Posted on 10/26/2002 7:12:48 AM PDT by Cpt Sir Richard Burton
If an individual imports a firearm and/or ammunition after becoming a resident of the UK, he will need to apply for a firearms or shotgun certificate. Application must be made to the Chief Officer of the Police for the area in which he is resident. The Metropolitan Police Service Firearms Enquiry Team provides specific information on firearms certificates and shotgun certificates.
(Excerpt) Read more at britainusa.com ...
Your elected representatives don't trust you with certain types of firearms. That should make you VERY upset.
Instead, you feel it makes your children "safer", when in fact lawful citizens are not the ones perpetrating offenses. Gun laws have no effect on criminals, since criminals by definition DON'T OBEY LAWS.
Why is that so hard for socialists and liberal utopians to figure out?
You just contradicted yourself. First you say only semi-auto AK47s are allowed, and these certainly require a "process" ... and then you say full autos may also be owned after all ... following a process. Which is it? And can you own magazines and 7.62x39 ammunition, too? What is the extent of what you are permitted to do by the grace and kindness of your betters?
Read the terms of use: NO RACISM.
To make this a bit clearer to you, here is your post in some mirrors:
If, you want to make it easy for some black ni**er to walk into a store to buy a shot gun and blow away school kids ...
If, you want to make it easy for some filthy Jew to walk into a store to buy a shot gun and blow away school kids ...
Get it?
I guess preventing an otherwise law abiding citizen the right to carry a concealed weapon to stop some Saudi A-rab Islamofacist from blowing away school kids makes it bad law too. An armed populace is a respected populace.
You Brits are so caught up in your Socialist governmental controls that you can't see the forest for the trees. But, hey, I would expect no more from a people who have developed a passion for boiled food and warm beer....
You picked the wrong state. So move.
I'm not surprised you find MA gun laws more prohibitive than those in the UK, MA prides itself on it's disregard for the Constitution.
If you are trying to make the point that Taxachussetts is a gun-grabbingly disarmed liberal socialist "for the children" utopia with full victim disarmament laws, then I wholeheartedly agree with you.
Please - you mean "here in Taxachussetts." There are some police chiefs out where I live that give advice to residents about being armed, and seeing that they have enough gun for their own protection, admitting that the police can't be there for them all the time, and that their self-defense is up to them.
And now you are a foreign immigrant in another country, and Lo! are disarmed by the local constable.
Oh, the irony...
The same reasoning is used in NY State, which is a Taxachusetts clone- when applying for a handgun license never tell them it's for self-defense, but target practice. Whatever, it's still perfectly legal, as it should be to use it for the purpose of defending yourself.
In Britain though, I've heard you can't do that, even if someone breaks into your house. If that's true, why do British citizens tolerate those kind of laws?
The question isn't whether I do, it's that you do: you stated that foreigners in your own country shouldn't be able to easily arm themselves, and now you are a foreinger and can't easily arm yourself. Apparently you miss the irony of getting what you would seek for others.
In the UK, it is hard (if not impossible) for somebody to get off the plane from Saudi Arabia (say) and go and buy a shot gun in a store. Why should it it be easy?
Because self defense is a basic human right, and regimes that infringe this right deny individual human value.
If it turns out that he just some fat Arab prince that wishes to shoot grouse, then give him a license.
Skinny Arab princes need not apply, LOL!
Licenses are for peasants, "please, sir, may I humbly ask you to allow me to ______" Do you have the right to your life? Yes or no.
But if it turns out to be a young, single, crazy eyed individual, that looks as if he has just come out of an Al-Qaeda training camp - then "NO!
This is what our CIA, etc, is supposed to be able to sort out. They fail (usually - they can't even get current maps of Belgrade (according to them)) but one does not become stronger by making everyone else weaker. Incidentally, it's not like smuggling doesn't exist - certainly it does in your country and also here. So it's not like more gun laws can stop terrorists from getting armed, look at the total failure of drug laws here.
And if I catch you with a shot gun then it's off to the nick (jail)!
I don't support such a prohibition. If someone is a known criminal or terrorist, he should be jailed or killed. If not, then he should have rights, as for self-defense. A basic human right, remember. Though you deny this.
Then the solution would be to prosecute those land owners individually, not strip away everyone's right to shoot those who would break into one's own house with the intent to do harm.
Do you have a right to your own life? Yes or no.
Oh, really? Can you own a hand gun there? In your home, or do you have to go "visit" it at the gun club? Anything bigger than a .22? That's right.....GUN PROHIBITION.
By the way...you STILL haven't answered my question. Apart from a "military look", what defines an assault weapon?
The late, great George Harrison would probably have disagreed with you on that one.
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.