Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Toughest laws in the world could not stop Cumbria tragedy(UK mass murder)
Timesonline ^ | 2 June, 2010 | Richard Ford

Posted on 06/02/2010 7:07:49 PM PDT by marktwain

Gun laws in the UK are among the toughest in the world after a number of mass killings over the past three decades. Anyone who acquires or is in possession of a shotgun — the weapon believed to have been used in the Cumbria killings — must have a certificate issued by a chief police officer in the area in which they live. The certificate allows the holder to possess any number of shotguns, including pump-action and self-loading weapons with a magazine that cannot hold more than two cartridges. The officer must be satisfied that an applicant has “good reason” for wanting a shotgun, is fit to have it and that public safety will not be endangered. Police must interview every applicant and visit their home to check that the gun is held in a secure locker. There were 574,946 shotgun certificates in operation at the end of March last year, 5 per cent higher than the previous year. The number of certificates peaked in 1988 at 882,000 and has since fallen by more than a third, according to Home Office figures published in March. The reduction coincided with revised rules for renewing shotgun certificates, including a requirement on the police to carry out additional checks on applicants, including a visit to their home. The certificates covered 1.3 million shotguns. In Cumbria 9,868 certificates were in operation in March covering 22,476 shotguns, an average of 2.3 guns per certificate. Police in the area received 370 new applications for shotgun certificates of which only two were refused. Shotgun certificates must be renewed every five years, with the police conducting the same checks on the applicant, including a face-to-face interview. Gun laws were tightened after the Hungerford massacre in 1987, in which Michael Ryan killed 16 people and himself with two semi-automatic

(Excerpt) Read more at timesonline.co.uk ...


TOPICS:
KEYWORDS: banglist; gun; massmurder; uk
We do not know if the firearms used were legally purchased and owned or not.
1 posted on 06/02/2010 7:07:50 PM PDT by marktwain
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: marktwain
We do not know if the firearms used were legally purchased and owned or not.

Which is where gun control laws fail miserably.

2 posted on 06/02/2010 7:12:53 PM PDT by metmom (Welfare was never meant to be a career choice.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: marktwain

Restricting gun ownership to protect people, by making them utterly defenseless against violent crime, where the cops are the only ones armed and are not responsible to protect anyone, is so fantastically stupid that only insane people could possibly go along with it - literally sheep to the slaughter.

This world does not have a political problem. It has an insanity problem.


3 posted on 06/02/2010 7:15:22 PM PDT by Talisker (When you find a turtle on top of a fence post, you can be damn sure it didn't get there on it's own.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: marktwain
The officer must be satisfied that an applicant has “good reason” for wanting a shotgun

I take it that "To defend against a tyrannical government and overly zealous law enforcement" does not cut the mustard over there?

4 posted on 06/02/2010 7:17:29 PM PDT by steve86 (Acerbic by nature, not nurture)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: marktwain

All of the reports that I have seen and heard harp on the fact that handguns are not allowed in GB....

He had a rifle and a shotgun.


5 posted on 06/02/2010 7:18:01 PM PDT by ButThreeLeftsDo (Are You Ready?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: marktwain

Gun Control and gun control laws are the excuse of negligent, incompetent, foolish and irrational public officials playing upon social pop-culture ignorance!


6 posted on 06/02/2010 7:25:36 PM PDT by ntmxx (I am not so sure about this misdirection!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: marktwain

My view is similar to the Ft. Hood shootings. Had firearms been allowed, the massacre could have been prevented.


7 posted on 06/02/2010 7:29:37 PM PDT by fatnotlazy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: marktwain

:We do not know if the firearms used were legally purchased and owned or not.”

That doesn’t matter. They will simply ban all guns and think that they have solved the problem.


8 posted on 06/02/2010 7:33:00 PM PDT by Blood of Tyrants (The US will not die with a whimper. It will die with thundering applause from the left.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: steve86

“To defend against a tyrannical government and overly zealous law enforcement”
It’s Great Britain.....socialist tyranny is standard operating procedure....


9 posted on 06/02/2010 7:46:25 PM PDT by GenXteacher (He that hath no stomach for this fight, let him depart!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: fatnotlazy

Or, at least, greatly reduced...


10 posted on 06/02/2010 7:47:12 PM PDT by TXnMA
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Talisker
This world does not have a political problem. It has an insanity problem.

What's worse is they think they're just like everyone else and are voted into positions of power.

11 posted on 06/02/2010 7:55:29 PM PDT by TOneocon (The reason there is so much poverty is because of the uneven distribution of capitalism...Rush)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: marktwain
Toughest laws in the world could not stop Cumbria tragedy

But a Good Guy, with a gun, could have.

Same as at Ft. Hood, where the ending had to wait until the *civilian* post police showed up. Which was probably quicker than police generally would have shown up, since the two responding officers were pretty close when the call came in.

12 posted on 06/02/2010 8:06:30 PM PDT by El Gato ("The second amendment is the reset button of the US constitution"-Doug McKay)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: marktwain

But since the guy apparently had a clean history and was well-liked by those who knew him, it’s unlikely he’d have been turned down for a shotgun certificate if he’d apply, since the turn-down rate is extremely low. What was needed was plenty of armed citizens, with concealed handguns that could quickly be pressed into service.


13 posted on 06/02/2010 8:08:38 PM PDT by GovernmentShrinker
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: marktwain
China recently had a shooting spree - 3 judges killed in court by a man with anextremely illegal automatic weapon! - and several sprees of schoolyards STABBINGS where crazed adults murdered multiple school children...in one case, 7 kids, a parent, and a teacher were killed with a meat cleaver.

Ya won't hear that on Commie News Network.

14 posted on 06/02/2010 8:39:16 PM PDT by Rytwyng (I'm still fond of the United States. I just can't find it. -- Fred Reed)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: marktwain

It doesn’t really make any difference. Nothing stops people whose heads get puddled like this, especially a law.


15 posted on 06/03/2010 8:13:37 AM PDT by Vanders9
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: fatnotlazy

I disagree. I dont think it would have any difference at all.


16 posted on 06/03/2010 8:15:17 AM PDT by Vanders9
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: marktwain
Any public official that is afraid to be surrounded by armed constituents is a public official the constituents should be armed against.

Garde la Foi, mes amis! Nous nous sommes les sauveurs de la République! Maintenant et Toujours!
(Keep the Faith, my friends! We are the saviors of the Republic! Now and Forever!)

LonePalm, le Républicain du verre cassé (The Broken Glass Republican)

17 posted on 06/03/2010 8:19:08 AM PDT by LonePalm (Commander and Chef)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: GovernmentShrinker

Folks, he was driving through small towns, via rural roads, for three hours, taking pot shots at random at folks for no readily apparent reason. How many people expect that to happen and have time to draw a concealed weapon? If you did, would you really fire it at a fast moving vehicle in a built up area?


18 posted on 06/03/2010 8:19:45 AM PDT by Vanders9
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: Vanders9

First you say he was in small towns via rural roads, then you ask if we’d really fire in a “built up area”. There was plenty of opportunity over all those hours to shoot out his tires and then shoot him as he emerged from the car. Sadly, nobody did that so he just kept going and kept killing.


19 posted on 06/03/2010 8:38:29 AM PDT by GovernmentShrinker
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: LonePalm

When the people fear their government, there is tyranny; when the government fears the people, there is liberty.
Thomas Jefferson


20 posted on 06/03/2010 8:41:51 AM PDT by SUSSA
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: SUSSA
When President John F. Kennedy welcomed 49 Nobel Prize winners to the White House in 1962 he said, "I think this is the most extraordinary collection of talent and of human knowledge that has ever been gathered together at the White House – with the possible exception of when Thomas Jefferson dined alone."

Garde la Foi, mes amis! Nous nous sommes les sauveurs de la République! Maintenant et Toujours!
(Keep the Faith, my friends! We are the saviors of the Republic! Now and Forever!)

LonePalm, le Républicain du verre cassé (The Broken Glass Republican)

21 posted on 06/03/2010 8:49:41 AM PDT by LonePalm (Commander and Chef)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: LonePalm

Thomas Jefferson frequently to answer the door at the White House himself. If a citizen wanted to talk to President Jefferson they just went to the White House and knocked on the door.

Jefferson stayed in a boarding house the night before his inauguration and walked alone from the boarding house to his inauguration. When he was sworn in as President, he returned to his boarding house for dinner. Every seat was taken, and no one stood to offer him a seat. After awhile, the wife of a Kentucky senator offered him her seat. Jefferson politely declined.


22 posted on 06/03/2010 8:51:30 AM PDT by SUSSA
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: SUSSA; LonePalm

Those are great stories! Things have changed since then...


23 posted on 06/04/2010 12:35:53 AM PDT by Vanders9
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: GovernmentShrinker

No, I didnt say that. Reread it.


24 posted on 06/04/2010 12:37:17 AM PDT by Vanders9
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson