Off Topic Chat. (MOD NOTE post# 3949 and post#5279)

gunny123

Grizzly 45 wrote: »

Cal Ward's blog post[long] on why do many women find shooting and guns "toxic masculinity"?[While tearing their fellow sisters who hunt and shoot and own guns to bits]

https://calward.blogspot.com/2018/08/women-feminism-and-guns.html?m=1

Because its not "Right-on sister". I have a sneaking suspicion, that a huge amount of people, hide their real opinions on things, for the sake of being popular, especially on things like social media.

A fella i worked with absolutely hated gays, but he kept it quiet and in public was all support for them, especially on social media, bookface and all that rubbish. But in private he had not a good word for them.

I think a lot of this goes on.

gunny123

tac foley wrote: »

This is patently NOT true, or else you would not be allowed to legally acquire and possess a handgun in Northern Ireland - part of the UK that decided to exempt itself from the 1997 revised laws.


In FACT, many many thousands of us here in mainland UK STILL have handguns. I have two - a .44cal Ruger Old Army black powder revolver, and a Ruger Super Redhawk .357Magnum long-barrelled revolver. In accordance with the law, the barrel is 12 inches long, and it has a rod-like extension to the butt to make it 24" long overall. The first example, a loose-loading black powder cap and ball handgun, is a gun that I can share with anybody coming to the gun club on a guest day, the second is one that only the license-holder may shoot. There are NO long-barrelled centre-fire semi-auto handguns, but here ARE numerous .22cal semi-auto pistols. In addition, veterinarians may have a centre-fire handgun, restricted to two shots, for the purpose of humane despatch of large animals.

However, you CAN have a cartridge-firing handgun by applying for a Section 7 form of FAC. In the first type, you may acquire and possess the gun, even keep it at home, but you may NOT shoot it - ever. In the second type, you may own it, and shoot it in the interests of historical research etc, but only at a nominated location, where the gun and its ammunition must be stored. It's rather like have a relative in jail that you can visit and play cards with, under the watchful eye of a supervisor, presumably to make sure that you are not having fun.

Having commanded troops, and at the same time been publicly branded a child-slaughtering mass-murderer and been deprived of my many thousands of £££-worth of legal handguns by the government of this country, I chose not to go down this route, and therefore limit myself to what is easiest to have.

For anybody who has read this far, it won't do much more than hurt your eyes to read what goes in to the ownership of prohibited firearm here in the mainland.

None of this rigmarole applies in Northern Ireland, BTW.

Take a deep breath, and......................


Heritage Pistol (Section 7.1 & 7.3)

(List of Heritage Pistol Sites)

Section 7(1) and Section 7(3) of the Firearms Act were promulgated and achieved following the efforts of the HBSA and others to preserve the “Heritage” pistols in danger of being destroyed following the Dunblane tragedy. In brief Section 7(1) permits certain pistols to be held at home as part of a collection, without ammunition, and allows them to be exhibited; while 7(3) permits the possession and use of heritage pistols at certain designated sites. It is possible to own one or more section 7(3) pistols without having a recognised collection.

It should be noted that both section 7(1) and section 7(3) are essentially a means to enable the use of a Firearms Certificate granted by a chief officer of police to authorise the possession and possible use of a section 5 “prohibited” firearm. There is however an essential difference between section 1 and section 7(1) or 7(3) authorities. Section 1 certification in its pure unconditioned form grants unrestricted use of the firearm (within the law that is), and conditions are added to restrict use, whilst for sections 7(1) and 7(3) authority for possession (and use in the case of 7(3)) is granted only under specific terms. In other words, for the latter all is forbidden unless specifically authorised. One side effect of this has led to restriction of research, because users are prohibited from testing or handling each other's pistols unless these are specifically entered on their certificates or some other authority is given, since the possession and use of a section 7(3) pistol does not benefit from the Home Office Approved Club exemption regarding possession and use.


The operation of the Act has settled down in most regions. The administration of Heritage Sites by the Police has in the past caused problems to some administrators through widely differing interpretations of the Guidance, as well as licence conditions. These aspects have been addressed by the Section 7(3) Forum of Designated Site Managers. However, for users, the procedures for applying to acquire pistols and justifying their eligibility are now largely in place.


Section 7 was established primarily for the purpose of the preservation, collecting, demonstration, research and study of pistols of historic or heritage interest. Pistols may be used at the sites of storage for these purposes alone, and section 7 of the Act does not permit target practice or competition. The Act, and the accompanying Guidance are helpful in defining the pistols that may be preserved. (See the Home Office web site for a copy of the Guidance to the Police - Chapter 9 is the section referring to Section 7 pistols.)


The applicant is required to demonstrate to the police that a pistol fulfils one or more of the criteria given in the law, and how these may be interpreted is can be found in the Guidance The specific examples given in the Guidance can be extrapolated to other types of pistol. ‘Good reason’ as used under section 1 of the Act does not apply to section 7. In fact the term ‘good reason’ is not included in section 7 of the Act. Whilst section 7(1) pistols may be kept ‘as part of a collection’, the good reason (or more accurately, qualification criterion) aspect for 7(3) is more diverse, relating to those headings in the law under which each pistol falls. The most important difference is that the pistol need not be part of a collection, although as discussed below, collection qualifies and is now a favoured criterion. Most forces will not accept a Section 1-style application for an open undefined variation for a pistol (e.g. ‘One .450 revolver’). Justification for a specific pistol is required for each variation, and commonly this comprises details of the make, model (if applicable) and serial number (to assist the police in verifying date of manufacture), date of manufacture (if already known to the applicant) and a statement demonstrating its eligibility according to one or more of the four tenets in primary legislation, namely: ‘historical importance’, ‘aesthetic quality’', ‘technical interest’, and ‘particular rarity’. Each of these is defined in the Guidance and this should be read and consulted by 7(3) certificate holders. It is sufficient for a pistol to fulfil one of these alone. For a more recent pistol (for example post WW2), an exponentially stronger justification is required. The qualification (or ‘good reason’') thus centres on the pistol itself under these circumstances. In addition, more common pistols are held to fall under the definition of ‘Historical Importance’ when they form part of a genuine collection, as detailed in paragraph 9.21iv of the Guidelines.


For difficult cases, the police have recourse to a Home Office Historic Arms Reference Panel of experts. Note, however, that, when a more common type pistol is allowed as part of a collection, its 7(3) status is not permanently assured. A subsequent buyer would have to make the case for it all over again. The police will usually advise, when granting the variation, that the pistol is not being given 7(3) status in its own right, but only as a coherent and logical part of an existing collection.


Commonly, the variation will be for the specific pistol and serial number requested, though on occasion in some police areas variations are made for a particular type of pistol, this gives the collector a certain leeway if there is a choice or ‘opportune’ moment.


Pistols are stored at Sites Designated by the Secretary of State. For maintenance, or, more commonly, refurbishment and conservation by gunsmiths, the authority of the issuing police is required in writing to the owner before the pistol may be moved from the site, and this by a section 5(1)(aba) dealer with a specific authority to transport such prohibited weapons. This includes pistols that are transported by section 5aba dealers on the behalf of owners for academic purposes such as research, study, and lectures (such as those given to the HBSA). In addition, 7.3 pistols may now be exhibited at some specified HBSA section 7 events, albeit under stringent conditions.


Ammunition is either bought or made at the site, or, if purchased away from the site, must be delivered there by the dealer from whom it is purchased. The only exception to this is when the Certificate holder owns a Section 1 firearm which uses the identical cartridge, and for which he is already permitted an ammunition holding under Section 1. Levels of ammunition holdings by the owner reflect the need as it would under section 1. Thus those undertaking regular research may be justified in requiring more than those who are not. On the other hand batch holdings of ammunition may be important to ensure consistency of performance between range attendances. Some cartridges are now hard to source or are in irregular supply. It must be noted that use is light in comparison to competitive shooting and practice, considering the pistols' ages and the type of use.


Acquiring Section 7 pistols has become more straightforward as the system has now been in use for some time. Many auction houses offer Section 5 pistols. Also many of the designated sites involve section 5(1)(aba) dealers who can supply or arrange delivery, including from abroad. The authority of the issuing Force is required by the owner before moving, as detailed earlier. Designated Sites are not permitted to deal in, or own, 7(3) pistols, but any section 5(1)(aba) RFD of course may do so.


It should be said that all of the Sites have been excellent in keeping access open to owners, and in seeking to accommodate them. In all cases they have had to work extremely hard to achieve the standards required to gain their authority. In many instances the Designated Site feature to a range is a ‘loss leader’, and a labour of love. Those who wish to extend their section 7 collections into section 7(3), who wish to move to a site closer to home, or otherwise need to use the section 7(3) scheme to preserve heritage pistols should contact their nearest Site.





tac

Or you could say "sod this i'm off", sell up, move to the USA or Europe, probably earn better a better salary with better prospects, buy a better house, car etc, and if you want to buy a gun, it is a simple matter where you are not treated like a simpleton or child.

gunny123

Cass wrote: »

The hypocrisy of this man and the claims he makes. Claims of not needing "weapons". He was referring to weapons of war, but it's a fine distinction he makes to keep him on the "right" side as he has this in his basement, and that is only the "for show" stuff.

LUKE 22.36 :

Jesus said :

Then said he unto them, But now, he that hath a purse, let him take it, and likewise his scrip: and he that hath no sword, let him sell his garment, and buy one.

Grizzly 45

Couple of others on self-defence and RTKBA from the cosmic Sky Wizards PR manual.
1. Exodus 22:2-3 “If a thief is caught in the act of breaking into a house and is struck and killed in the process, the person who killed the thief is not guilty of murder. But if it happens in daylight, the one who killed the thief is guilty of murder.”

2. Luke 11:21 “When a strong man, fully armed, guards his own mansion, his property is safe.”

3. Isaiah 49:25 “Who can snatch the plunder of war from the hands of a warrior? Who can demand that a tyrant let his captives go?”

10. Psalm 144:1 “Praise the Lord, who is my rock. He trains my hands for war and gives my fingers skill for battle.”

11. Psalm 18:34 “He trains my hands for battle; he strengthens my arm to draw a bronze bow.”

gunny123

This programme is on tonight at 8.30. I wonder how many times i will shake my head when the buzzwords start flying, "high-powered", "Misfiring", "Magazine clip"................


https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/p06hj89l

tac foley

gunny123 wrote: »

This programme is on tonight at 8.30. I wonder how many times i will shake my head when the buzzwords start flying, "high-powered", "Misfiring", "Magazine clip"................


https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/p06hj89l

I've just watched it.


At no time were any of those words mentioned.


Nor was the word 'primer' without which no round of ammunition can be fired.


In UK primers can only be sold face-to-face, on production of a firearms certificate which details the primers that you are permitted to acquire. I only shoot a revolver that uses small pistol primers, and rifles that use large rifle primers. So I cannot buy large pistol primers or small rifle primers. Propellants can also only be bought after showing your FAC to the dealer.


The reporter gave a false name and address to the antique dealer at the Militaria, Arms and Arnour show in Birmingham. This is a criminal offence as he did not disclose that he might have been a person for whom even the purchase of a Section 58 [obslolete calibre ]antique handgun is illegal. The dealer is similarly amiss in not checking the ID.


tac

gunny123

tac foley wrote: »

I've just watched it.


At no time were any of those words mentioned.


Nor was the word 'primer' without which no round of ammunition can be fired.


In UK primers can only be sold face-to-face, on production of a firearms certificate which details the primers that you are permitted to acquire. I only shoot a revolver that uses small pistol primers, and rifles that use large rifle primers. So I cannot buy large pistol primers or small rifle primers. Propellants can also only be bought after showing your FAC to the dealer.


The reporter gave a false name and address to the antique dealer at the Militaria, Arms and Arnour show in Birmingham. This is a criminal offence as he did not disclose that he might have been a person for whom even the purchase of a Section 58 [obslolete calibre ]antique handgun is illegal. The dealer is similarly amiss in not checking the ID.


tac

Yes i was amazed there were no buzz words, first time for everything, but there were no semi-autos mentioned at all.

I think the way to go is to make serious collectors licenced or authorised, you have to be cleared by the police, the situation obviously cannot continue like it has, and the only alternative is to completely ban obsolete cartridge handguns. Which would be a shame.

Some lovely guns shown in that police lock-up, cased Webley's and Cogswell and Harrison revolvers. I suppose they have a date with the furnace.

tac foley

gunny123 wrote: »

I think the way to go is to make serious collectors licenced or authorised, you have to be cleared by the police, the situation obviously cannot continue like it has, and the only alternative is to completely ban obsolete cartridge handguns. Which would be a shame.

Serious collectors are already 'licensed and authorised' by the police authorities, where their firearms are Section 1 [rifled] live firers. It is the making of illegal ammunition that is the problem here, added to the predisposition of young black men to want to slaughter each other, sometimes with guns, but more often with knives.


A lot of total tosh was also spoken by the lawyer, who seemed somehow to have overlooked the current firearms laws that prevail in the UK, that make it hard enough to LEGALLY obtain a firearm, and a criminal offence to possess one without the necessary authorisation.


There will be more said about this awful programme, I'm sure.


tac

tac foley

One poster on another forum that I visit has already sent a letter of compalint to the Watchdog...

Your Panorama episode made two glaring errors/omissions.

The first was the interview with the Criminal QC who claimed it was easier to purchase a gun than scrap metal. Whilst this is true of antique firearms, it is a complete generalisation and factually untrue for most firearms. In order to acquire a firearm, a licence must be held, the police must give authority to acquire, you must tell the police you have acquired (with serial number) as must the firearms dealer. The interview gave a generalisation which gave an incorrect view/opinion to those that don't know the law.

The second was the presenter discussing the purchase of components to make your own ammunition via handloading. The presenter claimed that all the components could be purchased online, and on some websites, this could be done without a licence.

This is untrue and completely illegal. A point that neither the program or the presenter made or even tried to insinuate.

Under the Violent Crime Reduction Act 2006 - in order to acquire primers for firearms, the purchaser must possess a firearms licence, show it to the dealer and then, they can only purchase primers that match a calibre on their licence. It is an offence under Section 35 of this act not to meet this criteria.

At the very least, the existence of the primer restrictions in the VCR Act 2006 should be published as a clarification. Although an apology for misleading people on the law would also be appropriate.

The dwang is about to descend upon the Panorama producers.

tac

gunny123

tac foley wrote: »

Serious collectors are already 'licensed and authorised' by the police authorities, where their firearms are Section 1 [rifled] live firers. It is the making of illegal ammunition that is the problem here, added to the predisposition of young black men to want to slaughter each other, sometimes with guns, but more often with knives.



tac

Yes, but collectors of obsolete calibre firearms in the UK are not licenced or as happens in Ireland, given an authorisation from a super to own or possess a muzzle loader as a wall hanger. Thats the whole point, anyone can buy them.

Its a programme more dangerous to reloaders in the uk than anyone else, i would think. Very dangerous if a village idiot like Diane Abbott was, by some twist of fate, to become home secretary.

Uinseann_16

gunny123 wrote: »

Yes, but collectors of obsolete calibre firearms in the UK are not licenced or as happens in Ireland, given an authorisation from a super to own or possess a muzzle loader as a wall hanger. Thats the whole point, anyone can buy them.

Its a programme more dangerous to reloaders in the uk than anyone else, i would think. Very dangerous if a village idiot like Diane Abbott was, by some twist of fate, to become home secretary.

Antique firearms are meant to be exempt from the firearms act here too theres no real legislation around it so gardai very wrongly imo take the law unto themselves to decide what is and isnt antique and whether or not they issue permissions on certain age/types of antique firearms
They shouldn't have to licence or get permission the UK for antiques or obsolete calibers it should stay they way it is . Any sentiments or proposals otherwise will mean they will take a mile not a inch if they cave in at all on this it'll get wiped out completely:(

gunny123

Uinseann_16 wrote: »

Antique firearms are meant to be exempt from the firearms act here too theres no real legislation around it so gardai very wrongly imo take the law unto themselves to decide what is and isnt antique and whether or not they issue permissions on certain age/types of antique firearms
They shouldn't have to licence or get permission the UK for antiques or obsolete calibers it should stay they way it is . Any sentiments or proposals otherwise will mean they will take a mile not a inch if they cave in at all on this it'll get wiped out completely:(

I doubt the gardai are taking it upon themselves to say what is and is not obsolete or antique, they would have asked the doj/moj for guidelines. I did ask a guard about this and was told unitary ammunition firearms need a licence, regardless if there is ammunition is available or not, where as original muzzleloaders can be kept on a supers authorisation, newly made muzzleloaders may not.

Also in the UK, up until recently, some of the firearms in the programme tonight were licencable section 1 firearms. They only went off ticket when ol' lets-bomb Iraq Blair decided to fanny around with the firearms acts after Dunblane. Probably an oversight, or maybe they genuinely thought if ammunition was not easily available, then the guns would never be shootable again. As was seen tonight, they are, useable, with a reloading kit and modicum of knowledge.

Uinseann_16

gunny123 wrote: »

I doubt the gardai are taking it upon themselves to say what is and is not obsolete or antique, they would have asked the doj/moj for guidelines. I did ask a guard about this and was told unitary ammunition firearms need a licence, regardless if there is ammunition is available or not, where as original muzzleloaders can be kept on a supers authorisation, newly made muzzleloaders may not.

Also in the UK, up until recently, some of the firearms in the programme tonight were licencable section 1 firearms. They only went off ticket when ol' lets-bomb Iraq Blair decided to fanny around with the firearms acts after Dunblane. Probably an oversight, or maybe they genuinely thought if ammunition was not easily available, then the guns would never be shootable again. As was seen tonight, they are, useable, with a reloading kit and modicum of knowledge.

Certain supers decided to add rifled muzzle loaders could not be kept.... hence taking it upon themselves to decide:rolleyes:

tac foley

But, but, but, I KEEP saying...you can't make ammunition without primers.

Primers can only be bought - face-to-face - by a person with a firearms license for the type of cartridge that uses the type of primer he or she wants to buy.

They are controlled items under the Explosives Act, classed as HAZMAT and are stored in the same way as gun-powder.

So what does this tell us? It tells us that somebody is selling or obtaining primers illegally.

The two scroats currently banged up in jail are nt going to tell us anything, else we'd probably already know, and that facile programme last night, by Paranoia, would not have been made.

tac

tac foley

gunny123 wrote: »

Also in the UK, up until recently, some of the firearms in the programme tonight were licencable section 1 firearms. They only went off ticket when ol' lets-bomb Iraq Blair decided to fanny around with the firearms acts after Dunblane. Probably an oversight, or maybe they genuinely thought if ammunition was not easily available, then the guns would never be shootable again. As was seen tonight, they are, useable, with a reloading kit and modicum of knowledge.

Yes, some of them WERE Section 1 handguns, now prohibited in England, Scotland and Wales but not in Northern Ireland.


Certain categories of cartridge-firing handguns CAN be held in mainland UK, under the provision of Section 7[a] and 7 of the Firearms Acts [1997].


To have a Section 7[a] license you must, in most cases of my knowledge, already have a Section 1 FAC. The 7[a] allows you to have a handgun of historical or technological interest, but not to fire it or have ammunition for it. 7[2] allows you to shoot it under controlled supervision at one of about a dozen locations in England, in the interests of carrying out historical assessment, technological examination and so on, but not, of course, to have fun. However, both it and the ammunition have to be lodged there permanently - a bit like visiting your brother in jail and having a game of scrabble with him while somebody watches to see that you aren't cheating.


Meanwhile, large animal veterinarians and game wardens of large estates, and certain others who deal with large animals, can have a 'large'-calibre handgun for humane despatch. They are mechanically limited to two shots, in much the same way as your revolvers are 'pinned' to five shots.


Meanwhile, I'll just carry on shooting my .44cal BP revolver and .357Mag Ruger Super Redhawk of the approved, Home office compatible version.

Uinseann_16

tac foley wrote: »

But, but, but, I KEEP saying...you can't make ammunition without primers.

Primers can only be bought - face-to-face - by a person with a firearms license for the type of cartridge that uses the type of primer he or she wants to buy.

They are controlled items under the Explosives Act, classed as HAZMAT and are stored in the same way as gun-powder.

So what does this tell us? It tells us that somebody is selling or obtaining primers illegally.

The two scroats currently banged up in jail are nt going to tell us anything, else we'd probably already know, and that facile programme last night, by Paranoia, would not have been made.

tac

Thats the thing why would you let facts get in the way of a good story especially one that scares the sheeple:rolleyes:

Grizzly 45

tac foley wrote: »

Y


Meanwhile, large animal veterinarians and game wardens of large estates, and certain others who deal with large animals, can have a 'large'-calibre handgun for humane despatch. They are mechanically limited to two shots, in much the same way as your revolvers are 'pinned' to five shots.
.

And certain "qualified persons" who work in or on projects that are agreeable to HM Govt domestic and foreign policy, may also be issued a PDW and concealed carry ticket. And No, they need never have served an hour in uniform or taken the Queen's schilling either. Just signed the offical secrets act. Seems to be very helpful in acquiring one...Beretta M9s and Glock17s seem to be the issue of choice. Literally mere civilians, who are doing interesting jobs.

tac foley

The Royal Bodyguard and certain close-protection government-level personnel are also routinely armed, just as they are in any other country. I'm sure that the RoI has people like this in high places doing the same job - it would be amazing if there were not.

In Northern Ireland there are, of course, quite a few handguns issued to members of the judiciary and government as well as other organisations whose members have had threats against their lives from the still-present elements of extremism.

Grizzly 45

Apprently having a family member in the PSNI or HM Govt forces, even a BF/GF situation of same, can be grounds to grant a CCWP.

When you think about it, the island of Ireland should be living proof of the pro gun/anti-gun ownership, and the more guns less/more crime discussion debate. As we have the Republic with THE most restrictive gun laws in the EU and with a few other anti-gun wet dream fantasies in law. While in NI we have, next to the Czech Republic, the only EU state that allows concealed carry, and being a state that was close onto open civil war for 35 years, never actually did confiscate civilian arms.And if you exclude terrorist-related gun crime,which is getting blurred into criminal activity NI seems to have little if no other or civilian gun crime.IE we dont hear of CCWP NI holders shooting up pubs, their neighbours or whatever.Or of known criminal /terrorist heads using IPSC for "combat training" or said Terrorist heads using black or nitro reloading powder for pipe bombs.

Down in "Mexico" however. With our " CF handgun bans", no CCWP, technically no reloading of ammo or BP, definitely no CCWP, unless you are a Veronica Guerin type, and even then. Dublin can be like the South side of Chicago on a long weekend betimes...Wonder why this is never mentioned in gun debates??

gunny123

Says it all really.

tac foley

That is precisely the argument used by a number of government ministers at the time, not necessarily part of the then NI-Government, either. That NI had so little armed crime, let alone mass murders, carried out using legally-owned firearms as to be unmeasurable by normal standards. That being the case, it was decided that NI citizens, of all the UK, shouldbe allowed to continue to use and acquire their sporting handguns.

Grizzly 45

They did try banning firearms in NI. Taken from an excellent webpage on the Loyalist/Republican arms race in NI

https://balaclavastreet.wordpress.com/2014/12/16/terminal-effects-the-guns-of-the-loyalist-paramilitaries/

nationalist concern over the growing number of thefts targeting guns shops, clubs, and owners led to a major debate on gun control which dominated the second half of 1972. It came to a head in October when the leader of the opposition Harold Wilson opened his speech at the Labour Party conference in Blackpool by calling for a total ban:

Must our troops be subject to a virtually uncontrolled gun-law? On April 6, 1971, 18 months ago, in the anxious debate which followed the deposition of Major Chichester-Clark and the accession of Mr Faulkner, I demanded that all gun licences be withdrawn, subject to a minimum issue for self-defence in remote areas, including the border. I demanded that, these apart, the holding of private weapons be no longer tolerated in Northern Ireland. There are upwards of 100,000 licensed weapons in Northern Ireland, and God alone knows how many illegal ones. I now warn Mr Heath. The possession of private arms is not an inalienable human right. Public opinion in Britain will not for long tolerate the continued presence of British troops, unless firm action is taken to make illegal the holding of private arms.

Compared with the surfeit of Armalites, sub-machineguns, and other weapons swamping Northern Ireland at the time legally-held firearms constituted a small and not particularly formidable threat, but Wilson was keen to take up the concerns of the minority community and outmanoeuvre the government on the issue. William Whitelaw pointed out that no member of the security forces was known to have been killed with a legally-held gun at that point, although the situation regarding civilians was less clear.

The Lynch government in the Republic had already mounted the preventative call-in of all handguns, and rifles over .22 calibre, they along with shotguns being exempted, as pressure mounted for the authorities further north to follow suit. A Belfast magistrate speaking after the prosecution of one FAC holder for exceeding his allowance stated “it is time everyone looked at everyone’s firearms certificates in this country. Another country has decided to call in certain arms”. Anti-gun sentiment gained momentum and the Belfast Telegraph reported “Legal arms in Ulster may be banned”. The paper threw its weight behind calls for a ban, an editorial declaring “the general public would breathe more easily if Mr Whitelaw ordered all civilian-held guns to be turned in immediately, and all gun clubs to be disbanded, for the sake of public safety”. Wilson’s proposals also found immediate support from the SDLP and Provisional Sinn Fein.

Adding its voice to the debate around civilian arms was the Catholic Ex-Servicemen’s Association. A statement released following a meeting of the group in Lurgan let it be known that:

the Association expressed great concern regarding the continuing policy of allowing licensed guns to remain in the hands of over 100,000 people in Northern Ireland. They question the right of these 100,000 people to have a means of protection when a further 1 1/2 million people in Northern Ireland have no such right. What entitles them to the privilege of being armed other other than that they are, in the main, Unionist Government supporters?

Although plainly paramilitary in nature – members wore uniforms of a fashion and conducted street drills – the CESA, a legal group of some 8,000 members led by chairman Phil Curran, a former soldier himself, claimed that it neither possessed guns nor carried them during its “defensive” vigilante patrols. In reality the group was armed to a certain degree, even if guns were not displayed openly. In November 1972 a 27yr old Dunmurry man was jailed for four years at a court in Belfast for unlawful possession of five rifles, two shotguns, and 350 rounds of ammunition with intent to endanger life. The ex-soldier, described as a “weapons training officer” in the CESA, had moved to Northern Ireland from England and converted to Catholicism after marrying a local woman. The court heard how he had smuggled the guns into the Bogside and given training lessons to people who were “not members of the CESA” – a veiled reference to the IRA. In fact the CESA regularly gave training to IRA volunteers. Following the trial the organisation was criticised by the Alliance Party in west Belfast who said, “[the] CESA has been in existence for some time now, and the only noticeable change in Catholic areas attributable to them is the rash of illegal drinking clubs […] the only reason for such a force is to give Mr Curran the satisfaction of having the same petty and illegal power as Tommy Herron of the UDA”.

Gun owners reacted angrily to talk of a ban, claiming that any law would unfairly and disproportionately affect rural Protestants and leave them at the mercy of an IRA well-armed with illegal guns, with George Green of the Ulster Special Constabulary Association heading up criticism. The Belfast Telegraph printed a copy of a letter sent to Wilson by an anonymous shooter writing under the name “Sportsman”:

I am quite appalled at your attitude towards legally-held guns which, as you must appreciate, are in the hands of sportsmen. I can appreciate that the present situation in Northern Ireland could cloud personal judgement but I can see only political opportunism in your recommendations to Mr Paul Channon in the House on 31st July 1972, to impound all privately and legally held guns in our province […] even the most naive person must appreciate that even if all legally-held guns were impounded, the illegal rifles, revolvers and explosives would still be in profusion, and it is these which are taking human life […] remember that the authorities know where the legal guns are; it is the illegal guns they have to worry about.

In the end only 1,000 fullbore rifles were called in to be held in gun clubs with fortified stores. The debate had an unexpected side effects as the UVF deviously took advantage of confusion over the law. Two men posing as police officers enacting a call-in of legal arms came to the door of a gun owner in Templepatrick and tricked him into handing over a licensed weapon. A week later in Glengormley they succeeded in taking a shotgun using the same ruse, even giving the owner a receipt for the gun. As a result of a number of such deceptions the RUC were forced to issue a statement reiterating that no call-in had been ordered. The more confrontational robberies that were also taking place at this time were not without risk. An attempt by two loyalists, one armed with a revolver, to steal weapons from a licensed owner living off the Albertbridge Road was foiled when the man opened fire on them with a shotgun.

RG_fakecops

How important were legal civilian-owned guns as a source for the loyalist paramilitaries? The evidence suggests “not very”. Nationalist claims of upwards of 140,000 firearms in circulation were incorrect. In 1972 the figure actually stood at roughly 77,000 certificates covering 106,000 weapons of all kinds: 93% of these were shotguns (73,160), .22 rimfire rifles (13,767), or airguns (12,125). The militarily-worthless airguns were not, are not, subject to license in Great Britain, leaving a total figure of 92,926. Neither remaining category constituted a particularly formidable resource: 281 shotguns were stolen from private owners in 1972 and ’73 but they lacked range, ammunition capacity, and without buckshot or solid shot, hitting power; .22LR rifles suffered similar disadvantages and were less than a tenth as powerful as an Armalite. Many of the stolen guns were stashed away in long-term hides in rural Antrim and Down for issue in the event of a “Doomsday” united Ireland scenario. Even then it is doubtful whether they would have been of much benefit beyond a simple morale-booster. The experience of the Confederacy during the American Civil War proved that shotguns are a poor substitute for military firearms.

More useful were the 6,520 legally-owned handguns, of which 2,800 or roughly 40% were Personal Protection Weapons owned by members of the security forces. By 1978 and in the face of mounting attacks on vulnerable off-duty personnel that figure had increased to 7,550. Northern Ireland was not subject to the ban on handguns enacted by the Tory and later Labour governments in response to the Dunblane massacre of 1996, and while up to date figures are not available it is believed thousands of PPWs are still held by serving and former members of the security forces and prison service. Politicians, contractors to the security forces, and other figures seen as potential targets for assassination were also granted PPWs. Even Sinn Fein, in spite of its usual hostility towards legally-held firearms, called for its members to be permitted licensed guns for their protection in August 1993 after scores of loyalist attacks.

Voting Labour in the UK may damage your rights to your firearm ownership.:eek:They obviously have a track record.

tac foley

'The possession of private arms is not an inalienable human right.'

Yes it is. The right to defend your life and that of your loved ones, from those who would do you harm, is part of the human condition.

And many thanks for that post above - I've added it to my files. By the time that was written, I had already had two short tours in Northern Ireland. My dad, who had died in November 1971, had already remarked that I'd be older than he was then before the matter was resolved. And here we are, forty-seven years later, still looking over our collective shoulders.

PS - As an adjunct, and reading this - Even Sinn Fein, in spite of its usual hostility towards legally-held firearms, called for its members to be permitted licensed guns for their protection in August 1993 after scores of loyalist attacks. - I know of no member of SF who has ever been issued with a PPW, but then my information is years OOD.

gunny123

tac foley wrote: »

'The possession of private arms is not an inalienable human right.'

Yes it is. The right to defend your life and that of your loved ones, from those who would do you harm, is part of the human condition.

The first law of nature, is the right to defend yourself.

I had this out with a guard after being attacked by a "drug user". He was upset that i had smacked said gentleman of the road in the gob after he pinned me to the side of a car, a situation i could not run off from.

What he wanted me to have done, was get thumped, not fight back and report the incident to them later.

As i informed him, you do have the inalienable right to defend yourself.

gunny123

https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-sussex-45271874

tac foley

Ah yes, just on the evening news. What a coincidence, eh? Nothing new, though, people in a certain large ship-building facility not too far from where you might be were making submachine guns in the 70's from scrap metal. I fired one with service 9mm Mk2Z stuff, and pretty lively it was too - perfect!

Uinseann_16

tac foley wrote: »

Ah yes, just on the evening news. What a coincidence, eh? Nothing new, though, people in a certain large ship-building facility not too far from where you might be were making submachine guns in the 70's from scrap metal. I fired one with service 9mm Mk2Z stuff, and pretty lively it was too - perfect!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sIhGCRIQnCA
Kinda reminds me of this^^^^

Grizzly 45

A fine selection of Ulster funny guns with the gun Jesus.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0TMrunbZLJw

gunny123

The world has gone completely nutty

https://news.sky.com/story/people-with-criminal-records-urged-to-become-magistrates-11479016

Grizzly 45

Interesting bit of Irish history going under the hammer at Whytes.They have a few interesting guns for sale betimes, including a ChurchillSXS and Beretta O/U shotguns this month.

https://www.whytes.ie/art/1914-howth-mauser-rifle/164995/?SearchString=mauser&LotNumSearch=&GuidePrice=&OrderBy=&ArtistID=&ArrangeBy=list&NumPerPage=15&offset=0