The UK's Finest Independent Forum for Shooters and Gun Owners. Est 2010.

Sim G wrote:7.3 is one of those things I’ve struggled with. I was a dyed in the wool handgunner. Rifles were a curiosity or a tool for me prior to 97. I have a 7.3 facility about an hour and a half away. A very good friend is a member. But no, I can’t reconcile the restriction, the expense, the inconvenience and frankly, the utter bollox that surrounds 7.3.

My nearest 7.3 is only 20 mins away at Bisley, although I know no one that does 7.3, but I agree with your last sentence regarding the situation of 7.3.
I still get annoyed thinking back to the aggressive and holier than though attitude that a few of us experienced when being told to vacate Chelysmore range a few years ago by the GB pistol team as they had a practice shoot in the afternoon. How to win friends and influence people.....

Exactly. “Elite”, but a rich man’s game to travel abroad to reach that level. Granted there are parts of GB an aspiring pistol shooter could move to. But, try moving the whole family. My wife’s face was a picture when the penny dropped why I was looking to transfer to the Isle of Man!

When the bid was won to host the Olympics, we had a Conservative govt who took power and actually never supported a full pistol ban. He that was heading the UK Olympic push and IOC member was Lord Coe, the last President of the National Pistol Association. (Granted he bottled out at the time) But, and it proved hopeless, that the representative organisations were Shiite. Couldn’t even get to host the shooting events full stop, never mind have the Firearms Amendment Act Number 2 repealed!!! Useless feckers...

If you are certificated fit to own a firearm then you are fit.

It's not if your fit enough to own a handgun it's the fact, ease of concealment try hiding a rifle in your pocket or down your trousers.

bnz41 wrote:If you are certificated fit to own a firearm then you are fit.

It's not if your fit enough to own a handgun it's the fact, ease of concealment try hiding a rifle in your pocket or down your trousers.

But you'd be hard pressed to be able to conceal a Garand or a SLR down yer trousers either but we're also not allowed those, so is that really the issue?

No matter how concealable the firearm is, despite the this reason being offered up by the government as part of the consideration for the ban, it did nothing to improve gauging the fitness of potential owners. What the ban did reduce was the probability that the next mass shooting on mainland GB, would not have been carried out with a legally held pistol. In fact the next two by Bird in Cumbria and Atherton in Durham were perpetrated with the most common guns in the UK, a rimfire rifle and a shotgun.

No one could have predicted Bird, but Atherton, Ryan to a degree and certainly Hamilton should not have been deemed fit. And that will forever be at the shame of the police.

So really my statement I believe stands, if you’re deemed fit at all levels, then you are fit.

Sim G wrote: No one could have predicted Bird, but Atherton, Ryan to a degree and certainly Hamilton should not have been deemed fit. And that will forever be at the shame of the police.

Well in the case of Ryan and Hamilton, didn't the FEO's in both forces make the recommendation to revoke the certs of both, but this was overruled in both cases, and in Hamilton's case for reasons we'll never know given the 100 year rule imposed some of the documentation.
Shame of someone high up, yes, but not all of those involved?

GeeRam wrote:

Sim G wrote: No one could have predicted Bird, but Atherton, Ryan to a degree and certainly Hamilton should not have been deemed fit. And that will forever be at the shame of the police.

Well in the case of Ryan and Hamilton, didn't the FEO's in both forces make the recommendation to revoke the certs of both, but this was overruled in both cases, and in Hamilton's case for reasons we'll never know given the 100 year rule imposed some of the documentation.
Shame of someone high up, yes, but not all of those involved?

It does make you wonder why they chose to seal the records, it would appear (but who knows) to protect the guilty?

GeeRam wrote:

bnz41 wrote:If you are certificated fit to own a firearm then you are fit.

It's not if your fit enough to own a handgun it's the fact, ease of concealment try hiding a rifle in your pocket or down your trousers.

But you'd be hard pressed to be able to conceal a Garand or a SLR down yer trousers either but we're also not allowed those, so is that really the issue?

I did say a handgun was easy to conceal and rifles not so.

We are allowed a SLR & a Garand I have both Ok straight pull but the rifles you named.

bnz41 wrote: We are allowed a SLR & a Garand I have both Ok straight pull but the rifles you named.

I am well aware that we can own a castrated Garand or SLR in the UK, but that isn't relevant to point I was making.

Actually Neil, you are the perfect example. You’ve been shooting for years have owned a multitude of firearms, have displayed an impeccable character and now own a number of 7.3 pistols which you’ve shown on here and no doubt showed to others involved in 7.3, which you can also shoot at a particular location. But, essentially you are not deemed fit enough to take one of your pistols from its secure location to a gunsmith for a repair, if it was necessary...

Are you deemed fit or not? That’s the point I was making and which I believe Geeram agrees with. If you’re fit for one, you’re fit for whatever.