New laws coming?

[SevenSixTwo]

Excellent letter overall, James048 however we're still tacitly conceding that if one of our firearms is used in a crime we'd somehow be happy to see it go.

We simply will not accept being punished for the actions of others. This is not reasonable. Nor will we accept that we should lose our lawfully-owned and hard-earned property because 'muh dangerous'.

[James84]

Excellent letter overall, James048 however we're still tacitly conceding that if one of our firearms is used in a crime we'd somehow be happy to see it go.

We simply will not accept being punished for the actions of others. This is not reasonable. Nor will we accept that we should lose our lawfully-owned and hard-earned property because 'muh dangerous'.

Good point and I agree.

Hindsight...

[Mikaveli]

Here's what I sent.

Dear Mrs Maria Miller,

...

Nicely worded, rational letter. Hopefully others will use your example.

[Gazza]

Here's what I sent.

Dear Mrs Maria Miller,

I am contacting you regarding the upcoming consultation on offensive weapons as announced by the Home Secretary, Ambur Rudd which includes the moving of .50 calibre and certain rapid firing rifles from Section 1 to Section 5 'prohibited' firearms. They are termed as 'dangerous firearms' within the initial announcement.

I fully appreciate and understand the other areas of this consultation (restricting open sales of acids and online sales of knives) due to their usage in recent crimes within the UK, however I am concerned as to the reasoning behind the reclassification of two legal, Section 1 types of firearm being moved when there has to date not been a single crime committed in the UK with either.

It has not been formally announced but I am assuming that the 'rapid firing' rifles refer to the recently adopted MARS and/or Lever Release rifles. Both of these sporting rifles, unlike acid and knives are currently licensed (strictly and with extra scrutiny from the licensing Authority) and have been cleared as Section 1 firearms. This raises the question as to why they have been latched onto the back of this consultation which focuses on non-licensed and criminally associated devices/substances.

In reality, firearm related crimes will continue at their current rate with or without such restrictions and as the recent and awful events in Europe have shown, mass shootings are being carried out using illegally owned firearms which were never registered to anyone in the first place. They are transported illegally from further afield throughout Europe and it is a known fact that many of these illegal firearms find their way into the UK:

https://inews.co.uk/essentials/news/uk/ ... g-inquiry/

In short, banning licensed individuals from owning rifles that have never been used in any crime is arguably a pointless exercise. Surely the focus should be on ensuring no illegal firearms make their way onto our shores rather than forcing legitimate firearm owners to hand theirs over even though they are registered and traceable? The firearms in question are not used in crimes nor are they the same 'dangerous firearms' in terms of function or operation as those illegally imported into the UK and used by gangs and other irresponsible individuals.

I fear that this is another step that will undermine the UK's shooting community and that shooting is further becoming a 'taboo' sport which is hushed into the corner and beaten whenever there is a need to show that something is being done in the wake of events abroad. Whilst any shooting is a tragedy, they commonly occur with illegal firearms or in countries that allow firearms that are already prohibited in the UK.

The outcome I am seeking from this correspondence is that you consider the above points and the fact that there will be no benefit to public safety by prohibiting these two types of firearms. The UK shooting community consists of upstanding and law abiding citizens who use these firearms to challenge themselves as a sport, be it using a .50 for long range or a MARS rifle for shorter range target shooting. I ask that if you have any visibility of the proposed consultation and/or the thinking behind it that you air the idea that perhaps this minority of responsible sportsmen and women should not be punished for enjoying a hobby with firearms that are deemed by a few to be unsuitable for a licensed, vetted and competent individual to own and use on approved sites within the UK.

Yours sincerely,

Good letter

[Blackstuff]

Personally I think we should 'hold fire' and not do their job for them by identifying which are the 'rapid fire firearms'. I'm sure most MP's won't have even heard of MARS/lever release guns (hell, there are plenty of shooters who haven't!) and bringing them to their attention may have the opposite effect to what we're intending. I know plenty of friends I've shown some of my guns to have remarked "Wow, I can't believe you're allowed to own something like XYZ"

[Mikaveli]

Personally I think we should 'hold fire' and not do their job for them by identifying which are the 'rapid fire firearms'. I'm sure most MP's won't have even heard of MARS/lever release guns (hell, there are plenty of shooters who haven't!) and bringing them to their attention may have the opposite effect to what we're intending. I know plenty of friends I've shown some of my guns to have remarked "Wow, I can't believe you're allowed to own something like XYZ"

I take your point, but... the term "rapid fire" is now being used by the media to describe semi-automatics, fitted with slide/bump-fire stocks, giving them an effective full-auto capability.

In our case, the home office is using the term to describe MARS rifles (and possibly lever-release). We all need to ensure everyone knows that these (UK) guns are nowhere near the same thing - they're not even semi-automatic!

[Mikaveli]

Ban targeting just .50 cal and MARS according to BASC:

https://basc.org.uk/blog/press-releases ... says-basc/

[HH1]

Ban targeting just .50 cal and MARS according to BASC:

https://basc.org.uk/blog/press-releases ... says-basc/

As the owner of a SGC 9mm, I have my fingers crossed as this looks like an improvement on what we were all fearing.
That being said, as a community, we need to support each other more than ever.

[Mikaveli]

Ban targeting just .50 cal and MARS according to BASC:

https://basc.org.uk/blog/press-releases ... says-basc/

As the owner of a SGC 9mm, I have my fingers crossed as this looks like an improvement on what we were all fearing.
That being said, as a community, we need to support each other more than ever.

Exactly - BASC have said they are opposed to the ban.

My position stays the same (despite my discipline now looking "safe" for now).

Hopefully we'll save both classes, or at the very least, have them grandfathered for existing owners.

Let's do what we can - I'll also be paying close attention to the level of support we get from the shooting associations...

[Blackstuff]

Well now at least we seem to know what we're dealing with. (I bet Bob at SGC is secretly grinding his teeth that his rifles action has been dismissed as not 'fast firing' though )

Once the consultation starts its time to start bombarding them!