FF0000]something else[/color] going wrong in societies and that there is no easy cure to it?!


#12

So far, all seems to be going well. It’s fortunate that the Labour government is out.

Someone asked about the UK’s shotgun regs. I’m a US resident but have UK friends and am on a couple of UK shooting forums, so let me take a stab (bad unintentional pun) at answering this. If any UK members want to clarify or correct me, please feel free.

Basically, any law-abiding adult resident can own a shotgun, or as many shotguns as he likes, and need not give a reason why he wants them. He does need a Section 2 license (Shotgun Certificate, or SGC). The gun(s) need to be registered, and must be kept in a metal gunsafe when not in use.

The barrel(s) must be at least 24 inches, and the gun must break open, or have a fixed box or tubular magazine that holds no more than 2 shells.

It’s possible to own a shotgun with a shorter barrel / higher capacity magazine but for that you need a Section 1 license, which requires you to show “good reason” to own, such as vermin control, Cowboy Action shooting, or Practical shooting.

Jim


#13

Hi Jim
Basically you are correct but the statement about not needing to tell them why you need it and not having to demonstrate a need is being eroded. To the extent now I would say it has gone.

Under British law you are theoretically entiled to be given a licence for a shotgun and the police have no right to ask why you need it but in practice these days they do. You need to produce a letter from a farmer, called a “permission” or prove you are a member of an approved clay club.

Like so many gun laws in Britain the rules are being imposed by what I call creeping legislation. Gradually they tighten up and tighten up by stealth. Over a period of time these ad hoc requirements become established as “law”.

The rules for things like security and the buying of reloading components, in particular primers have been tightened the same way.


#14

Vince, I wasn’t aware of this, and I find it disturbing: I’d always understood that owning a shotgun was regarded as a right, and the ostensible purpose for the SGC was to screen out those shouldn’t be allowed to exercise that right, because of a criminal conviction, etc.

SGC holders need to resist this trend, if it’s a matter of police policy, and not of law: otherwise there’ll be no difference between Section 2 and Section 1 licensing.

Jim