UK Handgun Ownership/Carry


PDA






razorback2003
December 5, 2012, 02:53 PM
I understand that with the right connections, people can carry handguns in Canada and Australia. I also understand there are quite a few carry permits in Northern Ireland.

Is it possible for people such as judges, politicians, wealthy in the rest of the UK to own a handgun for protection and also carry it? Does this happen to some degree?

If you enjoyed reading about "UK Handgun Ownership/Carry" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
Skribs
December 5, 2012, 02:55 PM
I'm not sure, but I think they would have to be very well connected. Most police officers in the UK don't carry a firearm while on duty.

Trent
December 5, 2012, 02:58 PM
What about security services, armored car drivers, etc?

Even in the draconian land of Illinois, armored car drivers and other types of security people can carry a firearm while working.

mljdeckard
December 5, 2012, 03:01 PM
Let's put it this way. The UK Olympic pistol teams have to practice outside the country.

oneounceload
December 5, 2012, 03:47 PM
Because they are not licensed security or armored car drivers or connected politicians
They tore down the Olympic shooting venue (or were supposed to) after the Olympics because it was for shooting.

DurangoKid
December 5, 2012, 11:35 PM
I have not been to Grt. Britian for 15 years. Back at that time my feelings were the general population in England, Scotland and Northern Ireland were antigun. Yes there were some progun people but I met very few. I got so Damn tired being ask why America did a poor job of gun control. They also asked why we lusted after "Blood Sports" Hunting.

The Republic Of Ireland seemed to be more gun friendly. I visited some gun shops and visited with hunters and shooters. Canada is very antigun I found Canada to be a Police state with the issue of firearms. Austraila outlawed most of the arms like semiautos handguns etc. The citizens marched down and surrendered their firearms without a wimper. The Government of Austraila cut these arms up for scrap. There were no Crocodile Dundees at that party.:uhoh:

jack404
December 6, 2012, 12:47 AM
G'day Kid , if i may

there where lots of dundee's as you call em , Patriots is what the rest of reality uses , from ranging from your own "professor wonderful" from disney , moved to Oz in the late 70's , was my teacher in physics here

when the gun grabber came at 4 am he refused , and was carted away , 9 days later they charged his wife and kids as accessories so he handed it over

good mate of mine Rodney Ansell , ( he's the guy in real life they based Croc dundee's character on , fact , google it ) shot once in the back and again in the side by police , we had hundreds of thousands in the streets here

260,000 folks made criminal , maybe 15,000 locked up , 15 year olds who found a air rifle and traded it for a bike , busted weapons dealing , 5 years

when they lock up your kids dont you dare give in eh ..

since then we've been fighting back , warrentless search and seazures ended a recent win see no licence or registration for most BP weapons that predate 1900

there are now more gun here that when they took em

we have more shooters rights here in many ways than what i see you all going through

i shot 90 something deer this year , how'd you do ?

( a fair few hundred foxes and roo's as well but thats what i do )

we've recently gotten shooters ( pretty much anyone who wants ) as feral animal controllers in our national parks

yes we cant have AK's or AR's , but specialist shooters who cant prove requirments can buy mini 14's and other semi's

as for hand guns yes they are hard and theres limits , i own my limit

and a fair few more in the US that i'm working on getting back here too

the UN gun control cost a lot of good folks their lives , some gunned down on their door steps in front of their family

most called up to the boss's office at work and arrested by the awaiting cops or pulled over in thick traffic while driving alone

i was in cambodia when i went down and thankfully got many semi's out with the help of a ex marine mate in FL , who i sold my collection to on agreement i get first offer if he resells ;) i've 1/4 of it back over the years

you may think aussies are wimps and all that you infer but mate

its a tough man who can see his wife and kids locked up in the holes we have here for his right to stand on his principles or get shot in the back while talking to the media

now that the US is looking to adopt all the UN policies and throw our the constitution we'll get to see how you folks all do in the next few years

and though i'm 55 now i'll get to see it real close as i promised some mates i'd come over and help fight back , save you folks from what went on here

but you can scale it to US proportions if you wish

200 millions guns say

300 million folks

they dont grab you they grab your family when they go to the store
say 20 million in fema camps for a few years .. ( we had almost enough gaols here then , you dont ) get you to surrender ,

make you the bad guy and anyone who may know where you be is a accessory , look how the UN works , it wont be blue helmets it'll be your cops

it wont be over night , it'll start with buy backs and such then some terrible things will happen and kneee jerk laws you'll have to submit too , then they'll play the AR folks off against the hand gunners and folks will devide to protect their interest shotgunners will be targeted hard as legitimate but threatened if they dont go anti semi auto

how do i know this ?

that how it went in the UK and Australia

Big bold speakers divided opinion and folks stance so they created little self interest groups that could be picked off by the anti gun lobby and government

sounds like the USA at the moment eh ?

;)

you got a marxist in charge of the place . lies deception are everyday things to them , to find the truth find what they dodge to answer..

keep what your founding fathers gave you , and keep it safe , never trade a section of it for anything , you'll lose the lot if you do

and remember we never had that , we started as a penal colony and if i may remind you of some factual history

when Australian freemen and convicts both wish to rebel and sent money to the new USA to buy guns ( 15200 USD in gold then ) , you decided not to upset the british some more and kept our funds , told the brits what we had planned and vinegar hill was a flop and all the participants even those only armed with sticks , locked up in chains again for life

as you where reworking sea routes and whaling was way more important to the US economy that a colony of slaves of the british , brits offered you berthing in fremantle and melborne in Australia , while they ran the joint , so thats the way the deal went

we dont hold grudges and have with the USA the world longest and continuous military agreement in the world

if we're such wimps , why do you always call upon us to help and why do we always rock up ?

cheers folks

armedandsafe
December 6, 2012, 01:16 AM
Thanks Jack. The truth will always out.

Pops

jack404
December 6, 2012, 01:23 AM
i'll add why was not this reported ?

i ask how did two tin pot aussie news papers owned by murdoch and packer get so big so fast ? oh UN funding development loans to help spread free speech in far away places like the USA , how that for a pay off ? now you see the results in the lack of spine in your own media , they are owned and have been for years folks

and yes that started here and between them murdock and packer own 82% of the US media companies ..

and they are loyal to the UN ..

hope you dont have to get used to it like we did .. bloody hard fight back

next we get our rights to use em back ..

castle doctrine if you will..

but thats all UN , and they dont see it our way , so maybe we gotta start thinking getting rid of the UN

maybe you folks there should too ;)

cheers

USAF_Vet
December 6, 2012, 01:33 AM
Jack404,
I met some Aussies in Iraq in '05, and landed in Darwin in '03. The Austrailians are some of the most fantastic folks I have ever had the pleasure to meet. Thanks for the insight on how things went down, well, down under. It gives me some things to consider for the future of gun rights here in the US.

You Aussies are no wimps. You guys are some if the toughest SOB's on the planet. And kind enough to give a thirsty GI a beer from their daily rations.

newbuckeye
December 6, 2012, 01:38 AM
Jack, there are a lot of us in the US that see the history of Australia and the UK, and see it becoming a reality here. Some talk of pushing back using civil disobedience all the way to civil war to prevent us from becoming the "next" in line. I agree with you, it will be just like the other things they have gotten past us. A little bit at a time, and knee jerk reactions to a few really bad, bloody incidents. We've had a few...Waco, Ruby Ridge.....where the govt got heavy handed enforcing "the law"

Vizsla
December 6, 2012, 01:50 AM
No, you can't carry a gun for protection in the UK. To be fair though, the whole UK has fewer murders than Chicago or Detroit.

The only reason you can give to own a handgun is for humane dispatch of injured animals (no, burglars don't count), but as a rule you have to be in a career that warrants this i.e, professional deerstalker, gamekeeper or veterinary surgeon. I know a few people with pistols, but they tend to keep pretty quiet about it.

Cap and ball revolvers and muzzleloading pistols can be owned if you hold a FAC (firearms certificate- gun licence) and are very popular for recreational shooting.

Scrumbag
December 6, 2012, 03:33 AM
Originally coming from the UK and owning shotguns over there perhaps I can shed some light on things:

Thing I last read was that there are ~3,000 legally held handguns in the UK

You can get a certificate for a handgun basically for the following (This applies to England, Scotland and Wales. NI you can still legally own a gun for recreational use and NI has a different firearms set up to the rest of the UK).

Some private security (These guys tend to be ex-military)
Personal protection (This tends to be former military or civil servants, often who had things to do with Northern Ireland)
Humane dispatch - For those who do a lot hunting (often professional guides) or slaughtermen (often have restricted capacity)

In all cases you need to convince the police that you have good reason to own it before they issue a certificate.

Kind regards,

Scrummy

Midwest
December 6, 2012, 06:03 AM
Jack, can you dispel a rumor. I have heard that some U.S. troops were involved with the confiscations of firearms in Australia. Was it true or not.
Thanks

thump_rrr
December 6, 2012, 07:20 AM
The only chance you have in Canada to carry is a wilderness carry permit.
This is mostly issued to trappers and loggers who are working in the wilderness and may encounter bears or other predators.
They are typically large caliber revolvers.
The license only permits you to carry in the prescribed environment while working.
When you are in your vehicle or outside the perscribed wilderness area the gun must be trigger locked and locked in an opaque container.
You will also be given a permit to transport from your wildermess area to your home.
This permit doesn't allow you to carry any way you want anywhere you want.
The offence for not following the rules and regulations will get you a 3 year all expenses paid vacation courtesy of the federal government.

http://www.rcmp-grc.gc.ca/cfp-pcaf/fs-fd/wild-sauvage-eng.htm

Sam1911
December 6, 2012, 09:58 AM
[MOD TALK: Some stuff has gone away. We don't do forum wars here, and if you have a personal beef with someone, don't EVER let it show up here or your time with us will be short. Keep it civil and welcoming to all shooters from all countries -- that's "The High Road."]

Sam1911
December 6, 2012, 10:03 AM
To be fair though, the whole UK has fewer murders than Chicago or Detroit.

Er, no it doesn't.

Homicides reported in Detroit in 2011: 173
Homicides reported in Chicago in 2011: 423
Homicides reported in England in f.y. 2010/2011: 636

Hyperbole is fun, but it doesn't help us here.

hq
December 6, 2012, 10:48 AM
UK crime statistics have lost much of their relevance to anything since home office ordered police precincts not to publish any data. The official figures are doctored and censored for political purposes.

I did quite a bit of research on the subject a few years ago, for an article that was later submitted to finnish parliament. In late 90's police precincts were already pressured to omit much of actual homicide data from their statistics and after the home office took monopoly in publishing it, numbers have had very little to do with reality. Their grounds for omitting incidents from official statistics are creative and vague at best - double and triple murders with no suspect and no conviction = not a homicide, collateral death by stray bullets during a drive-by shooting = not a homicide. The list is endless.

British officials are lying through their teeth to prove that their half-a$$ed legislative "solutions" to prevent crime work.

Curiously, CCW was legalized in Estonia a few years ago and that's one of the very few european countries where crime rate has been in constant decline ever since.

bobbo
December 6, 2012, 11:10 AM
Sorry, Sam, but flat murder numbers show nothing (as the population of Detroit is 713,000, and the U.K. is 62 million). You need to look at population.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_intentional_homicide_rate
U.K. murder rate per 100,000 people: 1.2
U.S. murder rate: 4.2

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_cities_by_crime_rate
Detroit: 34.5 (4th in nation)
Chicago: 15.2 (18th in the nation).

Yeah, you're far more likely to get murdered in Detroit or Chicago (or virtually any city with more than 200,000 people in the U.S.) than in the U.K.

HQ: do you have any sources to back that up? Nationwide fraud is a serious allegation.

Certaindeaf
December 6, 2012, 11:14 AM
Sorry, Sam, but flat murder numbers show nothing (as the population of Detroit is 713,000, and the U.K. is 62 million). You need to look at population.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_intentional_homicide_rate
U.K. murder rate per 100,000 people: 1.2
U.S. murder rate: 4.2

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_cities_by_crime_rate
Detroit: 34.5 (4th in nation)
Chicago: 15.2 (18th in the nation).

Yeah, you're far more likely to get murdered in Detroit or Chicago (or virtually any city with more than 200,000 people in the U.S.) than in the U.K.

HQ: do you have any sources to back that up? Nationwide fraud is a serious allegation.
Maybe re-read post #17.

Skribs
December 6, 2012, 11:20 AM
Anyone pro- or anti-gun can point to countries with low or high levels of gun rights and their respective crime rates and say "see, they have 'better' gun laws, and they have less crime than us."

The real fact is that the OCCURANCE of violent crime in general has no direct correlation to do with who is and isn't allowed to carry a gun, and everything to do with the culture of the nation. Case in point: guns get banned in UK, gun murders go down, knife murders go up, resulting in about the same amount of murders overall. So gun bans stopped *SOME* gun crime, but really did nothing to address the true problem - murders. It's just that some people got a gun illegally anyway, and others just decided to use a knife.

jem375
December 6, 2012, 11:40 AM
Jack, if they try that here with the UN crap, there would be civil disobedience that you would not believe...

Carl N. Brown
December 6, 2012, 11:42 AM
The city of El Paso Texas 2010 had a murder rate of 0.8 and Vermont known as a lax gun law state often dips below the reported UK rate of 1.2.

Sam1911
December 6, 2012, 11:42 AM
Sorry, Sam, but flat murder numbers show nothing (as the population of Detroit is 713,000, and the U.K. is 62 million). You need to look at population. Of course, but that's not what was claimed.

Odd Job
December 6, 2012, 12:36 PM
The real fact is that the OCCURANCE of violent crime in general has no direct correlation to do with who is and isn't allowed to carry a gun, and everything to do with the culture of the nation.

That's the rub of the matter. Guns have very little to do with it, other than the relative ease with which some killings can happen with firearms compared to other weapons.

Skribs
December 6, 2012, 12:39 PM
That's the rub of the matter. Guns have very little to do with it, other than the relative ease with which some killings can happen with firearms compared to other weapons.

And the fact that they often present the best option for defense, especially if there is a disparity of force.

Guns are also safer for all involved, IMHO. Someone who pulls a knife on me, for example, is likely to walk away if I draw a gun. If I am unarmed and he charges me, well I've been trained on a couple of ways to stab someone with their own knife. I prefer the deterrent over the scuffle where probably both of us end up bleeding and at least one is severely injured.

Carl N. Brown
December 6, 2012, 12:57 PM
Sam911: Homicides reported in England in f.y. 2010/2011: 636

We are only supposed to list the number of shooting murders (1st degree) for UK, then lump suicides and accidents with homicides for the US figures.

razorback2003
December 6, 2012, 01:59 PM
Scrumbag,

That does not surprise me that there are 3,000 legal handguns in the UK. Those who are connected still are able to have a way even though the rest cannot.

Skribs
December 6, 2012, 02:10 PM
I find it funny that the UK needs to have the elite carrying handguns, because the excuse for the anti- elites carrying here is that if the BGs have guns, they want guns. In the UK, supposedly the BGs don't have guns, so why does the elite need them?

razorback2003
December 6, 2012, 02:14 PM
Yeah it is especially pathetic in Canada, Australia, and the UK that if the average person submits that he wants to buy a firearm for self defense, his application is denied. The police claim that self defense is not a reason to own a gun.

But if the elite want a gun for self defense to even carry, he can. And even more so, they do not want the information leaked out that a few special people are carrying guns that for most people are flat out not legal to own in those countries even with a license.

Skribs
December 6, 2012, 02:17 PM
I don't normally nitpick grammar, but I think it changes the meaning if I'm correct on this: do you mean flat out illegal?

hq
December 6, 2012, 03:12 PM
HQ: do you have any sources to back that up? Nationwide fraud is a serious allegation.

Plenty. The problem is widely publicized in a number of studies and newspaper articles. During last 15 years all decline in homicide and crime rate in the UK has coincided with government-mandated changes in recording and publishing statistics. This is a fairly well-known issue, try a search engine, you'll be very surprised with what you'll find, if you still think UK government and home office even try to be truthful. Occasional leaks from police districts have shown a 200-300%+ difference between official figures and the reality.

Neo-Luddite
December 6, 2012, 03:16 PM
jack404 -- GREAT post. Give Becky Peters our regards :fire:

jack404
December 6, 2012, 04:03 PM
luddite , aint you heard ?? she's in boston organising for obama , no foolin

Scrumbag
December 6, 2012, 04:29 PM
Yeah, sadly in the UK there is a view that firearms should only be owned by the government. Sadly we are moving rapidly towards the nanny state.

And HQ is right. People just generally don't believe gov't figures in the UK. Most people believe them to be if not directly fraudulent, the methodology for calculating statistics is often skewed in the Gov't favour. (I'm an economist by profession and so I notice this in EU gov't figures generally).

ATB,

Scrummy

Neo-Luddite
December 6, 2012, 04:58 PM
Jack--I knew she'd made the rounds here a few years back selling the same snake oil George Sorros was providing her. I'll have to read up on her.The UN Treaty will be the next big hurdle.

razorback2003
December 6, 2012, 06:34 PM
If you look, most of these gun control laws around the world around the same time. Mid 90's US gets the assault weapon ban, Australia a lot of guns banned, Canada required gun registration and bans, and UK handgun ban.

Shadow 7D
December 6, 2012, 06:53 PM
I was reading a thread (think here) about a UK home invasion.
where a member had his licensed? demilled in a glass case, and ended up pulling it on the home invaders. Called the cops a number of times, once it was established that he had ran them off, there was no interest in it, until he mentioned he had used his demil to do it.

The cops showed up FOR HIM, once he convinced them it was legally owned, they mentioned all the paperwork and charges HE would face, that they would steal (hold as evidence) his dewatted gun, as for the criminals, and taking a police report.....

eh, they'd never find them anyways, so, we are going to report you're fine, not mention anything, you keep your gun, and have a nice day, or this will go badly for you......

And people wonder why I say NEVER negotiate on the second, it's pointless when you have nothing to win, and everything to loose.

Bohemus
December 6, 2012, 07:11 PM
Sorry, Sam, but flat murder numbers show nothing (as the population of Detroit is 713,000, and the U.K. is 62 million). You need to look at population.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_intentional_homicide_rate
U.K. murder rate per 100,000 people: 1.2
U.S. murder rate: 4.2

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_cities_by_crime_rate
Detroit: 34.5 (4th in nation)
Chicago: 15.2 (18th in the nation).

Yeah, you're far more likely to get murdered in Detroit or Chicago (or virtually any city with more than 200,000 people in the U.S.) than in the U.K.

HQ: do you have any sources to back that up? Nationwide fraud is a serious allegation.

Interestingly Eurostat shows different data: http://epp.eurostat.ec.europa.eu/statistics_explained/index.php/Crime_trends_in_detail

DurangoKid
December 6, 2012, 07:18 PM
The 1930s most of Europe was disarmed. The German people went down and turned their firearms in to the Nazis.

bobmcd
December 6, 2012, 11:07 PM
German civilian disarmament was not by the Nazis, but by the Weimar Republic. The Nazis may have benefitted from disarmament, but they did not instigate it.

http://www.guncite.com/gun_control_gcnazimyth.html

USAF_Vet
December 7, 2012, 01:14 AM
Godwin's law in just 40 posts. :)

Dr_B
December 7, 2012, 01:45 AM
I have not been to Grt. Britian for 15 years. Back at that time my feelings were the general population in England, Scotland and Northern Ireland were antigun. Yes there were some progun people but I met very few. I got so Damn tired being ask why America did a poor job of gun control. They also asked why we lusted after "Blood Sports" Hunting.

The UK has a very violent history. They controlled an empire once, and before that they massacred people on their own island. And we're the ones with a lust for bloodsport?

Forget about handgun carry over there. Its not even legal to carry a pocket knife. At least when I was there in 2010 you could be arrested for having one on you, and saying it was a tool or for protection was no good.

DurangoKid
December 7, 2012, 02:24 AM
I think a pocket knife was legal when I was there. I carried one at that time. The laws are very anti firearms in all the of the old English held Nations as well as England. I found most of the people in favor of strong gun laws in those countries. Some one posted that the Nazis were not antgun. I can not believe where these yarns come from.

Shadow 7D
December 7, 2012, 02:57 AM
Consider
you average brit cop is NOW armed, wears body armor etc.

BEFORE the ban
there was felt no need
the reason 'bobby's' historically were unarmed was that there was the assumption (1800's early 19th century) that if a gun was needed, they would simply enlist 'upstanding citizens' (Posse Comitus BTW) who were assumed to be armed...

NOW, gun crime is rising, and even the home office can't squelch that
Kitchen knives are regulated
Glass beer mugs are banned
Plastic mugs are rated NOT to break into sharp shards

BTW, UK has a HIGHER violent crime rate than the US, but hey who's counting that, it's ONLY the 'murders' (and lets not get into HOW they are spun...) that count, after all, other numbers might show that gun control doesn't work.

Scrumbag
December 7, 2012, 03:26 AM
The UK is ridiculous. I'm glad I left. Really enjoying being able to carry a penknife with a locking blade and not break the law and shoot my growing collection of handguns...

M19 or 1911 next...? Tough choices...

hq
December 7, 2012, 04:52 AM
The UK has a very violent history. They controlled an empire once, and before that they massacred people on their own island. And we're the ones with a lust for bloodsport?

Frankly, - and unfortunately - UK is a country that exists primarily for its government, not its citizens. The density of police-monitored surveillance cameras is staggering (one for every 14 people :eek:) , blaming inanimate objects for crime is out of proportion, criminal legislation is biased towards perceived danger instead of real one, government has pretty much an absolute power over its subj... eh, I mean citizens. Even regular policemen aren't generally trusted; only special firearms units can carry guns on duty and they resemble a paramilitary riot squad with armored vehicles, body armor, helmets and SMG:s.

UK is the only place in the world where I've been carded when I wanted to buy silverware (SPOONS!) and these assault spoons were in a locked display case as mandated by the law.

A couple of my friends are high-ranking UK police officials and they've told me countless stories how screwed up and hypocritical the whole system is. I wish I could repeat some of them here, just to scratch the surface. One of them, for example, had only fired about 50 rounds with a handgun in his life, in supervised environment, and he was pretty much ecstatic visiting my summer place when I took a bunch of handguns and machine guns out of the safe, gave him a case of ammo and told him to have fun on the backyard.

jack404
December 7, 2012, 06:55 AM
NOTE!!! this was written in 1999 after a years research (1998)

Gun Control in Australia --- Chaos Down Under

Miguel A. Faria, Jr., MD
Last August, the rugged Aussie survivalist whose real life exploits inspired the "Crocodile Dundee" movies died in what then appeared to be a mysterious shootout with Australian police. A police sergeant was also killed in the incident. It was reported that Rodney William Ansell, the 44-year-old, blond haired Aussie, resembled uncannily Paul Hogan the actor who played his part in the movie and the sequel. Although Ansell was no angel and had had previous run-ins with police, he had been named 1988 Australian Northern Territory Man of the Year for inspiring the movie and putting "the Australian Outback on the map."

What motivated this shooting? In 1996, Australia adopted draconian gun control laws banning certain guns (60 percent of all firearms), requiring registration of all firearms and licensing of all gun owners. "Crocodile Dundee" believed the police were coming to confiscate his unregistered firearms.

In Australia today, police can enter your house and search for guns, copy the hard drive of your computer, seize records, and do it all without a search warrant. It's the law that police can go door to door searching for weapons that have not been surrendered in their much publicized gun buy back program. They have been using previous registration and firearm license lists to check for lapses and confiscate non-surrendered firearms.

The problem began with the Port Arthur (a Tasmanian resort) tragedy on April 28, 1996, when a crazed assailant opened fire and shot 35 people. Australians were shocked and the government reacted quickly. Draconian gun legislation was passed in the heat of the moment. There are three major political parties in Australia: the center right (Liberal Party), the socialist camp (Labor Party), and the ultra left (Australian Democratic Party) --- which tilted the balance of power toward stringent gun control at the expense of freedom.

As a result of the ban, all semiautomatic firearms (rifles and handguns) are proscribed, including .22 caliber rabbit guns and duck-hunting Remington shotguns.

Writing in The Gun Owners (Jan. 31, 2000), the newsletter for Gun Owners of America (GOA), former California State Senator H.L. Richardson writes: "They outlawed every semi-auto, even those pretty duck guns, the Browning A5 and the Remington 1100s. They even struck down pump shotguns: the Winchester model 12 and the Remington 870...Do you own a Browning BAR rifle? Banned. How about a Winchester Model 100? Out of luck, all semi-auto hunting rifles were outlawed as well. They didn't miss a one."

Be that as it may, at a cost of $500 million, out of an estimated 7 million firearms (of which 2.8 million were prohibited), only 640,000 guns were surrendered to police. What has been the result? Same as in England. Like in Great Britain, crime Down Under has escalated.

Twelve months after the law was implemented in 1997, there has been a 44 percent increase in armed robberies; an 8.6 percent increase in aggravated assaults; and, a 3.2 percent increase in homicides. That same year in the state of Victoria, there was a 300 percent increase in homicides committed with firearms. The following year, robberies increased almost 60 percent in South Australia. By 1999, assaults had increased in New South Wales by almost 20 percent.

Two years after the ban, there have been further increases in crime: armed robberies by 73 percent; unarmed robberies by 28 percent; kidnappings by 38 percent; assaults by 17 percent; manslaughter by 29 percent, according to the Australian Bureau of Statistics.

And consider the fact that over the previous 25-year period, Australia had shown a steady decrease both in homicide with firearms and armed robbery --- until the ban.


Australia, a semi-arid, isolated continent, and a vast nation-state, in many ways parallels the history of the United States. In the 1850s and 1860s, it had gold rushes and pioneering settlers, reminiscent of our own western migration. In World War I and World War II, it fought with the allies. Australia remained a subject of Great Britain until 1986, when the last ties with the British crown were dissolved. With only 19 million people, Australia has an impressive fauna that includes plenty of varmints, marsupials, dingoes (that wreak havoc on livestock), as well as large rats and other rodents. Yet, hunting has become prohibitively difficult for all but a handful of Australians with private lands and the usual connections.

Now, the ban on firearms and the disarmament of ordinary Australians has left criminals free to roam the countryside as they please. Bandits, of course, kept their guns. Like in America, only the law-abiding, by definition, obey the law. Yet, the leftist Australian government has responded by passing more laws; in 1998 Bowie knives and other knives and items including handcuffs were banned.

Licensing is difficult. Self and family protection is not considered a valid reason to own a firearm. The right to self-defense, like in Great Britain and Canada, is not recognized in Australia, Like Americans, Australians loved and possessed firearms --- that is until the ban. Freedom has been extinguished. A way of life has ended. Please, don't tell me it cannot happen here!

Dr. Faria is the Editor-in-Chief of the Medical Sentinel. His e-mail is
Originally published in the Medical Sentinel 2000;5(3):107. Copyright?2000 Association of American Physicians and Surgeons (AAPS)

Certaindeaf
December 7, 2012, 08:58 AM
Even in their zombie movies they have to use cricket bats etc.. like in Shaun of the Dead. tsk tsk.

Dr_B
December 7, 2012, 12:53 PM
Frankly, - and unfortunately - UK is a country that exists primarily for its government, not its citizens. The density of police-monitored surveillance cameras is staggering (one for every 14 people ) , blaming inanimate objects for crime is out of proportion, criminal legislation is biased towards perceived danger instead of real one, government has pretty much an absolute power over its subj... eh, I mean citizens. Even regular policemen aren't generally trusted; only special firearms units can carry guns on duty and they resemble a paramilitary riot squad with armored vehicles, body armor, helmets and SMG:s.

I think you're dead-on with that statement. Its like 1984 with the telescreens and beetle-eyed men watching in some secret monitoring station. I was there in late 2010. Only in London, to be fair, but I was all over that city. I spotted cameras bolted to buildings, strapped to trees, etc. They're everywhere. You're being watched 24/7 pretty much unless you're in the bathroom.

I saw exactly two police-persons, one man, one woman, the entire time I was there and they were in the same place. Neither was carrying a firearm. Each had a taser.

While I was there, they were having problems in London with gangs of adolescents attacking people. Sort of a flash mob kind of thing; beat the snot out of someone picked at random and run away. The news was telling citizens to NOT fight back. If it happens to you, get all the info you can and report it to the police!

The UK has a problem with attitude. They've been slowly snowed by their government into being dependent on a welfare state and politely swallowing regulation after regulation because they are told they'll be safer and more civilized. THAT is the root of their lack of access to firearms.

Onmilo
December 7, 2012, 01:19 PM
This is what I know about owning firearms in England as it stands right now.
Handguns are extremely difficult to own.
Hanguns must now have a barrel of some 16" in length and a wrist support, similar to wire type stocks.
Semi Auto rimfires, rimfire revolvers, centerfire revolvers and black powder muzzleloaded revolvers are the main choices and it is a gigantic pain to get the permit.
Also the pistol must be stored at your shooting club, you can't take it home with you.
There are some Cowboy Action clubs that are allowed to have shorter barrelled caplock revolvers (Blank Firing Guns) for "Gunfighter" demonstration purposes (Cowboy Shows) but the barrels are solid most of the way through and they are still treated as any other handgun.
Shotguns are fairly easy to get permitted for as are .22 rimfire rifles and suppressors for rifles are quite common and legal to own.
Easier to own suppressors there than here in the USA actually.
If you qualify for a rifle permit, you automatically qualify for a suppressor.
Rifle barrels must be 16" or longer, magazine capacity is limited to 10 shots
Shotguns are limited to 2 shots and can be single shot, pump, O/U or SXS
Barrel must be 26" or longer.
Pump guns, even 2 shot pump guns are considered extremely unsporting.
As for rifles, bolt action, single shots, O/U & SXS as well as combination guns are predominant.
My friend lives up near Grimsby in the north of England and THINKS one can own certain semi automatic rifles, mainly Ruger Mini 14 and 10/22s as he has seen them in shops, but magazine capacity in these guns is limited to 5 shots though they too can have a suppressor legally installed.
Ammunition is about 4X as expensive in England, even shotgun shells are quite expensive.
A $5 box of .22s here in the USA will cost 13 Quid there which is about $20 at current exchange rates.
My buddy tells me anybody packing a gun in England is either Intelligence Services, SAS, or a criminal.Avoid talking to them at any and all costs.

Onmilo
December 7, 2012, 01:37 PM
At least you can kinda sorta ccw in californication.
I live in the ONLY state in the union that doesn't see fit to consider its citizens as people of free will and common sense,,,

Iramo94
December 7, 2012, 01:41 PM
Even in their zombie movies they have to use cricket bats etc.. like in Shaun of the Dead. tsk tsk.
I found it funny that the probably illegal lever gun saves the day in that movie.

hq
December 7, 2012, 02:12 PM
The UK has a problem with attitude. They've been slowly snowed by their government into being dependent on a welfare state and politely swallowing regulation after regulation because they are told they'll be safer and more civilized. THAT is the root of their lack of access to firearms.

Artificial, ever-increasing dependency of the state and government is a disease. When people have been brainwashed into believing that safety and security are somehow collective issues rather than a matter of taking personal responsibility, things have gone horribly wrong. It's in the best interest of government and politicians to make people as dependent on them as possible; security and finances are the most effective way to do it. People who can't defend or support themselves are easy pray to malicious politicians. High taxation and draconian gun laws are commonly used instruments to achieve this goal.

"Government knows best" -mentality. Politicians claim that the police will protect you (in theory) and the state will support you financially (with money taken by force from other people), and expect you to be grateful for it. It's sick and disgusting that so many spoon-fed individuals can vote for a living and, at the same time, unleash their psychotic envy and hatred against those who in fact ARE capable of taking responsibility for their own security and finances.

Much of the hope has been lost in countries like the UK. There are exceptions to this generalization, of course, but the vast majority of population don't question high taxes or a collective concept of security. That's what they've been brainwashed to believe. Literally.

Personally, I MUCH prefer game to processed food, being able to counter a possible threat myself to being dependent on police arriving in time, and working for a living to trusting the government to funnel me money someone else has worked hard for. I'm the kind of person socialist, totalitarian and power greedy politicians hate and despise. My vote can't be bought with empty promises, imaginary threats and other people's money.

Unfortunately, too many people's votes can.

Ok. I'm off the soapbox now.

oneounceload
December 7, 2012, 02:14 PM
There was a news article a few months back about a retired military person seeing a handgun from his window near a dumpster. Being civic minded for kids' safety, he gets the gun and brings it to local constabulary - who promptly arrest for illegal gun possession and IIRC he was sentenced to a severe jail sentence when all he was trying to do was to turn it in so some kid didn't find it.

I have friends who live in the UK and here in States. The rise in slashing attacks by gangs of youth - mostly of Middle-Eastern decent - has risen alarmingly as they will run by you and slash you or a purse strap with a box cutter and keep running. All those cameras do nothing to prevent crime - merely let the police watch it happen and try to solve it later (Unless, of course and just like here, the miscreants are from certain PC-protected groups)

7thCavScout
December 7, 2012, 03:45 PM
Both Australia and the UK in the last 70 years faced the very serious threat of being invaded by a foreign aggressors. And now they have some of the strictest gun laws. *Scratches head*

Odd Job
December 7, 2012, 04:42 PM
This is what I know about owning firearms in England as it stands right now.
Handguns are extremely difficult to own.
Hanguns must now have a barrel of some 16" in length and a wrist support, similar to wire type stocks.
Semi Auto rimfires, rimfire revolvers, centerfire revolvers and black powder muzzleloaded revolvers are the main choices and it is a gigantic pain to get the permit.

That's not entirely correct.
Firstly, you can't have a rimfire pistol (and I mean "pistol" in the traditional sense of the word where it would not be out of place in a holster and would be practical to use one-handed).

You can have a black powder pistol if it is on a Section 1 Firearms Certificate (FAC). It is no more difficult to get that than it is to get a Ruger 10/22 for example.
You can get any bolt action or other manually loading rifle you want on a Section 1 FAC. This applies to lever guns, lever release guns, single shot rifles and revolving carbines.
The only self-loading rifles permitted are rimfire, typically in the .22 family. There are no magazine restrictions.

You can have a long-barreled revolver but the barrel mustn't be shorter than 30cm. IIRC the overall length of the pistol must be 60cm or more. You don't need to have a wire protrusion on the handle, but there aren't that many guns which meet that requirement without some kind of grip protrusion or wire stock. I've personally only tried a Uberti 1873 Buntline in .357 down at the club, that had an 18" barrel like this one:

http://www.uberti.com/firearms/revolver-carbine-and-buntline.php

I concede that these guns are best thought of as carbines and they look totally ridiculous in a holster.

Shotguns: you can have as many as you want on a Section 2 FAC but then you are limited to three cartridges (whether it is a pump or semi-auto).
If you want a Section 1 shotgun you then have no limits on magazine capacity, you could use a 50 round drum mag if such a thing was available.

Suppressors: are licensed on a Section 1 FAC but these days there is no resistance to obtaining them because of the health and safety benefits. If you've got 3 .22s and a 9mm rifle on your FAC they will approve 3 .22 suppressors and a 9mm suppressor and you can go out and buy those from any dealer you like over the counter.

That's probably the only thing we have better in the UK than the US: the ease with which suppressors (or sound moderators, as they are called here) can be obtained.

Anyone wanting more than the above needs a Section 5 FAC, which covers all the other items such as self-loading centerfire rifles and pistols, automatic weapons and short barreled shotguns.

You can't have expanding ammunition unless you are killing animals and have permission from a farmer or other land owner to do this.

Odd Job
December 7, 2012, 04:50 PM
Artificial, ever-increasing dependency of the state and government is a disease. When people have been brainwashed into believing that safety and security are somehow collective issues rather than a matter of taking personal responsibility, things have gone horribly wrong. It's in the best interest of government and politicians to make people as dependent on them as possible; security and finances are the most effective way to do it. People who can't defend or support themselves are easy pray to malicious politicians. High taxation and draconian gun laws are commonly used instruments to achieve this goal.


I think that is the case in general, but there have been some surprising cases under the new Conservative government which probably would have gone a different way if the Labour government was still in power.
In two separate incidents robbers were shot with shotguns on house-owners' properties and the shooters were not convicted. There is a growing sense that home owners have the right to defend themselves on their property, I even saw a newspaper article with the headline "License to shoot burglars" or similar.

EDIT: here it is...

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2208972/A-licence-shoot-burglars-Its-chance-judge-tells-raiders-fired-homeowners-isolated-cottage.html

I know it is less than ideal, but at least there is some hope that the situation does not decline further. I think the London riots helped a lot also: we had record numbers of people turning up on the first Sunday of the month wanting to try out firearms. It has been busier at the club and continues to be busy.

razorback2003
December 7, 2012, 06:47 PM
HQ,

How hard is it for you to own a gun in finland? You said that you own machine guns and can shoot them? Can you carry a handgun for protection or keep one at home for protection?

razorback2003
December 7, 2012, 06:49 PM
OddJob,

Can people own the long barreled Thompson Center Contender/Encore handguns since those have long barrels?

Odd Job
December 7, 2012, 07:12 PM
I don't know, it seems to me they are shorter than the Buntline I posted a link to. I can find out from the importer...

Onmilo
December 8, 2012, 06:30 AM
Thanks Odd job.
My buddy isn't a gun person and was relating to me what he understood the laws and requirements to be.
He still thinks rimfire pistols are legal as long as they have an 18" barrel and a wrist support.
His belief comes from seeing a couple being shot at a target range,
He thinks the guns were a Ruger Mkll auto and he thinks the other one was a Browning Buckmark.

As for shotguns, I questioned the 2 round limit on pump guns but he really wasn't sure & still thinks all shotguns are limited to but two shots.
I asked again about semi auto shotguns as I remember seeing a video of a driven pheasant hunt where one of the hunters was using a Browning Auto 5 but he swears semi auto shotguns are a no-no.

He also wasn't sure what the license requirements were to obtain certain restricted items either though he did tell me that guns aren't as totally restricted in the UK as some people might believe.

Odd Job
December 8, 2012, 06:36 AM
He still thinks rimfire pistols are legal as long as they have an 18" barrel and a wrist support.
His belief comes from seeing a couple being shot at a target range,
He thinks the guns were a Ruger Mkll auto and he thinks the other one was a Browning Buckmark.

Yep, you can get a long barreled rimfire, but it won't be a "pistol" in the traditional sense of the word, more like a carbine.

hq
December 8, 2012, 07:02 AM
HQ,

How hard is it for you to own a gun in finland? You said that you own machine guns and can shoot them? Can you carry a handgun for protection or keep one at home for protection?

Unfortunately much of this is "grandfathered" nowadays. I have an equivalent of CCW (handgun license for personal protection) and full auto collector status, both of which date back to late 80's and early 90's. Fortunately they don't have an expiration date. These have been pretty much impossible to get since 1998 when the law was changed; there are still thousands of these licenses and collector approvals in existence but their holders aren't getting any younger.

Each gun is licensed individually. Collectors can automatically get a purchase license for anything that's listed in their collecting plan, be it machine guns or even artillery. All sporting firearms are subject to approval by the police, according to guidelines which are nowadays downright idiotic. Age limit for any sporting gun license used to be 15 until June 13th last year, now it's 18 for long guns and 20 for handguns.

It doesn't end there. All applicants must provide a mental health certificate from a doctor, take an evaluation test at a police station, prove that they actually have a history of shooting sports (when you apply for your first license, two years with a rental gun under supervision at a shooting club) and/or a valid hunting license. The gun has to be particularly suitable for the stated application, which is mainly an excuse to deny anyone any license.

To keep a gun license issued after June 13th last year you'll have to be able to prove that you've been shooting regularly (a signed certificate from an official, police-approved "instructor") or the gun will be confiscated. Deactivating a firearm yourself is a felony.

During last 15 years everything has pretty much gone down the drain. We "old farts" are still covered, especially those of us who have a collector status. Between '08 and '11 I was on a massive shopping spree, mainly because fewer and fewer people were eligible for a purchase license and there was a nationwide fire sale of handguns - $150 S&W target revolvers, $200 Beretta 92:s, $100 Colt Woodsman Match Targets and so on. The funny thing is, I'm not eligible for new handgun licenses anymore - I have a shooting range of my own and I have failed to invite a police-approved "instructor" there to watch me shoot. Machine guns are not a problem.

The real problem is twofold; not many people want to jump through all the idiotic legal hoops anymore and unlicensed illegal guns have become common, not that much among violent and career criminals but regular people who just want to have something to plink with. On the other hand, if you want to hunt or compete, you have no choice but to obey the law and people like that are the least likely to commit any kind of crime to start with.

There has been talk about introducing a personal gun license, a card that allows you to buy, keep and sell the types of firearms approved in the license. That would make things a lot easier but left-wing politicians and especially government officials oppose that, because it would cut down bureaucracy and prevent them from exercising strict control on people who the least need it. They don't want to be told that it's not up to them to decide whether I, for example, will be more "dangerous" after buying my ~40th handgun instead of having just 39 of them; they just want to reduce the number of firearms in private hands, no matter what. That's what their twisted ideology is all about.

Personally I have a molon labe mindset. I stay legal, but take all attacks on legally owned private property as infringement of the constitution.

Odd Job
December 8, 2012, 08:44 AM
Sounds similar to the UK then, for a first-time firearms applicant. We don't have to get a mental health "clearance" or take any kind of test but it is expected that your GP alert the police if you have any condition that makes it unwise for you to be in possession of a firearm.
We don't need a 2 year "history" of using firearms but they generally want you to be a member of a club and have one of the club officials vouch that during a probation period of a few months you have not exhibited any untoward behaviour (mainly to do with the safe handling of firearms).

There are limits also, with regards to same calibre weapons (excluding Section 2 shotguns). You generally have to satisfy the police that you have a "need" for multiple weapons of the same calibre. For example if you have three .22s it is expected you would have them for different purposes. You could have an Anschutz bolt for prone shooting, a SIG522 for gallery and another semi-auto for 3 position shooting.

hq
December 8, 2012, 09:38 AM
Fortunately we don't have any limitations on number of firearms. Licenses for some types of firearms are scrutinized a bit more than others (SBR, .50cal+) but generally speaking you can get as many licenses as you want, for anything from handguns of any caliber to carbines/rifles and shotguns with no artificial restrictions. As long as you're ready to jump through the legal hoops and put some effort in officially proving your sport shooting history, of course.

Defensive use depends on the situation. With an (old) CCW you can still carry, at home you can respond to armed threats, which includes knives and blunt weapons. There's no castle doctrine, though, so you have to be back against the wall before you pull the trigger. Very few criminals are armed, even though sanctions for possessing unlicensed firearms are very lenient (machine gun = usually a small fine and a few months of probation) and the country is literally full of unlicensed WWII guns, both as souvenirs and stashes.

lykoris
December 8, 2012, 03:28 PM
I would never like to take my chances within the UK justice system when it comes to a home invasion and their concept of "reasonable force". In fact, I find this notion entirely absurd given a fight or flight response is our natural primate reaction and for those with families or loved ones that really leaves only one choice.

So if you are unfortunate enough to have to defend yourself with a firearm in the UK your future will depend upon whether a judge & jury in a court months/years later decides you used "reasonable force" given the circumstances. In the past I have only seen the law siding with the intruder, by in large, within the U.K.

You also have to justify every single firearm you purchase, you cannot have 3 rifles in the same calibre unless you can distinguish distinct usage for each firearm.

That being said, you guys do have very liberal hunting laws which is a bonus in comparison to the continent.

splattergun
December 8, 2012, 06:32 PM
Sorry, Sam, but flat murder numbers show nothing (as the population of Detroit is 713,000, and the U.K. is 62 million). You need to look at population.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_intentional_homicide_rate
U.K. murder rate per 100,000 people: 1.2
U.S. murder rate: 4.2

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_cities_by_crime_rate
Detroit: 34.5 (4th in nation)
Chicago: 15.2 (18th in the nation).

Yeah, you're far more likely to get murdered in Detroit or Chicago (or virtually any city with more than 200,000 people in the U.S.) than in the U.K.

HQ: do you have any sources to back that up? Nationwide fraud is a serious allegation.
There are legitimate reasons why universties do not allow Wikipedia to be used as source material in reasearch papers etc. Not the least of which are self-serving articles, inaccurate and false data.

Iramo94
December 8, 2012, 10:00 PM
There are legitimate reasons why universties do not allow Wikipedia to be used as source material in reasearch papers etc. Not the least of which are self-serving articles, inaccurate and false data.
Five of the six citations on the Wikipedia page on America were from the FBI.
Wikipedia is just a convient place to collate primary sources.

splattergun
December 9, 2012, 06:37 PM
Five of the six citations on the Wikipedia page on America were from the FBI.
Wikipedia is just a convient place to collate primary sources.
A fair illustration of my point.

Blackstone
December 9, 2012, 06:55 PM
I own a handgun in Northern Ireland.

My friend lives up near Grimsby in the north of England and THINKS one can own certain semi automatic rifles, mainly Ruger Mini 14 and 10/22s as he has seen them in shops, but magazine capacity in these guns is limited to 5 shots though they too can have a suppressor legally installed.
There is no magazine capacity limit except in the case of "Section 2" shotguns, where pump/semi-autos are restricted to a tube capacity of 2. You may have semi-automatic rifles but in .22lr only.

If you qualify for a rifle permit, you automatically qualify for a suppressor.
No, you must justify the purpose of each suppressor you intend to possess, and it will be noted down as conditions on your certificate.

A $5 box of .22s here in the USA will cost 13 Quid there which is about $20 at current exchange rates.
Assuming you're talking a box of 50 .22 rounds, that will cost you on average 4, which is about $6 at current exchange rates.

My buddy tells me anybody packing a gun in England is either Intelligence Services, SAS, or a criminal.Avoid talking to them at any and all costs.
Highly unlikely, except if you're in Northern Ireland. Case in point:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-20536558

I asked again about semi auto shotguns as I remember seeing a video of a driven pheasant hunt where one of the hunters was using a Browning Auto 5 but he swears semi auto shotguns are a no-no.
Semi autos/pumps are definitely okay. If you want the magazine capacity limit removed, you need to apply for them as "Section 1", which means you must have good reason to own one. Generally, you have to be part of the UKPSA (UK's IPSC organisation) and be participating in Practical Shotgun. That also lets you buy solid slug ammunition as well

sidibear
December 10, 2012, 03:53 PM
There is no requirement to be associated with or have anything to do with the ukpsa to own a multi capacity shotgun. The use in the sport of practical shotgun is usually a more than adequate reason.
I have been shooting PSG for four years and am not a member of the ukpsa, and I have a 12 shot SX3 to compete with, and a Spas 12 just for the fun of it.

With regards long barrelled revolvers I have a .45acp Taurus, and recently sold a .454 Casull Mateba Griffone. Semi auto pistols can be obtained along the lines of the Browning Buckmark, and only in .22, and have a minimum barrel length of 12" and minimum overall length of 24"
There is also a version of the 1911, in .22 and with the same minimum barrel and overall length, but people I know who have them are having reliability issues. in order to make the slide light enough for a .22 to cycle it, its made from light thin grade alloy, which over time seems to be cracking and breaking.

Blackstone, do you shoot at Ballymena?

Blackstone
December 10, 2012, 04:49 PM
It's true that there is no written requirement to be associated with UKPSA, but it's up to each individual police force and I believe a lot of them ask for UKPSA membership.

I shoot at Carrowdore.

Odd Job
December 10, 2012, 04:55 PM
It's true that there is no written requirement to be associated with UKPSA, but it's up to each individual police force and I believe a lot of them ask for UKPSA membership.

That's what happened in my case, the police wanted to know if I was a UKPSA member. I said no, but referred them to the club where they have target shotgun once a month. They granted me a Section 1 shotgun but specified it has to be used at the club. I got the distinct impression they don't want to grant those section 1 shotguns unless they have to, if you see what I mean...

Grassman
December 10, 2012, 05:08 PM
Fascinating thread....I've always wondered about gun ownership overseas.

Blackstone
December 10, 2012, 05:08 PM
I think the police in general just have the attitude of "the fewer guns, the better". Some forces are better than others but I'd doubt any of them would bat an eyelid of all guns were reclassified Section 5 overnight.

olafhardtB
December 11, 2012, 02:42 AM
I read a lot about wars. In stuff I read about WWI, WWII the aussies were rated as the best infantry. When I was in Vietnam they were rated as the best in a military publication I read,so I can't think of them as wimps. I think the aussies, canadians, brits and irish are capable of running their own countries.. I would like to point that there are a lot of democrat and liberals that are gun owners and supporters of the second amendment. Let me caution you about believing what you hear and read about everything. THEY LIE---ALL OF THEM.

lykoris
December 11, 2012, 01:09 PM
Fascinating thread....I've always wondered about gun ownership overseas.

It is important to understand that the UK and mainland Europe in terms of firearms legislation are completely different worlds.

there was a thread on here for foreign gun owners and I am sure you would visually see the difference between what we can possess on mainland Europe vs the extremely restrictive laws for U.K. gun owners.

I will search for it and post it up


http://www.thehighroad.org/showthread.php?t=396668&highlight=foreign+gun+owners

hq
December 11, 2012, 02:00 PM
That thread clearly needs more group photos of various M16:s and MG42:s, and I didn't come across a single picture of Thompson or Suomi SMG:s. ;)

razorback2003
December 11, 2012, 03:20 PM
This is very interesting.

Is the handgun owned in Northern Island for protection? Such as is it easy to say buy a Glock 17 9mm to keep in your night stand?

Blackstone
December 11, 2012, 04:22 PM
No my handgun is for target shooting/IPSC only. The conditions on my certificate state that it may only be used on approved target shooting ranges. It has to be transported unloaded and in a case. In the house, it must be stored in a locked gun cabinet, so you would need the cabinet in your bedroom with the key handy if you wanted easy access to it at night ;)

It is easier to get a personal protection weapon in Northern Ireland than in mainland Britain, but still very difficult for the average person. To be considered for a PPW, you must have had a specific threat made against you, ie. one of the paramilitary groups issues a death threat against your person. The exceptions are police (who can take their guns with them when off-duty) and prison officers (who by their very occupation are at extreme risk), and probably some other people who do jobs that the rest of us would rather not.

razorback2003
December 12, 2012, 03:25 PM
So I guess if you want to carry a gun in Northern Ireland you have to own a gun store or jewelry store, some type of business.

Blackstone
December 12, 2012, 04:39 PM
No that won't be enough. There are very few occupations that would be considered to put you in automatic danger. As I said before, prison officer or other security forces (and I'm not talking about security guards).

Chunky
December 22, 2012, 06:03 PM
but referred them to the club where they have target shotgun once a month.
Would that happen to be first Sunday of the month?

Odd Job
December 22, 2012, 06:14 PM
No, it is on a Saturday usually. First Sunday of the month is open day: no shotgun.

Chunky
December 22, 2012, 06:16 PM
Ah ok, thought we may have been fellow club members!

Mk VII
December 22, 2012, 07:54 PM
Is it possible for people such as judges, politicians, wealthy in the rest of the UK to own a handgun for protection and also carry it? Does this happen to some degree?
No, it is not. If the threat was that well-founded, you would get police bodyguards (e.g. Salman Rushdie). Enoch Powell had a guard at time. In later years it was taken away and he had just a panic button.

If you enjoyed reading about "UK Handgun Ownership/Carry" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!