The Philosophy CANNOT Be Wrong! Do it AGAIN, Only HARDER!

Ravenwood links to this news report under the heading of “UK still doesn’t get it

Blunkett orders overhaul of outdated firearm laws

The Government will attempt to tackle Britain’s gun culture with plans to be unveiled this week for an overhaul of outdated firearms laws.

Really? Outdated?

Let’s see:

1920 saw the introduction of registration of all handguns and rifles.

1936 saw the banning of all privately possessed fully-auto weapons and short-barreled shotguns.

As of 1946, “self-defense” was no longer an acceptable reason for issuance of a firearm license.

In 1953 the Prevention of Crime Act made carrying any “offensive weapon” in public a crime.

The Criminal Justice Act 1967 added shotguns to the registry. And jury trials no longer required a unanimous decision. (If they still did, Tony Martin, the farmer who shot two burglars – in the back – would never have gone to jail. His was a 10-2 decision.)

In 1982 reloaders and blackpowder shooters were made subject to warrantless inspection by police to “ensure safe storage.” Yup, the cops can come into the house without a warrant and inspect the premises.

In 1987 most semi-auto and pump-action shotguns and all rifles of these types were banned and (the legally-owned ones) confiscated.

In 1997 all handguns were banned and (the legally-owned ones) confiscated.

In 2004 a certain type of airgun has been banned. Possession of one without a license will now bring up to a 5-year sentence.

But England’s gun laws are outdated and in need of an overhaul.


David Blunkett, the Home Secretary, will publish a consultation document which is expected to lead to tougher restrictions on the sale and manufacture of replica firearms as well as new age limits on gun ownership, especially for airguns, starter pistols and shotguns.

What, no new restrictions on the few rifles still in circulation?

The consultation follows lobbying by the police and anti-gun campaigners who say Britain’s gun laws are confused, out of date and in desperate need of reform.

Meaning “It’s still legal for some citizens to own projectile weaponry! THIS MUST END!

Of particular concern are replica firearms which are popular with gun collectors and can be bought legally but are being converted by criminals into lethal weapons to fire live ammunition.

Next up: Zip guns!

Economics 101: Supply will always rise to meet demand.

Police say that the greatest increase in gun crime is linked to a rise in the use of imitation weapons and converted airguns. In London alone, at least 70 per cent of weapons now seized by officers are converted replicas.

Only because they’re the easiest to get – right now.

Last November, the All-Party Parliamentary Group on Gun Crime published a report calling for a complete ban on the import, sale and manufacture of replica firearms.

Remove the word “replica” from that sentence, replace it with “anything even resembling a” and you’d have the gist of the entire gun control movement.

There has also been a rise in attacks on people involving airguns. Last week, a firefighter was shot in the face by an airgun pellet as he drove a 24-ton fire truck along a street in Dumfries, Scotland.

And the airgun is obviously at fault, right? If the hooligan hadn’t had the gun, he wouldn’t have been tempted in the first place. It’s those evil brain-altering mindwaves that guns give off that cause these acts, after all.

Ministers have already brought in some measures to curb gun crime in Britain.

You don’t say! You mean, like that list I gave above that didn’t reduce gun crime a damned bit?

Last month, new anti-social behaviour laws came into effect which included a new imprisonable offence of carrying a replica gun in public.

I love that. Anti-social. What a lovely expression.

The legal age for owning an airgun has also been raised from 14 to 17 and it is now an offence to buy a weapon for someone under 17. But the ban on underage ownership only applies to Brocock-style airguns, which operate using a gas cartridge, and not to all types of airguns.

“Which must be amended, because we cannot have our youth corrupted by actually learning to shoot!”

A Home Office source confirmed that the consultation document would cover all aspects of gun-control legislation. “We will be seeking people’s views on all aspects of firearm legislation. We are looking at the whole issue, although replica and imitation firearms are of particular concern,” the source added.

Left unstated, however, is that people who legally own guns – that tiny minority – need not give their views. Their opinions are not needed or wanted.

Anti-gun groups have welcomed the planned reforms, which are the first major overhaul of firearms laws since 1997, when the Government introduced a ban on handguns after 16 schoolchildren and their teacher were killed at Dunblane primary school in Scotland.

I bet they have. Especially since the conclusion of the inquiry into the Dunblane massacre specifically recommended against the handgun ban that resulted. Note, please, that all the laws enumerated above did not prevent Thomas Hamilton from legally having the handguns he used at Dunblane.

Once again, it’s the gun that is at fault. Remove the guns and the problem will vanish, goes the philosophy.

The Gun Control Network, which campaigns for tighter arms control, said Britain lagged behind other countries because it did not have a universal age limit on people buying guns. “In our increasingly violent world we need to … tighten up on our gun laws,” said Gill Marshall-Andrews, chairwoman of the GCN. “The world-wide pressures are for … an increase in global gun violence.”

“Tighten up?” They’re so tight now you squeek when you walk. And now the push – lead by the UN – is for global gun confiscation control.

And the U.S. remains the evil poster-boy for it. Here we still give more than mere lip-service to the idea of a right to arms.


But any restrictions on gun ownership are expected to face fierce opposition from the British Association for Shooting and Conservation, which represents gun enthusiasts.

Oh, right. They’ve been so effective in the past.

The cognitive dissonance here is really incredible to me. They’ve tried and tried and tried to reduce violent crime – specifically violent crime involving firearms, for over eighty years – and failed miserably. One definintion of “insanity” is doing the same thing over and over and expecting a different result. But the philosophy cannot be wrong! Do it again ONLY HARDER!

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.