More UK madness

[throdgrain]

But they don't actually want to know, they just want to type stuff

Yet again ...

In some places like the UK someone exercising a large number of the liberties in the USA is by definition committing criminal acts

This is true. And in the USA it is just the same , for example a 19 year old having a beer in a a bar, or anyone with any sort of criminal conviction owning a firearm, ever. Thats one you guys always gloss over, the fact that someone could have committed a criminal conviction 25 years ago, and still not be allowed to own a firearm? Thats actually not the case in the UK, which is one thing I suppose ...

 

[Zoogster]

the fact that someone could have committed a criminal conviction 25 years ago, and still not be allowed to own a firearm? Thats actually not the case in the UK, which is one thing I suppose ...

Actually I seem to recall a similar prohibition. Anyone who has ever been in prison for 3 years or more is prohibited for life from qualifying for a firearm license.
While most in jail for a shorter time will not be having a firearm license granted for at least some years in most areas of England. And a license can be revoked for something like speeding.
What happens to all your legally held firearms when your 90mph speeding ticket revokes your license? I guess you better not be into sport bikes and firearms in the UK, because they certainly don't mix with laws like that.

 

[throdgrain]

Well strangely enough I was a motorcycle dealer for the best part of 15 years, so I know a bit about that subject ...

I've never heard of licence being revoked for speeding, certainly not for 90pm, though I expect if it was one of those 140mph cases you would probably be right, unfortunately.

However at least the man with some criminal convictions can own firearms, at least once he's proved that he has changed his ways. The difference is, and one that you're deliberately avoiding it seems, is that someone convicted for a relatively minor offence like fighting in a bar or possesion of grass or something many years in the past is permanently unable to own a firearm in your country. If that's not the case, please let me know, I don't like to make sweeping generalisations on subjects I dont really know about, I'll leave that to others

All this is coming over like a "my country is best" arguement, one I never wanted to get into. There's a lot of things that worry me about my country right now. The idiot unelected leader and his party trying to get state control into every aspect of our lives, while at the same time allowing immegration by hundreds of thousand of people who seem to be just coming for an easy life, at our expense it seems, and how rising crime is often coming from precisely these quarters.

There's an election next year, and hopefully we can get a Conservative government back in, and get some of this stuff - like the ban on hunting with dogs for example - repealed.

Thats assuming the present prime minister hasnt imported enough voters to keep him in power ....

 

[lobo9er]

someone convicted for a relatively minor offence like fighting in a bar or possesion of grass or something many years in the past is permanently unable to own a firearm in your country.

thats not true at all. only felony convictions, major stuff, not speeding not grass not getting into a tiff at a bar.
UK gunlaws do not make sense and ours are dont either. UK is heading into scary legislation. one for examle, camera monitoring, like making sure people are recycling. USA is flirting with the same stuff.

 

[zombienerd]

The difference is, and one that you're deliberately avoiding it seems, is that someone convicted for a relatively minor offence like fighting in a bar or possesion of grass or something many years in the past is permanently unable to own a firearm in your country. If that's not the case, please let me know, I don't like to make sweeping generalisations on subjects I dont really know about, I'll leave that to others

You're half right.

You lose your rights to firearm ownership for a Felony conviction. Some things that are Felonies could be considered rather "light" for restricting firearm ownership, and it does bar you for life.

However, in most places (varies state to state), simple possession of Mary Jane isn't a felony, nor is simple assault (bar fight) unless you seriously injure or kill...

On the other hand, someone who writes a check for $7500 that they know will bounce has just guaranteed they've lost their gun rights.

 

[lobo9er]

i dont think life is completely fact, expungement of criminal convictions is available for both felony or misdemeanor convictions, and i belive you regain some of your rights.

 

[throdgrain]

Thanks for helping me with those facts guys

Obviously there arn't cameras to make sure people arn't recycling. I wouldnt put it past this Labour government though.

They do things and tell you "it's for your own good" to rationalise it. For example, half the price of a gallon of fuel in this country is duty, i.e straight to the government. So, if you use more fuel, you pay more duty, right?

BUT. Thats not good enough. We also pay a yearly thing we call Road Tax, which is supposed to go towards road upkeep (yeah right)

So this goverment decides as a "green issue" it will reduce road tax on very small cars, like 1.0 VWs etc, while cars like my Jeep have thier road tax doubled to £420 per year! Even though the fact that I use more fuel means I'm paying more tax in the first place ....

God I hate the government

 

[lobo9er]

http://p10.hostingprod.com/@spyblog.org.uk/blog/2006/11/cctv_spying_on_recycling_dump_users.html

i dont just type stuff. UK in areas do monitor recycling, trash being brought out to early or late with cameras. Theres alot of spying on the people by the govt in the UK more than US, but unfortunatly we are heading your direction. and it is sold as the for the greater good. UK is also having talk about Camera's in peoples homes there is a town doing it as a "test" site. Google "UK CAMERA'S IN HOME". UK Gov't is what i believe alot of our poloticians want the USA to be.

 

[throdgrain]

Aweful

 

[lobo9er]

throdgrain not attacking. we both probably disagree with all that jargen going on with our gov't . i think its down right scary and wrong.

 

[throdgrain]

I agree with you completely Lobo9er.

 

[rainbowbob]

i dont think life is completely fact, expungement of criminal convictions is available for both felony or misdemeanor convictions, and i belive you regain some of your rights.

The federal bureaucracy charged with restoring civil rights to ex-felons has been purposely "unfunded". Nobody's home. Meaning that if you have ever committed a federal felony, regardless of whether you have "paid your debt", and regardless if it was a non-violent crime unrelated to the use of firearms - you have no chance of having your 2A rights restored.

We have all kinds of unfair infringement issues in this country. We comment so vociferously about the UK's ban of handguns because of our fear they could be enacted here by politicians who hold up the UK's gun bans as an achievable and desirable model.

 

[throdgrain]

Absolutely Bob, and so you should!


edit

Firstly, I'm afraid that means I personally would probably be better-off here in England than if I was in the US. How bizzare!

Secondly, I just want to add that the reason I tend to argue about the hand gun comments, is because Americans tend to look at the gun thing from thier own point of view. What they tend not to see is that in my country the vast majority of people have no interest whatsoever in guns, hand or otherwise, and that crimes involving firearms are reasonably rare. This makes the horrible attitude towards firearms by the UK government really bad for me and people like me, but that we are such a small minority we just never get a say. You guys have a much bigger voice because there many more of you. I hope you continue to use that voice.

 

[lykoris]

As Zoogster pointed out, we've been conditioned to think a certain way about gun control with each generation. Ideas/concepts can be bred out.

Government by nature doesn't trust its public. An ignorant and fearful public are the easiest to govern and we've become both. The means of self-defense ought to be an inalienable right yet 'strangely' we are dependent upon government.

The nature of man doesn't change, however much we believe we have evolved into a more 'civil' society. But then here in Europe we live in a plutocracy at a national level and a technocracy at the newly established federal level.

 

[emilianoksa]

The Scottish Parliament is going to have power over firearms legislation devolved from London next year.

The majority of Scottish MPs want to ban airguns, due to their misuse by a minority of antisocial types in Scotland.

They will almost certainly get their way.

The pressure will then be on England to ban airguns too.

It's only a matter of time before the only shooting sport allowed in the UK will be paper pellets fired from a rubber band.

And the "progressives" who run our miserable island will then probably introduce rules stipulating how long the rubber band can be.

 

[throdgrain]

It's true. The Scottish are mental They've all watched Braveheart and thought it was real. Then they all vote Scottish National Party who are so left wing it's scary, and the SNP want to ban everything.

I wouldn't live in Scotland if you paid me

 

[Art Eatman]

Hokay. Enough political philosophy for one thread.