Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

Whilst I generally think the less guns around the better, it comes as no great surprise to me that banning hand guns in the UK after Dunblane did not eliminate the possibiliy that some nutter would go on a shooting rampage.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/10214661.stm

Expect a great deal of pious hand wringing in the Daily mail tomorrow.

I don't think it can ever be reasonably expected that guns will vanish, ban or no ban. The criminal element will always find ways of smuggling them in; plus the large propensity for people reactivating 'display' weapons.

Sue Matthews, a telephonist at A2B Taxis in Whitehaven, said the Mr Bird was self-employed and lived alone. She described him as a "quiet fellow".

aren't they always ? Further evidence that only loud, extrovert outgoing types should be armed. Never hear about clowns or bingo callers doing this sort of thing eh ?

I was there on Holiday in December, im taking my bastard body armour next time!

For non-UK, this is an incident which has seen a former taxi driver kill 12 people in the Lake District and injure a further 25 with what witnesses have described as a shotgun. He has since shot himself.

Two former massacres of this nature have led to the ban of the weapon in question. Hungerford = a ban on semi-automatic weapons. Dunblane = a ban on hand guns.

Of all the things I could have counted on not to contribute to the current amount of gun law threads on dakakdakka, I thought my local area was one of em.

It is worth noting that the Hungerford and Dunblane killers were both licensed to own firearms.

If this killer turns out to have held a license, what will it say about the gun licensing system?

Considering he was witnessed having a shotgun and a sniper rifle, I would doubt as a taxi driver he held a licence for that.

Considering his age location and occupation i would be stunned if he had a military grade sniper rifle. Maybe it was a hunting rifle of some kind?

Time will tell...

someone on the news (at 10 to 8 mind as well) just described incredibly ghaphicly what he saw including the phrase
"things that shouldnt be outside of her head" and he and a friend "joked about the police taking their time to get to the
scene whilst waiting for the police"

oo er i can se the daily mail running with "sicko laughs while my wife bled to death on the floor"
also this same person claims the shooter was armed with a sniper rifle with a huge telescopic sight fixed,
i cant help but think the logical conclusion will be a ban on shotguns/bolt action/single action guns altogether, which im
not sure is completely fair, i mean people managed to kill eachother before guns

also whilst on the note, i understand this area sufferered a terrible bus crash recently which killed a large amount of people,
they dont seem to be haveing a good time of it at the moment

**edit i would have thought it was probably a bolt action rifle of some sort with a scope as these are "fairly common"
in rural areas and the guy who saw him get into the taxi with the rifl didnt think anything of it, im sure if he was wielding
something military grade this would have made an instant impression

Flashman wrote:Whilst I generally think the less guns around the better, it comes as no great surprise to me that banning hand guns in the UK after Dunblane did not eliminate the possibiliy that some nutter would go on a shooting rampage.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/10214661.stm

Expect a great deal of pious hand wringing in the Daily mail tomorrow.

I don't care what anyone says - this NEVER would have happened if Diana was still alive.

jamessearle0 wrote:also whilst on the note, i understand this area sufferered a terrible bus crash recently which killed a large amount of people,
they dont seem to be haveing a good time of it at the moment

make that a school bus and add the worst flooding in uk records. All in the last year. This place is cursed.

reds8n wrote:

aren't they always ? Further evidence that only loud, extrovert outgoing types should be armed. Never hear about clowns or bingo callers doing this sort of thing eh ?

So, just Frazzled then?

Good analysis on Telegraph website by some university boffin. Basically states this was a completely random event that no amount of legislation could have prevented. Is common sense going to kick in before hysteria this time around?

In this case I can't see there being a ban brought in to cover shotguns and hunting rifles, there are too many people in the UK who have a legitimate business reason for owning them (farmers and pigeon/pheasant shoots). When you look at the hand gun and semi auto bans, compared to any potential shotgun/rifles ban, very few people owned them and there were no practicle reasons to own them beyond sport.

What has happened is truly sad, but banning guns which are used by many as legitimate tools is not the answer. If someone is hell bent on killing they will find a way, be it illegal firearms, modified air weapons, other projectiles such as crossbows or handbows or just grabbing the kitchen knife.

squilverine wrote:In this case I can't see there being a ban brought in to cover shotguns and hunting rifles, there are too many people in the UK who have a legitimate business reason for owning them (farmers and pigeon/pheasant shoots). When you look at the hand gun and semi auto bans, compared to any potential shotgun/rifles ban, very few people owned them and there were no practicle reasons to own them beyond sport.

What has happened is truly sad, but banning guns which are used by many as legitimate tools is not the answer. If someone is hell bent on killing they will find a way, be it illegal firearms, modified air weapons, other projectiles such as crossbows or handbows or just grabbing the kitchen knife.

+1, can't stop the insane, laws are irrelevant to nutters.

The police have yet to confirm that the weapons used in this spree were legally held, however that is a formality. They have already said the killer had licences for guns of both types. They only need to make formal ballistic tests.

That means that all three mass shootings in the UK in modern times have been by people holding their weapons legally.

Wouldn't surprise me to see the UK ban bolt action rifles if he did indeed use a hunting rifle with a scope attached.

squilverine wrote:In this case I can't see there being a ban brought in to cover shotguns and hunting rifles, there are too many people in the UK who have a legitimate business reason for owning them (farmers and pigeon/pheasant shoots). When you look at the hand gun and semi auto bans, compared to any potential shotgun/rifles ban, very few people owned them and there were no practicle reasons to own them beyond sport.

What has happened is truly sad, but banning guns which are used by many as legitimate tools is not the answer. If someone is hell bent on killing they will find a way, be it illegal firearms, modified air weapons, other projectiles such as crossbows or handbows or just grabbing the kitchen knife.

The two worse mass murders in american history (9/11 and Oklahoma City) were perpetuated with box cutters and fertilizer. The truly troubled will find a way to cause harm.

Rampages like this can't be fixed with legislation. What they can, arguably, help prevent are the day in and day out homicides.

Just looking at this shooting as is, there could be an arguement for a further ban. Yesterday's shootings, Dunblane & Hungerford involved non criminals. People just losing it and going on the rampage. Although you hear of criminals involved in driveby shootings, the figures aren't the same. So although a ban wouldn't affect the guns available to the criminal world, it would have an affect on mainstream users.

Not that I'm calling for a ban, but I can see how it could be justified.

Thank God I live in the US.

I could stab someone in the throat with a ball point pen. Should ball point pens be banned? It'd be justified.

Word from the grapevine is that the current government will "not be making New Labour's mistake" after Dunblane.
This has been interpreted to mean no knee jerk ban on remaining firearms. The issue raised is sloppy testing of firearms licenses, not fervour in banning guns. The ban on handguns did little to nothing to stop illegal ownership of handguns or reduce gun crime. It is good to note that the BBC has released handgun crime figures alongside this latest incident, shooting handgun crime as up. Had the government been trying a knee jerk solution the Beeb would not have been allowed to highlight the news in this way or order.
I suspect no change in gun ownership laws, but a tighter control over individual licensing.

Fateweaver wrote: Should ball point pens be banned? It'd be justified.

Of course it wouldn't. Mainly due to a sense of proportion, please try to maintain one when contributing to a thread.

from the BBC

At least three of his victims - his brother, his solicitor and a fellow taxi driver - were known to him, but others were apparently strangers.

..well..we've all thought about it I guess...

My first reaction to the story on MSN was that I have never heard of something like this in Texas. It may have, but I have never heard of it. In this particular case, if some of the people that got shot or witnessed this guy shooting were carrying a licensed handgun, it's possible this guy might have killed one or two folks instead of 12 plus.

I'm old enough now to be pretty confident that I can keep perspective. I don't drink or do drugs. I'm thinking more and more of getting a concealed carry license. It's better to have it and not need it than to need it and not have it...

I'd get it if I was you Krak. The best way to vote to keep gun legislation out of governments hands is by becoming an active gun promoter and carrier.

I've even renewed my NRA membership.

One of them was only a solicitor, surely that means that only 11 people died right?

I would get one when you want to, because a common compromise if states get rid of the license is to allow all current holders to keep one, but not issue new ones. It's harder to take something away than it is to not give it.

Fateweaver wrote:Wouldn't surprise me to see the UK ban bolt action rifles if he did indeed use a hunting rifle with a scope attached.

It would surprise me because we would not be able to cull deer, etc.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Wolfstan wrote:Just looking at this shooting as is, there could be an arguement for a further ban. Yesterday's shootings, Dunblane & Hungerford involved non criminals. People just losing it and going on the rampage. Although you hear of criminals involved in driveby shootings, the figures aren't the same. So although a ban wouldn't affect the guns available to the criminal world, it would have an affect on mainstream users.

Not that I'm calling for a ban, but I can see how it could be justified.

Looking at it statistically, the total killed in the three mass shootings is 16 at Hungerford, 17 at Dunblane and 12 in Cumbria, which is 45 in 23 years or two a year.

In comparison there were 42 gunshot deaths in the UK in 2008, which was the lowest on record for 20 years, and there had been 51 in 2007.

From that perspective, the number of deaths from illegal firearms is about 20-25 times greater than the number of deaths from legally held weapons including weapons which are no longer legal to hold, such as semi-automatic rifles and pistols.

Realistically, the banning of shotguns and bolt-action rifles would have a negligible effect on murder statistics while denying an important use of weapons for the control of pigeons, deer, wild boars etc as well as leisure use in shooting and stalking.

Kilkrazy wrote:Realistically, the banning of shotguns and bolt-action rifles would have a negligible effect on murder statistics while denying an important use of weapons for the control of pigeons, deer, wild boars etc as well as leisure use in shooting and stalking.

It would also do well to note that even if these guys all had firearm licenses, how many others who are also licensed have not gone out to shoot people? There will always be vile, mean, disturbed, or otherwise messed up people out there, but some of them do a good job of hiding it. It's not surprising that out of everyone who can have a weapon, a rare few will do harm with it, and as long as that number of rare few follows the pattern you'd expect for people flipping out (like the woman in Japan a long while back who put industrial pesticide into the food at a community picnic) tighter regulation is not going to provide you with any benefit in safety.

Thats not a pic of the actual gun, but the one in the paper looks like an L96.
Not quite sure how the feth he got a military grade rifle.