Is his family business that restores antique grain milling machines located in North Carolina, by any chance?
4 Likes
Your family car is more likely to kill someone (whether before or after being stolen) than all of his guns.
His family car isn’t purpose-designed to kill and wound mammals or punch holes in its targets. His family car also has more features to secure it from misuse by himself or thieves than do firearms.
5 Likes
Agreed. It’s still a greater threat to life and limb.
It is. Taking the humans out of the driver’s seat will probably reduce that threat over time. In any case, that’s a separate and off-topic discussion from the one about needless deaths and injuries caused by firearms (the ownership of which is far less necessary to living in the industrialised West than are cars).
2 Likes
As @Mister44 said: “The Government estimates that there are one hundred and thirty-two .50 calibre rifles”
Not so very far off.
(Even given his next quote which says “700 rapid-fire rifles currently held by registered individuals or dealers.” Not that I have any real idea of the difference. One less 9 after my decimal point would have done it, and I typed them randomly to illustrate a point, not create a statistic.)
1 Like
[quote=“Mister44, post:75, topic:134198”]
Ah yes, we must erode more rights (well, privileges in the UK) because of potential terrorism. Why yes, officer, go ahead and shift through my personal computer and check out my social media as I enter your country. Of course you can use the built in back door to unlock it. Cool, cool. Feel free to look at my junk and take pity on me in the air port scanner.[/quote]
That’s a curious example. Specific threat based on past history (both the IRA and theft of weapons) vs security theatre. I think you might want to find a better example to use there to show how poorly we’re all being treated by 132 people not being able to own a large calibre rifle.
By the way, I remember when the ‘privilege’ of having public waste bins was curtailed.
A lot of them (and the money to pay for them) were sourced from the US as well. Thanks for that. And just because .30 cal rifles are dangerous doesn’t mean that .50 cal rifles aren’t.
It’s not that the IRA is inactive, just less active, and you yourself pointed out that one of these weapons has been stolen. Even if it was recovered, that’s not an idle threat.
Bear in mind also that the IRA (and Loyalists as well) have been reasonably quiet is because of the Good Friday agreement, the underpinnings of which are based on us being a member of the EU…which we are in the process of leaving. We don’t know for certain that the Troubles will flair up again, but it’s a non-zero chance.
9 Likes
Both support for and violent actions by the IRA (and Unionist groups, the IRA isn’t the only risk here) also tend to wax and wane with the economic winds in Northern Ireland (and to a lesser extent in The Republic). So with the near certainty of a major economic down turn caused by Brexit, fears of reignited Partisan violence in The UK and Ireland are absolutely warranted. Given that what little economic stability and development exists in NI comes almost entirely from the EU and not from the UK they stand to be hit quite a bit harder than the rest of the UK, and NI was heavily pro-stay. So its also pretty clear that the Northern Irish are gonna thrown into economic turmoil and super pissed at England.
Not just the Good Friday accord, but nearly every peace and border agreement. And all of that trans-national cooperation with The Republic of Ireland run through the EU as well. Along with the open border and a lot of day to day practicalities. All of that stuff needs to be renegotiated or find new ways to function, and much of it goes to the back of the line.
And where Reunification might solve a bunch of the EU problems and mitigate economic problems for NI, it doesn’t exactly solve the IRA issue. Reunification isn’t their goal and they’re also antagonistic at a minimum (and “at war” for certain groups) to the government of The Republic of Ireland. Plus there are still the Unionist groups who’ll be pretty pissed.
Its less that IRA groups are less active, than a different kind of active too. Less terrorism, more organized crime and political corruption. They got plenty of funds, plenty of guns, and plenty of members on deck.
5 Likes
I;'ve purposefully checked out of Brexit news for a while since it’s my understanding it can’t be averted. Am I wrong? Or is the title’s “Brexit deal” just referring to establishing some similar treaties to the ones UK in EU had (movement, trade etc) - basically will brexit suck, or suck hard?
One of the outcomes that the EU is planning for is no Brexit, so I would guess (and hope) that it is still an option.
3 Likes
I have joined this site because there is one set of voices that is rather missing from this conversation. We have had comments from those who support the ban and comments from mainly Americans against it. There are plenty of assumptions about the people who participate in sports shooting in the UK but what is missing a voice from someone who does participate in UK sports shooting.
Firstly contrary to one comment above most of us are not toffs especially those who participate in target shooting. Most tend to be of more modest backgrounds and have regular careers in average paying jobs. Secondly we are not all hard Right wing Tories, in my own rifle club there is a mix from left to the right of the political spectrum and the general rule of thumb is to leave your politics at home when at the range. Personally I am Centre left in my political leanings and have voted accordingly over the years.
I have regularly shot alongside members of the Fifty Caliber Shooters Association (FCSA) and they are certainly not how people here are assuming them to be here. They are pleasant people and not the ‘Gun nut’ penis extension seeking individuals that people are assuming here. Actually in temperament they are more like the members of a Classic car club. Most members spend many years saving to afford what is a very niche part of the sport. These rifles are expensive to buy, expensive to run, difficult to store and difficult to transport. They are also challenging to use due to their high performance and it tends to be a tedious exercise to actually shoot them well.
There is much lurid things said about these performance of the rifles but the reality is all guns are dangerous which is why we as sports shooters have to jump through many hoops to be trusted with ownership of a gun. In respect of disabling a truck, yes they can do that but so can a hunting rifle chambered in .30-06. At 1800 yards, there are several magnum calibers that could do it that would full under the 10,000ft/lb limit. A Tikka T3 in .223 another popular small hunting caliber would have no problem with a standard Police stab vest. There thousands upon thousands of people in the UK entrusted with rifles like this.
We are not monsters, we have a chosen hobby and operate within the law. Rather than make assumptions about us why not place a call to your local rifle club and visit. Most have annual open days and I think you will all be surprised at how unlike your assumptions we are.
7 Likes
To be clear, I was discussing the people Rees-Mogg is (disingenuously) claiming will be most affected by the ban on ownership of the weapons in question: casual hunters and marksmen who can afford to purchase and supposedly “need” these high-energy .50 calibre weapons for their hobbies. Our resident ammosexuals on this site have basically joined him in the claim that “well, they’re expensive, fewer than 150 wealthy people can afford to own and register them, and wealthy people don’t commit crimes [or, apparently, get their weapons stolen]” – you can take up that false claim with them.
I’d expect that shooters who aren’t wealthy take more care in securing and caring for the weapons than Rees-Mogg’s put-upon toffs do – not like they can just drop their pocket change on a new one. I’m also sure that serious ones like yourself don’t want to see what we can all acknowledge as particularly powerful purpose-designed AMRs/AP rifles falling into the hands of terrorists, criminals, or casual owners who don’t really need them.
Which is why I’d be fine with an exception for these weapons if they’re registered and stored in a secure facility at a licensed range when not in use (inter-range shipping services with tracking would be useful as well). There’s no reason for these civilian-owned weapons ever to go outside the premises of a shooting range, and from what you say such a restriction would turn into a convenience for those who own and use the weapons.
Sounds like a ban on that ammo might be in order as well. One step at a time, though.
5 Likes
I hope so too. I have multiple friends living in the UK.
I think if they don’t reverse it, Scotland will declare independence and I think that may not be the best for either entity. The victims would not be the elites who created the mess, but the working class who feel the brunt of a shrinking economy. Maybe in the long term Scotland and England having a relationship more similar to Canada and America would be ideal but I’m not convinced it’s worth the short term pains - much better to just maintain EU membership IMHO.
Forgive me I am not familiar with how to quote on this site yet but answer in part:
“To be clear, I was discussing the people Rees-Mogg is (disingenuously) claiming will be most affected by the ban on ownership of the weapons in question: casual hunters and marksmen who can afford to purchase and supposedly “need” these high-energy .50 calibre weapons for their hobbies. Our resident ammosexuals on this site have basically joined him in the claim that “well, they’re expensive, less than 150 wealthy people can afford them, and wealthy people don’t commit crimes [or, apparently, get their weapons stolen]” – you can take up that false claim with them.”
I utterly despise Jacob-Rees Mogg being a staunch Remainer, HME .50bmg is not used for hunting and his association this part of the sport with hunting is not welcome.
" I’d expect that shooters who aren’t wealthy take more care in securing and caring for the weapons than Rees-Mogg’s put-upon toffs do – not like they can just drop their pocket change on a new one. I’m also sure that serious ones like yourself don’t want to see what we can all acknowledge as particularly powerful purpose-designed material rifles falling into the hands of terrorists, criminals, or casual owners who don’t really need them."
We all regardless of wealth or background have to adhere to the same strict storage and security rules. I myself have to adhere to what is called ‘Level 2 security’ under the firearms act due to owning several different rifles for different shooting disciplines. Suggesting that ‘toffs’ are not adhering to the rules as laid out in the Firearms act shows a worrying lack of understanding or empathy.
“Which is why I’d be fine with an exception for these weapons if they’re registered and stored in a secure facility at a licensed range when not in use (inter-range shipping services with tracking would be useful as well). There’s no reason for these civilian-owned weapons ever to go outside the premises of a shooting range, and from what you say such a restriction would turn into a convenience for those who own and use the weapons.”
Storing HME rifles at a single range would reduce their security. Security for civilian owned guns works on the principle that they are dispersed at anonymous addresses in approved safes. By placing them all in a single range you make them a far more tempting target for terrorists. Baader-Meinhof stole most of their weapons from Police and Army armouries. An intershipping service again would reduce security by placing the guns in a single vehicle with a trackable route.
“Sounds like a ban on that ammo might be in order as well. One step at a time, though.”
That would eliminate all Sports shooting something that I do not support.
5 Likes
The ultra-wealthy have a different relationship to rules of all sorts than you or I do. Especially when the Tories are in power.
That’s a question of improved security standards and practises for ranges and intershipping services. Security standards are always more effectively implemented within the context of a centralised and highly regulated system, albeit at the cost of convenience (and, to some ammosexuals, the sense of identity and penis that comes from being able to keep a weapon at home).
These weapons may be civilian-owned, but they’re designed for military use. When they’re not in use, either on the field or the range, they need to be stored in secure facilities run by professionals.
The IRA didn’t have to raid armouries to get their Barrett sniper rifles; they were delivered to them by American supporters or purchased on the black market. That is precisely the kind of activity this legislation proposed to stanch. If Rees-Mogg, Johnson, and their ilk get the hard Brexit of their dreams (which is the real motivation for getting the clause dropped) it becomes even more important. The DUP, of course, knows that a hard Brexit means that they’ll need as free a hand as possible to stock up.
And someone on the (presumably short and easily attained) membership rolls of the FCSA driving one over from his home to the range in his car would be more secure? As we saw in Northern Ireland and Sarajevo in the 1990s and in other conflict zones since, one illegally attained powerful sniper rifle is enough to cause disproportionate levels havoc and dread in a civil conflict. The Barretts are popular with terrorists and criminals for that reason: these are weapons you don’t have to buy in bulk to kill your enemies from afar or take effective control of urban areas.
[you can quote by highlighting the text you want to respond to; a quote button will show up at the top of the block and clicking it will open a new reply box. You can go back and highlight other blocks to add them to a reply]
4 Likes
Brexit will either suck hard or suck catastrophically. I’m not sure if there’s any option on the table that’s as good as it just sucking.
@Zardoz1 Thanks for your insight. It’s a really useful perspective and it’s good to have it in the debate.
4 Likes
To be honest that you are consistently using the term ‘Ammosexual’ is pretty insulting and lacking in empathy. We are real breathing emotional people and not monsters, I am trying to explain the situation in a polite manner, maybe you could afford me the same respect?
Just because someone is wealthy doesn’t exempt them for the Firearms act. Just because someone is wealthy does not render them evil, it doesn’t even assume their politics. I have met many fine and decent wealthy people, I would argue you have a slightly bigoted attitude to people that you clearly don’t want to pre-judge.
I’m sorry it just isn’t workable, it would all but kill sports shooting, most clubs couldn’t hope to afford the security required to ensure the safety of the secured firearms of any type. Civilian firearms ownership and security works upon the principle of dispersion and anonymity. Many clubs don’t even have their own range to store guns at. My club does have its own range and also storage for some firearms, but only a small number of Club rifles for Probationers and certainly no space for all the members Firearms.
“The IRA didn’t have to raid armouries to get their Barrett sniper rifles; they were delivered to them by American supporters or purchased on the black market.”
No they didn’t indeed, what does that have to do with the civilian ownership of firearms. Why should UK sports shooters who have committed no crime be collectively punished?
It isn’t easily attained, certainly no more than the membership of any other Rifle club. The rifles are widely dispersed, actually most members of the FSCA who own .50bmg are also Firearms dealers with monitored alarms. Unless you have Supermans eyes you will have no idea that the Ford Mondeo that you are overtaking on the M6 has a .50bmg in it.
No they are not, the statistical evidence is quite the reverse, even in the United States where ownership of these HME rifles is more common they are not used in crime or terrorism to any noticeable degree if at all. Again you are working on assumptions rather than facts. My suggestion is give your local Full-bore club a call and go along to see what we actually do in our sport rather than assume.
1 Like
I would also say that if you were up in Scotland I would happily host you at one of our clubs range days and introduce you to how our sports works. Personally my favoured discipline is ‘Service Rifle’ shooting which is target shooting with antique military and straight pull rifles.
It’s meant to be. It’s not describing you in particular or all sport shooters. It’s in fact making a distinction between serious shooters like yourself on the one hand and those around here who twist themselves into knots rather than accept any measure that threatens to take away what are obviously totems to them on the other.
You’ll see the term used a lot around here for the latter type of person and NRA supporters. If it distresses you that much you’re in the wrong place.
I’m pointing out that wealthy people often get away with breaking or skirting the rules, especially when conservative officials and judges are in power. That isn’t the same thing as saying that all wealthy people are evil or corrupt or conservatives themselves.
For various reasons, the attitude you’d erroneously ascribe to me wouldn’t serve me well in my professional and personal life, so you might want to consider your own assumptions that you make about people you just encountered. Better yet, assume good faith like I have with you so far.
That’s the problem of the very small number of range areas in the UK where a civilian can fire these weapons once a month or so. Dispersion and anonymity as a security measure doesn’t work very well with these particular weapons.
It’s a lot easier to steal a single powerful weapon from a civilian’s home or car than it is from a secure facility where it lives full-time, be it a military or police armoury or well-secured civilian range storage vault.
You underestimate the industriousness and creativity of terrorists and criminals, especially when seeking out the path of least resistance between themselves and high-powered weapons. Hacking into the membership and scheduling database of the FCSA through a variety of methods (including getting an inside man to provide it) is a lot easier than robbing a military armoury.
I wouldn’t be surprised if both the militant Irish Catholics and Protestants already have those lists ready to go. And some of the Barretts from the Troubles were never recovered.
We’ve seen Barretts used by the IRA and in the former Yugoslavia during the 1990s. They’ve been carried by American sovereign citizen/militia types. Narco criminals use them in Mexico and Central America. Goodness knows how many of them are floating around conflict zones in the Middle East and Africa. There’s a very real global black market in them (and similarly powerful sniper rifles) that prompted this legislation in the first place.
That’s not saying that everyone who fires these weapons is a terrorist or criminal; it’s saying that, when they can get their hands on these weapons, criminal and terrorist organisations really like them. I don’t have to visit a full-bore shooting club to know that.
I go to the range at least once a year with my Marine vet friends. I’ve seen how the sport works and also seen people there firing weapons like this. Even in those safe and controlled spaces where people take firearms seriously, I’ve seen some very irresponsible behaviour by some of the range’s members (one incident resulted in a parking lot “tune-up” for the offender by my friends). I don’t want guys like that driving from their homes to the range with weapons like this in the car.
Again, maybe check your assumptions about people on this site. And perhaps learn that a statement on this site acknowledging the existence of some bad actors within a group (e.g. wealthy people or gun owners or users of high-powered sniper rifles) does not imply that all members of a group are bad actors.
2 Likes
Peasant revolt, monarchy deposed, new government affirms EU membership?
