Read the forum code of contact
By: - 5th June 2010 at 19:27 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
No doubt it will result in some knee jerk reaction to the holding of firearms yet again.
Take away ALL the firearms and the unhinged will just find some other way of killing their victims...
It is a terrible event, and the poor old Cumbria Bill probably dealt with it the best they could given their small force size and huge 'beat', but I expect they'll get blamed for some aspect of their response. The news that medics were prevented, by H&S rules, from approaching victims for fear of Bird still being around is worrying.
As for the media? Well, they certainly love a tragedy and it riles me when they ask dumbass questions to 'witnesses'. Maybe having 24 hour news at your fingertips is a bad thing...
By: - 5th June 2010 at 19:42 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Terrible event for all concerned, but my only question is this,
why didn't the authorities actually use the loacal, or even national, media to report man on the rampage with a gun?
I was listening to Radio2, and there were odd bits of info here and there, but a general broadcast might have ensured a few people new about the situation, and could have been ready for it in some small way.
I agree with Bob, firearms laws can't prevent what happened
By: - 5th June 2010 at 21:09 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
No doubt it will result in some knee jerk reaction to the holding of firearms yet again.A knee jerk reaction is guaranteed as is always the way with this country. One chap they interviewed on the morning news yesterday said that if you keep weapons at home you shouldn't have immediate access to the ammunition. That kind of defeats the object of a farmer keeping a shotgun for pest control.What is the bloke supposed to do if he's inundated with crows/foxes/ rabbits or whatever other pest is best dealt with by a shotgun? Send a request to his local cop shop 7 days in advanceAs one police department in the US pointed out back in the late 60s/ early 70s in reply to the anti gun lobby. If you outlaw guns only the outlaws will have guns. We've seen the proof of that statement in the escalation of handgun crime since this country banned the private ownership of handguns.Take away ALL the firearms and the unhinged will just find some other way of killing their victims...
It is a terrible event, and the poor old Cumbria Bill probably dealt with it the best they could given their small force size and huge 'beat', but I expect they'll get blamed for some aspect of their response. The news that medics were prevented, by H&S rules, from approaching victims for fear of Bird still being around is worrying.
As for the media? Well, they certainly love a tragedy and it riles me when they ask dumbass questions to 'witnesses'. Maybe having 24 hour news at your fingertips is a bad thing...
Also around the same time that remark was made The US ATTF bureau pointed out that the states with the highest private gun ownership were the states that had the lowest incidence of armed crime.
I agree that if Firearms are banned the nutters will find other ways of killing their victims.
By: - 5th June 2010 at 23:44 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
There are two things that this sad case brings up for me really, Number one is that a madman/woman with a weapon of any sort can kill many people in a very short amount of time.
Number two is that persons such as this man always seem to fall through the cracks and are never stopped or spotted until its too late. Maybe society in general is to blame for that.
Changing the gun laws again will not prevent another case like this in the future,Just as past legisation has not stopped such incidents, Its worth remembering that there are many people holding guns fully legally in the UK and this tragic incident is an isolated one really.
Ultimately the guns are not at fault its the mind of the owner of them that was, No amount of laws can cure an unstable mind unless you know its unstable and can take appropiate actions.
As to 24 hour news it seems to me that they sensationalise such incidents as this one and crave useless eye witness reports just to pad out their stories, Sadly a incident like this was/is pure gold to them.
I sympathise will all involved in this tragic event and hope the news networks will soon leave them alone to grieve and rebuild shuttered lives.
By: - 6th June 2010 at 00:30 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
What do you think of the way the media handled the event ?
Well the Mirror obviously couldn't get a picture of Bird with a gun, so they had someone come up with an "artists impression" of Bird holding a gun - a Thompson SMG, what were they thinking?
By: - 6th June 2010 at 00:54 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Chris Rock jokes in one of his stand-ups, but it actually makes some sense: start selling the bullets for several thousand pounds per bullet. Then people would seriously have to think about using them on others.
By: - 6th June 2010 at 00:54 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
This incident got me thinking though, might the situation have been ended sooner if all Police Officers were armed?
I believe there is a station in Whitehaven, and officers from there responded fairly quickly, evacuating and warning people - but if they had been armed they would have had more options.
By: - 6th June 2010 at 05:05 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
If the Thames Valley force is any indication of the police thinking in the rest of the country they don't want all officers armed. Are they scaredd they might be involved in a shooting match if they are?
By: - 6th June 2010 at 09:20 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Shotgun/firearms certificates used to be renewable every 3 years, that was changed to every 5 years, I would suggest as a cost cutting exercise; a lot can happen in 5 years, maybe more regular contact, and a requirement for a GP to notify change in personal circumstances, and or prescription of anti depressants (during the course of the license)
Interesting point regarding home possession of amunition, agreed farmers need to keep a supply for vermin control, but those who shoot clay pigeons or static targets perhaps do not, afterall most clay shoots that I have been to sell amunition, and even if they didn't they could.
Maybe the way forward is to regulate more carefully, shooting grounds (some of which are very informal) and move some responsibility towards them, if you own a gun and do not use it regularily, do you really need to own a gun?
By: - 6th June 2010 at 10:46 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
.. after all most clay shoots that I have been to sell amunition, and even if they didn't they could.
The pricing structure for clay target ammunition makes bulk buying much cheaper. 1,000 or 5,000 rounds at a time being useful quantities. Buying in 25s at a clay shoot is not economical by any means. Plus serious clay shooters train and shoot using one cartridge carefully selected from hundreds of different brands and specifications. Are we expecting every little shoot at an agricultural show to carry the full range?
What of ammunition not used? Are the shoot organisers going to buy back the handful of rounds not used from the ones they have sold? A 25-bird shoot could use anything between 25 and 50 rounds depending on the number of second barrel kills, so inevitably there will be some left. It would only take a few shoots to amass a useful number of left-over rounds stockpiled.
Plus most clay shooters also shoot game and vermin, sometimes using clay target ammunition, sometimes using dedicated game rounds.
Nice idea, just wouldn't work.
Moggy
Ex Head of Sales & Marketing. Winchester UK
By: - 6th June 2010 at 11:35 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Shotgun/firearms certificates used to be renewable every 3 years, that was changed to every 5 years.Maybe the way forward is to regulate more carefully?
Still three years in S.Wales.
No matter how tightly you regulate it will effect the genuine users of Firearms greatly, and the determined nutters will still get hold of weapons and ammo but be driven off the authorities radar.
By: - 6th June 2010 at 12:11 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
first of all can i express my sympathies to the friends and families of all those who were effected by this horrendous act.
with regards to prevention as someone who lives in the country ( but who isnt one of the fox hunting crowd ) I have to say that a total ban on firearms is not practical , farmers need them & their are tens if not hundred's of thousands of responsable owners who will never be a problem.
On this mornings "the big question " on BBC1 ..the one that kept breaking down every 2 mins...a lady whose son was i beleive murdered a number of years ago was very passionate in her view that all guns should be banned. I can totally sympathise with her but cant endorse her view as it is just not practical .
Having said that we are all only a short step away from madness , as has been demonstrated many times. I would think that there will need to be some changes in the licencing set up....i just am not sure what will work.
By: - 6th June 2010 at 13:13 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
The pricing structure for clay target ammunition makes bulk buying much cheaper. 1,000 or 5,000 rounds at a time being useful quantities. Buying in 25s at a clay shoot is not economical by any means. Plus serious clay shooters train and shoot using one cartridge carefully selected from hundreds of different brands and specifications. Are we expecting every little shoot at an agricultural show to carry the full range?What of ammunition not used? Are the shoot organisers going to buy back the handful of rounds not used from the ones they have sold? A 25-bird shoot could use anything between 25 and 50 rounds depending on the number of second barrel kills, so inevitably there will be some left. It would only take a few shoots to amass a useful number of left-over rounds stockpiled.
Plus most clay shooters also shoot game and vermin, sometimes using clay target ammunition, sometimes using dedicated game rounds.
Nice idea, just wouldn't work.
Moggy
Ex Head of Sales & Marketing. Winchester UK
Speaking as a shotgun/firearms holder of some 22 years, and a lifelong shooter, i think the idea could work.
A 50 bird shoot offers 50 targets, and you get 50 shots, any crossing pairs of clays "killed" with one shot don't count, as the idea is one target with one shot, whilst this happens, as do shots at broken clays, it is infrequent, but the idea is that if you aren't allowed to keep amunition at home, then you return unused cartridges for a refund at the end of the shoot.
Lets not forget, that clay shooting is a hobby not a need, you cannot get around the fact that, the average man in the street (where most of the UK's guns are to be found), has no need for amunition at home, and whilst this is undoubtably an infringement of civil liberties, (ring this number) look what happened to all the law abiding handgun owners.
Most clay shooters that I know don't do vermin control, those that do will be able to show written permission from a land owner,(something that is already in place for firearms) in anycase different amunition is needed, 24grams of no.7.5 or no.9 shot (the most common clay loads) don't have the range or the hitting power for pigeon, rabbits, crows etc and is way too much for rats and the like.
I have a variation on my firearms licence for the possesion of hollow point bullets, a target shooter with the same amunition is breaking the law)
You are quite right that cartridges are cheaper bought in bulk, however most shooters don't buy a 1000 in one go, as it is, most shoots provide amunition of the right kind already, they buy them in 1000's, and sell them on for a profit, just like cans of coke at an airshow; I myself buy 250's at a time, but to be honest when on vermin control, a box of 25 lasts a long while.
I wasn't suggesting that the words contained in my original post ,should be transferred straight into the statute books, but clearly there is a way that it can work; the alternative, I fear is that gun ownership in this country could become a thing of the past.
By: - 6th June 2010 at 13:23 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Still three years in S.Wales.No matter how tightly you regulate it will effect the genuine users of Firearms greatly, and the determined nutters will still get hold of weapons and ammo but be driven off the authorities radar.
Just a small point but your quote of my post is slightly misleading; the line "regulate more carefully" was attached to "shooting grounds" .
Currently many can operate under the 28 day rule, meaning that they neither need planning permission, nor do they have a membership list, or any police involvement.
By: - 6th June 2010 at 13:48 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
"if you own a gun and do not use it regularly, do you really need to own a gun?"
Sorry but this sentiment ticks me right off. The answer is "YES" I have two German K98`s, so what if I don't use them loads surely its my right to have them if I want to.
What's next cars kill and injure people more than firearms, I know lets review and revoke licenses if you drive less than 1000 miles in a year:mad:
By: - 6th June 2010 at 13:59 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
You need to look at gun ownership as a priviledge rather than a right, because we are all very close to losing our priviledges; cars are made for transport, baseball bats for sport, kitchen knives for preparing food..guns are made to kill.
By: - 6th June 2010 at 14:18 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Speaking as a shotgun/firearms holder of some 22 years, and a lifelong shooter, i think the idea could work.
We'll agree to differ then.
Moggy
By: - 6th June 2010 at 14:23 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Guns are made to kill? I personally use them for shooting targets. Its not the gun that kills its the person behind it.
A kitchen knife can and does kill! However its not designed to.
Baseball bats are used as weapons all the time (possibly more than they are used in the sport).
Cars can be used as a weapon.
So what you are saying is:-
Ban guns, guns are bad.
Ban kitchen utensils, utensils are bad.
Ban baseball bats, baseball bats are bad.
Ban cars, cars are bad.
What about a tin of Baked Beans, if thrown at a head hard enough that would kill, so better ban baked beans too to be on the safe side.
Posts: 1,549
By: BumbleBee - 5th June 2010 at 18:34
What a tragedy.
Thoughts with everyone affected,particularly Derrick Bird's two young sons,one in the middle of important school exams,the other one just recently become a father himself.
Can any lessons be learned ?
What do you think of the way the media handled the event ?