Stolen Guns in the U.K.

 via The BBC

Nearly 3,000 guns were lost by or stolen from people registered to hold them in the past five years, according to figures obtained by the BBC. More than half of these weapons were shotguns.

The data, which was published for the first time on Wednesday, revealed that 1,448 shotguns and 294 rifles have been stolen since 2007.

The guns lost during the period included 730 shotguns, 86 rifles and 14 revolvers. 

Chrissie Hall, spokesperson for the Gun Control Network, said public safety was being compromised "by individuals who have shown themselves to be irresponsible".

"These figures are probably the tip of the iceberg. If gun owners lose their weapons and are in breach of their registration and conditions, their licence should be revoked," she told BBC News. 

"But whether this happens is at the discretion of the chief constable and the firearms department. It's not always rigorously applied." She added: "People lose their glasses and they lose their umbrella but to lose their gun is unbelievably irresponsible.

"It's part of their conditions that the shotgun is safely stored at all times... obviously if it's lost it isn't safely stored, they're in breach of their licence, they're putting members of the public at risk."

What do you think? How does the situation in the U.K. compare to our own?

Please leave a comment.

Fox Hunting in England

The North Devon Journal reports

That was where hunting foxes and hares with packs of hounds worked so well. Because it was such a thoroughly inefficient way of killing the wildlife, it worked as a highly effective culling system – generally catching only the very old, the sick and the infirm.

If I'm not mistaken this is the same argument they make in The States for deer hunting. It's always for the good of the animals.

In Britain, they're right up there with the best of them when it comes to justifying.

And contrary to what the Antis would like you to think, hunting is not the preserve of toffs, but a totally levelling occupation, with packs of hounds kept by hill farmers and Welsh miners, all with that shared love of the chase.

I'm not sure if I understand the word "toff," but in the picture above I dont' see any coal miners or hill farmers, do you?

What's your opinion? Please leave a comment.

British Crime Initiatives: the Knife exchange

WARNING--DO NOT WATCH IF EASILY OFFENDED!

This bulletin from The News At 4.37 introduces a brand new scheme which will eradicate knife crime forever. Weapons are exchanged for something a lot less harmful, but equally threatening...

Perhaps, the US can adopt a similar scheme for firearms.

I'm sure JadeGold would approve:

British Gun Fanatic David Evans

The Daily Mail reports.

But yesterday the self-confessed gun ‘fanatic’ was starting a 16-year jail term after being convicted of a total of 29 charges of possessing and transferring the weapons to two brothers who are already behind bars.

The gun fanatic had been banned from owning guns after he was jailed for three years in 2005 for posting an illegal firearm to a legitimate dealer in Scotland.

He told officers: ‘It might sound a bit sad but in my loft I had some mannequins which I dressed as German soldiers, American soldiers – but obviously I had no guns.

Officers who seized the cache of 16 deadly guns initially feared they may have been stored on behalf of a far-Right group such as the English Defence League.

They said the guns could have caused mayhem had they fallen into the hands of terrorists or the region’s drugs gangs.

What's your opinion? Is that a too harsh sentence? He wasn't a first time offender, remember.

Please leave a comment.

Ashley Cole - No Charges

When the story broke, it looked like this guy was in big trouble.

Here's what happened.

Chelsea claim Cole, 30, has been punished by the club internally but he has not been suspended from playing since the incident was first reported by a British newspaper at the turn of the month.

Cowan did not press charges and left-back Cole has escaped a police charge, according to reports in the British press.

Cole has been an ever-present for champions Chelsea this season and has continued to play every minute while the incident was being investigated.

What a guy! He hasn't missed a beat!

What's your opinion? Please leave a comment.

Ashley Cole in "Accidental" Shooting

Ashley Cole shot and injured a trainee with an air rifle at Chelsea's Cobham training ground.

The incident happened in the Chelsea dressing room last Sunday, while the England defender was reportedly carrying his rifle around.

Cole, who did not realize that the gun was loaded, accidentally shot at Tom Cowan who was at Cobham on a placement programme.

The News of the World reported the accident and Chelsea owner Roman Abramovich is apparently livid with his star defender's silly antic that caused a bleeding wound.

A source told the paper: "It's truly inconceivable that a Premier League footballer could bring a gun to the training ground.

"But Ashley pulled the rifle from a box and started larking about with it in the changing room.

"Cole didn't know the gun was loaded but it's a disgrace. His behaviour beggars belief."

Those Brits sure do talk funny, but when it comes to professional athletes doing stupid shit with guns, we're all the same.

Does this mean that air-rifles are allowed in the U.K.? Maybe they need to tighten up on their gun laws.

What's your opinion? Please leave a comment.

The United Kingdom

I present this wonderful video as proof that when the gun-rights advocates refer to the U.K. they have no idea what they're talking about. Admit it, fellas. via The Laughing Squid.

Child Abuse in England

What?

The minimum age at which people can apply for a gun licence should be lowered from 14 to 10, Britain's most senior firearms officer has suggested.

Assistant Chief Constable Adrian Whiting, the firearms spokesman for the Association of Chief Police Officers (Acpo), said that the age at which children can legally apply for a firearms certificate should be brought down to the same age at which they can apply for a shotgun licence – currently 10.

I'd like to know what kind of shotgun a 10-year-old can fire? It couldn't possibly be the normal weapon that adults use. The recoil is too much.

Bur, even if it were recoilless, it would still be child abuse in my opinion.

What's yours? Please leave a comment.

Legitimate Gun Owners Gone Wild

The Morning Star published an article, to which FishyJay sent us the link. I'm wondering if this represents a change of heart for our regular commenter. Could he be my first convert? I knew it would happen sooner or later, but I'd always hoped it would be Mike W. or Kurt. Welcome aboard FishyJay.

IANSA director Rebecca Peters said: "The idea that only 'bad guys' do things like this is false.

"People who are not career criminals can turn violent. Having weapons designed to kill people is dangerous.

"The gun lobby says legal gun holders are not a problem at all and what we have to worry about is career criminals.

"But these are not career criminals, they're normal people, so that's an argument for recognising that just checking someone's criminal background is not enough to prevent homicides."

The killings showed the importance of strict controls on who should be allowed to own guns and what type, she added.

"In Britain the controls are strict compared with many other countries," she said.

"But this is yet another example of how a law-abiding gun owner can turn very suddenly into not law-abiding and the fact that they have been previously law-abiding does not mean they're responsible enough to own guns."

The answer is clear: fewer guns, and the ones that are allowed have to be licensed and registered in the strictest way possible. Truly law-abiding gun owners would applaud such initiatives.

What do you think? Please leave a comment.

In England They Get It

The Daily Mirror published an article that summed up the gun control position in Great Britain.

Gun crime is thankfully rare in Britain. That's because we have very tight laws on firearms, not because we are less barmy than Americans.

If we had Yankee-style "right to bear arms," there would be many more homicides and mass shootings.

The horrific massacre in Cumbria is a powerful reminder of why we need such legislation, born out of bitter experience that you can't trust men (it's always men) with lethal weapons.

The shooting lobby invariably reacts against the possibility of further restrictions on gun ownership, arguing that people kill people, not guns. Well, it's a lot harder without guns.

What's so difficult about that? Fewer guns, fewer gun crimes. I especially liked this line: "born out of bitter experience that you can't trust men (it's always men) with lethal weapons."

What do you think? Please leave a comment.

Heavily Armed London Police

Security Manaagement reports on the arming up of London street cops.

Some London neighborhoods are set to look a little more like Northern Ireland as elite paramilitary police hit the streets of specific neighborhoods marked by high levels of drug-related gang violence.

About 20 officers from the Metropolitan Police's CO19 branch, the English equivalent of American SWAT Teams, will increasingly patrol "no go" zones where rival Turkish gangs have engaged in violent shootouts recently. The officers, some on motorbikes, will conduct weapon sweeps on individuals.

Drugs and violence and obviously guns are coming into London. It seems perfectly logical that the police need to meet the threat with increased firepower.

London has recently seen a significant jump in gun crimes with 1,736 gun crimes reported in between April and September—a 17 percent increase over last year. On average, there are 50 to 60 shooting deaths a year in England and Wales, according to the AP.

Do you think the increase in gun crime in spite of strict gun control laws proves those laws do not work? That's the pro-gun argument, isn't it? I say it's not necessarily so. If gun availability increased and we somehow could ensure that none of the other factors changed, then the argument might make sense, but I'm afraid that's not the case.

Often I'm accused of focusing only on the gun to the exclusion of all else, an accusation I deny. I'm well aware of the other factors involved in a violent society. Ironically, the pro-gun argument that says Chicago or Newark or London has gun violence in spite of their laws, which proves those laws don't work, pretends that gun availability is the only factor. In other words, when convenient the gun rights crowd does the same thing they accuse me of.

I ask you this, about the gun violence in London, about the suicide rate in Japan, about Chicago and Newark, if somehow we could immediately flood those places with handguns, do you think there'd be more violence or less? Do you think the violence would increase in lethality in such a case? This is how common sense and reason can give you the answer when conflicting statistics often cannot.

What's your opinion? What do you think about the opposition to London's decision? They feel it violates the tenets of English policing, which is traditionally done by unarmed officers on foot patrol. Another concern is "how the unit would handle such powerful weaponry on crowded city streets." That's a good question, isn't it?

What's your opinion? Please leave a comment.

Medal Count

Unrelated to the photo on the left, a good friend of mine pointed out that Great Britain is holding a solid third place with only a tiny fraction of the population of the US and China. I guess that's why they ran the world for so long. Didn't they also own Jamaica at one point?


The New York Times has the story.