posted Jan 26, 2008

just to verify- are these modified target pistols, or standard military pistols (GLOCK 17 etc)

add comment | complain about this comment

posted Jan 26, 2008

The proposal is discriminatory. Not within the Olympic ideal, in fact contrary to the charter.

Everyone who wants to should be allowed to practice their chosen sport.

There should be a legacy for the sport after the games. The proposal does nothing to allow new blood into the sport. After the games the multi million pound shooting facility is to be bulldozed at a cost of many more millions.

Should the legislation be passed? Well something needs to be done to allow UK sportsmen to practice pistol shooting. The legislation does not go far enough. The opportunity should be available to all.

Will it be passed? Yes, but heels have been dragged for so long, someone should be held to account for why it has taken so long.

What should be the future? A complete unbiased review of the pistol ban.

add comment | complain about this comment

posted Jan 26, 2008

TimebombGilliangham, these will be specialist target pistols, many costing thousands of pounds. Not the sort of thing you might see on the streets of Brixton.

Certainly not something you would like some army armourer looking after for you.

add comment | complain about this comment

posted Jan 26, 2008

Yeah, what smokeless said. Your standard military pistol will give a group about the size of a human body at 50metres. If it's shot by a skilled marksman (and it's not as easy as it looks in the movies. They're HEAVY! I've been lucky enough to shoot them on the Isle of Man).
The pistols used in the 50m event need to be capable of grouping inside a circle of about an inch diameter (in the right hands). It's precision engineering, designed for accuracy, at the expense of all else - including "stopping power" (since they're not designed as weapons).

The equipment is very expensive, very specialist, and if you want a gun for criminal purposes, you spend £50 on one from the dodgy geezer down the pub in Brixton. No paperwork, no licence, untraceable - and it doesn't cost >£900.
Compare that to getting a Firearms Certificate to acquire one legally - extensive vetting by police, 2 exemplary references, check your medical records for mental health problems, being a full member of an approved club (can't be made up from Probationary status for at least 6 months from joining), and the club committee have to confirm to the police that you're competent in the safe handling and storage of firearms, and shoot regularly and are (to their knowledge) of sound character (i.e. actually interested in it as a sport, not just learning to shoot for their own obscure reasons).

All in all, a very thorough procedure. And a lot of hassle (that criminals won't bother with). Legally held guns are simply NOT used in crime. OK, a couple get stolen every year from legal users, but if you're focussing on them, you're missing the 99% of crime that's committed with illegal, unregistered weapons - lets sort our priorities here!

It's more robust now than in the days when Thomas Hamilton got his certificate, and it is my firm belief that you could allow FAC holders to apply for variations to acquire handguns tomorrow - anything from a .22 Olympic match pistol to a 9mm Glock (just because it's not an Olympic discipline doesn't mean it's not fun to shoot with and compete in internal club competitions!), and there would be no threat posed to the public safety whatsoever.

Why? Because you don't get free reign to buy what you like once you have your certificate - you have to apply for a slot for a certain type of gun (rifle/pistol) of a certain calibre (.22, 7.62mm, 9mm, etc), of a certain action (bolt action, semi-auto, falling block, Martini action, etc).
You then have to justify why you want that firearm, and show that you have a place where you can legally use it (a club with ranges certified up to that calibre).
The current procedures are more robust than those in place in 1997. We have a National Firearms Database which lists every certificate holder and what firearms they hold. In many ways Dunblane acted as a wake-up call, and the Police are infinitely more thorough in their assesment of applicants and do not skip bits, or give the benefit of the doubt. The Cullen Enquiry identified 18 seperate failings by Central Scotland Police, some due to poor commuication within the department, some due to negligence. Those issues are resolved through the use of mobile phones and e-mail to keep in regular contact with clubs, the aforementioned Database, etc.

As a result, it is time the legislation was re-written and consolidated in favour of legal shooters. And that includes giving back handguns for Target Shooting.

add comment | complain about this comment

posted Jan 26, 2008

'What should be the future? A complete unbiased review of the pistol ban.'

This would require a government that was able to admit that was wrong,it would also require a police service that it's running of the firearms certification was very wrong.Neither is going to happen.
This country has some of the worlds top shooters,not bad considering what they have to endure to follow their sport,but this government attempt to allow our top competitors to train in the UK means nothing to the thousands of others now ex pistols shooters who would love to practise and maybe compete to whatever level they can aspire too.
It does nothing for the future of the sport.

add comment | complain about this comment

posted Jan 28, 2008

I quite agree with MikeEve, Marksman-Hemmers and others. While the lifting of the ban for the current Olympic squad would be welcomed, what we need is a complete review of the current ban to enable the athletes of the future to train, as well as the athletes of the past who aspired to reach competitive levels before the ban put a stop to their aspirations.

As Marksman-Hemmers has said, the current vetting procedure is extremely thorough (which serious competitors in the sport welcome), something the general public is not aware of, never minds cares about!

add comment | complain about this comment

posted Jan 29, 2008

Is there not a type of gun which has no potential to be lethal but which could still be used for the sport?

------------------

No there isn't. Any gun is lethal in the wrong hands, but then so are baseball bats, golf clubs and javelins.

At the moment the only real option for people wanting to get into the sport is via Air Pistol. Which is a good enough barometer of their talent in my opinion.

Should section 5 licences be granted to certain facilities and competitors then I don't see anythign unreasonable in having required people to use the Air Pistol route as a proving ground.

And yes, as a marksman (both .22 and airpistol/rifle) myself I do realise just how different the disciplines are, but proving yourself to be talented and more importantly disciplined enough in one tends to lead to similar traits in the other.

In fact most competition pistol shootres chose to go down this route anyway, it tends to be those who enjoyed hearing the loud bang that scoffed at it as an alternative and went black powder shooting instead.

add comment | complain about this comment

posted Feb 2, 2008

No, the rules for the competitions specifically state the requirements of the firearms.

The closest you can get is an Air pistol, they cost about £1000. Practice with Air is useful of course, but the dwell time (time from pulling trigger to pellet / bullet leaving the barrel) is totally different.

I shoot Air / .22 Rifle, it really is not the same.

add comment | complain about this comment

posted Feb 11, 2008

As someone who lost all his target pistols after Dunblane I wish the good old days could return. By that I mean hobby shooters keeping pistols instead of just the "moss side" etc gangsters.
However, given the calibre of firearms officer who allowed this pervert (with a previous conviction for a shotgun offence) to keep his F.A.C. I don't see it happening.

add comment | complain about this comment

posted May 18, 2008

the ban was intended to hit criminal and psychotic elements who wanted handguns...
...the thing you tend to notice about these types (and the home sec may want to write this down) is that they DON'T OBEY THE LAW

the government is vehemently against any shooting sport. Why else sek to spend millions on a shooting range for 2012 that will be taken down afterwards instead of investing in facilities that could be used for years to come?

add comment | complain about this comment