Interesting statistic on gun crime in UK

Sparks

Fratton Fred wrote: »

ncidentally, where do you buy a legal handgun from (supposing you could)? a gun shop? would they not have large stocks of guns and therefore become a target for criminals in the way a gun club is supposed to?

Shops are in towns. Hard to spend an hour with a jackhammer on the front door of a shop in the middle of the town without being noticed. (And you'd need a jackhammer because of the regulations about gun shop strongrooms). Clubs however, because they involve firing firearms, are usually not located in the middle of a town, and are usually in out-of-the-way sites out in the countryside. Miles from anywhere. Makes them easier targets for robbery.

for the time being, removing guns from the country seems to be the best option imho.

Which country? There aren't any pistols left in the UK other than air pistols. And it hasn't worked - gun crime there is two actual orders of magnitude higher than before the ban.

It wasn't me!

Fratton Fred wrote: »

When the ban came into place, there were not many pistols in the UK full stop, legal or otherwise. Until the situation is under control then i don't think the government can contemplate removing the ban as no one has any idea what it will do.

Wiki seems to suggest there were about 57000 legally held pistols before the ban, which is rather a lot, I should think, especially considering we have less than 2000 licensed pistols here.

Incidentally, where do you buy a legal handgun from (supposing you could)? a gun shop? would they not have large stocks of guns and therefore become a target for criminals in the way a gun club is supposed to?

In Ireland, dealers don't carry a stock of new pistols. They may have some second hand, but aren't allowed stock new ones for some reason. You arrange to import a pistol via a dealer, with the requisite paperwork, and deal with a seller outside the country. To be honest, the security arrangements in a firearms dealership are astounding. It's a bank vault.

for the time being, removing guns from the country seems to be the best option imho.

There is no evidence whatsoever to support that line of thinking. It's reactionary and, like all reactionary legislation, poorly thought out and ultimately probably harmful.

Fratton Fred

It wasn't me! wrote: »

Wiki seems to suggest there were about 57000 legally held pistols before the ban, which is rather a lot, I should think, especially considering we have less than 2000 licensed pistols here.



In Ireland, dealers don't carry a stock of new pistols. They may have some second hand, but aren't allowed stock new ones for some reason. You arrange to import a pistol via a dealer, with the requisite paperwork, and deal with a seller outside the country. To be honest, the security arrangements in a firearms dealership are astounding. It's a bank vault.



There is no evidence whatsoever to support that line of thinking. It's reactionary and, like all reactionary legislation, poorly thought out and ultimately probably harmful.

If gun clubs put in security like a bank vault, where's the problem?

how is the ban harmful? because a handful of people can't participate in a sport? ok I sympathise with those people, you can't tell me all 57,000 handguns were used in sport?

The ban may have been reactionary and badly thought out, but is it wise to repeal it at this time? I would sat not.

Besides the pro and con arguements, I can't really see any government loosening the gun laws at this time, due largely to political reasons.

It wasn't me!

Fratton Fred wrote: »

If gun clubs put in security like a bank vault, where's the problem?

As Sparks said, their location, largely away from urban areas due to concerns about noise and the like, makes clubs a far more attractive prospect than a shop in a town. Ultimately, no security system is entirely secure. There is nothing that can't be beaten, but you can make it a daunting prospect.

how is the ban harmful? because a handful of people can't participate in a sport? ok I sympathise with those people, you can't tell me all 57,000 handguns were used in sport?

Since as far as I'm aware, it was also the case in Britain that self-defence was not a legitimate reason for ownership of a firearm, yes I can. Why couldn't I? That's about 0.1% of the population indulging a sport. Why do you think it's so unthinkable that one in a thousand people participated in pistol sports?

The ban may have been reactionary and badly thought out, but is it wise to repeal it at this time? I would sat not.

You've yet to provide any evidence why it would be a bad idea though.

Besides the pro and con arguements, I can't really see any government loosening the gun laws at this time, due largely to political reasons.

You're quite correct. It's stupid, but you're quite correct.

RedPlanet

There are more statistics compiled at this site:
http://www.gun-control-network.org/GF05.htm
Yes it does show that gun injuries are higher today than before the ban.
Yet, statistically the numbers are falling for the last 3 years.
Incidentally the homicides by firearms including handguns are quite low.
The site doesn't give those statistics from before the ban however.

But regardless, I don't see a strong argument for repealing the ban in any of this. If anything, it demonstrates the UK should put more resources into combatting gun crime, and maybe they are.

Sparks

Fratton Fred wrote: »

If gun clubs put in security like a bank vault, where's the problem?

The problems are twofold - firstly, it would be so expensive that it would cripple the sport while achieving nothing; and secondly, it would not work anyway. Bank vaults are designed more to delay entry sufficiently to allow the police to interrupt the breakin, rather than to be impregnable. You can get into even the best vault given sufficient time and tools. But as I said above, if you're trying to blow the doors off a strongroom with explosives in the middle of a town, you'll be noticed rather rapidly and the robbery will most likely fail as a result; whereas if you're trying the same thing ten miles from the nearest town (and possibly quite a bit more from the nearest police stations), well, then the odds of successfully stealing a small armoury's contents go right up.

However, if you have the firearms stored securely in gun safes in the alarmed homes of the members of the club, you've made it just as hard to steal one firearm as clustering them all together makes it to steal a hundred.

how is the ban harmful?

Because it gave a false sense of security. Hamilton's rampage was not the fault of the tools he used, but was the fault of the system not catching that the man had lied on his renewal form and that he was after threatening with a firearm someone who'd complained to the police about him, and that he'd been kicked out of every shooting club he'd ever joined (being kicked out of a shooting club is not a minor thing, it's a giant flashing red light with accompanying waving flags - for it to happen several times without questions being asked is a serious failing on the part of the police).

However, instead of addressing the security holes in the system, Labour used the sentiment in the UK at the time to push through an incredibly draconian ban on what Hamilton had used, rather than addressing what he had done. Which means that Dunblane could happen tomorrow, but with knives or lump hammers or razor blades in apples.

That's the real problem here. Not that they did the wrong thing; but that they didn't do the necessary thing.

you can't tell me all 57,000 handguns were used in sport?

Are you kidding? You know nothing about the sport, but now you know that the legally issued target shooting pistols weren't being used for sport? On what grounds? Have you any idea of the size of the target shooting sport in the UK? Or elsewhere worldwide? It's one of the biggest sports in the world, and is the biggest in terms of the numbers of participants. It's the national sport of Switzerland, it's the number one sport in Italy, number three or four in Germany and France; it's massive. Just because it's not as big as the GAA in Ireland doesn't reflect on the numbers in the rest of the world. We're actually a special case here.

The ban may have been reactionary and badly thought out, but is it wise to repeal it at this time? I would sat not.

On what grounds?

Besides the pro and con arguements, I can't really see any government loosening the gun laws at this time, due largely to political reasons.

Yes, but that's not because of the law itself, it's because the crackdown of the law was done as an election stunt. Repealing it would be admitting that, and that'd be political suicide for Labour... but Labour won't be there forever...

RedPlanet

Sparks wrote: »

it's the number one sport in Italy....

Oh i doubt that.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sport_in_Italy
It doesn't even get mentioned in that wiki article.

It wasn't me!

RedPlanet wrote: »

Oh i doubt that.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sport_in_Italy
It doesn't even get mentioned in that wiki article.

Regardless of the ommissions of a Wikipedia article, it's quite huge in Italy.

RedPlanet

And you reckon it has more participants than football?

It wasn't me!

Didn't say that, purely because I don't have the figures to hand, but the country has an enormous number of ranges and facilities.

Also, it's important to remember that those playing football do not make up the numbers. Football is a spectator sport; shooting is not.

RedPlanet

Football is a team sport.
It requires numbers on the field to play.
Shooting does not.

Sparks

Participants yes. But participation means more than just sitting on the couch or in the stands yelling at a dozen lads who are the only ones actually doing anything.

Sparks

And shooting is a team sport. In fact Ireland won the World Championships team event in Olympic Trap in '02 (Clay pigeon shooting).

RedPlanet

Sparks wrote: »

And shooting is a team sport. In fact Ireland won the World Championships team event in Olympic Trap in '02 (Clay pigeon shooting).

And there's like what, 100 people in the country that even have heard of that?
So Sparks, do you believe that there more people playing "shooting" in Italy, than there are people playing football?

RedPlanet

Regardless,

Why should anybody care really, what sports the UK participate in?
What harm if the sport of Shooting is shut down?
There are probably more useless bans out there, like growing industrial hemp which could actually benefit the environment and the economy.

Sparks

RedPlanet wrote: »

And there's like what, 100 people in the country that even have heard of that?

More like 200,000. Which is roughly how many shooters we have in Ireland. And even if it wasn't that high, the merits of a thing are not determined by how many people know of it.

So Sparks, do you believe that there more people playing "shooting" in Italy, than there are people playing football?

Yes. Without a shadow of doubt, because there aren't that many people playing football. There are enormous numbers of folks who watch it, yes, but that's not the same thing.

RedPlanet wrote: »

Regardless, Why should anybody care really, what sports the UK participate in?

Because now they're hosting the Olympics in 2012, and three of the events in the Games will be illegal to partake in in the hosting nation.

What harm if the sport of Shooting is shut down?

Enormous harm. Economically, politically (one of the few rowbacks under McDowell was when he tried to hike the licence fees here by an extravagant amount - every shooter in the country was calling their local TD, calling the DoJ, and so on, and it was rolled back as a result) and in terms of sports (our best chance for a medal this year in Beijing is from Derek Burnett, a shotgun shooter - and that's not from me, it's from the Sports Council, the Olympic Council and the DoAST. We can't compete in Athletics or the other "Big" sports, there's too much money invested by larger nations into them. But sports like shooting are ones where we have proven we can beat the best the world has to offer, time and again).

oscarBravo

RedPlanet wrote: »

What harm if the sport of Shooting is shut down?

What harm if the sport of football is shut down?

What harm if the sport of baseball is shut down?

I have no interest in either of these sports, therefore there can be no negative consequences if they disappear.

Fratton Fred

Sparks wrote: »

More like 200,000. Which is roughly how many shooters we have in Ireland. And even if it wasn't that high, the merits of a thing are not determined by how many people know of it.Yes. Without a shadow of doubt, because there aren't that many people playing football. There are enormous numbers of folks who watch it, yes, but that's not the same thing.Because now they're hosting the Olympics in 2012, and three of the events in the Games will be illegal to partake in in the hosting nation.Enormous harm. Economically, politically (one of the few rowbacks under McDowell was when he tried to hike the licence fees here by an extravagant amount - every shooter in the country was calling their local TD, calling the DoJ, and so on, and it was rolled back as a result) and in terms of sports (our best chance for a medal this year in Beijing is from Derek Burnett, a shotgun shooter - and that's not from me, it's from the Sports Council, the Olympic Council and the DoAST. We can't compete in Athletics or the other "Big" sports, there's too much money invested by larger nations into them. But sports like shooting are ones where we have proven we can beat the best the world has to offer, time and again).

sorry, but it is laughable to say more people shoot than play football, anywhere. Professional football maybe, but you go to any park in any country in europe and there are kids kicking a ball around.

ok, in parts of Dublin and london the same applies to guns, but it kinda aint the same thing.

RedPlanet

Sparks wrote: »

But sports like shooting are ones where we have proven we can beat the best the world has to offer, time and again).

Huh?
Ireland haven't even one a single Olympic medal, and yet here you are claiming we are great.
Boxing is our best Olympic sport, and that's because Ireland's won most of it's Olympic medals there.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shooting_at_the_Summer_Olympics

RedPlanet

oscarBravo wrote: »

What harm if the sport of football is shut down?

What harm if the sport of baseball is shut down?

I have no interest in either of these sports, therefore there can be no negative consequences if they disappear.

Football is a very huge commerical industry the world over.
Olympic Shooting is not.
The UK has shut down the sport of Shooting in that country, what were the consequences you allude?

Sparks

RedPlanet wrote: »

Huh? Ireland haven't even one a single Olympic medal, and yet here you are claiming we are great.

Actually, we have one in target shooting. Granted, it's dusty, but the World Championship gold medal isn't, nor are the individual and team gold, silver and bronze medals from several world cups over the past four years. And Derek's currently ranked in the top ten in the world and finished in 7th place in Athens. Given the funding level shooting sees in this country, on a cost/benefit basis it's our most successful sport. Bar none. (And yes, I mean none, including the GAA, FAI, IRFU and everything else out there).

oscarBravo

RedPlanet wrote: »

Football is a very huge commerical industry the world over.

Yes, but is associated with hooliganism. If we can eliminate the hooliganism associated with football, surely the loss of entertainment and commercial value is a small price to pay?

Similarly, baseball bats are often used in violent crime. It's time this scourge was removed from our streets.






Do you see where I'm going with this?

RedPlanet

oscarBravo wrote: »

Yes, but is associated with hooliganism. If we can eliminate the hooliganism associated with football, surely the loss of entertainment and commercial value is a small price to pay?

Similarly, baseball bats are often used in violent crime. It's time this scourge was removed from our streets.
Do you see where I'm going with this?

It doesn't matter if football gets associated with hooliganism.
Because so many millions upon millions of kids, teens and adults play it.
You can add up all the damage done via hooliganism and it probably doesn't even amount for the wages of one top premiership player.
Unlike guns, baseball bats are engineered for killing power.
So tell me the consquences the UK has endured for shutting down Shooting.

Sparks

RedPlanet wrote: »

Football is a very huge commerical industry the world over.
Olympic Shooting is not.

Actually, it is. And when you go beyond just Olympic shooting, it gets much larger. Most people don't ever see the scale of it because it's not something most people think about. That does not, however, mean it goes away, it's like US oil imports. No-one thinks of Canada, but they're still the biggest source of oil for the US...

The UK has shut down the sport of Shooting in that country, what were the consequences you allude?

Economic problems started with the compensation program for every firearm and related piece of equipment handed in; the program ran to several times its initial budget. Gunshops closed and jobs were lost directly. And money started flowing out as the last few elite athletes started training in France and Switzerland, at a cost of about six grand (sterling) a weekend, paid for by taxpayers. Politically, there were massive protests at the time, and even today there are motions to repeal the ban every month in parliament; and in four years, you'll watch as the British Army guards Olympic Athletes as they go to and from the Village, not from others, but just in case they run off with their own pistols, because their sport is illegal in the host nation. Odds are that the next election will see a partial repeal of the ban at least, as part of the Tory election promises. It's that big a political embarrassment, especially with little things happening every month or two like a pistol shooter being knighted for taking the record for the largest number of medals ever won by an English athlete in the Commonwealth games.

Sparks

Fratton Fred wrote: »

sorry, but it is laughable to say more people shoot than play football, anywhere. Professional football maybe, but you go to any park in any country in europe and there are kids kicking a ball around.

Kicking a ball about versus formal matches. Not the same thing. If you want to go down that road, we'll just count airsoft , paintball, target shooting, hunting, and little kids playing cowboys and indians with toy guns all in the same lot, shall we?

RedPlanet

Sparks wrote: »

Actually, we have one in target shooting. Granted, it's dusty,

Is it over 100 years old?
Did they fly the Union Jack at the podium?
How it is an irish gold medal if that's the case?

Sparks

RedPlanet wrote: »

It doesn't matter if football gets associated with hooliganism.
Because so many millions upon millions of kids, teens and adults play it.
You can add up all the damage done via hooliganism and it probably doesn't even amount for the wages of one top premiership player.

So one top premiership player can pay for more than one human life then?
More people have been injured or killed by football hooliganism than by target shooting.

But oscar's point is a good one - banning football to stop hooliganism is very similar to the ban on pistols in the UK, because in both cases you're punishing an innocent group of people for the actions of a criminal who was rejected by that group and whom the law said should not have been involved in that sport thereafter.

Sparks

RedPlanet wrote: »

Is it over 100 years old?
Did they fly the Union Jack at the podium?
How it is an irish gold medal if that's the case?

Because it was won by an Irish shooter, who was at that time shooting on the Irish shooting team in the Home Counties matches.
But since you don't want to reach, look at the last decade. One world championships gold medal (2002), and a good double handful of gold, silver and bronze medals (both in team and individual events) in world cups and continental championships. And don't forget, those are more difficult fields of competition than the Olympics, because the Olympics is participation-oriented, but the World Championships and World Cups are performance-oriented. The scores are always lower in the Games than they are in the Championships.

Sparks

And we haven't even mentioned the other shooting disciplines, by the way, and they have an equally impressive list of medals won.
Face it - in terms of funding versus medals, shooting is Ireland's most successful sport.

RedPlanet

You should take your Shooting is bigger than Football (in Italy) here:
http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2055351652
Enjoy.