What do you think of our current President?

[Njaco]

President who??

[rogthedodge]

Just to correct a common mis-conception seen on here - in the UK we do have firearms, lots of them.

It's just that we have restrictions on certain types and stricter procedures for getting them. Still no autos but you can get handguns - basic principle (for firearms) is that you have to prove a need - not just a desire to own. Shotguns no issue.

TBH given our small crowded island the restrictions are sensible and do allow responsible shooters to enjoy their sport.

[drgondog]

Originally Posted by rogthedodge

Just to correct a common mis-conception seen on here - in the UK we do have firearms, lots of them.

It's just that we have restrictions on certain types and stricter procedures for getting them. Still no autos but you can get handguns - basic principle (for firearms) is that you have to prove a need - not just a desire to own. Shotguns no issue.

TBH given our small crowded island the restrictions are sensible and do allow responsible shooters to enjoy their sport.

Unless you try to defend yourself and home against an intruder. Far better to blow your own brains out than injure the criminal. Defending yourself or home or loved ones is not 'sufficient need' but the State will not protect you or your property from intruders or muggings.

It wasn't until recently that the British Pistol team was allowed to practice for Olympic Shooting in Britain - had to travel to France to practice pistols.

2nd Amendment here is about a.) defense of Life Liberty and Pursuit of Happiness, and b.) providing for a ready militia in a time of national emergency

Britain, like most countries fear 'armed Peasants'

Only the elite have the common senses to govern, you know, and must be protected from predators - which is why we beat King George, because we didn't hold with such aristocratic notions.

[rogthedodge]

Sorry?

I don't know where you get your 'expertise' on UK law from but you're completely wrong:

We have a law of self-defence, you can take life under this law and escape prosecution - people do frequently. You'll probably cite Tony Martin in response and further demonstrate that you don't understand the law.

Pistol target shooting is not a 'need' and therefore doesn't pass the test - humane deer despatch does. Pistols now being granted for the latter.

It cracks me up that so many Americans bang on about our firearm laws, and yet understand so little. I shoot regularly and I think they're about right for our country. Your firearm laws and their suitability for your situation are a matter for you - and vice-versa!

The 2nd amendment is about b. not a. (seems you don't even understand your own constitution)

You overthrew the British rule primarily because of taxes.

[DerAdlerIstGelandet]

Originally Posted by drgondog

Britain, like most countries fear 'armed Peasants'

Only the elite have the common senses to govern, you know, and must be protected from predators - which is why we beat King George, because we didn't hold with such aristocratic notions.

That is a bit harsh and a bit of an ignorant statement if you ask me...

Sorry, I just call it like I see it.

[drgondog]

Originally Posted by rogthedodge

Sorry?

I don't know where you get your 'expertise' on UK law from but you're completely wrong:

We have a law of self-defence, you can take life under this law and escape prosecution - people do frequently. You'll probably cite Tony Martin in response and further demonstrate that you don't understand the law.

Pistol target shooting is not a 'need' and therefore doesn't pass the test - humane deer despatch does. Pistols now being granted for the latter.

It cracks me up that so many Americans bang on about our firearm laws, and yet understand so little. I shoot regularly and I think they're about right for our country. Your firearm laws and their suitability for your situation are a matter for you - and vice-versa!

The 2nd amendment is about b. not a. (seems you don't even understand your own constitution)

You overthrew the British rule primarily because of taxes.

Roge - if you wish to pose as a Constitutional Expert on our 2nd Amendment, you better do more than read the Bill of Rights.

Start with Emerson vs US in 5th Circuit...it is a 100% and complete affirmation that every citizen has the right to keep and bear firearms independent of 'militia', and specifically has the right to own a firearm for self defense.. The recent ruling in the Appeals Court overseeing the District of Columbia restrictions on private ownership is another affirmation.

Then read both the Federalists and Anti-Federalist Papers as well as the debates during the Constitutional Congress. If the though bores you - so be it but they are the foundation for Intent by the Founding Fathers on this subject

I do agree your point about suitability for each point of view in our respective countries but not all of your countrymen agree with you as not all of mine agree with mine.... but 80,000,000 plus of mine basically agree and are armed

Now explain again how easy it is to be 'approved' for ownership based on self defense? I had a draconian prcess explained to me which is a.) long, and b.) mostly ends in rejection - so your comments suprise me

Are you saying all you have to do is state that you are a law abiding citizen, pass a speedy background check and desire a pistol for home defense? LOL!

I could be wrong by laughing Roge but my experience with Brit authorities, the conversations I have with my shooting friends such as Chris Potter a well respected firearms dealer lead me to believe you are a little 'subtle' in your description of 'ease' of paperwork to obtain permission to own a pistol for self defense -

I have to have a law enforcement officer write a letter of recommendation, belong to a 'legitimate' Gun Club, submit paperwork in advance, have it approved, to merely Pass a rifle THROUGH your country on the way to Africa - in checked baggage! Which is one reason I NEVER fly BA anymore, for any reason... I, and many of my friends who hunt Europe and Africa avoid UK like the plague for the hassle we receive from your authorities.

Last - As to Taxes being the Cause for Brits 'going away'?

You mean we just asked 'pretty please' and you packed your wigs and talcum and hopped on the boat?

a 'desire' to overthrow George based on taxes was insufficient force to overthrow Brit rule Roge. The Army of the Revolution was comprised of Citizen Soldiers Roge - not a professional army with unified arms and existing tactics, doctrine, etc... and they didn't defeat the Brit Army by throwing tea in the water or refusing to pay taxes.

[drgondog]

Originally Posted by DerAdlerIstGelandet

That is a bit harsh and a bit of an ignorant statement if you ask me...

Sorry, I just call it like I see it.

Please call 'em as you see 'em Chris. I've been guilty of harsh and ignorant in my past - why believe in infallibility today?

However, if you think the 16th to 19th Century Japanese, the Germans, the French, the Brits, etc permitted their citizens to own rifles as a matter of 'right' you may be ill informed.

The Royal families were many things but stupid was not high on that list - the potential of a rifle ball to knock off god's favored few by the many peasants in Europe or Asia was not lost on Kings and Princes or the Clergy.

Do you have any contra opinions or facts as to why peasants were not permitted firearms?..

Do you have other examples of monarchies or dictatorships trusting their citizens to keep and own firearms in the 1500-1800 timeframe?

In the case of 'today' do you think the United Nations leadership or EU leadership envision the ultimate right of individuals to keep and bear firearms for self defence?

or did you have another point regarding my ignorance?

Regards,

Bill

[rogthedodge]

Again you fail to understand - I said nothing about self defence being a legitimate need to own a firearm in the UK - it's not!

I said 'firearm' you reply about 'pistols'

So you're arguing against a point I didn't make.

Chris Potter? - He's a well-known dealer but unless you have attributable quotes I'd leave him out of it.

The second amendment IS about the militia - it's not about 'defense of Life Liberty and Pursuit of Happiness' - that's not IN the 2nd amendment, as you claimed.

That phrase isn't even in the US constitution - it's in the Declaration of Independence

b. not a. - as I said.

Given that you don't understand your own constitutional matters how you can claim any insight about our laws is beyond me.

Strangely we apply our laws to visitors as strictly as we apply them at home - we know UK firearms holders are checked carefully - you'd like us to allow any Tom, Dick or Osama in just 'cos they're foreign & armed??

Read your history ' no taxation without representation' - ring any bells?

No taxation without representation - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

[Aussie1001]

THE POMMYS GOT A POINT !!!!!!!

[drgondog]

Originally Posted by rogthedodge

Again you fail to understand - I said nothing about self defence being a legitimate need to own a firearm in the UK - it's not!

I said 'firearm' you reply about 'pistols'

Sir - you implied that self dense was an easy case to make with Brit authotities, now you wish to disqualify a side arm as a legitimate self defense tool. Now is a time to Laugh On Line!
So you're arguing against a point I didn't make.

Chris Potter? - He's a well-known dealer but unless you have attributable quotes I'd leave him out of it.

I will leave Chris out of it Roge but he won't support any case YOU wish to make. If you actually know Potter, and you want to press about me remind him of his visits to DFW in the 80's and shooting flyers at Bob Leonard's ranch in west Fort Worth with Dallas Gun Club members, including myself.!

The second amendment IS about the militia - it's not about 'defense of Life Liberty and Pursuit of Happiness' - that's not IN the 2nd amendment, as you claimed.

The Bill of Rights are unalienable rights granted by god to each human being... not collective rights to an abstract. I claimed that the Right to Keep and Bear Firearms IS not only in the Second Amendment (as an individual right - not collective) but also embodied in the Declaration of Indpendence, the Federalist Papers, the Anti Federalist Papers, the Virginia Constitution, the 5th Circuit Appeals ruling on Emerson vs US as well as the most recent ruling by the 3rd Court of Appeals

That phrase isn't even in the US constitution - it's in the Declaration of Independence

b. not a. - as I said.

You said correctly with respect to the precise language embodied, not the intent of the founding Fathers or to the basis of the to the 2nd Amendment - you are wrong with respect to isolation to 'militia' or rejection of the right to self defense.

The Declaration of Independence IS THE Foundation Document and Governing Principles for the US Constitution. The Federalist and Anti Federalist Papers and debates were the framework to embody the details for the Constitution!

Given that you don't understand your own constitutional matters how you can claim any insight about our laws is beyond me.

I have forgotten more than you will know about the US Constitution. I just asked a simple question - which may have been far beyond your grasp of the issues - does your goverment trust your citizens with pistols, with pump shotguns, with semi-auto shotguns, with semi auto matic rifles? simple question - you keep evading it.

If you wish to debate my knowledge of the US Constitution or its derivatives - come ahead! The first question is who forced James Madison to submit a draft Bill of Rights with the proposed US Constitution for Ratification by the States - and why?

Strangely we apply our laws to visitors as strictly as we apply them at home - we know UK firearms holders are checked carefully - you'd like us to allow any Tom, Dick or Osama in just 'cos they're foreign & armed??

In?? do you consider 'transit' without access in any way to locked storage, 'In' ?? Do you ask Osama from Pakistan for a Certificate from HIS local 'authority?? \

my last desire is to leave the transit terminal when in UK.

Read your history ' no taxation without representation' - ring any bells?

Why yes Roge - but the 'slogan' isn't what threw the Brits out on their ass twice - it was 'simple' force of arms by ordinary citizens, armed! have to give the Brits credit where credit is due - you didn't meekly submit to our outrage over the way you treated us 'colonists' - you actually resisted us in our joy of throwing you out! and BTW quartering of Troops, restriction of Right of Free Speech were also high on the list of outrages.

Roge - as to your feeble attempts at demeaning my knowledge of History - I have a Masters Degree in History to accompany my degree(s) in Engineering - if you wish to debate academic credentials bring it on!

No taxation without representation - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

And So, does the Brit Government trust their Law abiding citizens with the right to keep and bear firearms? Yes or No? If Yes - cite facts.

[Aussie1001]

I must agree rog your island is pitifially small, one Queensland (state in Auz which i happen to live in) can fit 13 englands in it. In australia gun laws are very tight after a psycho went nuts around 15 years ago and killed 30 people.
We have 3 reasons we can apply for gun use:
1) hunting- Self explanitory
2) Use on a farm- farm needs to be larger than 40 acers
3) Club- Owner must vist a club a set number of times a year to retain licence. How about you guys, can you get minors licences we can.

[drgondog]

Roge - I know you will be waiting in breathless anticipation regarding the number of Regular Army plus volunteers that were available to the Colonies when we revolted the first time and resisted the second time;

Soldiers of the War of Revolution - 289,715 (total served all years all durations) with 50 officers and 672 EM of the Regular Army included

Soldiers of the War of 1812 -serving more than 6 months - militia- 66,325
Regular Army officers 301/1475 and 2,835 for 1812-1814
Regular Army EM 17,560/35,701/31,028 for same period.

You suppose that the RA or US Government furnished the weapons?

A truly awesome force when compared to Napoleaon at Waterloo..??

How could you lose - twice?

When the War between the States started there were 1,004 and 15,148 Regular Army Officers and Enlisted Men - less for 1914. How could this country compete against the battle hardened empires of Europe?

Source - Twenty Years of Congress - James G Blaine Rand, Avery and Company 1884.

How well prepared was Great Britain when the German invasion was close 1940? When we had to ship 100's of thousands of rifles to GB?

[Njaco]

Dick Cheney has a gun and he's Vice-President.

[rogthedodge]

I can't argue against what you think I said, only what I actually said

I never said or implied self-defence was a legitmate need. It's not, as I said. Read what I said - carefully - and you'll see your error. Feel free to quote me and prove me wrong.

You said the second amendment was about stuff beyond the militia/right to bear arms which it patently isn't. You were incorrect.

Yes we can have shotguns -S/A, pump and 'normal' ones - your mate Chris sells loads - surprised he didn't tell you!

Pistols - if you can prove a NEED then yes - see comment about humane despatch. Long barrel and black powder allowed for sporting use too.

S/A rifles only in .22, straight pull/bolt or double-barrel apart from that - any calibre is fine (.50) and beyond - if you can prove a NEED.

Why I should bother finding sources to quash your ignorance / prejudices is beyond me.
But to start you off:
guntrader.co.uk (or maybe I just created that site to back up my point )

You won your war of independence - that's not in dispute (except in your mind). To claim it was originally due to some loathing for the monarchy per se is applying hindight and then some. History is clear on this. That was, and is, my only point on the war.

You seem very keen to re-fight the War of Independence why???

No-one disputes the contribution of sporting rifles by the US early in the war, I've acknowledged this in previous posts.

Quite honestly I think you're reaching / trying to pick a fight as you've been caught out .

[rogthedodge]

Originally Posted by Aussie1001

I must agree rog your island is pitifially small, one Queensland (state in Auz which i happen to live in) can fit 13 englands in it. In australia gun laws are very tight after a psycho went nuts around 15 years ago and killed 30 people.
We have 3 reasons we can apply for gun use:
1) hunting- Self explanitory
2) Use on a farm- farm needs to be larger than 40 acers
3) Club- Owner must vist a club a set number of times a year to retain licence. How about you guys, can you get minors licences we can.

Ah yes but we may be small have culture, I know I've been to Oz That's why there's so many Ozzies here.

Gun laws are tight here but not as tight as some think


Shotguns - no issue you can have one if you're a decent sort (not too many convictions etc). Any action any gauge. 3 shot maximum (like you - psychos to thank for that). If you try you can get a sporting exemption for that clause and get 6 or more shot).

No age restriction on use, on a certificate to own I think it's 14.

Pistols are tricky due to psycho killing kids in Scotland - if you have a need (see above) then you can, it's rare but possible .357 Mag is favoured for deer despatch.

Rifles S/a only in .22, above that only bolt/straight-pull or dbl barrel - again you must have a NEED, hunting, target only is not enough.

Ammo restrictions on purchase / holding limits only on firearms (not shotties)

In practice it's fairly simple, get a shotty, get some land (ie permissionto shoot on someone else's), a few checks and then you can get FAC (firearms cert), get a couple of rifles and then apply for a 'variation' for each extra rifle / calibre you require.

Bottom line is if you're savvy you can get pretty much anything, there's a thriving .50 cal shooting club or two

Self-defence is not a NEED and mentioning it is unlikley to help your case. You can, of course, shoot in self defence but the practicalities of storage would make it pratically difficult to do and still prove self-defence.

Actually our laws / processes are not that different from those in some US states although the pistol thing is the big difference.

HTH

R