Proposed EU gun legislation

[gazzarM1]

Agreed...........

[gbal]

Hauptman,so do I,even if that is proposed. It may be enough for some.

OSOK- it's ok,I'm more fed up with replying to distorted misinterpretations.But exploring one's thinking can be healthy,and backing it up certainly is,where that can be done.Would that others did so,instead of just making claims.

MJR,thank you,your question exemplifies the 'generalities/no data/support as above reply to OSOK.

 

Montey,I don't actually disagree-rule bending etc goes on-whether it goes on within the EU more than specifically within the UK,I don't know. The issue is anyhow better enforcement of the rules. It is unlikely to be perfect anywhere;no organisation ever is.

 

I undrstand very clearly-that's the data (not here,as it's a limited sample)- in/out is likely to be a close run referendum. There are points to be made either way,it's ultimately a matter of judgement.IT's not easy to include all the issues,but a little reading etc can clarifyeg budget,to some extent,or the actual decision processes.This would eliminate much of the false basis for some comments.

 

Nothing rose coloured about that.There is nothing to be gained by suggesting the equally unhelful "blinkered' instead-we all have some biases-human beings are prone to such errors and crooked thinking,but they can be reduced-and correct evidence-incomplete,agreed- presented.

 

Then the decision is at least better informed.

Some will see more important issues-not all fully costable,if that is the criterion-it is one criterion,but short or long term gets unclear.

 

22 autos/semis are within my concern,but way way below caring for immigrant children,at point of need. Not the simple choice of course,but the UK can effectively improve EU policy/practice on that issue. I don't think Albanians pose any threat,and could be contained if they did. I would not say 22s and Albanian rifles are petty concerns,but they are dwarfed by many others.Strictly on firearms,the UK government has let shooters down.Nothing rose coloured about that.Nothing easy about making the Europe a better place. The first rule of effective action,is be there. Brussels does not close down Westmnster-you know Westminster,of course,it's the place where half the UK population,though not always the same half,think the wrong decisions are made. Which half is right? :-)

 

Let's not lose sight of the bigger picture;and no-one has voted yet,remember.

 

OK,coffee time ,good advice MIke- coffee in Switzerland,and Norway is about as expensive as it currently gets,but the Swiss coffee is excellent,despite the costa. Nothing to do with the EU of course- correlational only. Such lines are worth drawing. I hope we can draw a line under much of this thread,and let the media do it for 3 months. :-)

 

g

[MJR]

Yes Swiss coffee is good bu not as good as the chocolate, I consumed both last week whilst on a ski trip.

 

But are you smelling it yet?

 

And a point of interest. I flew via Basel, France. Where is this supposed free movement within the EU? One day prior to departure and return I received emails advising of increased security checks and prolonged delays through passport control. I passed through passport control leaving manchester and again showed my passport. So why can an immigrant with no passport arrive in the UK, I can't?

[SWShooter]

Yes Swiss coffee is good bu not as good as the chocolate, I consumed both last week whilst on a ski trip.

 

But are you smelling it yet?

 

And a point of interest. I flew via Basel, France. Where is this supposed free movement within the EU? One day prior to departure and return I received emails advising of increased security checks and prolonged delays through passport control. I passed through passport control leaving manchester and again showed my passport. So why can an immigrant with no passport arrive in the UK, I can't?

 

You can if you claim political asylum , although it could be very confusing for the authorities if you are British

[gbal]

Mike, we're getting there- agreement on the chocolate. Better than Rose's (tinted) Assortment,but OK to have choice.

I usually fly to Zurich;Basel would be an option,though flights don't suit.

Or Geneva,and the excellent train to Zurich. Whatever,it all just works.(The federated cantons seem to have worked it out rather well,though it helps to speak French,German,Italian if you get around-I'm not calling that sovereignty,but no doubt the canton-ese each like it-otherwise there would be a legally binding referendum to change it all. Has some merit that system. I'm actally about to finish my xmas chocs,come in a nice tin too. I think we have to give the EU the nod for skiing (though Norway is more extreme...) :-)

 

The security-trade off is always disruption to the innocent-the price to pay,perhaps. As I suggested,the EU may well introduce more checks/ID checks- something has to give,I fear.

Being non EU is unlikely to give any favours,though. That's the relevant criterion/comparison.

It's less hassle if you are in (of course there are more important criteria).

[gbal]

Mon 29 Feb

Trial begins: consignment of Skorpion machine pistols,rifles,and ammo confiscated by police from a boat on the Medway.Allegedly Slovakian deactivated ,but subsequently reactivated.

[brown dog]

I'm more fed up with replying to distorted misinterpretations.

 

Hello pot, this is kettle.

[gbal]

Your smilies are far more professional than mine......:-)

 

Pax?

[Dalua]

Mon 29 Feb

Trial begins: consignment of Skorpion machine pistols,rifles,and ammo confiscated by police from a boat on the Medway.Allegedly Slovakian deactivated ,but subsequently reactivated.

A trial? You mean this is already unlawful?

 

Wherefore then all this nonsense about new laws?

[gbal]

Maybe the new regulations try to make reactivation much more difficult by setting new much higher standards for the deactivation.

Working Skorpions for sale in the UK -illegally,of course- suggests a problem as things stand at the moment.

[Dalua]

Maybe the new regulations try to make reactivation much more difficult by setting new much higher standards for the deactivation.

Working Skorpions for sale in the UK -illegally,of course- suggests a problem as things stand at the moment.

Perhaps you mean 'new regulations to try to make the alleged reactivation more difficult by setting much higher standards for the alleged deactivation'?

 

The main problem that I see at the moment is the same problem which has been evident since the start of serious firearms controls early in the last century - namely the belief held by governments and civil-servants, but unsupported by evidence, that more and more laws restricting law-abiding shooters will by some means prevent the use of firearms for criminal purposes.

[gazzarM1]

Perhaps you mean 'new regulations to try to make the alleged reactivation more difficult by setting much higher standards for the alleged deactivation'?

 

The main problem that I see at the moment is the same problem which has been evident since the start of serious firearms controls early in the last century - namely the belief held by governments and civil-servants, but unsupported by evidence, that more and more laws restricting law-abiding shooters will by some means prevent the use of firearms for criminal purposes.

correct!

[gbal]

Dalua (and gazzar)- OK,your amended version-more will probably come out in court about the deac/react statuses. Not critical_the issue is : do we want skorpion machine pistols in the hands of criminals,especially terrorists.

 

 

Agree on your second point too in general. But wrt de/re acts:

 

Are skorpion machine pistols UK legal; or should they be?

If not,UK shooters have not been deprived by this proposed bit of tightening up on de/re activation.

 

I have not seen anything from UK government saying they oppose the de/react proposals. Seems unlikely,given the first point above-don't want them here.

 

g

[Dalua]

Dalua (and gazzar)- OK,your amended version-more will probably come out in court about the deac/react statuses. Not critical_the issue is : do we want skorpion machine pistols in the hands of criminals,especially terrorists.

 

 

Agree on your second point too in general. But wrt de/re acts:

 

Are skorpion machine pistols UK legal; or should they be?

If not,UK shooters have not been deprived by this proposed bit of tightening up on de/re activation.

 

I have not seen anything from UK government saying they oppose the de/react proposals. Seems unlikely,given the first point above-don't want them here.

 

g

OK - you don't want machine-pistols in the UK. It's a point of view, I suppose. They have not been lawfully in civillian hands here since 1937.

When they were banned in the UK, there was no particular problem with their misuse either by certificated lawful owners or criminals.

 

I think the thing that you might be overlooking is that every time more laws are made, more freedom is lost. Lawful shooters have lost a lot of freedom in the last 100 years or so, and the public safety seems not to have been commensurately improved.

 

The argument that if a new restriction does not affect me, or my pals, or the UK; so it doesn't matter whether or not it is just, proportionate, or will be even slightly useful seems a familliar one to someone familliar with the UK shooting community - but not a helpful one.

[gbal]

Dalua,again some agreement- I don't want machine pistols in the hands of terrorists,and you probably agree.There is a balance of restrictive laws,and among other things,civil liberties.

An observant Roman summed it up-we suffered from crime,now we suffer from laws. Clearly ,it depends on the laws,and their striking a good balance.Some do not restrict the law abiding at all (eg they did not want to steal) sometimes-as with Firearm Law,they do-and to little purpose,often enough in terms of public safety;again we agree.

But not always. I don't adopt 'I'm ok,shooters ok,who cares'. There is the synoptic security/safety issue,and we need be vigilant of excess law ( that's what civil liberty-ists monitor,often controversially).

 

I repeat-I agree with your general point-governments-all governments-in my lifetime -let's squeeze in 1937 too-have done just what you say-legislate,restrictively-but to little if any public good.Agreed.

For the focus of this thread it follows that the EU proposals are nothing new-indeed de/re act is minor compared to most existing UK law restrictions,which will probably follow suit anyhow,if need be.Therefore the proposals don't really support either an in or an out stance. That's not 'on the fence',it's this particular issue does not allow a sensible preference.

 

I very much doubt that it's unique in that-maybe three months will tell!

( Scotland referendum didn't do too well on fair evidence pro and con).

 

g

[gbal]

Todays mail included the BASC magazine. It has two articles well worth reading.

The phrase 'without prejudice'-in both legal and common parlance senses applies.

Some of the complexities are touched on,but there is a useful review of progress.

 

Bill Harriman "Reforming UK Firearms Law' sums up where the Law Comission (Bill'sposition is that they are objective,impartial and evidence led;expert impartial lawyers(rather than slippery politicians whose opinions are formed not by fact or logic,but simply by the size of their postbags)...

He does mention the Charlie Hebro shooting with (alleged?) deacts that h=merely had pinsacross the bores...cllealy that needs redefinition (what lawyers do).

 

In "The story so far..." there is an account of how BASC has been campaigning on shooter's behalf; it's quite impressive,and not as negative as some less informed views: BASC believes that in MEP Vicky Ford,we have the right person to lead the EU Directive amendmanets to sensible concludsion,with minimal unintended consequences. She has already challenged some proposals as disproportionate and lacking evidence,as chair of the EU's Internal Markets and Consumer Protection Committee. (BASC/FACE/ESSF have met with the Commission,with ESSF representing the widest range of trade and sport shooting stakeholders in the EU). The IMCPC has some influence,in statutory EU legislation.

 

Voting is in June,so we shall have to wait while more good work goes on. Its well worth a read,unless you are too slippery ...... :-)

 

GB

[gazzarM1]

Hopefully around the 25th June which will be when it then becomes academic.

[gbal]

Hopefully around the 25th June which will be when it then becomes academic.[/quote

 

 

:-) Well,we will have to wait. As Bill Harriman implies,the data driven view of UK politicians is of a slithery,slippery set of slimey toves.....and that is data and experience driven from the recent past legislation. Pretty hard to argue not,but I'm all done on reason (and you haven't even started) so let's just shoot what we in the UK are allowed to by the UK government meanwhile,and by either lot afterwards. Don't yearn for an auto scorpion,though. :-)

 

g

[ds1]

Link below from Face

They and firearms United and Lex and doing something about it

Not blowing smoke.

 

https://m.facebook.com/story.php?story_fbid=956996717726336&id=527632137329465&_ft_=top_level_post_id.956996717726336%3Atl_objid.956996717726336&refid=17&__tn__=%2C%3B

[Dalua]

He does mention the Charlie Hebro shooting with (alleged?) deacts that h=merely had pinsacross the bores...cllealy that needs redefinition (what lawyers do).

 

 

Do you think the murderers would have simply given up their plans if they'd not been able to reactivate some deacts?

 

Anyhow, if I can quickly dodge the side-issues of the European in/out/shake-it-all-about question, the Law Commission's proposed tinkering with UK firearms law and paraphrasis/misquotation of Lewis Carroll...

The EU proposals go a good way beyond deactivation: reading post 40, one might be forgiven for thinking that the banning of rifles that look like automatics, the stuff about medical reports, the maximum term for a certificate and so on were all figments of the fevered anti-Europeans' imaginations.

 

[Montey]

Like I said better off out

[ds1]

There has been a deliberate lack of any impact studies with the proposed directive and some small minded people and groups seem not to be able to grasp the extent of the effect. This is the CZ scenario.

 

A few days ago Lubomir Kovarik, General Director of Ceska Zbrojovka said that the proposed EU Directive as it stands would mean an annual production loss of 50,000 to 100,000 weapons resulting in job losses of between 500 - 1000 people plus related out-sourced industry. The effect is not limited to Ceska Zbrojovka but also Sellier & Bellot estimate an annual production loss of +33%.

 

Just considering Sellier & Bellot (without massive knock on effects for Meopta - they employ a 2k workforce and other security sector industries) then if ammunition sales are reduced by +33% the cost of ammunition is going to go up and up, along with components (eg Lovex powder), not only will it go up for sports men and hunters but also for military and police. The staples of 9 mm and .223 will be the most heavily affected - previously sporting sales were able to subsidize military and police sales. Imagine if the cost of ammunition to police only doubles the purchase halves and as an armed police force it is substantial, plus instead of increasing effectiveness against terrorism through developing active shooter and single system of search programs as a part of general policing there will be much fewer resources to do it - I remember 2 years ago a stoppage on all non essential (not specialist units) shooting training for 3 months because there was no ammunition - budget exceeded.

 

The EU Commission is helping to support terrorism.

 

This is the impact that will follow if the Directive is enacted as is - what do you think the impact will be for Sako, Lapua, MEN, Norma, Geco etc and how many fold will ammunition and shooting components go up?

 

You can say that it is scaremongering, but they are the figures from S&B and CZ......the EU Commission could not be bothered to make an impact study.

[gbal]

OK,guys;accepting all David's concerns and the manufacturers views,the issue remains:

 

How is any proposed EU legislation changed at all by the UK leaving? In,we have a say,out we don't. it's that simple.

UK out is not going to keep cheaper ammo available,is it? Or keep any (EU) company in business.

 

"In" we may be able to mitigate the effects -they are proposals-we may not succeed on automatic weapons-given terrorist threat.

We don't have them in the UK,and leaving won't change the UK govenment on this,and any influence we might have had on EU legislation iis gone ( we won't of course -if out- be subject to EU legislation-unless it is a condition of future negatiated trade deals).

 

I empathise with much of the concerns ( the UK already having had the most restrictive imposed-no autos,no semis,no pistols).

Just can't see it as in/out ( if anything,some of the proposals seem sensible-not a complete solution,of course) but they are going to happen or not as decided by the EU member states.Any state 'out' has no say either way.

 

I know this is not the "brexit' thread,but almost all the posts relate to EU membership.

 

First rule of politics and decision making is,"be at the table". Our MEPs do have votes,like all other MEPs;

and Vicky Ford's committee has to be considered. I'm sure CZ etc will have made the 'impact' points to her. She may prevail,or not. Being 'out' though reduces the 'shooter' input-for sure,for no gain at all on these issues.

 

GB

[22lrman]

Recenty, it was interesting to see the activity of the shooters themselves in the UK with regards to the numbers of signatures on the various petitions floating about.

I am sure there are more than 25,000 or so airgunners and firearms and shotgun certificate holders in the UK.

 

So where did all the signatures go? There seems to be quite a few who couldn't take 5 minutes out of their year to sign a few online petitions.

It's a shame, but I frequently hear said people moaning the loudest about the ever increasing restrictions on firearms types.

 

I'm afraid that we as a country are far too tolerant to legislative creep based on political and personal agendas. In all areas, not just shooting.

What next? Ban certain styles of cars because look to racey

[Montey]

gbal please check your see that the uk has failed too win any change by voting on a EU policy, so staying in isn't going start changing thing now.

I can say I did ad my name but only after the link was posted for me to click on. I don't rember seeing a link on here? Perhaps admin on the site could post a link to such important matters?