Not even that. In his attempt to muddy the waters, our ammosexual commenter couldn’t provide a war-era example of a weapon of that calibre and power that (this is key) didn’t require an effectively static mount because they weren’t really in use during WWII. The heavy automatic and sniper rifles and the LMGs of the time (e.g. the BAR or Mauser 98 or MG 42) generally used cartridges that didn’t much exceed .30 calibre. You only got to that level of power during WWII with heavy machine guns and vehicle-mounted weapons that were bolted down or on heavy tripod mounts.
Apparently even Rees-Mogg isn’t prone enough to BSing to make the argument that this will affect re-enactors. His particular stupidity is claiming that there are perfectly legitimate use cases for private individuals and households (especially wealthy ones) to own these weapons. Perhaps he’s aware of a return of prehistoric beasts to the UK that need to be hunted for sport, or knows about an upcoming Olympics marksmanship competition that involves blasting out a truck’s engine block at almost 2 km, but most of us understand that his opposition to the clause was really political gamesmanship supporting another agenda.
The U.S. hasn’t reached that level of violent civil conflict yet, but I’ll bet that militia/sovereign-citizen snipers like this dickhead from the Bundy standoff would love to get their hands on these kinds of weapons, assuming they don’t already have them.
Who almost to a one are filthy rich private school elites.
Reenactors also tend to use inert weapons, and if they need to pretend fire them they’re converted to use propane to make “pop” noises and muzzle flare. Or just compressed air to make the noise. Reenacting doesn’t require real fire arms, and where they’re used its a lot safer (and often cheaper) to use something that can’t fire a bullet. When I was a kid we had a guy nearby who was an avid reenactor of various sorts, ran a little tank/military museum and put on antique and military surplus flea markets. Had a nice side line in making fake heavy machine guns, or converting inert antiques to “fire” off propane tanks. Told us all about it. A firing example would be a bit too rare and expensive to use that way. And even in the gun happy US usually requires some intense fucking licensing.
Various .50 rifles are commonly available in the US, and quite popular. And there are conversion kits to up ARs to that caliber, that are also very popular. IIRC at least one of the goons at the Bundy standoff was specifically identified as carrying a .50 sniper rifle.
Here in the U.S. it’s dick waving (“This gun can punch clean through a car”) or historical re-enactments: your typical rifle in the US civil war was 0.5".
Ok, makes more sense. It’s a huge stretch on the concept of “assault rifle” which is generally defined as a select-fire small caliber compact rifle. Also wondering how much if any crime in the UK is associated with these super-duper rifles? Are criminals legally acquiring big heavy guns that cost thousands and then using them for crimes? I guess anything is possible but aren’t there other far more pressing public safety issues in the UK right now? My understanding is that the UK is the land of knife crimes, and given how ubiquitous, cheap and low-tech knives are, they’re going to have to focus on perpetrators more than on implements.
Are you aware of this place called Northern Ireland? The Troubles? Or maybe the problem that Brexit is having with their border with Ireland?
We’ve had 20 years of not seeing news that someone has shot someone because they want to be part of the wrong country. I have no desire to return to those days.
Current “troubles” or not Ira is pretty active on the whole running guns for fun and profit end. Neighbor of one of my family members over in the Irish midlands and his son were caught with a load of guns they’d brought down from the North. Apparently a mix of antiques, guns that were “legally acquired” in the UK, and crazy shit that had been smuggled in through organized crime and over seas connections. Including an apparently functional RPG and a Barrett 50 cal. Lot of heroin too if memory serves. Or maybe they were supposed to be sending them North? Don’t recall.
May not be a whole lot going on on that front. But The Cause needs a late model Range Rover.
I am still trying to find the specific text on how high muzzle energy weapons are defined over there. I have been reading the letters of evidence submitted by various groups on the proposed Offensive Weapons Bill, and it is a little dystopian sounding to me. British muzzle loading and antique arms associations seem to have serious issues with the proposals, as does the Woodturners of Great Britain, and some other (for me) unexpected groups.
Certainly makes sense, but it seems like the vast majority of people affected by this legislation will be law abiding people who pose very little risk of contributing to violent crime. But that seems to be a how things are being addressed over there.
Of course I am seeing this whole issue from the perspective of someone who not only collects antique guns, but swords as well. And quite a bit of the work I do involves bladed tools. So if such rules were proposed here, it would be pretty unpleasant for me. So that colors how I view this issue, even from an ocean away. Certainly people who do not own or collect such things find it of little consequence that those who do will be affected adversely.
I do think also that the process of criminalizing everything that might be used as a weapon is going to fail. At some point, you are going to have to deal with the fact that violent and hateful people need to be isolated from society, instead of just trying to remove anything they might use to hurt someone. That is a little OT, but certainly relates to the legislation in question.
This legislation is designed to solve the important issue of “piles of dead children”, but the legislation does not solve the problem in any measurable way, and instead focuses on tormenting groups of people not responsible for the dead children. Those who have their livelihoods or hobbies affected, when they complain, or point out the flaws in the legislation, are not advocating for more crime or “piles of dead children”.
I will try another tack: If i complain that I want to keep my collection and business, it is not because I value my interests and possessions more than I mourn for dead children. If donating my collection to a museum would save those kids, I would do it. But it would not. The only positive to come out of such a situation would be that you might temporarily feel good about yourself for “doing something about gun and knife crime”. Most importantly, the people who will suffer from it’s enforcement are not the sort of people you like very much anyway. So even when this proves to be another useless measure, you have not been inconvenienced much, and those other people probably had it coming anyway.
So from what I’ve seen, more piss poor reporting, this time from the source BB used. I can’t find any source, other than BB’s link, that cites “assault weapons” nor even “semi-automatics”. So the headline is pure bullshit even if it is quoting a source.
This bill has been kicking around for over a year (I think) and the two things I have seen suggested were: restricting some .50 caliber rifles and “rapid-fire rifles”. Both are currently legal with all the proper licensing etc that goes with that sort of thing.
The rest of the law seems to address: tightening acid and knife laws, securing rights for the various bladed weapons the Sikhs use.
I found the PDF of the brief of the bill - but I will have to read it better later. It is too late. If someone gleans more details feel free to share. Plus it isn’t the actual law - which MAY be more specific, but doubtful.
Only the M90 and M95 would be legal in the UK. The M82 (like pictured) and M107 are both semiauto. But… (see below)
Do we have a source on what that limit is? The text I have seen cites ‘materiel destruction’ - but what the fuck does that mean? Yes, that is a designation the military uses for the Barrett, Steyr, UK’s own Accuracy Intl, and other makers rifles. But that is just a label. It doesn’t MEAN anything.
While the .50 cal BMG is the most widely used .50cal round, England is also home to the Nitro Express series of cartridges. While not as energetic as the .50 BMG, the .600 and .700 series can have nearly 9000 ft/lb of muzzle energy. The .500 clocks in at 5800 ft/lbs. These are marketed to rich big game hunters mainly, but they will destroy some materials just the same.
The Nitro express rifles START at 10 grand and can be over 50 grand if you get all the bells and whistle. Hell most .50cals will be at least $7500. These aren’t rifles the average criminal can afford.
Hey, the paper linked above actually addresses this. The answer is: no. One was stolen and recovered.
In answer to a parliamentary question on the 12th October 2017 the Government stated that they know of one incident in which a .50 calibre rifle was stolen and subsequently recovered.
Oh they are. The UK has a hard on for knife laws, including more in this bill.
I am guessing the “rapid-fire rifles” restriction is what the original author is confusing with the being “assault rifles”, though if you ask me he is using the wrong language on purpose to stoke fear and anger. The info I see from Parliament doesn’t use that wording, so why does he?
So what is a “rapid-fire rifles”? Good question. The brief gives an example, but technically the 150+ year old design of the lever action is a “rapid-fire rifle”. (See Chuck Conners). Semi auto rifles are not allowed in the UK, so there are rifles that are styled and use some of the same parts as semi auto rifles (like AKs or ARs) but with no gas system, you have to manually work the action each time. The example they gave was the VZ.58 MARS Action Target Rifle. Never heard of it, but evidently it will actually lock back with each shot (similar to if a regular semi auto was empty) and then you hit another button to release the bolt and load a round. Still not semi-auto, but faster than say a bolt action.
So, yeah. Gonna get on my soup box and say unpopular things again.
When people wonder why I am resistant to “common sense gun laws”, besides because most of them won’t affect criminals, it is because of this. THIS! The UK has “common sense” gun laws, I think everyone can agree with this statement, yes? They banned semi-autos. They have licensing and registration. Their gun homicide rate is held up as the goal for the rest of the 1st world. And yet, it isn’t enough. These things aren’t even a PROBLEM, are already tightly controlled, and it isn’t enough.
How many LEGAL gun owners are we looking to crack down on - basically as a preemptive measure, as these guns aren’t really being used in crimes. Go ahead, take a guess. How many of these dangerous rifles must be rounded up from the people who were duly licensed and approved to own one previously, but now thanks to “what ifs”, are too dangerous.
Answer below.
The Government estimates that there are one hundred and thirty-two .50 calibre rifles and seven hundred rapid-fire rifles82 currently held by registered individuals or dealers.83
So, yeah, I am resistant to my rights being eroded further because I know there will never be an acceptable limit for many people. I honestly respect the people who say out right they want to ban all guns. or everything above a break action shot gun or a .22lr. At least they won’t piss on my leg and tell me it’s just a reasonable amount of rain.
Thank you for responding, Dude-Who-Owns-Tankbusting-Weapons.
But the question is… can’t you find a hobby that doesn’t involve highly refined weapons invented to kill people?
One can’t magically eliminate the weapons possessed by outlaws today. But we can restrict the usage of weapons designed to kill scores of humans. And we should, long before the next sectarian violence or before some rich gunlad goes off on a rampage like the tower snipers of yore.
Swords with curves in them are “offensive weapons”
“Ninja claws” are offensive weapons
Pretty much any knife carried publicly is an “offensive weapon”
But to save Brexit they decide that military rifles are not (I’m assuming the New Statesman is using the term correctly)
When the dust settles, Northern Ireland and Scotland have broken away, and Little Britain is reduced to fascist poverty I hope they are happy with their Freedom Bang Sticks
You’e context is wrong, this isn’t about normal criminals. We’re facing a hard brexit which has the very real possibility of re-igniting the Troubles in Northern Ireland. This is a conflict where terrorists have used .50 cal sniper rifles to murder people in the United Kingdom in living memory. 132 .50 cal rifles in private ownership is 132 guns that can be stolen, and as you pointed out this has already happened.
