Stun guns in the UK

Status
Not open for further replies.

ZMP_CTR

Member
Joined
May 15, 2007
Messages
252
Just remember it could be worse than we have it. Holy "anti" batman

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/articles/news/news.html?in_article_id=469652&in_page_id=1770

We reveal how easy it is to buy lethal stun guns
By RICHARD PRICE

The Viper Defender is a perfectly innocuous-looking piece of equipment.

Sleek, matt black and no bigger than a pack of playing cards, it could quite easily be mistaken for a pocketsize radio. Given that it runs on the same harmless batteries as your average Walkman or electric razor, what harm could it possibly do?

Well, quite a lot actually. Just ask teacher Peter Kelly, who was zapped in the back with a Viper Defender as he stood outside the gates of Ashton Park secondary school in Bristol.

Scroll down for more ...

All it took was the press of a button to send the best part of a million volts surging through his body, throwing him paralysed to the ground where he lay writhing in agony.

Unable to defend himself because of the overwhelming electric shock, he was left at the mercy of his attacker, who then punched him, as well as a female colleague standing next to him.

The Viper Defender, you see, is no standard piece of household electronics. It is the most powerful stun gun in the world, with the capacity to instantly blast 950,000 volts of electricity into the central nervous system of anyone unfortunate enough to brush against it. That's what happened to Mr Kelly.

One moment he was outside the school, where he teaches mathematics; the next instant he was transported into unspeakable pain, his legs turning to jelly as the massive electrical charge overwhelmed his body, while horrified pupils looked on.

Such was the devastating impact of the attack that Mr Kelly remains too upset to discuss it. His attacker - a 19-year-old stranger, Marvin Airey - this week admitted the attack at Bristol Crown Court and will be sentenced at a later date.

But how on earth did a teenager lay his hands on such a devastating - and illegal - weapon?

The answer, a Mail investigation has chillingly discovered, is all too easily. In less than a week, we were able to take delivery of a small arsenal of stun guns. All of them are illegal in this country, all were delivered by post with no questions asked, all were purchased over the internet, and all of them were frighteningly cheap.

Indeed, the most expensive item - a stun gun baton which can deliver a 750,000-volt shock as you smash someone over the head with it - cost just £65. The Viper Defender, which is an astonishing 20 times more powerful than standard police issue Taser stun guns, came to a paltry £45 including postage.

Is it any wonder that campaigners and those responsible for enforcing the law are becoming increasingly concerned about this menacing trade?

Consider this startling statistic: the number of stun guns seized by Customs has increased by 750 per cent in the past five years.

Though Customs officials concede that they intercept a tiny fraction of the total number arriving in the country (around 1,000 a year at the last time of counting), the figures are seen as clear evidence that the popularity of stun guns is increasing at an unsettling rate.

In an increasingly violent society, the prospect of scores of thugs and criminals getting their hands on them is frightening indeed. Already Amnesty International has expressed its concern. It has gathered statistics in the United States, where stun guns are far more widely used, to show that more than 220 people have died after being 'shot' with stun guns in police incidents alone.

Most suffered massive heart attacks. And they fear Britain is heading in the same direction. When other medical research is considered, the dangers become even more evident.

In the first study of its kind, published recently in the Annals Of Emergency Medicine, Dr William Bozeman concluded that the chance of dying after being shot by a stun gun could be as high as one in 870. Other potential serious injuries include respiratory failure, malfunction of pacemakers, injury to the central nervous system and miscarriage.

As Amnesty's Oliver Sprague puts it: 'Stun guns are dangerous weapons, they cause extreme pain and inflict immense terror. In many countries they are used as the tool of the torturer. No one in the UK should be allowed to obtain such a weapon, let alone for as little as £45.

'It's horrifying to think that an ordinary British citizen can get their hands on such a dangerous piece of torture equipment so easily. The internet has made it far too easy for arms dealers to circumvent the law.'

Of course, torture is not an issue in the United Kingdom. Or is it? Senior police officers have told the Mail that drug dealers and hardened criminals are increasingly turning to stun guns as a means of torturing debtors and enemies without leaving any visible marks.

Just consider these random examples.

In December last year, a suspected robber ran amok with a 500,000-volt Taser in Harrods.

In Cressing, Essex, a 60-year-old man was attacked with a stun gun as he tried to fight off four masked burglars at his home, later requiring hospital treatment following his ordeal. In Northamptonshire, a gang used a stun gun to attack a lorry driver and steal his vehicle, along with its £250,000 cargo.

In February, Brian Whitfield, a 44-year-old doorman from Gateshead, was jailed for life for murdering his expartner, whom he was said to have tortured with a stun gun before stabbing her to death.

And in Avon, two teenagers will soon stand trial for allegedly attacking an innocent bystander with a stun gun outside a McDonald's restaurant 'for a laugh'. Their victim, too, was hospitalised.

Of course, if you believe the sales hype, stun guns are essentially harmless. They are sold as a safe and effective way to protect yourself without any lasting damage, by incapacitating assailants at the flick of a switch.

The marketing is increasingly sophisticated. In America a new version of the Taser will soon go on sale to the public, available in four colours: black pearl, titanium silver, electric blue and a female-friendly metallic pink. But what if you are not an attacker but a victim?

That was the position in which 50-year-old Barry Dickinson unexpectedly found himself as he walked along a street in Oldham, near Manchester. Without warning a gang of men leapt out of a car and blasted him with a stun gun. He immediately lost control of his muscles and was dragged into the car, beaten and robbed of his watch before being dumped further up the road.

While paralysed by the shock, he was beaten so badly his nose and cheekbone were broken. With stun guns so easily available, police are increasingly coming across incidents such as this in which criminals use stun guns to incapacitate victims before assaulting or robbing them. One senior Scotland Yard officer told the Mail: 'The beauty of these weapons - if you could call it that - is that they leave no real mark and often the victim literally doesn't know what hit them.

'They're increasingly used by drug dealers to settle scores with each other, teenage tearaways and football hooligans, but they've also been used by thieves and in armed robberies. We are taking it very seriously.'

The Metropolitan Police are so concerned about the issue that the Flying Squad's remit has been changed. Until two years ago they would only investigate crimes involving firearms, but now they are called in when stun guns are involved as well.

Yet as the Mail's investigation proved, getting hold of these weapons online is frighteningly easy. On the official website for the Viper Defender, the stun gun is promoted as a muscular boys' own toy.

It features footage of people demonstrating the 'raw savage power' of handheld stun guns. Included among the purportedly light-hearted films is a clip of four teenagers daring each other to be 'zapped'.

The boys are not identified, but both the setting (a typical suburban back garden) and their accents are unmistakably British. How did they get hold of an illegal weapon? The website does not elaborate.

Buying the Viper was a simple enough process, which merely required a credit card. There were no checks made on my age or whether or not I had any criminal convictions. In other words, a ten-year-old boy using his father's cash card could find a stun gun dropping through his front door in a matter of days.

All the items I purchased, it should be noted, are banned under the Firearms Act, and in theory anyone possessing such a weapon could be jailed for up to ten years. Yet you would never have known it from the attitude of the suppliers.

Our research showed that companies providing stun guns to British customers can be found in Germany, France, South Africa and the Far East - though the majority hide behind the cosy anonymity of the internet.

I was able to take delivery of three stun guns within a week from two suppliers - but was left in no doubt that if I was prepared to wait longer, dozens more weapons were available to us. One of the companies, Security Discount Germany, operates from a well-appointed office and warehouse on an industrial estate in Darmstadt, a small town just south of Frankfurt.

It sells a variety of stun guns ranging from 100,000 volts to 750,000 volts, as well as a variety of batons, pepper/CS sprays (from as little as £3 each), handcuffs and other security items.

They also offer online package deals - for instance a 100,000-volt stun gun, a pepper spray and a CS spray retails for just over £20. We spoke to SDG's owner, Andreas Floethe, who could not have been more helpful.

He said: 'I have to inform you that some products are not legal in the UK, but that is up to you to find out.' Would they still send us a 750,000-volt stun gun and a 10-inch 750,000-volt stun baton? 'Yes we will.'

And when the packages arrived, one was discovered to contain a complimentary can of pepper spray - also illegal in this country. So much for regulations.

We also purchased a Viper Defender from another website, to which we had been directed by Viper Defender's South African sales team.

All we had to do was pay £45 by Visa, with no questions asked, and less than a week later the weapon arrived in a unmarked white jiffy bag, with no receipt and nothing to indicate anything else about the company.

All this just goes to show how the British authorities' attempts to clamp down on the trade in stun guns have been emasculated by the rise of the internet.

When the Mail put its concerns about the easy availability of stun guns to the Home Office, its response was: 'Our laws on the import of firearms are very strict and enforcement agencies take comprehensive action to prevent illegal importation of firearms.

'HM Revenue and Customs and the police service are active in targeting groups who would seek to illegally import firearms, whatever their motive, including criminal gangs who use firearms to protect or expand their illegal activities.'

As part of their 'activity' they might consider taking a look at the internet. Otherwise it is surely only a matter of time until Britain sees its first stungun death.
 
Perhaps they should look into weakening their population to the point where they are incapable of punching others.
 
"It has gathered statistics in the United States, where stun guns are far more widely used, to show that more than 220 people have died after being 'shot' with stun guns in police incidents alone."

They should put in the part about how many people didn't have to be shot with a real gun due to the use of stun guns.
 
This does happen every once in a while, and in more than one case, it seems that an older teenager (16-19) goes to the school of a younger friend, and attacks a teacher with one of these, because the teacher punished his 'homie', or something. That's what happened in one Bristol school in the last month.
 
They mention pepper spray and stun guns are illegal in the same article that they whine about people being victimized with and without them. Whining that in a nation where even non lethal force is banned for civilian possession people are being victimized seems so ironic.

You mean totaly disarming a population has not led to a total lack of violent crime?! In a society where not just firearms are basicly outlawed, but knives, pepper spray, stun guns, and self defense in general, criminals victimize people. They don't just use legal items either!

I cannot even imagine being a man in that country. Life as a woman or elderly and especialy a handicapped individual would be even worse.
 
What in the hell is wrong with Britain? They blame us for all their crime? Stun guns are widely available over here in the US. I can't think of ANY crimes committed with one.
 
UK needs to pull those things off the street and go back to real guns. Why are the police allowed to carry torture devices anyway?
 
Oh my. "It's horrifying to think that an ordinary British citizen can get their hands on such a dangerous piece of torture equipment?" "Devastating - and illegal - weapon?!" The way they describe them, one would think they were talking about a Martian Death Ray or something.

And did they not notice that most of the injuries in all their anecdotes were inflicted by hands and feet? Or should I not say that out loud lest Home Office decides you need a license for those too? :p
 
It is safe to say that MOST of the pepper sprays and stun guns being illegally imported into the UK are owned by the otherwise law abiding who are simply sick and tired of waiting to be the next victim of a violent crime.

If every illegally imported 'weapon' was owned by a violent criminal then the crime rates featuring such items would be far, far higher.

The greatest tragedy about living in the UK is that you can end up in prison because you don't want to be a victim of a violent crime.

I am getting pretty sick of it myself.
 
The Viper Defender, you see, is no standard piece of household electronics. It is the most powerful stun gun in the world, with the capacity to instantly blast 950,000 volts of electricity into the central nervous system of anyone unfortunate enough to brush against it. That's what happened to Mr Kelly.

Well mine has 1,000,000 volts so i guess i have the most most powerful in the world. And its not volts that hurt its the amps. More volts just mean it can go through thicker clothing. To bad he did not have a gun to defend him self with or even a stun gun of his own:( Thats what you get when you take away good peoples lines of self defense. Bad guys doing illegal things with illegal weapons. Who knew.


Also they talk about it as if its all the stun guns fault. The bad guys had nothing to do with it really, the stun gun made them do it.
 
Thugs have been using stun-guns in Japanese cities for a while now. Pop out of an alley, stun your target, rob and/or rape them, and be on your merry way. The sickest part of this article is that they're outrightly saying that the average schmuck has no fundamental right to protect themselves. "Lie-down and Die". That's sick. But what can you expect from a country who's allowed themselves to be disarmed of everything down the list past kitchen knives, does nothing about foreign invaders, and then berates the country that bailed them out of a World War that we're the uncivilized ones because we view personal security as important on the individual level. We just don't get that we'd all be better off if we trusted our government to do everything for us.

Aren't we the fools. :rolleyes:
 
'In less than a week, we were able to take delivery of a small arsenal of stun guns. '

...where's that barf smiley...
 
Didn't the Democrats in Congress try to totally ban stun guns in the US back in the mid 1980s?
 
But what can you expect from a country who's allowed themselves to be disarmed of everything down the list past kitchen knives, does nothing about foreign invaders

Have you not heard of the Falklands conflict Buddy? … Google it and you may learn something about this little island that you clearly know nothing about. When Argentina decided to invade our sovereign land they found out the hard way what happens when Britain is invaded. Our task-force sailed 7500 miles to kick them back out. It was the biggest Naval operation since WW2.

And while we are on the subject, America did not ‘bail Britain out of WW2 - thank you. Don’t you see the bigger picture? – the latter part of WW2 was a race against time to defeat a fascist regime that was threatening everyone’s freedom. Do you think Hitler would have stopped if he had defeated Britain and Russia? I think not – America would have been next in his sights. Germany was on the brink of developing nuclear weapons and wouldn’t have thought twice about bombing America. America and Britain worked in collaboration to free Europe and restore freedom for all. There have been a number of references on THR to the ‘Yanks’ saving Britain’s ‘butts’, which I find offensive and belittling to the amazing collaboration and sacrifices it took to drive back and defeat the Germans.

Years ago I went to a Warbird aeroplane meeting at Duxford in England and was luckily enough to board the ‘Sally B’ B17G’ for a quick tour. Inside, what used to be the bomb bay, I came across an America ex-airman from WW2 who had broken down in tears from the memories being in that bomber brought back. I took the opportunity to thank him for his efforts in freeing Europe in terrible times. It was a privilege to do so.

BTW my father fought in WW2 (Royal Gloucester Regiment) and guess what? he fought the Japanese – was he bailing you out!?

Hopefully for the last time: GUNS ARE NOT BANNED IN BRITAIN! On Sunday I spent the morning at my local range shooting my 44 Mag Winchester 1894 Trails End, .22 semi-auto, .308 Bolt action, .44 & .36 BP Revolvers. All legally owned. At the range I also shot my friends long barrelled .44 handgun, SAA Buntline and a .303 Lee Enfield. A fellow shooter had also just got permission to buy a .50 snipers rifle plus some tracer rounds. Only handguns of a certain barrel length are banned here and full-bore semi-autos. You can still get semi autos – AR15 etc except that the semi-auto function has been modified to a ‘straight-pull, ie you have to manually pull back the slide.

I apologise for the rant but if THR invites people from other countries to participate in its great site than the users should at least exercise some common courtesies towards them and not make offensive comments about its people - some Politicians, criminals yes ... but not the average person in the street.
 
Only certain guns are banned in Britain.

Heck handguns are still legal in Northern Ireland and I believe semi auto rifles are still legal in the Channel Islands.
 
Hopefully for the last time: GUNS ARE NOT BANNED IN BRITAIN! On Sunday I spent the morning at my local range shooting my 44 Mag Winchester 1894 Trails End, .22 semi-auto, .308 Bolt action, .44 & .36 BP Revolvers. All legally owned. At the range I also shot my friends long barrelled .44 handgun, SAA Buntline and a .303 Lee Enfield. A fellow shooter had also just got permission to buy a .50 snipers rifle plus some tracer rounds. Only handguns of a certain barrel length are banned here and full-bore semi-autos. You can still get semi autos – AR15 etc except that the semi-auto function has been modified to a ‘straight-pull, ie you have to manually pull back the slide.

…was graciously allowed to purchase…

What 'good reason' did he cite on his application form, it would not have been 'defence of the realm' or self defence would it??

I think the point is that our US cousins are quite right to say as a generalism that 'guns are banned in the UK' because apart from sporting firearms they are 'banned' for all intents and purposes. Firearms for defence have been outlawed by Home Office policy since 1947 and as you point out in your post, you have to ask permission to have one.
 
Prince Yamato said:
What in the hell is wrong with Britain? They blame us for all their crime? Stun guns are widely available over here in the US. I can't think of ANY crimes committed with one.

I can. A student was repeatedly hit with a stun weapon inside a college library. Oh, the crime was performed by three "public safety" officers.

There was video of it on YouTube.
 
…was graciously allowed to purchase…

I don’t agree. He was allowed to purchase it because it is his right to do so as long as he satisfied the ‘good reason’ clause, which clearly he did.

What 'good reason' did he cite on his application form, it would not have been 'defence of the realm' or self defence would it??

I didn’t ask what the reason was but I would presume that ‘long distance competitive target shooting, 1000 yards plus’ would suffice. ‘Defence of the Realm’ is dealt with by our Armed Forces. I don’t think owning a .50 sniper rifle would constitute a good reason for self defence unless you were luckily enough to see your attacker from a distance and had the time to adjust the elevation and windage.

I think the point is that our US cousins are quite right to say as a generalism that 'guns are banned in the UK' because apart from sporting firearms they are 'banned' for all intents and purposes. Firearms for defence have been outlawed by Home Office policy since 1947 and as you point out in your post, you have to ask permission to have one.

I don’t agree since it sends the wrong message to our friends in the states. Something is either banned or not. It’s as simple as that. Guns, being plural suggests are all guns are banned in the UK regardless of the reason, which they are not. LAR 15 is quite correct by putting the word ‘certain’ at the beginning puts the statement into perspective.
 
I don’t agree. He was allowed to purchase it because it is his right to do so as long as he satisfied the ‘good reason’ clause, which clearly he did.
And if he fails to fire the thing for a few months the police have the 'right' to take it off him. :)

What 'good reason' did he cite on his application form, it would not have been 'defence of the realm' or self defence would it??

My point being that self defence is no longer considered to be a 'good reason' and that fact will no doubt mean to the US members of this forum that guns are banned for the very reasons most US members here own their weapons.
Guns in the UK are not banned for various purposes although they are in affect banned for self defence.

I don’t agree since it sends the wrong message to our friends in the states. Something is either banned or not. It’s as simple as that. Guns, being plural suggests are all guns are banned in the UK regardless of the reason, which they are not. LAR 15 is quite correct by putting the word ‘certain’ at the beginning puts the statement into perspective.

So you don't agree that guns for self defence have in practical terms been banned since 1947?

Would you agree that centre fire pistols have been banned for self defence here in the UK?

At the end of the day if you accept that for most US members here the idea of having to state a 'good reason' that does not include self defence is as good as an absolute ban you will better understand where they are coming from when they question why we put up with such things.

It's all about a bigger picture. It's actually the principle we seem to have here in the UK that says that only the police have any right to carry a weapon for self defence and that the 'ordinary' person should rely on other people to save the day that appears to confuse the US members on this forum. I dont think it's the US citizens here that need to change their opinions about the right to arms in the UK to be honest.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top