From: "E.J. Totty", [EMAIL PROTECTED] >Just recieved the following reply from Charles Clark MP regarding the HAC >report. Anyone with any doubts that ACPO are behind proposals for >restrictions need only read on. --snip-- Steve, & Neil, Somebody, or some group, needs to sit down and rebut that load hog wash, point-by-point. Like for instance: [...] The Governments over-riding concern is to ensure pubic safety and we believe that strong controls on firearms are absolutely essential to achieve this. Our firearms controls are already among the strongest in the world, and these new proposals will increase their effectiveness. [...] Okay, the main thought is safety. So, where is all that time and money being spent on the awareness and safety training? How is depriving law abiding people, who by the way, have a safety record far and above the government's in this regard, going to improve safety? And why, above all else, is such an emphasis being placed on one singular item, which happens to have a better safety record than the ownership of other things that have a much greater impact on 'public safety'? If the community of law abiding citizens has proven to everyone their qualifications time and again, and it has been shown that it isn't them whom are the problem, but the miscreants who disregard the laws, then how in the name of the Queen, is depriving those law abiding citizens going to have an impact on the criminals? You cannot 'increase' the effectiveness of something which has been shown not to be effective: laws that prohibit only invite their own demise. [...] The Government recognizes that this is an emotive subject and sought to strike a balance and to target our controls fairly and proportionately. [...] By totally banning an object which you can't control? By treating the law abiding <as> criminals whenever they seek to comply with the laws? By application of the laws in such an unequal way as to make discovery of just what is and isn't acceptable, a veritable maze that varies from location to location? [...] It is right in principle that anyone who wants to own a shotgun should be able to do so provided that they can demonstrate that they have a good reason. It is not right that shotguns and other firearms should be treated differently, as at present, and the Government therefore proposes to rationalizes the situation, while rot restricting the present range of lawful shooting activities. [...] Yet another attempt at equivocation. One wonders just what deceptive intent was ever engendered by the phrase "good reason". The English Bill of Rights ought be good enough reason for any person who isn't a criminal, or decidedly insane. [...] The Government believes that the ages at which young people should be permitted to handle firearms under varying degrees of adult supervision should be reformed and simplified. However, we do not believe that a lower age limit for young people being taught to handle firearms responsibly under adult supervision would be appropriate or would benefit pubic safety. [...] Hearken! A ray of hope? Did a Cybershooter sneak that one in there somehow? [...] The Government or course is also aware that illegally held firearms and their use in crime is a significant threat to public safety The Government is currently examining a range of measures to support the police in dealing with this problem. [...] Hint: All men are armed with probes of conception. Some men misuse their probes by attacking others with them. Do we outlaw all men's probes because of the few who misuse them, or do we properly punish those whom misuse them? If the concept worked wonderfully before, in the British Isles, then why not now? [...] In seeking to amend our control on firearms, the Government will consult widely with all Interested parties- The Government is grateful for the view of your constituent and will wish to take these into account in deciding how to carry these proposals forward. [...] By all means, please do! However, it should be understood that a (6) person group headed by a person whose initials are 'GMA', should not have the power to trump the total power of all of the shooters whose lives were unfairly and cruelly affected by totally unnecessary and extremely misdirected disaffection, brought about by a self seeking political minority. [...] Te address the second of Mr. Robert's points, I can confirm that we have received representations from the Association of Chief Police Officers (ACPO) about long barrelled revolver guns and powerful long-range sniping rifles ACPO have expressed grave concerns about these weapons which we fully understand. We have sought the advice of the Firearms Consultative Committee (FCC) about these classes of weapons and whether any further controls on these might be needed. [...] One can only wonder at the political mind. It sees phantoms in every shadow, skeletons in every closet, and assassins behind every trigger. With regard to the ACPO report, I can only say is that somebody really needs to get that organization to completely validate its assertions on every matter it has commented upon, and if any are found to be shaky at all, they need to be attacked for all they are worth. Mere suppositions should never be allowed to make law, but rather concrete facts, case histories, and solid criminological data should be asserted as the only acceptable inputs to law making, and even then, with great care. But this piddling fiasco of an organization called "ACPO" needs to be taken to task for weaseling its way into a self-important role that never backs down one iota even when it has been shown to have been wrong in its pronouncements. There is something dreadfully wrong with an organization, when all it can perceive of is nothing but ever more incrementally restrictive laws as an answer to a problem for which they cannot admit there is no easy answer to, especially when their suggestions have proven time and again to have had no net effect upon the problem they pronounced upon. And, rather than suggest that their propositions were defective, and that shooters rights ought be restored to their former levels, they hide behind the criminal's acts, and escalate the war upon the law abiding as convenient patsies to cover for their own inability to 'get it right' the first time. -- =*= =*= =*= =*= =*= =*= =*= =*= =*= =*= 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