Resident Members
  • Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

0 Neutral

About Pastypies

  • Rank
    Relative Newbie
  1. Interesting post there Trojan and of course the default position of ACPO 'The public must be disarmed'. Oddly enough elsewhere in Europe there doesn’t seem to be the same level of fear and hysteria that you get in this country but then again they all arm there police by default what is more they haven't just had 13 years of a left wing socialist police state dictating over them. Maybe if the police took a little more time looking at who could have a firearms licence in the first place this country would undoubtedly be a safer place the names Derrick Bird and Thomas Hamilton spring to mind immediately. Two men given gun licences by the police and yet both known criminals, the later without even being vetted despite being a known homosexual paedophile, and that sir is simple criminal negligence. With regards to you MP5 snipe I disagree. If what you say is true then all the people with MP5 replicas chambered for .22 rimfire on section 1 which are dimensionally the same other than the bore, chamber etc. are if fact in possession of .22 semi automatic pistols. Fact is a firearm of this size constitutes as a carbine rifle which is why you can own one on S1 and if it where chambered for pistol calibre ammunition it would come under the definition of a gallery rifle in UK law even though it would then be S5.
  2. Hi Tony, I think your idea might have some kind of merit but not here in anti gun anti shooting sports socialist Britain. I'm not in the police but have certain insider knowledge through various channels and when it comes to firearms it would seem some forces believe that less knowledge of firearms is better than more. Indeed one firearms licensing department I know employed all of it's staff based on the criteria they had little or no knowledge of firearms. The logic it would seem if they had an interest or knowledge they must be some kind of gun nut or maniac. I ask you, have you ever heard anything quite so ridiculous, I heard that some of them didn't even know the difference between an automatic pistol and a revolver, someone else between a shotgun and a rifle! These people are issuing licences to the public, must be the only job in the country where you get the job by knowing nothing about it and having no experience. I happen to know there are a group of people offering courses to the shooting public in France similar to the one you talking about I happen to know a few people (UK shooters) who have gone on it and said it was worth the time and money. If nothing else you get to have a pop again with the stuff you could use all the time before the police and the government starting getting worried and took it all away. Someone mentioned all you need is to take a three week course on firearms instruction in the police force and you get the all clear to use a handgun, sub machine gun (all be it semi auto, so more of a self loading gallery rifle) or SLR. Surely if its good enough for the police then logic dictates it must also be good enough for members of the public who are gun owners? Perhaps someone here could post the requirements for this course and how someone meets the vetting requirements and maybe how you qualify, can't think its all that difficult. I've always believed where there is a will there is always a way, not sure however the police and government have the will though to hand back the stuff they were so eager to take away.
  3. Interesting subject without a doubt. From someone who has an interest in this field but is a member of the public and not a police officer I say arm the police and stop gimping around and putting it off. Someone said earlier that there simply isn't the crime level here in the UK to warrant arming the police. Tell that to the victims of Derrick Bird where you had the police chasing a man round the countryside like the scene from the Benny Hill Show powerless to act as he shoots people down with little more than a section 2 shotgun. Don't get me wrong I have a lot of respect for the police and all the rubbish they are forced to put up with every day but at the same time they need to pull there finger out on this one. If officers can't be trusted with a firearm because they are likely to shoot first and ask questions later that then you can no longer be a front line officer or even an officer, period. End of the day though that's just poor training. If your skills at marksmanship are so poor that you cannot be trusted with a side-arm then the same applies. You could go on and on but at the end of the day you have to do something some time. As far as cutting down on gun crime such as the incident mentioned above, and this is one that can be squarely leveled at the senior police, stop giving gun licences to known criminals or people with criminal records. Derrick Bird who had a conviction for theft and Thomas Hamilton who was a known homosexual pedophile, no coincidence almost all his victims where children. To this day nobody has ever been brought to book for giving Mr. Hamilton a gun licence instead you have a politically motivated gun ban and then the whole sorry issue swept under the carpet. Like someone said before this issue is so politically charged I'm not sure it will ever get resolved. Sadly I think it might only ever change when a group of officers are gunned down in the street because they were powerless to defend themselves and the public. BTW great forum, very interesting...