IANSA and the edited transcript.

Status
Not open for further replies.

Vex

Member
Joined
Oct 27, 2004
Messages
413
Location
Central Ohio
Wikipedia search for "Wayne LaPierre" and the result will come up with a short biography of thisCEO of the NRA. At the bottom of this page is an edited transcript of a debate Wayne LaPierre had with the despicable Rebecca Peters.

Here is the link to the transcript: http://www.iansa.org/action/gun_debate_transcript.doc

It's hosted on IANSA's website, so visit if you must, at your own peril.... bwa ha ha....

Okay, seriously though, where do they get off posting an edited transcript? Who knows how much it's been edited? They could have made Mr. LaPierre state that he "Eats Oscay Mayer wieners by sticking them up his nose with lost of tobasco," and it would be taken as gospel by the leftists that visit their site. What's more is this mockery of a transcript is now associated with Mr. LaPierre and his bio on Wikipedia.

Note that Ms. Peters gets an opening statement and a closing statement, but Mr. LaPierre gets none. Furthermore, I believe his statements purposely seem immature, the statistics he cites as ambiguous, and his responses meaningless.

I wonder... does anyone know where this transcript came from, and is it possible to get an un-edited version?

Thoughts?
 
Interesting. I'll check that out when I get home. I'm pretty sure the NRA has the transcript on their site somewhere...I know you can also buy the DVD from NRA for like 10 bucks.
 
Isn't Wikipedia supposed to be open-source? If the bio is incorrect or the transcript is misleading -- go in and revise it.

Technical point (which might be passed along to the folks at IANSA): if it has been edited in any way, it is not a "transcript." It is a "report" or an "excerpt." Depending on the editing performed, excerpt probably doesn't fit either, so report might be the most accurate description (other than "fiction").

Transcript it ain't. A transcript cannot be edited (except to correct errors in spelling and transcription) and still be considered a transcript. Ask any court reporter.
 
Wouldn't a biased link like that violate their "neutral point of view" rule? Either edit it to refect the fact that it's propagandized, or remove it entirely. And state why ("NPOV edit" is usually sufficient).
 
Did anybody happen to look at the Discussion page there? A guy who says his name is Keith Gordon, claims that he was LaPierre's best friend until the 70s and that LaPierre is actually anti-gun, sold out to the NRA to get money, etc. Does anybody have any info on this?:confused:
 
If you click on "Rebecca Peters" in Pierre's link you'll find the same link to the "edited transcript" under her Wikipedia entry.

The bloody thing's 14 pages--what did they edit out? Clearly the point wasn't to shorten it significantly... :rolleyes:

BTW, the link is to the IANSA site.

[edit]Ooops, now it's gone too...[/edit]
 
I read the original a while back in a copy of 1st Freedom my grandpa had near the sofa. I'll see if I can't find that magazine so I have a date and issue number for reference.

BTW Wayne really smoked Rebecca. It sounded like he made a studdering dunce out of her, but then, from what I have seen of her, that wouldn't be very difficult.
 
As far as LaPierre's performance in the debate, one other guy here said that some people thought Peters did better (just putting this out there)

http://www.thehighroad.org/showpost.php?p=2448722&postcount=45

Originally posted by cbsbyte:
I have not seen the debate, but a few NRA friends of mine have, and they all agree that she won the debate even though they don't agree with her. They said she was a technicaly better debater than LaPierre.
 
I saw it and thought Wayne did well against lawyer Rebecca

My take on the debate:

The UN conference on small arms and light weapons is
scheduled for 4 July 2006. As a precursor event, Kings
College London televised the Great Gun Debate in 2004
(available on DVD) on "THE MOTION: Should the United
States Senate support the proposed United Nations treaty
that bans the private ownership of guns?"

Rebecca Peters of IANSA spoke for the Yes side of the
debate and Wayne LaPierre of NRA spoke for the No side.

IANSA (pronounced Eye Ann Sa) is International Action
Network on Small Arms, an umbrella organization for
500 to 600 groups dedicated to various aspects of the
arms trade, from legal private ownership within nations,
to arms trade between nations, to illegal traffick by
international gunrunners, and to every issue in between.
IANSA is supported by funds from governments, from
private foundations, and from billionaire philanthropists
like George Soros.

Rebecca Peters of IANSA is proud of her crowning achievement:
the turn-in and destruction of 640,000 legally registered
firearms from lawabiding Australians. Affected were formerly
legal semi-auto and pump-action rifles and shotguns; for
instance, the Ruger 10/22 rimfire carbine and the Mossberg
590 Mariner shotgun. These firearms were declared illegal
after a madman committed a massacre with similar weapons
at Port Arthur in Australia.

When the NRA called this a confiscation and a ban to punish
lawabiding Australians for the criminal acts of one man,
Rebecca Peters called it an "adjustment in regulation"
not a ban or confiscation, and denounced the fact that the
US Bill of Rights First Amendment allows the NRA to tell
lies protected as political speech.

Declaring 640,000 registered firearms contraband because
a murderer used similar weapons is not a ban; to order
lawabiding subjects of the crown to surrender them for
destruction is not confiscation; this is an adjustment of
regulation. War is Peace; Freedom is Slavery; Ignorance
is Strength: NRA Thought-Crime is DoublePlusUnGood. After
Right to Bear Arms, Freedom of Speech needs an adjustment
of regulation.

During the Gun Debate, Rebecca Peters said she, in her royal
indulgent manner, would allow Americans to own single-shot
hunting rifles with a range of less than 100 meters. Boxes
of .22 long rifle rimfire are marked: Dangerous within 1 mile.
A rifle with a range under 100 meters is an impossibility.

When a British handgun target shooter said he felt betrayed
by his own government when his registered handguns were
confiscated through no fault of his own, Peters clucked
"You lost your sport. So sad. Take up another sport."

Why were all legally registered handguns confiscated in
England? Why should Americans be limited to a physically
impossible definition of a hunting rifle? Rebecca Peters
says it is because humanitarian aid workers in Africa are
threatened by child soldiers armed with Kalashnikovs.

The problem of child soldiers in Africa is not caused by
Americans owning rifles that hold more than one shot and
have a range more than 100 meters: the problem of child
soldiers in Africa is caused by governments and political
movements that supply weapons illicitly to children and
use those children as soldiers.

Like the long line of noble crusaders before her, Rebecca
Peters sees guns as a symbol of what she hates, and that
banning and confiscating--oops, "adjusting regulation"--
of that symbol, she believes she is showing her opposition
to what she hates. This is in line with the ancient
practice of choosing a scapegoat to punish for the sins
of the tribe, or the voodoo practice of sticking pins
in dolls.

The UN is made up of governments and political movements
who are all too eager to divert the UN conference on small
arms and light weapons from the issue of governments and
political movements supplying illicit weapons, to the issue
of civilians owning firearms for personal use.

The answer to the problem of governments and political
movements supplying weapons illicitly to foment wars and
insurrections is NOT a United Nations treaty that bans
the private ownership of guns.

"THE MOTION: Should the United States Senate support the
proposed United Nations treaty that bans the private
ownership of guns?"

NO.

----------------------------------------------------------------
last edit Carl Naaman Brown
DOS date and time: 05-18-2006 07:24:54 (Thu 18 May 06 7:24 am)
 
Did anybody happen to look at the Discussion page there? A guy who says his name is Keith Gordon, claims that he was LaPierre's best friend until the 70s and that LaPierre is actually anti-gun, sold out to the NRA to get money, etc. Does anybody have any info on this?

I saw that as well. Some Googling turned up a person with a similar name and making pretty much the same claims over at Daily Kos, but offered no evidence. Unless this person posts proof of his claims, say a picture of a young Wayne taking a bong hit or something, I'd just chalk it up to yet another asylum resident who's off his meds and using the internet unsupervised.
 
FWIW, the latest issue of American Rifleman includes a page (Standing Guard) where Wayne LaPierre comments on the U.N. strategies that are taking place, and the meeting on July 4th of this year that is being hosted by the U.N. Secretary-General Kofi Annan. Placed next to the page is a rip-out postcard address to:

The Honorable Kofi Annan
Secretary-General of the United Nations
United Nations Headquarters
First Avenue at 46th Street
New York, New York 10017

Which on the flip-side has printed:

Dear Secretary-General Annan:

The 4th of July is America's most revered national holiday. Yet, you've invited 50 dictatorships and six terrorist states to join with you on that day in your conspiracy to ban civilian firearms ownership worldwide and strip Americans of our freedoms. In doing so, you have demonstrated the U.N.'s explicit disrespect of our Bill of Rights and declared the U.N. to be an enemy of freedom everywhere.

Americans like me have over 230 years of experience in defeating the anti-freedom aims of petty tyrants and powerful dictators alike. We will never let the U.N. take away the rights our 4th of July holiday represents -- now, or ever.

Quit wasting resources on this gun-ban cause. Our freedoms are not to blame for the world's problems, and this is a battle you can never win.

Sincerely, ___________________________________

Before mailing mine in, I ran off a few copies of the page and postcard for giving to others I know that aren't in the NRA to use, but am thinking that Annan will have something in place to automatically trash any of these postcards that come in. I think I'll stick one of those in a regular envelope and mail that, too (at least he'll have to open something first).
 
True. Chalk one "Duh!" and a head-slap up for me I guess. :eek:
At least someone there will have to open it, and even if that's automated too, the time it takes for someone there to make a tick is time they won't get back due to an American member of the NRA.
 
When a British handgun target shooter said he felt betrayed
by his own government when his registered handguns were
confiscated through no fault of his own, Peters clucked
"You lost your sport. So sad. Take up another sport."

Well does she or does she not, know that the Kings College University establishment,like so many traditional conservative establishments have their own small-arms club.?

I wish that I was present at that debate,so that I could tell her that:"Kings College Hospital has a small-arms club and alot of older members were fond of centrefire and rimfire pistol target-shooting,but people like you pressured our government in to banning them,then it happend- and so you antis triumphed with glory-but the Kings-College University small-arms club,do have ruger 10/22s,Remington 597s, long-barrelled pistols,etc-so would you like to go to their range and test out,some of the very types of guns that you and your antis help ban in Australia.Hahahahahahaha:) :) :)

Then I would take a picture of her,holding the Ruger 10/22- and contact the Metropolitan Police's gun club and ask Andrew Duffy to lend one of his shotguns-for the demonstration-,with 100 12 guage shells and insist that Rebecca Peters tests a Police officers legally-held shotgun.Then another photo opportunity and a copy to be scanned onto a computer,then a copy,(to be sent quite urgantly by email.) to the American NRA-for all to see.:) :) :) Wayne LaPierre,would be greatly amused,at this humiliation.

Actually trying to humiliate people like her,makes my day and is good all round entertainment for the shooting-communities,around the world.:evil: :evil: :) :)

Now I know that it would probably not happen in real life,but anything could be possible-even the wonderful thought of it.The comedy aspect of it, could be done in Monty Python style or in the style of the late Ronnie Barker and in Ronnie Corberts style.

Rebecca Peters should go over to the Oxford and Camberidge Universities and give her anti-firearms lectures there.Im sure that she will be well appreciated there.Then a trip to their firearm range,for a bit of hands-on experiance."Ladies first Rebbecca,-Yes im an Englishman,so I must remember my mannors".Hahahahhaha.

She should start with a straight-pull AK103 and participate in Practical Rifle shooting,to get her in the mood.Then some shooting with a long-barrelled revolver.

The most important reason for why the UK NRA was formed,it was as follows:
"The NRA was granted a Royal charter in 1894. This Royal charter continues to this day (the current president is the Prince of Wales) for the "promotion of marksmanship in the interests of the Defence of Realm and permanence of the Volunteer Forces, Navy, Military and Air".

Yes and it includes"Defence of the Realm" against the anti-gun activists,like Rebecca Peters.
 
Last edited:
More Anti-firearm meddling,from the antis

Exposed: global dealer in death

Mick Ranger sold the gun used in the Hungerford massacre. Now he is selling missiles, machine guns and rifles almost anywhere in the world

Antony Barnett, public affairs editor
Sunday April 27, 2003
The Observer


Anybody passing Frog Hall farm in the pretty Essex village of Takeley would not give it a second glance. But an Observer investigation can reveal that the white farmhouse is the headquarters of an international business that sells weapons in some of the most volatile trouble spots in the world.
It is the base of Mick Ranger, an arms dealer who sold Michael Ryan the Chinese-made Kalashnikov AK47 rifle that he used in 1987 to kill 16 people in Hungerford.

Ranger, now 56, has kept a low profile since that massacre. However, he runs a lucrative arms brokerage with operations in Bulgaria, Cyprus, Nigeria, Australia, South Africa and Vietnam.

The website of his firm, Imperial Defence Services, boasts: 'Our business is truly global, with no geographical limitations... with the sole exception of countries under United Nations embargo.

'Apart from countless transactions involving small arms, we have completed transactions for surface-to-air missiles, anti-tank weapons, missile warhead fuses, grenades and heavy machine guns.'

Ranger's website claims he sells grenade-launchers for £450 and a collection of rifles from £195 to a £20,000 General Electric mini-gun.

A reporter claiming he acted for a security company on the Iraqi border in Syria asked Ranger last February whether he could supply AK47s and land mines to protect an oilfield. The reporter made it clear the weapons might be used in Iraq.

Despite the sensitivity of the Middle East situation at the time, Ranger confirmed in writing that he was happy to supply 200 rifles at $275 (£173) each through his Bulgarian office, but not the mines as the 'penalties are very high'. and he would not agree to any deal where Iraq was mentioned in official documents.

Ranger wrote: 'There was actually very recently a scandle [sic] in Bulgaria where kit destined for Syria was in fact found to be going to Iraq, so the Bulgaria [sic] government will require very conclusive wording on the EUC [end-user certificate] that the guns being supplied will stay in Syria and will only be used by people so authorised by the Syrian government.'

Asked later in a phone call about getting an Iraqi import licence, he replied: 'I don't want to know anything about Iraq. I told you before, do not mention the word Iraq to me. There's a 25-year jail sentence for me. The UN embargo on Iraq is clear. Go and read it on the web.'

Ranger told The Observer from Bulgaria last week that he believed this deal was for a peacekeeping operation in Syria which had British government approval. He stressed that he always acted within the law and would never breach UN sanctions.

The Observer has also uncovered his involvement in a potential arms deal in Cambodia, which is still awash with guns after the civil war that ended five years ago. Last July Ranger approached the Cambodian authorities trying to buy 150,000 surplus rifle magazines. He offered to exchange them for Land Rovers. The Cambodian government refused to sanction the deal unless it was approved by the European Union.

The EU, which has set up an office in the capital, Phnom Penh, to help the government control the spread of small arms, refused to approve the deal. It believed that such a transaction would involve Cambodia in international arms trading.

According to an EU source, Ranger was so furious about the decision that he stormed out of talks with officials.

The arms broker insists he was operating with the 'blessing of British officials' in Phnom Penh and that he had all the correct export licences. Ranger said he had a client who was interested in buying the rifle magazines, but refused to reveal who this was.

There is no suggestion that Ranger has acted illegally in any of his arms deals. Indeed, that is what concerns human rights groups such as Oxfam and Saferworld. They are alarmed that British arms brokers can wander the globe trading weapons without proper scrutiny from the British authorities. They claim that Labour has broken an election pledge to clamp down on such deals.

Paul Eavis, director of Saferworld, called on the Government to stop British-based brokers like Ranger 'getting round the law by operating from overseas'.

The Government is consulting on changes to the Export Control Act, which includes proposals to control the activities of UK arms brokers by requiring them to be issued with a new 'control order' for each overseas deal. However, campaign groups believe these still leave open significant loopholes.

An order will be needed when any part of a transaction takes place in the UK. The Government has not, however, said exactly what this will mean in practice.

It is unclear whether the orders would cover deals such as the one in which Ranger was willing to sell arms to Syria through his Bulgarian company.

The broker insists he sells only to companies or governments which have proper authority, and that he obeys the law and the UN.

'If end-user statements are correct and authenticated by exporting governments, as one would hope they would, then it is a totally legitimate transaction... And that's the only kind of business I'm involved in,' Ranger said. Asked if he was concerned that the equipment he sells might be used for unsavoury purposes, he replied: 'It is true I unwittingly supplied the gun Michael Ryan used. But I didn't supply the licence for him to have it. That was the police. It is always somebody beyond me that makes the decision.'

Ranger's website says his company is 'licensed [by the UK Government] to deal in military weapons of all types and to manufacture pistols and fully automatic weapons.

'All currently required UK licences are held by this company in connection with arms dealing... [including] an open international import licence that allows us to import into the UK without further reference to government agencies an unlimited quantity of small arms and ammunition of conventional types, and an open licence for large quantities of automatic weapons.'

Brendan Cox, an Oxfam spokesman, said: 'Arms brokers are still operating with near impunity and making massive profits at the expense of the 500,000 people killed every year by firearms. It's time the Government made good its promises to crack down on this deadly trade.'

· Additional reporting by Bernadette McNulty
 
Last edited:
It was a good debate

A little light on accurate statistics and fact, alot of rhetoric, but the philosophy presented by LaPierre was good. He wasn't as good a speaker as what's her name, but I think he did okay.

Check out http://www.iansa.org/action/nra_debate.htm

I wonder why they really lost?

I have one copy of the debate, they were giving it out at some convention and a friend mailed me the copy he got. I would be happy to pass it on to someone.
 
'Ryan shot at me, then at my mother'
(Filed: 07/12/2004)


With violent crime a key political concern, the BBC has returned to Hungerford to make a film about the 1987 massacre. Elizabeth Grice asks why, and talks to survivors

Most of us think of the Hungerford massacre as a panorama of horror, unfolding like a film, in which a crazed gunman in full camouflage went on an afternoon's killing spree in his home town. Sixteen people were murdered by Michael Ryan that hot summer day in 1987. Fifteen were injured. He killed his mother, his neighbours and a policeman, pumping them full of bullets from a Kalashnikov with lunatic ferocity.


Alison Chapman was 16 when she was shot: the bullet is still in her body

Ryan set his house on fire and burned three others. Finally, holed up in the local school and surrounded by police marksmen, he shot himself. The retrospective narrative we know so well gives the whole thing a spurious unity. But for the people of the small Berkshire market town who were caught up in Ryan's terrible progress through Hungerford on August 19, there was no big picture, just a series of disjointed individual atrocities that made no sense.

Alison Chapman, then 16, heard what she thought was the cracking sound of workmen dropping scaffold poles. She was worried about the effect of the noise on her flighty mare, Buckskin, who was grazing nearby, so she and her mother, Linda, drove up towards Hungerford Common to check the horse. In South View, they saw a man in the road, standing beside a wrecked police car with a gun in his hand. Because of his camouflage uniform, they thought he was "something to do with the police".

"He pointed the gun at my side of the car and fired," Alison recalls. "It happened so quickly. A hot, burning sensation went through my leg and after that my body seemed to go into preservation mode. Then he started shooting at my mother. A bullet went through her shoulder. She was covered in glass and her throat was cut. Her face swelled up to twice its normal size. I have never seen anything so horrific. It looked as if she had been sprayed through a sieve with something red."

Ryan, "blank and expressionless", fired 11 bullets from his semi-automatic into their Volvo. The moment he paused to reload, Linda Chapman, with unbelievable presence of mind, reversed down the cul de sac and somehow managed to reach the doctor's surgery in her damaged car. One of Ryan's bullets had travelled through Alison's right thigh and into her lower back, destroying some of her nerves and removing a large piece of flesh. Her Wellington boot had filled with blood. Both women were deeply traumatised. Mrs Chapman, her windpipe constricted by the cut, spent two weeks in intensive care.

Alison Chapman is what the courts would term a reliable witness. There's no melodrama in her account, no bitterness or self pity, even though she has been left partially disabled and had to give up work three years ago. She has nightmares about Ryan. "In my most violent ones, I am being buried alive, chased through a wood, being stabbed or drowned or shut in a burning building. Sometimes I see Michael Ryan's face. When I wake, I am scared to go to sleep again."

The bullet is still in her body because to remove it would have risked paralysis. As a way of accommodating its inflammatory presence, she calls it Billy – "my little friend, my little foe". Immobilised by pain, she is sometimes confined to the house for several days and has to have help with simple tasks such as washing her hair. But she still feels lucky.

"Yes, it causes pain, but mostly I'm mobile. I've got a normal life. Other people went through very much worse. An experience like this makes you grateful for what you've got. We lost a lot of people we knew."


Pc Jim Wood: 'innocent people are still being killed by illegal weapons'
Alison Chapman, 33, now lives in the West Country with her husband, Richard, but many of her relatives are still in Hungerford. She consulted them before agreeing to take part in a BBC documentary about the Hungerford massacre to be shown tonight. None of them had any objections.

Hungerford is said to be in "uproar" about a programme that will inevitably open old wounds, but she thinks local distress has been exaggerated. Reassured that she would not be part of an exercise that tried to apportion blame, she was happy to contribute. "With something as unprecedented as this, you cannot lay blame," she says. "There is no manual on how to deal with something like Hungerford."

In fact, the programme resembles an extended version of a Crimewatch-type reconstruction. The short, stocky Ryan is played by a lean, unshaven actor. His depredations are intercut with the reminiscences of people he wounded or terrified, most of whom have not spoken before and seem happy to do so now.

"This is not a Rambo movie," says Simon Ford, executive producer. "It is a sensitive treatment of an important event. This was an iconic moment in recent British history and it repays looking at it again through the eyes of the victims. Many of them found it cathartic."

Outwardly, it takes a detached and chronological approach to a day of utter chaos, confusion and appalling unreadiness. The BT telephone exchange at Newbury was inadequate for the flood of 999 calls that catalogued Ryan's attacks. The Thames Valley tactical firearms squad were on a training exercise 40 miles away. The police helicopter was in for repair and had to be scrambled out of the workshop, at some risk to the pilot. "It was a very frightening scenario," admits the commanding officer, Charles Pollard, in the film.

Police communications were so woeful that for most of the operation Pollard (who had to travel 40 miles to Hungerford), had no idea where Michael Ryan was. Pollard says he felt "a ball of ice" in his stomach when he saw there were only two telephone lines at Hungerford police station, which was undergoing renovation.

He received nine separate reports of Ryan's whereabouts – but all the sightings conflicted. "You just hadn't any information," he said. "You hadn't a handle on it. I thought we had completely screwed up. I was powerless for most of the afternoon."

But he, too, was bewildered by the blitzkrieg of separate incidents and only the next morning, when the operation could be assessed against all the logistical frustrations and limitations, could he conclude: "Actually, we did OK."

The unhyped account of Ryan's murderous rampage comes from people who have all been scarred by it in some way – policemen, ambulance men, residents – people who at the time had no idea of the scale of destruction or that they were part of something unimaginably big.

Semi-automatic weapons were outlawed in Britain in 1988 as a result of Hungerford but nine years later there was Dunblane, where another loner, Thomas Hamilton, gunned down 16 children and their teacher in the gym of the local primary school. And late last year PC Ian Broadhurst was shot dead at point blank range in Leeds with a semi-automatic pistol believed to have been part of a consignment smuggled into Britain from Croatia.

The programme could have been used to point up lessons about the persistent inadequacy of gun control laws, but it is content to cite the 1988 Firearms Amendment Act as a positive outcome of the massacre. Its main message seems to be one of retrospective outrage: Michael Ryan harboured an arsenal of legal weaponry and look what happened.


Adrian Coggins now and (inset) as a paramedic: 'it's the sort of thing that stays with you for ever'

Simon Ford sees it as a way of countering the gun lobby's argument for a relaxation in the gun laws. "It is important for people to see what the consequences of these weapons were."

PC Jim Wood, whose best mate, PC Roger Brereton, perished in his police car in a blaze of 23 bullets, argues that the 1988 Firearms Amendment Act has "done no bloody good at all". Innocent people are still being killed by powerful illegal weapons. "It's a good time to remind people of that," he says.

Brereton was first on the scene. The police had been alerted by reports that someone was walking around with a gun in South View, a quiet residential cul de sac backing on to Hungerford Common. Nothing unusual about people carrying guns in pheasant country, says Wood. "In Oxford Street, yes, but not in woolly old Berkshire."

When he arrived, another colleague was coming towards him covered in blood and he saw Ryan pumping his friend's car full of bullets. Then Ryan turned and fired at Wood. "My reaction was disbelief and a little bit of terror. I could hear the bullets whizzing past but at the time I was not scared for myself," he says. "It didn't register. You just switch into police mode, work mode. I honestly don't think my ticket came out of the hat that day." Wood had to break the news to Brereton's wife, the worst thing he has ever had to do.

He had no idea of the scale of the disaster, or where he fitted into the puzzle, until the late evening news. The next day, he went into work as usual. "It was my duty – though I hasten to say I didn't do a lot." Eighteen months later, he was being treated for post-traumatic stress syndrome and, when he went back to work, he was on traffic duties. "Not a day goes past when I don't think about what happened. My best buddy was killed. I'm hoping this programme will lay the ghosts to rest."

He believes there is no such thing as being prepared for the unimaginable. "The same could happen again," he says. "West Berkshire is a vast area. The whole killing field was done in 55 minutes."

Adrian Coggins was only 23, a rookie ambulanceman, when Hungerford erupted. The ambulance crew ahead had been shot at but he and his colleague did not receive their message to keep away. The scene was mayhem, he says. He remembers the unusual high-pitched cracking sound of the Kalashnikov and the sight of PC Roger Brereton lying across the front seats of the police car, a radio still spluttering in his hand, the engine running.

He found Ivor Jackson badly wounded, Dorothy Ryan dead and a young girl shot in the legs. "I thought I was gone," says Jackson. "Adrian saved my life."

"It's the sort of thing that stays with you for ever. I wasn't offered any counselling. You just carried on in those days. When I pieced it all together, I couldn't believe it. Nothing happens in Hungerford."

Charles Pollard thinks Britain "grew up" as a result of Hungerford. "The realisation that this could happen in fun-loving England, where we don't have guns and the police aren't armed... it changed policing and it changed society for ever."


The Hungerford Massacre is on BBC1 tonight, at 9pm

This is why alot of the UK population dislike guns immensly and warm to members of IANSA and Rebecca Peters and her lackies.
 
Accused 'had gun under mattress'

Pc Ian Broadhurst was shot and killed on Boxing Day
A loaded gun was found hidden under a mattress in a room allegedly used by a man accused of shooting three police officers, a court has been told.
The 9mm semi-automatic pistol was found in a room at the Royal Hotel Dunston, Gateshead, where armed officers had earlier arrested David Bieber.

Newcastle Crown Court was told the gun was ready to fire.

Mr Bieber, of Springwood Road, Leeds, denies murdering Pc Ian Broadhurst and two charges of attempted murder.

The court was told Pc Broadhurst, 34, was already dying from a gunshot wound to the chest when a second shot was fired to his head.

Gun shop

Forensic pathologist Christopher Milroy said there was a "strong possibility" he would have died from the abdominal wound, regardless of the head wound.

He also told the court Pc Broadhurst's colleague, Pc Neil Roper, 45, was blasted in the shoulder and abdomen and could have bled to death from his injuries if he had not received medical treatment.

The court heard how a man, who the prosecution say is Bieber, bought 1,000 cartridge cases and a reloading press from a gun shop in Hertfordshire during the summer of 2003.

However, shop worker Henry Whittick was not able to supply two components of the reloading press.

His friend took down the man's details. He gave his name as Nathan Coleman of 10, Springwood Road, Leeds.

Earlier, Robert Clark of the Southern Gun Company, said he supplied a Nathan W Coleman with 900 cartridge cases in August 2003.

Social security card

Later, the court was taken through a list of items handed in at a Northumberland police station which belonged to Bieber.

There was more than £6,000 in notes and loose change, and a birth certificate and social security card in the name of American citizen David Michael Dudgeon, issued by the State of Ohio.

There was also a birth certificate in the name of Nathan Wayne Coleman, a National Insurance card in the same name, a bank card and a South Carolina identity card in the same name.

There was also 205 bulleted cartridges and some medication in tablet form.

Pc Broadhurst, 34, was killed and his colleague Pc Neil Roper, 45, seriously injured in the shooting in Leeds on Boxing Day 2003.

A third officer, Pc James Banks, 27, escaped injury after a bullet struck his radio.

The defendant also denies possessing a firearm with intent to endanger life and possessing 200 9mm bullet pistol cartridges.

He has admitted possessing 298 9mm bullet cartridges without a firearms certificate.


Now reloading equipment is to be heavily restricted as well.Bob Clarke of the Southern Gun Company builds AR-15s and imports ready-built straight-pulls from the USA.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top