Airgun licensing

[Haselsh1]

There is a witch hunt on at the moment in the media regarding the licensing of airguns within England. A young person was shot recently by an illegally held air rifle and the person unfortunately died. There is now a campaign to try to licence all air guns within England. I guess ultimately if this is passed and becomes a new law, like the banning of firearms, it will only succeed in removing air guns from decent law abiding people keeping them in the hands of criminals who have no intention of giving them up. Like firearms and hand guns, these are still out there being owned by people who will never give them up and use them for criminal activities.

The law dictates that an air pistol with a power rating of over 6ft/lb is a banned weapon. An air rifle is allowed to be up to twice the power of a pistol, the limit being 12ft/lb. The rifle in question was above 12ft/lb and covered by an FAC that the owner did not posses. So here we clearly see that licensing does not work as the gun was owned illegally.

Another difficult situation for the Home Office but of course air weapons have already been licensed under Scottish law so why would it not work ?

People who have no intention of giving up their hobbies and their liberties will be made into criminals for no reason whatsoever as the gun in question was already illegally owned.

I am pleased I am not tasked with sorting this one out.

Oh yes, a seriously good air rifle could easily cost well in excess of £1.5k, are the government seriously considering compensation ?

[ianlenco]

Sorry, I don't get your argument. Surely
decent law abiding people will simply get a licence. It's true that there will be bad people who hold unlicensed guns but if they are caught with them then there would now be laws to deal with them.

[Haselsh1]

Apologies, my point is that decent, law abiding people will be forced into applying for and possibly being turned down for a gun licence that is completely unnecessary whilst illegally owned guns will still be illegally owned.

[walpurgis]

I hope they don't licence them. There are seldom incidents involving them, so there's not a huge point in licencing, it'll just be a load more unjustified admin for the police, sticking to ending knife crime would be better. I own two air rifles and don't want to forfeit them, they are hardly the weapon of choice for criminals.

[struth]

I think airguns have become so powerful(not all) that regulation would be wise. They are potentially lethal.
Its always a shame when decent users are penalised tho so as always a bit of a conundrum as to what is right and proper.
I had airguns when young. Got into trouble once for crossing a rd with an unbroken gun.. was in country and no one around bar an unfortunate police panda lol.
They took gun and i had to tell my dad. He took me down to get it back, but as id embarrassed him i told them to get rid of it.
Never had another.

[Stryder5]

Sorry, I don't get your argument. Surely will simply get a licence. It's true that there will be bad people who hold unlicensed guns but if they are caught with them then there would now be laws to deal with them.

The licence used to be ten shillings from the post office I don't know why it was discontinued, no checks, but from memory you had to be 14.

This is another unenforceable law.

Look at the success of laws using phones whilst driving, and that's highly visible.

Look at the success of knife laws.

If the relevant authorities don't have the bandwidth to enforce laws, they are a joke.

Gary

[perlogalism]

Sorry, I don't get your argument. Surely will simply get a licence. It's true that there will be bad people who hold unlicensed guns but if they are caught with them then there would now be laws to deal with them.

Those laws exist now: It's illegal to own an air rifle above 12f/lbs energy without the relevant section 1 firearms certificate. It's illegal to carry that weapon in public. It's illegal to discharge that weapon so that the bullet / pellet /whatever lands on land which you don't have permission to use it on. I could go on... Essentially, you're currently looking at 5 years inside if you mess with illegal weapons or use an unlicenced weapon illegally. Why do we need another law?

[perlogalism]

I think airguns have become so powerful(not all) that regulation would be wise. They are potentially lethal.
.

I disagree. I was given a BSA airsporter when I was 10 (47 years ago). I checked the power a few years ago and it was 11.5 ft/lbs. That's pretty much the average you'll find for an adult airgun these days. Remember ANYTHING over 12 ft/lbs and you'd be in deep trouble. Yes you can get much more powerful air weapons but you'll need a Firearms certificate and as the owner of one, I can tell you they ain't easy to get!

[Stryder5]

I think airguns have become so powerful(not all) that regulation would be wise. They are potentially lethal.
Its always a shame when decent users are penalised tho so as always a bit of a conundrum as to what is right and proper.
I had airguns when young. Got into trouble once for crossing a rd with an unbroken gun.. was in country and no one around bar an unfortunate police panda lol.
They took gun and i had to tell my dad. He took me down to get it back, but as id embarrassed him i told them to get rid of it.
Never had another.

The lawful power of air rifles has not changed, it's 12 ftlbs. for rifles, as with most things they can be tampered with.

There are no regulated testing houses for the police to refer to, so any results are questionable .

Gary

[Stryder5]

Those laws exist now: It's illegal to own an air rifle above 12f/lbs energy without the relevant section 1 firearms certificate. It's illegal to carry that weapon in public. It's illegal to discharge that weapon so that the bullet / pellet /whatever lands on land which you don't have permission to use it on. I could go on... Essentially, you're currently looking at 5 years inside if you mess with illegal weapons or use an unlicenced weapon illegally. Why do we need another law?

It's not illegal to carry an air rifle in public as long as it cased or in a gun slip, it cannot be loaded though.

Gary

[walpurgis]

The lawful power of air rifles has not changed, it's 12 ftlbs. for rifles, as with most things they can be tampered with.

Gary

But not by much. You can take them a bit above the legal limit, but only by a modest margin.

[walpurgis]

It's not illegal to carry an air rifle in public as long as it cased or in a gun slip, it cannot be loaded though.

Gary

You might have fun trying to explain why you were carrying it through Westminster though, after you been held at gunpoint by the police and pinned to the ground in cuffs. :)

[Stryder5]

But not by much. You can take them a bit above the legal limit, but only by a modest margin.

Sorry but this is simply not true, I can turn my compressed air rifle to 15 ftlbs by turning one screw, don't have to open internals. I shoot HFT competitively, to maintain accuracy I need to adjust to 11.9 ftlbs. External temperature and pressure can effect this so I need to be able to adjust so I don't go over 12 ftlbs.

I have seen some spring rifles that have had different springs giving 18 ftlbs, hardly minimal.

Gary

[Haselsh1]

An FAC covers an air rifle up to and including 20ft/lb. Or it certainly used to.

[Haselsh1]

You might have fun trying to explain why you were carrying it through Westminster though, after you been held at gunpoint by the police and pinned to the ground in cuffs. :)

Indeed. If you are carrying one in a public place, even covered and contained, you need a bloody good reason.

[struth]

Had a shot of a smaller bore air rifle once that was ?? .177 or summat like that with much stronger 22 spring in it.. by god this thing could do damage. was a mate of my brothers.. way back in 60's i think

[julesd68]

Yes I have a Sig Sauer P226 air pistol that Sig makes to be as similar as possible to the real thing - if I got that out anywhere in public other than the range where my son and I use it, I would expect a whole lot of trouble.

Aren't the vast majority of airgun injuries accidentally inflicted? I very rarely hear of villains tooling up with them.

[Stryder5]

Indeed. If you are carrying one in a public place, even covered and contained, you need a bloody good reason.
You don't need a reason the law is clear, we can all conjure up situations where to carry one would be unwise, still legal though.

Gary

[perlogalism]

Aren't the vast majority of airgun injuries accidentally inflicted? I very rarely hear of villains tooling up with them.

Not sure about the accidentally inflicted injuries but certainly the number of people intentionally injured / killed by them is tiny.
Going to do a bank job with a Webley Osprey wouldn't do your cred much good :lol:
This reminds me of Lock, Stock: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a8tpWoStiw8

[perlogalism]

I can turn my compressed air rifle to 15 ftlbs by turning one screw, don't have to open internals.
Gary

Out of interest Gary, do you need a licence because the rifle is capable of 15ft/lbs or only if you're cought with it over 12?

[scotty38]

I have a Weihrauch HW97K sub 12ft/lb and I would not want to be shot with it. It would definitely kill someone, no doubt about it.

I've not looked into it so not sure what the licensing thoughts are but don't forget there's a huge difference between a shotgun licence and an FAC for example. The shotgun licence is a right and the authorities need to show why you should NOT have one (I know about the circumstances that preclude it, certain jail sentences, mental health etc) whereas the FAC is a privilege and the onus is on the person wanting it to prove why they should have one. Lots and lots of stipulation on categories and conditions on an FAC too and things can be removed if they are not used and so on. Far more difficult to get and if air rifles go this way it will be a challenge for a lot of folk saying why they want one.

[Stryder5]

That’s where the law is an ass, every air rifle sold is “capable” of exceeding 12 ftlbs.

If the authorities ever had a test house to test and your rifle recorded 12 ftlbs your clear, if 12.1 then it’s a firearm and I think the latest penalty is up to 10 years at her majesty’s pleasure.

I do have an FAC but my air rifle is not listed on it.

Gary


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[NRG]

It’s a solution looking for an issue. The amount of knife crime is way more serious and a much much larger issue than that of air gun licensing.

[Stryder5]

I have a Weihrauch HW97K sub 12ft/lb and I would not want to be shot with it. It would definitely kill someone, no doubt about it.

I've not looked into it so not sure what the licensing thoughts are but don't forget there's a huge difference between a shotgun licence and an FAC for example. The shotgun licence is a right and the authorities need to show why you should NOT have one (I know about the circumstances that preclude it, certain jail sentences, mental health etc) whereas the FAC is a privilege and the onus is on the person wanting it to prove why they should have one. Lots and lots of stipulation on categories and conditions on an FAC too and things can be removed if they are not used and so on. Far more difficult to get and if air rifles go this way it will be a challenge for a lot of folk saying why they want one.

Lots of items can kill given the right circumstances, a 12 ftlbs air rifle cannot be considered as capable of killing unless it's at very close range and hits vital areas such as the eye. If anyone feels the their rifle is capable of killing they MUST have its power checked.

I don't think having a shotgun can be a right, there are certain conditions that have to be met including why you need one, an easy answer but you need this. A gun cabinet that has to be inspected is a prerequisite too.

Gary

[Stryder5]

It’s a solution looking for an issue. The amount of knife crime is way more serious and a much much larger issue than that of air gun licensing.

I agree the media (political intervention) are hoping to link air gun/rifle possession with knife crime as a way of conning the general public that they are doing something to combat said knife crime, pathetic really.

But the great unwashed are easily lead.

Gary

[walpurgis]

A bow and arrow or crossbow are far more dangerous than air weapons. There doesn't seem to be much of a clamour to control those.

[Stryder5]

A bow and arrow or crossbow are far more dangerous than air weapons. There doesn't seem to be much of a clamour to control those.

As always it's political smoke and mirrors!

Gary

[scotty38]

Lots of items can kill given the right circumstances, a 12 ftlbs air rifle cannot be considered as capable of killing unless it's at very close range and hits vital areas such as the eye. If anyone feels the their rifle is capable of killing they MUST have its power checked.

I don't think having a shotgun can be a right, there are certain conditions that have to be met including why you need one, an easy answer but you need this. A gun cabinet that has to be inspected is a prerequisite too.

Gary

The point i was trying to make is that it is a powerful weapon and is designed to shoot at things. Yes a lead pipe is probably just as destructive but I hope you see my point.

A shotgun licence is a right, you cannot be refused one unless you meet certain documented criteria. If you say I want to go clay pigeon shooting and you've not had a 3 year or longer prison sentence (I think that's the term) or have mental issues etc you cannot be refused. Not the same for a FAC where you can be refused unless you show absolute good reason for why you need one. Just saying I want to shoot vermin, or even that you want to go down the local shooting range won't necessarily get you a licence.

Edit - Of course you have to meet the appropriate storage conditions.

[NRG]

I would have thought a shotgun licence or any government issued licence would be a privilege not a right. It can be revoked at anytime.

[scotty38]

With legislation most probably, but unless I commit some sort of crime (not necessarily gun related) or become mentally unstable (Doctor needs to verify) there would be no grounds to come and take my shotguns away from me. If I had a FAC on the grounds of a permission where I could lawfully use those firearms and that permission went away then I guess that could be grounds of taking away the firearms as I'd have no need (I don't know of that being tested btw) of them. However, if my local clay shooting ground closed down that would be no grounds for me losing them. There is a definite difference of right and privilege between the two certificates.

[NRG]

True, however the granting of a licence is still a privilege. We are not America which has the right to bear arms as part of its constitution.

[Stryder5]

True, however the granting of a licence is still a privilege. We are not America which has the right to bear arms as part of its constitution.

I totally agree!


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[Vince]

I recently gave up my shotgun certificate, that I'd held for 30 plus years, due to ill health. I have still got my Theoben Euro Custom air rifle that was recently serviced and set up to under 12 ft lbs. Another law, and consider we have some of the strictest gun controls in the world, will solve nothing. A carving knife is a helluva lot more likely to kill you. I don't want to be licensed for my air rifle as I already abide by the law and new laws on airguns will solve nothing. As it has been said, they are hardly the weapon of choice for your local criminal. Yet they easily get hold of unlicensed fire arms with little or no trouble. I also own a coumpound bow, that I don't use at the moment, due to health problems and this would go straight through a body. Again it is little or no use to a criminal, but there has been no out cry against them. Whilst I sympathise with victims family, we, the law abiding community, should not be penalised for this. Cars are used as weapons, far more than air guns, so where does it stop. I hope to get back into my shooting as I've quite a bit of money tied up in my gun and sights. Lets hope common sense prevails.

[scotty38]

True, however the granting of a licence is still a privilege. We are not America which has the right to bear arms as part of its constitution.

Still missing the point of the difference between a shotgun licence and a firearm's certificate. A shotgun licence IS a right we have and the onus is on authorities to give good reason why you shouldn't have one (mostly medical and/or criminal). A FAC is a privilege and YOU have to show good reason why you should have one before it is granted (usually with restrictions).

Whether you like it or agree with it or not that is a fact in the UK right now.

[Stryder5]

Still missing the point of the difference between a shotgun licence and a firearm's certificate. A shotgun licence IS a right we have and the onus is on authorities to give good reason why you shouldn't have one (mostly medical and/or criminal). A FAC is a privilege and YOU have to show good reason why you should have one before it is granted (usually with restrictions).

Whether you like it or agree with it or not that is a fact in the UK right now.

Not so, direct from police website.

​​It must be stressed that this section relates to shotguns (Section 2 weapons) only. "Good reason" for Section 1 Firearms is a different entity and dealt with under the firearm section.

The Firearms (Amendment) Act 1988 revised the criteria set out in Section 28 of the 1968 Act for the grant and renewal of a shotgun certificate, so as to allow Chief Officers of Police more discretion to make enquiries into applications. It is important to note how the criteria differ from those in respect of applications for Section 1 weapons.

No certificate shall be granted or renewed if the Chief Officer of Police:

has reason to believe that the applicant is prohibited by the Act from possessing a shotgun; OR
is satisfied that the applicant does not have a good reason for possessing, purchasing or acquiring a shotgun


However, the Act does not require the applicant to make out a good case for being granted a shotgun certificate, but extends the Chief Officer's grounds for refusing one.

Each and every application will be judged on its own merit, but the usual reasons for requiring a shotgun include the following:

So not a right, but a privilege to be granted! Note the words "grant, discretion "

Gary

[Minstrel SE]

My overall view is that they are mischevious weapons that soon get used for all sorts of wrongdoing.

Thay have no place outside the locked cabinets of a licensed shooting range. Same goes for crossbows or any dangerous projectile weapon.

Kids get bored and then everything gets shot...animals..... windows...people.... the lot.

Personally I think they are interesting for about half an hour and then I can see no point. Ive never been interested in owning one and that tells me a lot about the owners. I watch some of them and its clear they get their rocks off from owning and parading a weapon. I can think of countless things I would rather be doing.

So yes heavily restrict them with a view to a ban

[walpurgis]

Ive never been interested in owning one and that tells me a lot about the owners. I watch some of them and its clear they get their rocks off from owning and parading a weapon. I can think of a countless things I would rather be doing.

So yes heavily restrict them with a view to a ban

Meaning what exactly? And where is it you watch these owners?

[scotty38]

We can go round and round if you wish but it is a fact that onus is one side or the other dependent upon what you're applying for.

I will concede privilege and right in order to finish this but as you say above "However, the Act does not require the applicant to make out a good case for being granted a shotgun certificate, but extends the Chief Officer's grounds for refusing on" this is the polar opposite when applying for a FAC. Unless I'm a criminal or mentally ill all I have to say to get a shotgun licence is "clay pigeon shooting". You will get questioned about the law, where you will be shooting it, where and how you will store it, gun safety and the like which is right and proper but it's still on them to prove you shouldn't have one. Try getting a FAC without doing your homework and see how far you get....

[struth]

If the CC thinks your a wrong un, even if youve no direct record he can say no; in fact he is duty bound to... I dont know how often it happens but i know of it happening. Ive a mate who shoots and he is very safety concious, as i think most are. its drilled into them

[scotty38]

If the CC thinks your a wrong un, even if youve no direct record he can say no; in fact he is duty bound to... I dont know how often it happens but i know of it happening. Ive a mate who shoots and he is very safety concious, as i think most are. its drilled into them

And this is where organisations like BASC will come in and fight your corner based on the reasons given for refusal, because unless you have a record of criminal or mental issues there should be no reason to refuse you just because the CC didn't like the colour of your wallpaper or that you had a baseball cap on back to front :lol::lol:

I think it's fair to say some forces are more strict than others and do have CCs that have their own opinion of how licences should be dished out. Some folk will take the refusal and move on but that doesn't mean the refusal was the correct thing to do, hence why some organisations will fight for your right to have a shotgun licence.

[walpurgis]

Ive a mate who shoots and he is very safety concious, as i think most are. its drilled into them

Dead right. I belonged to shooting clubs and used to do a fair bit of range shooting years ago and safety was always foremost.

It's a perfectly legitimate pursuit and requires considerable skill. It's also very satisfying to do.

[Stryder5]

And this is where organisations like BASC will come in and fight your corner based on the reasons given for refusal, because unless you have a record of criminal or mental issues there should be no reason to refuse you just because the CC didn't like the colour of your wallpaper or that you had a baseball cap on back to front :lol::lol:

I think it's fair to say some forces are more strict than others and do have CCs that have their own opinion of how licences should be dished out. Some folk will take the refusal and move on but that doesn't mean the refusal was the correct thing to do, hence why some organisations will fight for your right to have a shotgun licence.

If you can demand it, it's a right. If it requires a grant it's a privilege.

BASC did a great job in Scotland :)

Gary

[Minstrel SE]

Meaning what exactly? And where is it you watch these owners?

Its whether you think its acceptable for people to generally have them on housing estates or what they are doing taking them to the countryside.

I think it moves quickly from shooting cans to shooting wildlife with them. I dont like them and I dont like the seedy little shops I used to see in Mcr selling them alongside the replica guns.

A rifle shooting pellets at high velocity...what could go wrong eh?

[montesquieu]

Guns are a funny thing. As a typical townie (even thought I've lived in or near the country for much of my adult life) I've never seen the point personally. I recall going to Ireland to visit family in about 1968 (when I was seven), coming into Larne and seeing RUC officers carrying real guns in holsters, which looked absolutely enormous compared to the little toy cap guns we played cowboys and indians with. Obviously they were doing this for good reason at the time, but it scared the hell out of me and I'm not sure I ever quite got over it. I went shooting rabbits with a .22 once with one of the teachers at school and a small group, I was a bit sickened by that thankfully almost every shot missed.

I was also a journalist in the Scotsman newsroom the day the Dunblane massacre happened, when a colleague and good friend sitting next to me had to go home because his kids were at Dunblane primary (a different age than the class that were killed, thankfully, but he didn't know that in those days before widespread mobile phones, as he jumped in his car for the 45-minute journey back from Edinburgh). Seldom has a news event had such a personal impact. Essentially nobody in Scotland had any objection to the law banning handguns that followed, and to hell with the Olympic squad who had to start training in France.

And yet .. I have friends who enjoy shooting rifles on ranges, who get a thrill from the precision of the whole thing and who take safety incredibly seriously.

I'm not quite sure where airgun use fits in this, most people who own them seem to get off on shooting rabbits or squirrels or whatever but I don't personally see the joy in that. But then again I don't see the fun in stamp collecting, in dressing up in lycra to go cycling, or in dogging, for that matter. I suppose it takes all sorts.

What is unfortunate is that any rational debate on guns in America has been lost in the culture wars, which is an out and out tragedy. I guess the only conclusion you can draw is that as a society they are happy on some level to trade off 30,000 gun deaths a year (vs a few dozen in most other countries) against some nebulous idea of freedom - not an equation most of us in the rest of the civilised world could go along with.

Ultimately I'm pretty happy with laws as tight as you can make them, there are a lot of idiots out there but somehow we manage (for the most part) in keeping guns out of their hands, whereas they utterly fail to do that in America. Long may our strict gun laws continue and if a few people on the margins of getting permision or affording permits are inconvenienced by that then I have no problem. The very fact that firearms are very tightly restricted here means that it's a big step to carry them and while obviously some people choose to break the law, it will be far fewer than if our laws were more lax.

[Alex_UK]

When firearms were (essentially) banned in the UK I was a “shooter” - belonged to a local gun club and used to love going to the range to shoot targets. I also used to shoot competitions, and thoroughly enjoyed it. Even though I owned my own pistol I never felt the need to take it home and always left it at the club. I guess it started as a teenager with air rifles and pistols. Never felt the need to kill anything, even rats.

When the ban came I took it on the chin and moved on - human lives are more important than my leisure, but I do think banning air guns or licensing them would be a step too far. As has been said above, crossbows or a compound bow would be far more dangerous, and with knife crime out of control we need to sort that out before worrying about a few air weapons.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[NRG]

Still missing the point of the difference between a shotgun licence and a firearm's certificate. A shotgun licence IS a right we have and the onus is on authorities to give good reason why you shouldn't have one (mostly medical and/or criminal). A FAC is a privilege and YOU have to show good reason why you should have one before it is granted (usually with restrictions).

Whether you like it or agree with it or not that is a fact in the UK right now.

Sorry it is not. It is a privilege like any government granted licence. You also have to show good reason to have a shotgun licence, they are not given away at the post office.

[Barry]

Guns are a funny thing. As a typical townie (even thought I've lived in or near the country for much of my adult life) I've never seen the point personally. I recall going to Ireland to visit family in about 1968 (when I was seven), coming into Larne and seeing RUC officers carrying real guns in holsters, which looked absolutely enormous compared to the little toy cap guns we played cowboys and indians with. Obviously they were doing this for good reason at the time, but it scared the hell out of me and I'm not sure I ever quite got over it. I went shooting rabbits with a .22 once with one of the teachers at school and a small group, I was a bit sickened by that thankfully almost every shot missed.

I was also a journalist in the Scotsman newsroom the day the Dunblane massacre happened, when a colleague and good friend sitting next to me had to go home because his kids were at Dunblane primary (a different age than the class that were killed, thankfully, but he didn't know that in those days before widespread mobile phones, as he jumped in his car for the 45-minute journey back from Edinburgh). Seldom has a news event had such a personal impact. Essentially nobody in Scotland had any objection to the law banning handguns that followed, and to hell with the Olympic squad who had to start training in France.

And yet .. I have friends who enjoy shooting rifles on ranges, who get a thrill from the precision of the whole thing and who take safety incredibly seriously.

I'm not quite sure where airgun use fits in this, most people who own them seem to get off on shooting rabbits or squirrels or whatever but I don't personally see the joy in that. But then again I don't see the fun in stamp collecting, in dressing up in lycra to go cycling, or in dogging, for that matter. I suppose it takes all sorts.

What is unfortunate is that any rational debate on guns in America has been lost in the culture wars, which is an out and out tragedy. I guess the only conclusion you can draw is that as a society they are happy on some level to trade off 30,000 gun deaths a year (vs a few dozen in most other countries) against some nebulous idea of freedom - not an equation most of us in the rest of the civilised world could go along with.

Ultimately I'm pretty happy with laws as tight as you can make them, there are a lot of idiots out there but somehow we manage (for the most part) in keeping guns out of their hands, whereas they utterly fail to do that in America. Long may our strict gun laws continue and if a few people on the margins of getting permision or affording permits are inconvenienced by that then I have no problem. The very fact that firearms are very tightly restricted here means that it's a big step to carry them and while obviously some people choose to break the law, it will be far fewer than if our laws were more lax.

Excellent post Tom.

[Pigmy Pony]

A bow and arrow or crossbow are far more dangerous than air weapons. There doesn't seem to be much of a clamour to control those.

True, bows and arrows are capable of great harm if used irresponsibly, but a number of factors help them pass under legislators' radar. Firstly, they are not very portable and a devil to conceal. Mine is 68" long, and I'm not bragging, that's about average. So walking into town with would not go unnoticed. Also the load/reload time will be about 5 seconds. And you would need space to use it - out of a car window is never going to happen.

Even when it comes to accidental injuries, I'm told that by far the greatest number of injuries are caused not by the point but by the rear (nock) end of an arrow. Caused by standing too close to the target when arrows are being withdrawn, also by people injuring shins when walking into arrows in the ground!

Slightly different with crossbows, I would certainly have their sale removed from everywhere but properly licensed dealers.

Their used to be a woman at my archery club who claimed to keep her bow and arrows beside her bed in case of intruders. But she was thick as a workhouse butty. I suppose she could have hit them over the head with it. But really she had nothing to worry about!

[Pigmy Pony]

Had a shot of a smaller bore air rifle once that was ?? .177 or summat like that with much stronger 22 spring in it.. by god this thing could do damage. was a mate of my brothers.. way back in 60's i think

I think the restrictions on air rifles are to do with muzzle energy, regardless of bore size. Most air rifles can use a .177 barrel or .22, some even .25. But on any given weapon a .177 pellet will have a greater muzzle velocity than a .22, but the pellet itself will weigh less. a physics thing I guess.

If my HW97k air rifle had a .177 barrel on it, the muzzle velocity would probably be around 800 fps, which is about the same as a Colt .45 ACP pistol. But I know which one would do the greater harm. All down to velocity/mass I reckon.

[Haselsh1]

Average gun deaths in the US - 36,383 in one year

England and Wales for 2018 - 31 fatal shootings (one year)

These are approximate figures only gained from Google searches and include suicides

I have to ask the question then, why are a few people in Britain on a crusade to criminalise airguns ?

I also used to shoot at the local club back in the day when we could and had a deep respect for the firearms used. The government then banned possession of them and paid off the public who owned them but of course this doesn't stop the problem as the illegally held firearms are still out there. The government only persecuted the good folk who obeyed the law. The problem still exists today as it did back then.

The government unlicensed dog ownership because it cost more than it was actually worth. How the hell are they going to Police and enforce the ownership of airguns..? How many airguns are there out there..?

I can't wait to see what the government eventually do.

[Haselsh1]

I think the restrictions on air rifles are to do with muzzle energy, regardless of bore size. Most air rifles can use a .177 barrel or .22, some even .25. But on any given weapon a .177 pellet will have a greater muzzle velocity than a .22, but the pellet itself will weigh less. a physics thing I guess.

If my HW97k air rifle had a .177 barrel on it, the muzzle velocity would probably be around 800 fps, which is about the same as a Colt .45 ACP pistol. But I know which one would do the greater harm. All down to velocity/mass I reckon.

Absolutely Steve.

[perlogalism]

My overall view is that they are mischevious weapons that soon get used for all sorts of wrongdoing. Bit of a sweeping statement but I'll let it go because "mischevious" made me laugh

Thay have no place outside the locked cabinets of a licensed shooting range. Same goes for crossbows or any dangerous projectile weapon. So you'd ban all pest control?

Kids get bored and then everything gets shot...animals..... windows...people.... the lot. "Kids" aren't allowed to buy or use airguns.

Personally I think they are interesting for about half an hour and then I can see no point. Ive never been interested in owning one and that tells me a lot about the owners. I watch some of them and its clear they get their rocks off from owning and parading a weapon. I can think of countless things I would rather be doing. Bit like my opinion of Jetskiers then?

So yes heavily restrict them with a view to a ban Again, just like my opinion of Jetskis. However, I recognise that it's my ignorance and prejudice along with some past bad experiences that's affecting me.

Not being a regular member of this forum I've just thought to my self "have I been trolled?" :doh:

[Stryder5]

I try too Mike.

https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20190815/548464450f4bea86148dbc7e109a614e.jpg


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[mad-moon]

I try too Mike.

https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20190815/548464450f4bea86148dbc7e109a614e.jpg


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

That's quite a nice photograph is that...the best type of shooting, in my humble opinion...;)

[Stryder5]

Thanks Alan, I love this type of shooting too.

Gary

[Vince]

I love my photography as well, but it doesn't mean I can't enjoy my air rifle also.
The general airgun owners as responsible law abiding citizens. They also are responsible for quite a bit of unpaid vermin control, this rarely gets a mention. I personally have shot untold numbers of rats, would you want them to get even more prevalent than they already are. I live next to a lot of farmland, but the worst hit areas, in my opinion, at least where I live are the local allotments. The allotment owners will tell you, they are more than ever immune to poisons and the traps are only enough for one rat at time. Myself and a couple of friends had permission to shoot on a pig farm and one day the farmer asked us if we could do anything with his plague of rats. We were shooting between 10 to 50 per night, it was infested. My point being, there was no damage or noise and both parties were happy. It cost the farmer nothing and because of the job we had done, we were invited to many more farms, and golf courses, though they were mainly for rabbits. If the air rifles were licensed, it may have been different or may not have happened in the first place. I'm really not sure if I would put up with the hassle of a licence for my air rifle and if licences are introduced, is the government going to compensate me for £800 my air rifle setup has cost me. As I mentioned before, we have some of the tightest gun laws in the world and because of an extremely small percentage of the population, do we all have to pay. It has been hinted that because of global warming, all high current, ie. class A gear may become illegal. Yet another stupid law as the high current gear in this country amounts to next to nothing, but it is still being considered apparently. How would the Hi-Fi fraternity feel about being told what kit you are allowed to own. I held my shotgun certificate for over 30 years without a blip on my record. I don't want to, nor should I be pushed into having to get a licence for something that is a peashooter compared to a shotgun. Don't let the government walk all over us all the time. Let common sense prevail.

[willbewill]

There'll be a call to ban Nerf guns next.

[struth]

A call to ban hifi:eek:

[walpurgis]

A call to ban hifi:eek:

And watches and coffee. :lol:

[Vince]

Yep that's what I read in Hi-Fi News, I think. There is a call to reduce carbon footprint by out lawing big heavy class A and valve amps. FFS, I have a big Musical Fidelity AMS 35I, pure class A and the oven, toaster and kettle draw more juice. I tried it out with a mains block that had a display of the power it was drawing. Oh and my old plasma tv as well. There has got to someone in charge who has a half grasp of common sense. I'm totally law abiding and they want to make me have a license for a gun that is below 12ft lbs. I know it is within power as Bagnall and Kirkwood in Newcastle serviced it for me and set it up to within allowance. Then the powers to be want me to get shot of my amp.....no probs.....cough up th £6000 it originally cost and the upgrades on top. Yeah no chance. We just keep getting kicked in the teeth over things that are blown all out of proportion, and we, the British, just accept it. Please for the sake of my sanity, find someone in charge with the tiniest bit of sense.

[Macca]

Regarding high current amplifiers I think the intention is to ban the further sale of them, I don't think that those already in existence will need to be handed in in some sort of 'amnesty'. They've got bob hope of that anyway. What are they going to do, conduct house to house searches for them?

[walpurgis]

It's ridiculous. In general, high current amps must be extremely rare when compared to the quantity of say vacuum cleaners or washing machines out there. Surely it's not a realistic issue?

[Stryder5]

Just think when your neighbors plug in their electric cars, and the rest of the street plug their's in, will there be sag in voltage or worse.

Smart meters may be able to detect what you're using power for, and have control?

Gary

[Stryder5]

It's ridiculous. In general, high current amps must be extremely rare when compared to the quantity of say vacuum cleaners or washing machines out there. Surely it's not a realistic issue?

But the EU are already specifying the max power vacuum cleaners etc., can be manufactured, it's not a big leap!

Gary

[Macca]

But the EU are already specifying the max power vacuum cleaners etc., can be manufactured, it's not a big leap!

Gary

AFAIK they are not insisting on all the old high power ones being recalled though.

Anyway it won't matter soon with any luck.

[struth]

AFAIK they are not insisting on all the old high power ones being recalled though.

Anyway it won't matter soon with any luck.

it would be hard to prove that you were ignoring the law anyway as most wouldnt know a high powered amp from chocolate... Its a bit different with a gun

[Pigmy Pony]

Yep that's what I read in Hi-Fi News, I think. There is a call to reduce carbon footprint by out lawing big heavy class A and valve amps. FFS, I have a big Musical Fidelity AMS 35I, pure class A and the oven, toaster and kettle draw more juice. I tried it out with a mains block that had a display of the power it was drawing. Oh and my old plasma tv as well. There has got to someone in charge who has a half grasp of common sense. I'm totally law abiding and they want to make me have a license for a gun that is below 12ft lbs. I know it is within power as Bagnall and Kirkwood in Newcastle serviced it for me and set it up to within allowance. Then the powers to be want me to get shot of my amp.....no probs.....cough up th £6000 it originally cost and the upgrades on top. Yeah no chance. We just keep getting kicked in the teeth over things that are blown all out of proportion, and we, the British, just accept it. Please for the sake of my sanity, find someone in charge with the tiniest bit of sense.

So true Vince, but I'll tell you one thing - even though I consider myself a responsible airgun owner, if the power consumption police try to take away my SET amp or my Panasonic plasma, they'll get a .22 pellet up their arse, with a perfectly legal 11.6ft lbs behind it. Whenever the incompetent shower of shits that are our successive governments have an issue to deal with, they always take the path of least resistance (us). If they're so concerned with reducing energy consumption and emissions, maybe they should give up their big Jags and Audis and turn up in Fiat 500s instead.

We constantly hear that the police and courts are getting tough on knife crime, with zero-tolerance. But whenever I see on TV some scrote found in possession of a "bladed weapon", the consequences are almost always a caution, a small fine, or even "released without charge" ffs. They should concentrate their energies on getting this right, and let us nice people get on with our lives.

[Vince]

You are completely right Steve. About 7-8 years ago an arsehole told me to be careful with my dogs as his Patterdales were fighters. I have a dog and bitch Staffordshire Bull Terriers, and they are very big for the breed. I would say well over twice the weight of his Patterdale Terriers, so I promtly told him to fuck off and get his dogs on a lead. 3 times I told him to get his dogs on a lead, he was at least 100 yards away from me and my dogs were next to me, with dogs just a few yards away. As I couldn't take my 'bairns' out one day, he turned up and let his dogs off while my missus was walking ours. Suffice to say, when the larger male Patterdale attacked my male Staff did as he was supposed to do and protected her. As my dog was fighting with dog he ran over and proceeded to whack my dog with a big nobbly walking stick. Susan, my partner was trying her best to stop the Patterdale from getting hurt and had bite injuries all over both hands. Meanwhile as he was beating my dog he repeatedly hit Susan, her arms and shoulders were black and blue the next day. Because the beating with a walking stick didn't work, he pulled out a knife and stuck the full length into the side of Nasus's neck. He is called Nasus as it is Susan's name backwards. The knife went to the hilt, there was entry and exit wounds, but it went in sideways, 90 degrees the other way and Nasus wouldn't be here now. Susan came running the house screaming, 'our Nasus has been stabbed'. I checked him out and saw it wasn't life threating and went straight round to the wankers door. He wouldn't come out, I was wanting to rip him a new ares hole, for what he had done to my 'bairn, friend, companion'. He phone the police, I phoned the police and they turned up and he had the knife on him. It had the blood and black hairs still on it. I know about knife laws, being an ex shotgun.....hunter for a better word. It had a blade length of at least 5 inches and it was a locking blade, both illegal to carry. When I pointed this out to the copper, he replied, extenuating circumstances, he uses it in his allotment. So I replied, why isn't it in his allotment instead of his pocket with the blade extended. This the bit I choke on....I was told to keep away from him as hes said I had threatened him and if I went near him I would be arrested. I said, after what he has done to my dog, and the total disregard for his own dogs wellbeing...I will accept arrest but he isn't getting away with this. I had warned him 3 times to get his dogs on a lead and because I shouted at him he let his own dog get seriously injured.....to try to make a point. Plus he waited until Susan was out with them, she said our bitch, Stella was just frightened when it went on. The copper came out with....the dog has X amount of staples in it and if you try to pursue this your dog will be classed as dangerous and could be put to sleep. I was absolutely gobsmacked, I again pointed out about the illegality of the weapon and hej just said.....Do you want to see your dog destroyed. I was ranting and raving about the so called rise in knife crime and the Zero tolerance against knife crime approach of the police. Again...do you want your dog destroyed. I was forced to let it go......I later found out that he is a police informer or grass if you like, that is why he walked away scott free. He has moved away not long after it happened and has gone totally unpunished for public knife crime, with a totally illegal blade. Man I just love the police.......I have absolutely no faith in them at all. I still have my bairns, Nasus and Stella, he was 15 years old in March and she is about 12 we think, we rescued her when she was about 1-2 years old. So her age is a guestimate. 15 years old and my mate Alan (Mad-Moon) will tell you, he is like a pup with so much energy. I know I've ranted on a bit, but licensing an air rifle, whilst someone is allowed to use a knife in public. Dick heads in power. We have got one of the best countries in the world to live in, but equality is nose diving.

[Vince]

I forgot to mention, the incident changed my own dog Nasus. Instead of just wanting to run about and play with other dogs, or just simply ignore them.....he totally changed. If he is off the lead chasing a stick or his golf ball, no problem. If a dog comes running towards us he goes for any dog that comes close to myself, Susan or indeed Stella. He basically was battered with a big knobbly walking stick and then knifed and the perpetrator walked away scott free. Plus he used his own dog to try to make a point. He should never, ever be allowed to own any pet. Ask anyone who vists us, they are bombarded with 2 'devil dogs',licking and jumping all over them. If you are looking at a bad Staffy, you are looking at the wrong end of the lead. I will fly their banner all day. Finished rant again.

[NRG]

What the heck happened to paragraphs? :lol:

[Barry]

What the heck happened to paragraphs? :lol:

The EU have banned them to save paper.

[Pigmy Pony]

Vince, that was a difficult post for me to read, and I don't mean the paucity of paragraphs - this sort of thing really offends my sense of justice. It goes back to some previous posts where it was suggested that perhaps police should be kept out of it, and justice of a more personal nature applied.

This knobhead doesn't deserve to keep his legs, and you know that being an informer, if he were to meet with an unfortunate "accident", the list of potential culprits must be huge. Pity that your name would now be near the top of that list :(

Poor Nasus. I know that Staffies are some of the most loving and loyal dogs you'll ever see, it's just a shame they are the 'dog of choice' for your average scumbag, due to them being tough little buggers and vaguely resembling other 'fighting' breeds. These scrotes then proceed to knock the good nature out of them, and if unsuccessful will just tie them to the railings of the local RSPCA shelter, or worse abandon them on a busy road.

Sounds like a case for bringing back dog licensing, but as with airgun licensing/banning, it totally misses the real problem, which is that wrong 'uns that ruin it for the rest of us. I would start by licensing any type of hooded clothing. Anyone found wearing one without a license will be dealt summary justice. No courts, no fines, just a pair of scissors which every copper should carry.

[alphaGT]

I can’t imagine gangsters fiddling with air pumps and pellets, I don’t see what the general public has to fear from pellet gun owners? Had their been an actual rise in pellet gun crime? I seriously doubt it. Some idiot in the government gets a wild hair, and to hell with your rights.

And I’ve heard talk of regulating stereo! There was big talk of it in Stereophile many years back. So far I don’t think any rules have been made. But Class A amps could be a thing of the past if they do. Not illegal for you to buy, but for manufacturers to make. They could be forced to make all of their equipment comply to some arbitrary limit on power consumption. And amp makers will be forced to only make Class D amps, in order to comply.

And believe me, there are those who believe no one needs anything louder than a clock radio. They don’t want you to have the ability to disturb the peace. And Lord forbid you’ve got children in the house! You may damage their hearing! Even if you’ve never turned it up loud, the fact you could might hurt the children! Before we go off being offended by what others do, like shoot pellet rifles, remember it’s a slippery slope, before someone starts to take offense to what we do.

Russell

[Vince]

Sorry about the paragraphs.

Is that better.

Don't want to upset you.

I think the content of my rant was a damn sight more important than paragraphs.

[Vince]

I know what you mean about dickheads and the Staffordshire Bull Terrier.
Trophy dogs, is about the best description for them. They all have spiky collars or harnesses, and as you say, they knock the character out of the dog.
My staffy's lick people to death when they come to the house and the amount of people who haven't mixed with Staffy's are shocked at just how friendly they are. If you have a Staffy, not a crossbreed mind, and it is viscous towards people, you are looking at the other end of the leader for blame.
As I said, it totally changed the character of Nasus towards dogs, he now growls and goes for them. But that is up to the resonsible owner to keep your dog on a lease if other dogs are present.
Our 'bairns' as Susan and I call them, are a very big, important part of our family. They love contact, to be as close as they can all the time. They give 100% unconditional love and we give it back.
My son who is now 30, is the same as us as he was raised with dogs and now has his own.
I know someone who has a Pitbull Terrier, he resuced her when she was young, and she is just like our dogs. Very obediant and loving. Again it is the way dogs are raised most of the time.
One dog that no matter what you do, will go for everything is the Jack Russell Terrier. My mother had one and he was so playful, until he saw a dog or cat. It was akin to a transformation, the way he changed. He could never be let off a lease as he would just go crazy if he saw another dog or cat. Again it was up to the responsibility of the owner to keep on a lease.
I know there are some people who just cannot grasp the whole dog thing. That is up to them, their choice.
Susan and were talking about the air weapon thing and if licensing come about, how are they going inforce the huge amount of guns that are out there. Something else that will pushed underground.

[struth]

Yup, most dogs are as viscious as their owner wants them to be and wishes himself to. Some folk; no, many folk shouldn't be allowed to keep animals, far less kids

[Oddball]

I accept high powered air rifles should be on a firearms cert , heavy handed ,but if you show a need to have one for club shooting , its something you need to do , to get one !

Lower powered airguns should maybe have a easier , new type licence to obtain one , but who the hells going to police it?
They cant cope with everything shotgun /firarms related , already !!

We all know that anyone with a table leg shaped as a gun or an air rifle ,is likely to attract the gun squad down on them if someone reports it as a potential ' gun related event /offence '!!

Out in the country its not so likely , but lets not forget vermin control is still needed !

[mad-moon]

[QUOTE=NRG;1114201]What the heck happened to paragraphs? :lol:[/QUOTE

Their 'chutes didn't open

[Vince]

Ha ha, good one Al

Sent from my D6503 using Tapatalk

[Pigmy Pony]

I accept high powered air rifles should be on a firearms cert , heavy handed ,but if you show a need to have one for club shooting , its something you need to do , to get one !

Lower powered airguns should maybe have a easier , new type licence to obtain one , but who the hells going to police it?
They cant cope with everything shotgun /firarms related , already !!

We all know that anyone with a table leg shaped as a gun or an air rifle ,is likely to attract the gun squad down on them if someone reports it as a potential ' gun related event /offence '!!

Out in the country its not so likely , but lets not forget vermin control is still needed !

There was a story 3 or 4 years ago where a man who was registered blind had his white stick mistaken for a weapon by the plod, and when he failed to 'comply', was tasered. He also had a heart condition and subsequently died. I kid you not, and if I can find a link to the story I will post it. But don't hold your breath.

[mad-moon]

There was a story 3 or 4 years ago where a man who was registered blind had his white stick mistaken for a weapon by the plod, and when he failed to 'comply', was tasered. He also had a heart condition and subsequently died. I kid you not, and if I can find a link to the story I will post it. But don't hold your breath.

https://www.theguardian.com/uk/2012/oct/17/police-taser-blind-man-stick

[Pigmy Pony]

https://www.theguardian.com/uk/2012/oct/17/police-taser-blind-man-stick

Thanks for that Alan! Though it would seem that reports of Mr Farmer's death were greatly exaggerated. Which is nice for Mr. Farmer :)