CS: Legal-IGs bad apples etc.
From: "Christopher Gould", [EMAIL PROTECTED] Over the many years that I have been shooting I suppose that there have been a few people that I have been uneasy about, but nothing really that I could do about it. Surely though, this is no longer the case. Who is going to submit a confidential reference for someone about whom they are unhappy? Which club committee member would agree to do a reference at all for someone like this? It seems to me that it just will not happen, I am a club committee member and I certainly will not. It seems self evident therefore that within three or four years or so any bad apples should have been weeded out by the new referee system. It seems rather a good idea in fact, so can we look forward to a similar system for police AFOs? What vetting procedures are currently applied for them? We have several in our club and they all seem to be eminently reasonable and sensible chaps; but , who knows, maybe there are a few bad apples somewhere that might be weeded out by a requirement for two references every few years from people outside the police such as friends or neighbours. It seems illogical to deny the police themselves the benefits that flow from the prohibition on police officers giving such references. Cybershooters website: http://www.cybershooters.org List admin: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ T O P I C A http://www.topica.com/t/17 Newsletters, Tips and Discussions on Your Favorite Topics
CS: Pol-terror bullets
From: nick royall, [EMAIL PROTECTED] So, all this article is really saying that the police are buying their ammunition from abroad. well, no change there then. Nick Why me? -- How many years ago was it now (about three) that I put on here the actual tender information from the European Journal showing the Met had awarded the contract to Samson? I think journalists are simply desperate for news, if there is no controversy they don't care. I personally think there is an untapped market out there for purely factual news, PBS does well in the States with the newshour programme. Steve. Cybershooters website: http://www.cybershooters.org List admin: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ T O P I C A http://www.topica.com/t/17 Newsletters, Tips and Discussions on Your Favorite Topics
CS: Misc-Police corruption
From: "Tom Charnock", [EMAIL PROTECTED] Surely the most blatant use of the Police to execute political "whims" was their arresting and removing from the streets the peaceable, placard carrying, protesters against the Chinese "Head Mans" visit in the last year (sorry not got his name or exact date). Quite agree, it was appaling and embarassing to see it. Some things are indefensible. IG I G If we assume that your thoughts on this may be held by other officers, then why was it executed? Does this mean that your fellow officers, if given ANY order, will follow it to the letter, irrespective of their thoughts as to it being un-reasonable action?? Where do YOU (and your fellow Officers) draw the line?? Tom C Cybershooters website: http://www.cybershooters.org List admin: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ T O P I C A http://www.topica.com/t/17 Newsletters, Tips and Discussions on Your Favorite Topics
CS: Pol-Queen and phesants
From: "niel fagan", [EMAIL PROTECTED] If fox hunting is banned, the raising of pheasants for shooting may then follow with an inevitaly devastating impact on the countryside economy. If anyone was listening to radio 2 at lunch time today the angry reponse to the shooting rep. by the anti over HM the Queen (god bless her cotton socks) wringing the neck of that phesant would realise that the writing is very much on the wall for all shooting sports. The best comment phoned in was from a rescue centre (possibly former) manager, "she (HM) did exactly the right thing and prevented any suffering continuing", and no comment about the rights or wrongs of sporting shooting. I did notice everyone was saying the queen doesn't shoot, but I remember seeing HM shooting and assisting with the dressing out of a deer a few years back on the beeb? Niel. Cybershooters website: http://www.cybershooters.org List admin: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ T O P I C A http://www.topica.com/t/17 Newsletters, Tips and Discussions on Your Favorite Topics
CS: Pol-Sunday Telegraph Nov19 2000
From: "Kay, Martin (DEI)", [EMAIL PROTECTED] If I recall correctly, one of the few sensible proposals of the Home Affairs Committee was to initiate a study into the sources of illegally held weapons, by means of a centralised research effort regarding the provenance of recovered weapons over the next year or so. The line of the Sunday Telegraph report (OK it has been disowned "for the most part" by the HO but that usually counts for nothing where those people are concerned, which parts are not disowned?) seems to be that the greatly diminished legal weapons pool is still regarded by the HO/ACPO cabal as a principle source of supply, by means of theft/loss/improper transfer. If this were so, then where are all the pistols coming from? Surely the investigation described into supply sources should be conducted before we are subject to any further pointless demands and restrictions. Regards Martin Kay -- Actually I think the official description was a "curious, disjointed article that is factually incorrect" from Richard Worth. I asked about deacs and he said it was total nonsense to suggest the HO had any intention of tightening the standards for flintlocks and other historical weapons as they don't feature in crime. He referred me to their response to the HAC report for what they are going to do. Steve. Cybershooters website: http://www.cybershooters.org List admin: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ T O P I C A http://www.topica.com/t/17 Newsletters, Tips and Discussions on Your Favorite Topics
CS: Pol-The Gun Control Network
From: "Paul, Chris", [EMAIL PROTECTED] The most recent e-mail on Shooters' Rights which has just hit my screen (very good way of disseminating info. and motivating shooters, the Internet) refers to the 6 members of the Gun Control Network whose submission on banning weapons was accepted whereas any opinions the Shooting Community had were ignored. So just who are these shadowy 6 figures? Are they MPs, or do they include that loony woman who didn't even live in Dunblane but clambered on the bandwagon for the sake of some self-publicity? The point of the query is this. A General Election may well be on the cards for Spring next year - April/May are the dates being touted in the Press.(This is why, incidentally, chosing 18th March for the next Big March is an ideal time - it's close enough to the likely Election Date to scare the shits out of Tony and his spineless Cronies). If the 6 members of GCN are MPs, a special effort should be made to mobilise helpers, canvassers, leaflet-distributors to flood their constituencies. These MPs deserve a favour from us - they deserve to be chucked out and into the real world where people have to work for a living. I voted for the "Anyone but David Mellor" Party in Putney last time and was delighted when he was ignominiously rejected by the electorate even though I am a natural Tory - I would cheerfully vote for the late Screaming Lord Sutch if it would help to dump out of Parliament any MP who supports gun control. Targetting these MPs (no pun intended) with overwhelming support for their opponents would help clarify other MPs' attitudes about gun control. The prospect of losing their nice, comfy sinecures should crystallise their thoughts nicely. Chris Paul Stock Exchange Rifle Club -- The six members are not MPs, although Gill's husband (I think or is it her brother) is. I think their members are stated on their website, but anyway it's Gill, that nutty professor, and four family members of people killed at Dunblane or Hungerford, although I think Tony Hill has packed it in now because the GCN did have seven members at one point. Obviously you're not going to have much luck flooding the MP for Dunblane with information. Steve. Cybershooters website: http://www.cybershooters.org List admin: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ T O P I C A http://www.topica.com/t/17 Newsletters, Tips and Discussions on Your Favorite Topics
CS: Pol-Certificate Holders Prophesy
From: "Cyril Fox", [EMAIL PROTECTED] It appears that your conclusion that if the FAC were for the public safety then it would be under a centralised administration is about to come true. In the Sunday Telegraph 19th November we have the first warning that the government is to set up a compulsory national register of all gun owners and introduce stringent security arrangements before owners can keep firearms in their houses. This is of course to keep guns out of criminal hands! So when more than one journalist has shown how easy it is to bring guns into the UK from Europe and those guns can include fully automatic weaponry why does a Home Office Minister called Charles Clarke imagine that the UK criminals are so stupid that they will take the time and trouble to determine who has got a useful firearm and then arrange to steal it. Well I guess that some may be sufficiently low on cash that they cannot afford the deposit on an illegal firearm. It is also intriguing that when a hacker can get into Microsoft's systems that the government thinks that a UK wide database offers more public protection that the currently dispersed databases. Of course they know better than we do! Yes I know that government should be Government but I do not believe that they deserve that sort of recognition. It would seem that once again we are to bear the brunt of more oppressive unnecessary measures in the interest of public safety which in the long term will just make the number of people at risk to armed criminals continue to increase. So Steve, in the absence of one body for all shooting disciplines, you had better start digging the about to be compulsory tank trap and saving up for the CCTV linked to the police station to be able to keep your firearms at home. The tank trap is just in case someone decides to ram you from door with a heavy vehicle and the CCTV is so that the police may watch it all happen and record it as an incident leading to the need for moats and drawbridges. This was intended to be a serious mailing but the crass stupidity made me too angry as I put it down. Apologies. Regards, Cyril Fox -- The 1997 Act contains a section that requires a central register of anyone who holds a certificate. Since then it has grown into a monster that requires a register of anyone who holds one, has held one, or has ever applied for one, and now the HAC wants it to include a detail of every gun held on certificate! Not surprisingly it is still not up and running, and even when it is, it will still depend on 50 police forces seperately inputting information, or at least 50 police forces supplying their info to someone who inputs it. If we must have a national register, then it should be one agency that also runs the licensing system, and it should also be independent of the police otherwise we will see civil rights abuses on a scale that will make the fiasco in Strathclyde (where one of their licensing team gave out confidential info) pale by comparison. My personal view is that it is probably illegal under the ECHR for the police to maintain a database of people who have committed no offence, so we will see what transpires. Steve. Cybershooters website: http://www.cybershooters.org List admin: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ T O P I C A http://www.topica.com/t/17 Newsletters, Tips and Discussions on Your Favorite Topics
CS: Pol-Queen in Trouble
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] What with the squirrels being given paramedic support at the roadside, and the LACS wittering on about HM the Queen wringing the neck of a winged pheasant, I'm in danger of coming on all Victor Meldrew-ish and asking what this country is coming to... Really, it makes you want to weep. In a mature, self-respecting society these pitiful animal-lib types would not receive any press coverage whatsoever. Anthony Harrison -- Well, it was the Mirror. Steve. Cybershooters website: http://www.cybershooters.org List admin: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ T O P I C A http://www.topica.com/t/17 Newsletters, Tips and Discussions on Your Favorite Topics
CS: Pol-innocent animals
From: nick royall, [EMAIL PROTECTED] There was a monkey from a shipwreck that was hanged in Sunderland in the 1790's for being a Frenchman. Perhaps that was an innocent animal. What do tree huggers wear? obviously not leather from innocent animals but nice synthetics made from petrochemicals whose processes cause global warming. That and all that methane from their lentil rich diet is all the evidence we need, ban 'em, hang 'em (nice organically grown hemp rope of course). Nick Why me? -- I think you've been watching Harry Enfield. Steve. Cybershooters website: http://www.cybershooters.org List admin: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ T O P I C A http://www.topica.com/t/17 Newsletters, Tips and Discussions on Your Favorite Topics
CS: Pol-Animal rights activists get upset, for a change
From: "Tim Jeffreys", [EMAIL PROTECTED] "You have to question the Queen's moral judgement when she is seen to be enjoying killing innocent creatures." -- What's that word for people who see human characteristics in animals? To answer you question, the first word that comes to mind is 'arse h--e', but the more commonly accepted term -- used in polite company -- is anthropomorphism. Actually, some of us who see human characteristics in animals, and vice versa, prefer to be called "cartoonists" (...but I'm sure I've been called ET's first suggestion by various victims in the past G). Animals are not innocent or guilty of anything, I can't remember the last time a pheasant was in the witness box. See above. Hmm...that conjures an interesting image. Tim Cybershooters website: http://www.cybershooters.org List admin: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ T O P I C A http://www.topica.com/t/17 Newsletters, Tips and Discussions on Your Favorite Topics
CS: Misc-Police Corruption
From: andrew, [EMAIL PROTECTED] Well IG, it looks like your key board took a hammering over the weekend. I presume that you are one of the inteligentsia who think that anyone, under any circumstances, should be allowed to possess a firearm for any reason whatsoever. In other words, you appear to be in favour of total freedom from controls. Fine. I ,unfortunately, along with many other millions of people, do not share your views! Why do I need to be a member of any particular group if I have the view that people should be able to get on with their law abiding lives free from harassment from pointless legislation and the ignorant opinions of jobsworths? I have difficulty reconciling the fact that whereas I put up with all the BS connected with owning firearms legally the local drug dealers get no hassle at all over their firearms or how they use them! Not only didn't they lose their pistols in 1998, the law specially only prohibited legally owned small firearms, but the only time they do not carry their pistols is when they have a court appearance! The above also applies to members of northern Ireland terrorist organizations. Can you imagine the response to a request from an RUC firearms licensing officer to inspect the security of the various terrorist arms dumps. I did not call you a nazi did I! My point was that you are making personal judgements on people based on your own beliefs and experience at the time. Not so long ago and in a place not so far away your judgement as to what constitutes a good character would be very different to that that you have now. It is because of the unreliability of the judgements of individuals, no matter how well meaning, that we have a judicial process involving magistrates, judges and juries and the prosecution process is kept separate from the enforcement process. It is also why criminals have rights! If you were dealing with a criminal and you expressed your personal views about that persons character then the any prosecution could be seen as being seriously flawed. I also have trouble with the concept of "I trust you with this but not that" as steve experienced with variations for collecting. In my case I had a sec.1 shotgun that I was prohibited from using for clay pigeon shooting! I fully understood the law and the home office guidance but not only was I disturbed by the insane logic expressed by various officials but I was also deeply disturbed by the fact that they did not see anything wrong or bizarre about the situation. I also cannot see how you can apply this selective trust to just legally held firearms; do you remove the driving licences and cars from any of the victims of your personal crusade? How about if they have children; do you have them put into care? On the wall of my living room is a print of a classic western painting called "End of the Trail", the subject is a dying indian warrior on a dying pony. A visiting firearms enquiry officer was very disturbed that I had this picture as he didn't agree with the end-of-the-trail shooting disciplines that were appearing and he told me that he would seek to have the certificate of anybody taking part in these competitions revoked! Of course this was just his personal prejudice, sorry opinion. You ask if we know of any way to judge character, are you asking members of this list to get into denouncing shooters in the same way as the police in other authoritarian regimes use public denunciations of individuals and groups oppress those they don't agree with? I wouldn't dare to pass judgement on another persons character. If I did, give me a reason why I shouldn't start with you? Or do you only see yourself as the stone thrower? And I would be interested to if my views and the fact that I take the trouble to express them make me a fit person in your eyes. Cybershooters website: http://www.cybershooters.org List admin: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ T O P I C A http://www.topica.com/t/17 Newsletters, Tips and Discussions on Your Favorite Topics
CS: Pol-innocent animals
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] There was a monkey from a shipwreck that was hanged in Sunderland in the 1790's for being a Frenchman. It was Hartlepool I think, down the coast a bit. Jonathan Laws. Cybershooters website: http://www.cybershooters.org List admin: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ T O P I C A http://www.topica.com/t/17 Newsletters, Tips and Discussions on Your Favorite Topics
CS: Legal-Certificate Holders
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] OK. I'll risk the hate mail and say that I tend agree with some at least of what IG says! Is there anyone out there who hasn't looked around the firing point and thought " Now how the hell did he/she ever get a certificate?" Fortunately none of us are privy to the particular peculiarities of some of our fellow shooters which might or might not disqualify them from firearms ownership but for society at large these matters are of some interest and we do ourselves no favours by adopting the 'any kind of gun for absolutely anyone' attitude that some subscribers seem to favour. I can honestly say that I have never come across another FAC holder who I have thought to be dangerous. Yes I have known one or two, maybe three, who have had tickets pulled and one who got refused an application quite a while ago. The ones who had tickets pulled were because of medical reasons or shooting where they shouldn't, yes I accept that under the Law the revocations were perfectly justified but that is a long way from actually using a firearm in a way so as to be dangerous ie; that may lead to damaging property, upsetting the peace or getting someone shot. I'm sure we have all thought at one time or another that "such and such" is a little strange, eccentric, weird etc, but I'll bet, most of this applied to people we didn't really know all that well? Even then being any of the above is a very long way from being actually dangerous with a firearm. If we had a system that issued FAC's, or any type of licence or privilege for that matter, based on the grounds that you didn't like the look of someone then no one would get them. Fortunately none of us are privy to the particular peculiarities of some of our fellow shooters which might or might not disqualify them from firearms ownership but for society at large these matters are of some interest and we do ourselves no favours by adopting the 'any kind of gun for absolutely anyone' attitude that some subscribers seem to favour. No one is advocating this type of approach. I don't have a problem with not issuing FAC's to people who genuinely are a potential danger and there are lots of them about, people convicted of violence, drug or alcohol addicts, the mentaly impared, but when we start applying the principle of "Well he's a little unorthodox, lets pull/deny his cert, we are heading for trouble because there's nothing to stop it being you next time. Jonathan Laws -- I've met tons of shooters who were a bit weird or eccentric, but there's nothing dangerous about that. In fact it is quite refreshing to be honest, more interesting than the homogenous TV-induced brainwashed people I'm used to meeting. Steve. Cybershooters website: http://www.cybershooters.org List admin: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ T O P I C A http://www.topica.com/t/17 Newsletters, Tips and Discussions on Your Favorite Topics
CS: Legal-Certificate Holders
From: "E.J. Totty", [EMAIL PROTECTED] As there has been so much venom vented on this topic, I would love to know what views the contributors hold on the subject of who should not be allowed to hold a firearm or shotgun certificate. I take it that it is the general consensus that there should be at least some restriction somewhere along the line? I would find it most illuminating to know whether the classes of people I categorise as dodgy are different to anyone else. --snip-- I will not change my opinions on this one. I see them all. You only see some. IG -- The only gun law I have ever really felt is worthwhile is a background check before a person takes possession. Licensing, registration, all the rest of it is largely worthless because once a person has a gun, they can misuse it if they choose. I did submit a very comprehensive paper to the HO outlining a new licensing system, although that was based largely with an eye on the political realities of the situation. --snip If it was intended to protect public safety it would have long since been centralised under a central administration, like virtually everything to do with cars, planes and most other things has. Steve. Steve, IG, Having been here before, I will only say that I agree with Steve. And, IG? You have the laws that you must contend with, as a sworn member of your force. I would not have your job for any amount of money. My personal philosophy on liberty would prevent any such happenstance. If ordered to perform it, I would refuse. It is one of the prime reasons that I would not accept a job in any police force: I could not find myself enforcing laws antithetical to my beliefs. If the laws were simple in the tenets of liberty, then I would have no compunctions. Whatever you do is your own business, but if enough men and women in the police forces were to object to such duties on the grounds that they were objectionable, and accomplished little in the way of reducing crime and added safety, then things might change. And, as Steve commented in an earlier post, by what measure of the law is a man or woman considered 'dodgy'? And, I'd like to ask one simple question: what is so wrong with just wanting something? Is that such a crime? When people are reduced to begging to be able to do something that would otherwise not harm anyone, you really have to wonder just what is next. Know what I mean? As for myself, I intend to be a large roadblock on the way to hell: If I can convince enough people to march in the other direction that the rest start to follow, I won't mind at all that hell is on my heels! -- Let's make one thing clear here, even if I was a member of mom and a clone of Sarah Brady I still wouldn't be advocating the British system of control. If I worshipped at the alter of licensing and registration I still wouldn't advocate the British method because it is sheer nonsense. Virtually every British colony or possession had this system imposed on them, from New Zealand to Canada, and nearly all of them have scrapped it. Australia, Canada, India, Pakistan, New Zealand, even the Falkland Islands all have licensing and registration to one degree or another, but their systems of control are substantially different. The only place I have found of any size that still uses the British system is good old Lesotho! Steve. Cybershooters website: http://www.cybershooters.org List admin: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ T O P I C A http://www.topica.com/t/17 Newsletters, Tips and Discussions on Your Favorite Topics
CS: Pol-Queen in Trouble
From: John Howat/Wellington Sporting Arms Co Ltd QUEEN WRINGS BIRD'S NECK Outrage as she strangles pheasant THIS is the moment that will shock every animal-lover in Britain. The bloody peasants want to remember that the pheasants are bred specifically for shooting. If there were no shooting sport those pheasants would not even exist. John Howat New Zealand. Cybershooters website: http://www.cybershooters.org List admin: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ T O P I C A http://www.topica.com/t/17 Newsletters, Tips and Discussions on Your Favorite Topics
CS: Legal-Certificate Holders
From: "E.J. Totty", [EMAIL PROTECTED] Steve: it's simpler than even that. A scanner used with a CAD program, will produce almost anything within reason, depending upon the capabilities of the machinery (tolerances). Peter: Your first comment above is legion; that is why it is ignored by even the most assessed of the facts. What would the people say if the truth of the matter were finally told? What would they say if finally assessed of the fact that only total, uncompromising and brutal subjugation of the 'masses' was the only way to effect a complete and utterly disarmed population? It will happen, and soon, if your fellows don't manage to shake a leg sooner that later. -- =*= =*= =*= =*= =*= =*= =*= =*= =*= =*= =*= =*= =*= =*= =*= =*= Liberty: Live it . . . or lose it. =*= =*= =*= =*= =*= =*= =*= =*= =*= =*= =*= =*= =*= =*= =*= =*= ET Cybershooters website: http://www.cybershooters.org List admin: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ T O P I C A http://www.topica.com/t/17 Newsletters, Tips and Discussions on Your Favorite Topics
CS: Misc-Police Corruption
From: "Tim Jeffreys", [EMAIL PROTECTED] As for examples of iffy FAC holders, a club I belong to chucked one out some years back: - not a very responsible individual, who brought some unsavoury friends in on a few occasions and left large numbers of "inaccurately placed holes" after each visit. He was definitely one of the there's_something_about_him types, though this took some time to surface. When his membership expired and no attempt was made to renew, the local constabulary were asked to look after his pistols (which had been stored in the club's armoury) until such time as he might be deserving of their return. Tim Cybershooters website: http://www.cybershooters.org List admin: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ T O P I C A http://www.topica.com/t/17 Newsletters, Tips and Discussions on Your Favorite Topics
CS: Misc-Police corruption
From: "IG", [EMAIL PROTECTED] I G If we assume that your thoughts on this may be held by other officers, then why was it executed? Does this mean that your fellow officers, if given ANY order, will follow it to the letter, irrespective of their thoughts as to it being un-reasonable action?? Where do YOU (and your fellow Officers) draw the line?? Tom C Why dont you ask them? I can only speak for myself. What do you want me to say? Its a nonsense question anyway, which invites the response: what is your position on the mass murderers who have used firearms to kill? We have had this debate before. IG Cybershooters website: http://www.cybershooters.org List admin: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ T O P I C A http://www.topica.com/t/17 Newsletters, Tips and Discussions on Your Favorite Topics
CS: Misc-Inspector Who?
From: "IG", [EMAIL PROTECTED] Would this be the male half of the investigative duo in the MEIKLEJOHN LEIDL mysteries? A good, well researched answer. Unfortunately, it is incorrect. You are the weakest link...etc etc. IG Cybershooters website: http://www.cybershooters.org List admin: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ T O P I C A http://www.topica.com/t/17 Newsletters, Tips and Discussions on Your Favorite Topics
CS: Pol-innocent animals
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] There was a monkey from a shipwreck that was hanged in Sunderland in the 1790's for being a Frenchman. It was Hartlepool actually. And its slightly more canny than it would appear. The law on marine salvage at the time considered a vessel abandoned only if there were no living things aboard. As a result it was common to leave a ship's cat, or in this case monkey, aboard when abandoning ship. The good folks of Hartlepool found the monkey on-board a ship-wreck, it was tried and convicted and then they helped themselves. Mind you the amount of p***-taking since I bet they've regretted it. Cybershooters website: http://www.cybershooters.org List admin: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ T O P I C A http://www.topica.com/t/17 Newsletters, Tips and Discussions on Your Favorite Topics
CS: Pol-innocent animals
From: "Tim Jeffreys", [EMAIL PROTECTED] There was a monkey from a shipwreck that was hanged in Sunderland in the 1790's for being a Frenchman. Perhaps that was an innocent animal. That was Hartlepool. It was apparently thought to be a spy and tried, its gibberings being assumed to be French (a bit like Celine Dion, only she ought to be hanged as a French Canadian). If you ever want to get close attention whilst up there, just shout "Who hung the monkey?" (sic). Tim. Cybershooters website: http://www.cybershooters.org List admin: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ T O P I C A http://www.topica.com/t/17 Newsletters, Tips and Discussions on Your Favorite Topics
CS: Pol-The Gun Control Network
From: "Tim Jeffreys", [EMAIL PROTECTED] These MPs deserve a favour from us - they deserve to be chucked out and into the real world where people have to work for a living. I voted for the "Anyone but David Mellor" Party in Putney last time and was delighted when he was ignominiously rejected by the electorate even though I am a natural Tory - I would cheerfully vote for the late Screaming Lord Sutch if it would help to dump out of Parliament any MP who supports gun control. Well if you fancy selling your soul, there's always Mohammed al Fayed's offer to support (upto about 300) independent candidates to try to displace some of the current chunks in the septic tank of HMG Tim . Cybershooters website: http://www.cybershooters.org List admin: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ T O P I C A http://www.topica.com/t/17 Newsletters, Tips and Discussions on Your Favorite Topics
CS: Misc-Cops Shooters tarred w. same brush?
From: "niel fagan", [EMAIL PROTECTED] Actually, I tend to agree with most of what you say. I can see that the police service is heading down the wrong road. It is headed by far too many politically sensitive types, who are more interested in their career and promotion prospects than in the actual rights and wrongs of what policies they pursue. Anyone in Southampton on the 30th Nov. might find the invited speaker, sir John Stevens, commissioner of the metropolitan police, speaking on THE FRONTIERS OF POLICING, of interest, 5.45 pm Murray lecture theater, Murrey building, University of Southampton. Not sure of my commitments, but I will try to make it. Niel. Cybershooters website: http://www.cybershooters.org List admin: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ T O P I C A http://www.topica.com/t/17 Newsletters, Tips and Discussions on Your Favorite Topics
CS: Misc-Police Corruption
From: "Tim Jeffreys", [EMAIL PROTECTED] I also have trouble with the concept of "I trust you with this but not that" as steve experienced with variations for collecting. In my case I had a sec.1 shotgun that I was prohibited from using for clay pigeon shooting! I fully understood the law and the home office guidance but not only was I disturbed by the insane logic expressed by various officials but I was also deeply disturbed by the fact that they did not see anything wrong or bizarre about the situation. I think we all find this situation rather silly. With the qualification that some people will not be physically capable of controlling some firearms, why shouldn't non-prohibited persons use any kind of firearm (or any other thing) if there is no additional danger resultant from it's use in suitable conditions? You ask if we know of any way to judge character, are you asking members of this list to get into denouncing shooters in the same way as the police in other authoritarian regimes use public denunciations of individuals and groups oppress those they don't agree with? I wouldn't dare to pass judgement on another persons character. If I did, give me a reason why I shouldn't start with you? Or do you only see yourself as the stone thrower? Personally, I have always regarded it as the duty of every club member to judge the character of fellow shooters to a limited extent. As an instructor it tends to happen automatically, watching the novice victims that you are prodding and poking into position, but up to the point where everybody is comfortable with everyone else, you will always be keeping an eye on your fellow shooters' behaviour, however subconsciously. Poor old IG just has to do it to complete strangers faster and more overtly... Tim -- Talking about variations, West Midlands Police allow me to possess 9mm ammunition for target shooting, but they won't let me collect it, because, wait for it, I have a gun in which I could use it, so it couldn't possibly be safe to let me collect it, because I might violate the condition by shooting it. Oh yes, I'm a really dodgy character I am. Steve. Cybershooters website: http://www.cybershooters.org List admin: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ T O P I C A http://www.topica.com/t/17 Newsletters, Tips and Discussions on Your Favorite Topics
CS: Legal-Certificate Holders
From: "IG", [EMAIL PROTECTED] The restrictions which you have in mind, be they heavy or light, bear only on people who have no desire or propensity to commit crime. Such restrictions are not in the interests of society as a whole. So the answer to your assumption is no. Guns should be sold and exchanged as freely as apples, individually or by the pound. Have to agree to disagree on this. I have no wish to live in a society where guns are as freely available as you want them to be. I find that disturbing coming from a dealer. (I presume..'Jackson rifles?) As I said elsewhere, this viewpoint of freedom from gun control is not the majority nor even a popular viewpoint. No credible political party subscribes to the theory and it will never appear on any election manifesto during the remainder of my life. It is held by a very small number of people. No matter how honourably and passionately those people hold the view, by very virtue of the fact that they are so committed to the viewpoint, they will never ever be prepared to countenance the moderate stance. They will remain, hoewver, in the minority. That fact is inescapable. I am not alone in the shooting world, not even alone on cybershooters, in being an advocate of sensible restrictions on ownership. It is amazing, and amusing it has to be said, to see the frenzied outbursts from people when someone has the sheer nerve to state an opposite viewpoint.
CS: Misc-Web Site of interest
From: "IG", [EMAIL PROTECTED] Take a look at http://www.kleasen.org.uk Now, I see that a gun club eventually shopped this guy. Good for them. Yes, it was outrageous that the Police gave him a certificate. No excuses there at all. Total incompetence. However, some of the contributors here would consider that it was quite OK for him to have firearms. In particular, Peter Jackson seems to advocate freely available firearms, which would mean that Monsieur Kleasen would be entitled to possess anything he wants. I would be interested in the views of the panel on this charmer. He has, I believe, now been deported back to the country of his birth. I wonder if he is entitled to possess firearms back there? Anyone enlighten me on that one? So many people like to use the American comparison, it would be interesting to know how they would treat this socially inadequate perverted murderer. IG -- Federal law prohibits anyone from possessing a firearm who has been convicted of a crime _punishable_ by more than a year in prison, so no he wouldn't be able to. Although it will be intriguing to find out if they are aware of his conviction here! Federal law also prohibits anyone from possessing a firearm who: is under indictment for a crime punishable by imprisonment for more than one year; is a fugitive from justice; is an unlawful user of marijuana or narcotics; has been adjudicated mentally defective or involuntarily commmitted; has been dishonourably discharged from the armed forces; is an alien illegally in the US; is a person who has renounced their US citizenship; is a person who is not a US citizen or permament resident alien, with the exception of non-resident aliens in the US for at least six months who have the authority of the Attorney General (there is an exception for "sporting purposes"). This is in many ways more restrictive than British law, because there is no way of getting your rights back if you are convicted of a Federal offence. In Britain, a person who has spent less than three years in prison gets their ability back after five years, they only lose it if they serve more than three years, and even then, a judge can lift that restriction. However the police must be satisfied "in all the circumstances" that the applicant for a certificate is not a danger to public safety or the peace, and they must have "good reason" for Section 1 firearms. The rather large caveat there though is that there are circumstances under which you don't need a certificate to possess a firearm. Steve. Cybershooters website: http://www.cybershooters.org List admin: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ T O P I C A http://www.topica.com/t/17 Newsletters, Tips and Discussions on Your Favorite Topics
CS: Misc-police corruption
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] I *know* its not rubbish, but I include applicants in this figure, as well as people who make spurious applications for variations, etc. (you know, when you get as far as checking out good reason for possession, you find there actually isnt one. Things like that). Firstly, this all kicked off with your statement that 5% of people who have FAC's are unpleasant, objectionable and potentially dangerous. It had nothing to do with those who had applied and been refused or have in your view applied for "spurious variations". Steve posted the figures for denied renewals and revoked cert's and it dosen't even approach 5%. Even if we assume that every one of the 340 revocations and refusals to renew were due to the reasons you state (and many of them are not) the figure is just under 0.2%. This again leads to the questions of a) if 5% of FAC holders really are unpleasant, objectionable and potentially dangerous then why are they not having their tickets pulled and b) why aren't they actually being dangerous with their guns? I mean 5% of 172,000 people is 8600 and if even 1% of them started acting dangerously we would have certainly have heard about it by now, in fact we wouldn't have any FAC's left to be arguing over. Jonathan Laws. Cybershooters website: http://www.cybershooters.org List admin: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ T O P I C A http://www.topica.com/t/17 Newsletters, Tips and Discussions on Your Favorite Topics
CS: Misc-Police Corruption
From: "Jim Franklin", [EMAIL PROTECTED] On the basis that IG feels free to pass judgement on the character of members of the shooting fraternity, I feel just as free to state that he is just a "wind-up artist", bent on provoking hasty and unwise comments by the use of provocative statements. I cannot understand why subscribers rise to the bait like ravenous trout and get hooked in the process. I would however like IG's comments on the prospects of the Police Service accepting into their ranks individuals who have committed offences. I ask on the basis that there are offences which would disqualify one from holding an FAC or SGC. Would the same offences be allowed by applicant to the Police ranks? Jim Franklin Orpington KENT. UK PGP key on request Cybershooters website: http://www.cybershooters.org List admin: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ T O P I C A http://www.topica.com/t/17 Newsletters, Tips and Discussions on Your Favorite Topics
CS: Legal-airsoft guns
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] There is a notice in Sussex Model Centre stating that purchasers of BBs and airsoft gear have to fill in names and addresses to comply with Police Authority requirements following the change in law (1998) !! Anyone shed any light on this please? Chris -- Sounds like some sort of local requirement. Steve. Cybershooters website: http://www.cybershooters.org List admin: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ T O P I C A http://www.topica.com/t/17 Newsletters, Tips and Discussions on Your Favorite Topics
CS: Misc-Insp. Meiklejohn fan club.
From: "Stone.s451", [EMAIL PROTECTED] I regret I can't claim the prize but a search of the Mets site turns up a reference on Open.gov.uk listed as Turf Fraud scandal, or trial of the detectives but "the web server was unable to locate the page" Blue pencil or flaky technology? Brian T A search on Google gave the same reference to the met police page. www.met.police.uk/police/mps/mps/history/time2b.htm However, the search entry synopsis gives a bit more of a clue: ... arrests had been so difficult, and Benson and Kurr began to explain. Inspector John Meiklejohn, a deeply corrupt character, had been in Kurr's pay since 1873 ... Cybershooters website: http://www.cybershooters.org List admin: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ T O P I C A http://www.topica.com/t/17 Newsletters, Tips and Discussions on Your Favorite Topics
CS: Legal-Certificate Holders
From: "jim.craig", [EMAIL PROTECTED] OK. I'll risk the hate mail and say that I tend agree with some at least of what IG says! Is there anyone out there who hasn't looked around the firing point and thought " Now how the hell did he/she ever get a certificate?" Fortunately none of us are privy to the particular peculiarities of some of our fellow shooters which might or might not disqualify them from firearms ownership but for society at large these matters are of some interest and we do ourselves no favours by adopting the 'any kind of gun for absolutely anyone' attitude that some subscribers seem to favour. Anyway, I thought that the main point many of us were trying to make was that it was precisely the person who should be subject to the controls and not the gun? Surely it makes more sense to base the decision to issue a certificate on the 'suitability's for want of a better word of the applicant than on some nonsense about dangerous' firearms. The difficulty comes, of course, from the criteria used to determine used to who is and who is not 'suitable' but it ought to be possible to create a better framework of laws around that idea than the present load of crap. Cybershooters website: http://www.cybershooters.org List admin: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ T O P I C A http://www.topica.com/t/17 Newsletters, Tips and Discussions on Your Favorite Topics
CS: Pol-The Gun Control Network
From: "E.J. Totty", [EMAIL PROTECTED] The most recent e-mail on Shooters' Rights which has just hit my screen (very good way of disseminating info. and motivating shooters, the Internet) refers to the 6 members of the Gun Control Network whose submission on banning weapons was accepted whereas any opinions the Shooting Community had were ignored. --snip-- Targetting these MPs (no pun intended) with overwhelming support for their opponents would help clarify other MPs' attitudes about gun control. The prospect of losing their nice, comfy sinecures should crystallise their thoughts nicely. Chris Paul Stock Exchange Rifle Club -- The six members are not MPs, although Gill's husband (I think or is it her brother) is. I think their members are stated on their website, but anyway it's Gill, that nutty professor, and four family members of people killed at Dunblane or Hungerford, although I think Tony Hill has packed it in now because the GCN did have seven members at one point. Obviously you're not going to have much luck flooding the MP for Dunblane with information. Steve. Steve, Chris, Steve: Flooding the Dunblane MP might not, but if several hundred protestors were to gather outside his residence a few times a week, between now and election time, and shout slogans protesting the unfair treatment of innocent men and women, then it would be one hell of a wake-up call! When the locals get to understand the ire of people who were targeted for the acts of one man, and get to know just how it feels to be made a scapegoat, then maybe they will wake up to the fact of just what the lies are that are about the land! I say give that filthy little bastard hell! And pardon my lingo, but that's just how I feel! -- We have at least two subscribers who are in that constituency, either of you been to see your MP about the ban, chaps? Steve. Cybershooters website: http://www.cybershooters.org List admin: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ T O P I C A http://www.topica.com/t/17 Newsletters, Tips and Discussions on Your Favorite Topics
CS: Misc-Death Penalty
From: "Richard Loweth", [EMAIL PROTECTED] Perhaps the reality is that the death penalty was never a deterrent to murder...after all when you murder someone you do it presuming that you actually won't get caughtso the "tariff" is irrelevant, but a deterrent to crimes of violence. What is probably certain is that the abolition of the act whereby if one member of a gang committed a murder ALL were guilty of it and thus ALL hanged did lead to a rise in murder during the course of armed robberies by gangs. On the other hand in the US the belief that kidnapping was a capital offence directly led to the murder documented in the book "The Onion Field". -- Believe me, the death penalty is a deterrent to the person who gets it! I just think life in prison is worse. Steve. Cybershooters website: http://www.cybershooters.org List admin: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ T O P I C A http://www.topica.com/t/17 Newsletters, Tips and Discussions on Your Favorite Topics
CS: Legal-Certificate Holders
From: Peter H Jackson, [EMAIL PROTECTED] As there has been so much venom vented on this topic, I would love to know what views the contributors hold on the subject of who should not be allowed to hold a firearm or shotgun certificate. I take it that it is the general consensus that there should be at least some restriction somewhere along the line? Why ever should such a notion attract "general consensus" among educated or thinking people? If you are going to argue on Cybershooters in favour of turning a fundamental individual right (self protection) into a government monopoly, you must start with a cost-benefit analysis. So go ahead. Start with John Lott, and work your way through Kates, Kleck, Cramer, Hume, Wright, and a few dozen others. Show us where these silly law professors went wrong. As for keeping guns out of the hands of criminals - well, that's a fine joke! Ninety years of gun control in Britain, and who are the people with pistols? Guns are really no harder to make than alcohol, and trying to "control" them is just about as effective. I was all of eight years old when I made my first gun. More recently, Luty has shown that if you can read, add, subtract and use basic DIY tools, you can make an erzatz sub-machine gun. If you can also work out how to switch on a lathe, you can make a rifle which will win matches at 1,000 yards. My own UK record holding rifle was built on a 40-year old lathe which was chucked out of a garage. The restrictions which you have in mind, be they heavy or light, bear only on people who have no desire or propensity to commit crime. Such restrictions are not in the interests of society as a whole. So the answer to your assumption is no. Guns should be sold and exchanged as freely as apples, individually or by the pound. Rgds, Peter. www.jacksonrifles.com -- I've had two people (both not in this country) relate to me stories of how they can make gun parts using some sort of scanning process that copies the part and writes a CNC process for it, I'm sure Peter Sarony knows more about it than I do.
CS: Crime-Homeopath's killer may have psychic grudge
From: "niel fagan", [EMAIL PROTECTED] There is some debate about how many shots were fired, but ... the man bent over him and another shot was discharged. There may have been three shots discharged in total. The Teletext article I read said it could have been up to 12 shots. Jonathan Laws.
CS: Misc-Police Corruption
From: "IG", [EMAIL PROTECTED] I have difficulty reconciling the fact that whereas I put up with all the BS connected with owning firearms legally the local drug dealers get no hassle at all over their firearms or how they use them! This is a common thread, so lets deal with it. First of all, this is popular mythology that has come to be believed due to repetition amongst people with axes to grind. It is simply not true that drug dealers etc are allowed by the police to carry firearms without penalty. Before you repeat this mythology, take the time to do some research and find out the truth.
