[MicroBalrog]

The following is quoted from the Cybershooters list

Did anyone see this piece written by Richard Littlejohn in The Sun Friday 2 May?

I recently spent a fantastic day target shooting in the Florida groves.

Before we went, I told my American friend John McHugh that if we stumbled
across anyone with one tooth playing a banjo, I was out of there.

"Don't worry," John said, "we're better armed than they are."

He wasn't kidding. When he opened the boot of the car he had an array
of weapons Saddam Hussein would have killed for.

Every one of them was legal - Magnums, a Browning, a Glock, a
pump-action shotgun, even a Russian AK assault rifle. John's a
lawyer and wouldn't have it any other way.

Let me tell you, there's no better way of relaxing, as Tom Waits
put it, than with a Winchester rifle and a whole box of shells.
But if I tried it in Britain, I'd be banged up.

Police are currently celebrating the haul from their latest gun
amnesty. But they admit that in certain areas, like the inner
London boroughs where most gun crime happens, results have been
"disappointing".

Since the Government banned most types of legally-held weapon&
shootings have gone through the roof. As they say in America,
if you outlaw guns, the only people with guns will be outlaws.

Or, let me put it another way. They don't get many burglaries
or street robberies down John's way.

[NonServiam]

Why should you be surprised? There were a whole lot of British shooters before the ban, and I expect they miss their guns a whole lot.

Unfortunately, the shooting sports were not for everyone in old England, so there was never a chance for a mass movement of shooters among the general population. One of the reasons their rights were so easily overturned. Oh and yes, the lack of the excellent US Consitution and the 2nd Amendment. We should all have one of those.

[agricola]

Sadly the Sun is the property of one R. Murdoch, and has a long history of fabrication behind it.

[Dorrin79]

Oh really, Agricola?

You might try reading this report on British gun law history.

fascinating

Link here (http://www.reason.com/0211/fe.jm.gun.shtml)

[trooper]

Hey Norseman,

remember I wrote about the upcoming draft of the new firearm regulations in Germany which would have effectively exterminated shooting sports over here?

I just got the word today that it has been turned down by the Minister of the Interior himself after the massive intervention of the shooting federations...

I guess the big associations pulled in the same direction for the first time ever. It shows the worth of a united central organisation like the NRA, for example. We should attempt to get the German shooters more together in the future. After all, we're a couple million gun owners among a population of 90 millions. That should provide some political weight.

MicroBalrog, I apologize for hijacking your thread, but we were just one step away from British gun laws. :)


Regards,

Trooper

<layingbackandopeninganotherbeer>

[MicroBalrog]

But wasn't there a EU directive which said gun laws couldn't be lax? So no matter how big a gun lobby a country has, they can't break loose?

[Mr. Bombastic]

An article from the Mail On Sunday (4-5-2003).

A fat lot of use this would be to an armed robber
(headline next to a picture of a small cannon handed-in in the latest gun amnesty)

TREMENDOUS news, or then perhaps not. The police have collected thousands of firearms from law-abiding people, including a miniature cannon bizarrely painted in camouflage colours.

It goes without saying that not one of these weapons was handed in by a terrorist or a criminal. The people who gave them up were the gentle, the honest, and the law abiding, who are now utterly disarmed in our society.

It doesn’t take a genius to work out that this will not stop gun crime. What is worse, the more of these amnesties there are, the more certain the armed crook can be that his victim will be defenceless.

As Mafia turncoat Sammy 'The Bull' Gravano once said on gun control: 'It's the best thing you can do for crooks and gangsters. I want you to have nothing. If I'm a bad guy, I'm always gonna have a gun'.

By Peter Hitchens.

-----------------------

Maybe one day our first, and most basic right as living beings; the right of self preservation, won't be illegal. Here's hoping.

[trooper]

But wasn't there a EU directive which said gun laws couldn't be lax? So no matter how big a gun lobby a country has, they can't break loose?

I've never heard about this. There are countries in the EU that have much better gun laws than Germany, such as France, Belgium and Poland (ok, Poland is still a candidate).

If there ever is a common European gun law it could possibly be less restrictive than our current laws.


Regards,

Trooper

[MicroBalrog]

yes, it exists. Here's a quote from an EU document

(18) As mentioned above, the Directive lays down minimum conditions to be met for the
acquisition and possession of firearms in the Member States. It is important to note
that it does not, however, affect national provisions on the carrying of weapons, such
as rules banning the carrying of weapons, even those lawfully in the bearer's
possession, on certain occasions. The Directive also does not affect national rules on
hunting, e.g. on hunting permits or shooting seasons, or national rules on target
shooting, notably the question of whether minors can take part. (Article 2 (1)).
(19) The Directive lays down an obligation on Member States to prohibit the acquisition
and possession of firearms of category A. Authorisations may, however be granted in
special cases (Article 6). As regards firearms of category B, Member States shall make
the acquisition and possession subject at least to authorisation (Article 7). The
possession of firearms of category C shall to be subject at least to a declaration to the
authorities in the Member State where the firearm is held (Article 8). As regards
firearms of category D, Member States do not have to make the acquisition and
possession subject to authorisation or declaration, although this is not expressly stated
in the Directive.
(20) The Directive also lays down certain minimum conditions to be met by the persons
acquiring a firearm, in terms of age, reason, etc. (Article 5).

[MicroBalrog]

And here's the real mean part:

(14) The Directive applies to weapons as referred to in its Annex I, and in particular, it lays
down explicit rules in respect of firearms. Firearms are classified by Annex I into four
categories, which correspond to the different regimes of acquisition and possession
provided by the Directive:
– Category A: prohibited firearms, such as automatic arms and explosive military
missiles and launchers,
– Category B: firearms subject to authorisation, such as semi-automatic firearms or
repeating firearms,
– Category C: firearms subject to declaration, such as repeating long firearms,
– Category D other firearms, such as the long firearms with smooth-bore barrels.

[NonServiam]

Good news, trooper. :) Fight the good fight!

Yup, MicroBalrog, that is nasty. One of the reasons I am still undecided about Norway joining the EU. Our laws are much more lax than I would expect any EU gunlaws to be. I feel we should bond more closely to the US, but reality is unfortunately that our interests might be more in tune with the EU's. It's hard to stay alone when you are small and vulnerable.

[trooper]

OK, you beat me... didn't know that, really ;)

I have to admit that I wasn't really aware of those regulations but our national laws are much stricter anyway. :(

I'd say that this directive still seems to allow a much less restrictive gun law than we have today, though.

While the possession of Category B firearms must be authorized by the respective member state according to this directive, this would allow shall-issue laws.

Of course I'd rather have a real 2nd amendment in the European constitution that is supposed to be drafted during the next couple years. Sadly, I don't even see a small chance for it.

But we'll continue to fight for our cause. Maybe they'll listen once they are more likely to be mugged than to be involved in a car accident...


Regards,

Trooper


P.S. Now I'll a open a nice bottle of Cote du Rhone and celebrate our little victory... Ah, French wine and German firearms...

[MicroBalrog]

I suspect some International activism might be in order. Check out
The Self-Defense-Network (http://www.rkba.co.uk/sdn/)

[amprecon]

Once the Brits reject their gun laws after realizing the folly that they are, will the persons who turned in their guns get them back? Will they get fully reimbursed? Or did they already? If I were a Brit I would sue for the full cost of my property that was stolen from me by the "queen".
Then again, it is easy for me to say since I'm not under the watchful eye of royalty and am not at worry for reprisal or imprisonment in a dungeon.

[ahadams]

amprecon the answer is no to all of your questions. Also do NOT question the British monarch - it makes about as much sense as the old Army saying about tobh (if you don't know don't ask) but the whole monarchy thing is uniquely theirs and it ain't going away anytime soon.

On another list when I was back east I encountered a Brit who had turned in a collection of original Colt SAA's - with the knowledge that they were subsequently melted into slag. What we have to reinforce to guys like that is that when they do get their rights back *we* aren't going to send them a ton of junk like we did in WWII - they're going to have to buy/develop their own and hopefully market some of them over here in the USA.

If we do that, we will avoid what happened at the end of WWII when too many Brits didn't have any investment in the firearms they had and so willingly turned them in when their govt told them they had to do so.