I hold a FAC and have done so for many years. “Pre Dunblane” I owned handguns, rifles and shotguns. I used to reload all my own ammunition and would happily spend hours tinkering with ballistics to try and match the perfect load for a particular gun. I can understand that people don’t like the idea of “civilians” owning guns, based on what they see on television. However there is a world of difference between guns used for target shooting, be it paper targets at 25 metre for a pistol or 1,000 yds for a bench rest rifle and those that used to be used for disciplines like practical pistol, where the pistols were developments (very expensive developments
) of standard police or services issue. Now, in the “Post Dunblane” era, I may not own a single shot .22 target pistol. Bearing in mind that these have the muzzle energy of not much more than a pea shooter, yet I can still possess a .44 calibre carbine, a 12 gauge shotgun or a military calibre rifle, all of which have massive muzzle energy capacity. Do those people who clamour “pistols are only made for killing people” have any understanding of this at all? I think not.
The “gun culture” that undoubtedly exists and is growing in this country, despite what statistics have been quoted here, fuelled by popular culture. How many of the young (or even not-so-young
)kids, who find guns cool, because a music idol sings about them or is seen to carry them, or in the case of that arsewipe, 50-cents, has even been shot, actually have any comprehension of the damage that a bullet can do?
The man beaten about the head, who doesn’t get up as in the films, but spends the rest of his life having to wear nappies because he is incontinent. The youngster who is shot in the leg with a cheap eastern block pistol who doesn’t just suffer a slight limp, but who has to have his leg amputated and remains dependant on his parents for the rest of his life. What about showing the operation to replace a man’s face and scalp after he’s been hit with a broken glass?
Get rid of the glamorisation, the myths and the “coolness” of violence in any form
and replace it with education about the real effects.
Don’t get sucked into the argument that banning the possession of handguns, especially those specifically built for target shooting, has had any effect on gun crime.
As an aside…
I do feel that “Pre Dunblane” the licensing authorities were getting a little lax. I had, at one time, four large calibre hand guns in my safe. Now that was an awful lot of “fire power”. At the time I was shooting .22 target league, full bore pistol league, practical pistol and had just started to shoot handgun out to 100 metres. Now that’s a discipline that required an awful lot of skill (No, I wasn’t very good
). If the powers that be had restricted FAC holders to one small bore and one full bore I don’t think there would have ever been an issue. However the draconian ban (Knee jerk.. call it what you will) has caused an awful lot of ill feeling, especially in light of the report and enquiries which revealed that Hamilton should never have been “renewed” under existing Police worries about him.
Have I wandered off topic?.....again?
<edit> I confess I didn't bother watching the video clip until now, having seen that sort of thing before, on film and live. However, I can see what some might think..... it is rather "Gung-ho" isn't it
? What I want to know from our ‘Merkin cousins, is the legality of converting pistols to full auto? I thought that was banned, pretty much everywhere. There is a small bit in the clip with a bloke firing two pistols with extended magazines. Are they available or have they been converted from semi auto to full auto (modified sear?). Legal or not?