Do they use human like target in basic handgun classes

[coop44]

I always aim fer dah eye hole or the ear hole. If ya are a little off it don't matter.

 

[Member 52301]

"Shooting human silhouettes in basic training was easy, I just imaged they were touching my stuff."
Francis "Psycho" Soyer

I had to look this up.

Stripes!

Stripes (1981) - Conrad Dunn as Psycho - IMDb

Stripes (1981) - Conrad Dunn as Psycho

www.imdb.com

Stripes (1981) ⭐ 6.8 | Comedy, War

1h 46m | R

www.imdb.com

I have not thought of or seen that movie in a VERY long time!

Crikey! Was that when my late husband owned a Sony BETA MAX machine?! LOL

Old Lady Cate

 

[OldBroad44]

...p.s. You will never be attacked by a paper circle with numbers on it.

I've never been attacked by a paper outline of a human either.

 

[oremike]

My thought is to learn to shoot first before even thinking about self defense. If shooting at humanistic shaped targets bothers you then don't shoot at them. There are a multitude of other targets to shoot like gongs, pop cans, bowling pins, clay pigeons, ect. I've seen a couple good ol' boys playing Battleship at 50yds with .22 rifles. (they were side by side shooting at two different targets, not at each other) Yes there is a tremendous responsibility that goes with firearms ownership but they don't have to be a single use item to be used only in the gravest extreme.
Learn the skill set to be a good shot first, and that knowledge is transferable to any firearm and situation.

 

[WillametteWill]

Many times, in VERY SPECIFIC self defense situations, the situation ONLY requires a person showing or NOT even showing a gun to the bad guy/criminal because they are AWARE that you are armed or aware that YOU know what they are up to!

Important, subtle and nuanced point you make. I'm definitely not a fan of armed citizens displaying a firearm in attempt to change behavior in most cases, especially if they have not thought through actually using the firearm. But a person's awareness, preparedness and confidence in certain situations make them less of an inviting target. Most criminals do not like attention being brought upon them or know that people see what they are up to. They go and try to find another victim in these cases.

I have found the exceptions, where it can be taken as a challenge and escalate the situation, involve people with certain mental health issues and alpha predators. The former getting more common with the latter, fortunately, still pretty rare. They won't even care if a gun is pointed at them.

 

[tac]

I apologize if I misunderstood or upset you. In responses to somebody saying "Some people should not own guns" you replied that in UK and Republic of Ireland there are only serious gun owners because of the difficult process. In that context it sounded to me like you were advocating for making gun ownership more difficult. Based on some other posts I don't think I was the only person who read it that way either.

Regarding having just popped up out of the woodwork, I've been here since Sep 2020 and just renewed my support. I'm here here just about daily. I don't post very often and I only did because it really sounded to me like you were suggesting gun ownership should be made more difficult.

You still don't get it, do you?

In the USA, gun ownership is a RIGHT protected by the Constitution.

In the entire rest of the world, in those places where gun ownership is actually POSSIBLE at all, it is a privilege. I'm not talking about the armpit nations of the planet, of which there are many - Yemen, Syria, Afghanistan, North Korea and so on, but the civilised, Westernised nations of Europe and Scandinavia and Australasia.

In the Republic of Ireland - heaven on earth to a large number of your fellow citizens - you to have to license each and every firearm you own - each with its own individual 3-year license, and be subjected to laws that seem to be interpreted at the whim of the local Gardaí superintendent.

No reloading unless you shoot for the nation - so that's about forty people out of 120,000 shooters. It is carried out in the one location at the Midlands National shooting Centre, under strict supervision by both police and firefighters - in a bunker.

No black powder shooting of any kind.

Restrictions on rifle calibres, too. You CAN have a .300Win Mag, but you can only have a .38cal lever-action as a restricted firearm. 'Ah shure, da tirty-ates a bigger bullet altogether, so it must be a lot more deadly for shure!!'

No bull-pup style rifles or carbines - they look 'too military'.

No IPSC-style shooting with 'movement' - that is judged to be 'paramilitary and terrorist training for nefarious purposes' - the Prevention of Terrorism Acts apply.

No 'three-gun' comps - the Prevention of Terrorism Acts apply.

No 'cowboy action shooting' - the Prevention of Terrorism Acts apply.

No historical re-enactment with actual firing, even of blanks - black powder, y'see? No black powder - it's an explosive and can be used for making bombs.

No IPSC or police pistol shooting - the Prevention of Terrorism Acts apply.

No 'duelling'-style.

No 'practical shotgun'.

No 'practical/tactical' rifle shooting of any kind - the Prevention of Terrorism Acts apply.

No simulation of shooting in a military scenario - the Prevention of Terrorism Acts apply.

No handguns above .22cal - the very few, probably less than TEN 9mmP handguns will not have their licenses renewed when they are due.

No magazines above five-rounds capacity for semi-auto pistols.

No six-round or more cylinders on revolvers - chambers are blocked off to five.

More than two guns, one of which is a rifle? Compulsory home alarms. More than three? Compulsory 24-hour monitored alarms.

No putting up a target on your own land to zero in your gun. 'Target shooting' can only be carried out on an approved target range.

No 'plinking' with an airgun in your back yard - that's 'target shooting' - see above.

ALL airguns over 1 Joule are classed as firearms.

At least all my guns are on one registration document, with a five-year life. I can have any kind of a magazine. I can have a moderator. I can reload. I can shoot black powder to my heart's content - up to 3/4" calibre on my club range. I can shoot on ranges up to 5km. I can hang on to all my empty cases - they are no longer classed as live rounds, as they are in the Republic of Ireland. If I had a mind to do so, I could walk into a gun store and use a forklift truck to take out a million airgun pellets - in Ireland they are classed the same as live ammunition - some poor airgun shooters can only have 200 airgun pellets at any time - any more and they are subject to the full weight of the many-years-out-of-date firearms laws, and could go to prison.

All this in a country that, like the USA, fought for its freedom by use of firearms.

However, I still say that there are some people who should not have guns. Here, it's easy for them not to have them - you have to really WANT to take up legal shooting sports in order to take up legal shooting sports.

The hoops of fire we have to go through, the checks and balances and oversight necessary here these days more or less ensures that only sensible and law-abiding people can get their hands on a gun.

Are you now telling me that EVERYBODY should be able to have a gun in the USA?

Your own Federal laws say otherwise.

 

[tac]

No we cannot, we have deer & other game seasons seasons as you do, however I CAN unlimber ol' Betsy, take a walk in the woods and shoot targets (or varmints) if I want - providing I am in a National/State Forest/private property and legally able to do so in the area and following basic gun safety.

However I was not talking about hunting - and perhaps you missed this part of my post - just simply woods walking with a gun in hand - and maybe not necessarily hunting but as a symbol of our freedoms.

I was simply trying to communicate a large part of gun ownership in the U.S. is based on the outdoors which has become an indelible part of our history since we first came ashore. Hunting is only one aspect of our outdoor traditions however gun ownership and shooting is a much greater part of it, and for the most part is a FREEDOM that is largely in part available to us all - regardless of how much one chooses to spend on his or her firearms - and for the most part without having to 'justify ownership' to anyone.

In short, having to 'justify' ownership negates any 'freedom' and makes gun ownership an 'organizational' 'fee based' undertaking.

If you read and are interested I highly recommend this book. It is a fantastic collection of historical writings, pictures, illustrations outlining 200 years of American Outdoor History.

View attachment 1096627

Well, Sir, you wrote - 'However I was not talking about hunting - and perhaps you missed this part of my post - just simply woods walking with a gun in hand - and maybe not necessarily hunting but as a symbol of our freedoms.'

I was simply trying to communicate a large part of gun ownership in the U.S. is based on the outdoors which has become an indelible part of our history since we first came ashore.''

Here, it's not part of the history. No Indians to slaughter as we move West into huge uncharted territories. No frontier towns. No range wars. No 'opening of the West'. No territory that has not been owned or managed by anybody.

A different world, almost a different planet than little old Europe, no wonder you look at us here and shake your heads in pity or disbelief.

Where I live, the forests were cleared around five thousand years ago.

To get into the other part of the village, I cross a bridge that was built in 1200, and if I was a Christian, I could go to church in a church that WAS a church a hundred years or more before William of Normandy invaded in 1066.

So, what I am saying is that gun ownership is NOT part of the way of life of people here, let alone an 'indelible part of our history'. I know a couple of people in the twin villages who have shotguns, because they are farmers. They might even have some kind of a .22cal for sheep protection during lambing, or on the other hand, they might hire in somebody to do the protection thing. I really have no idea. The guy opposite me might be a keen shooter - but I just don't know. There are, after all, over 19,000 shotgun certificates issued in this county, according to police figures - who knows? I don't.

All the woods around me belong to somebody, not that there are many of them in this mainly agricultural county. Sure, there are people I know who shoot game like deer, or pests like foxes or rabbits, or vermin like crows and magpies. But only because they are also club members of my target shooting club.

We DO live in a different world.

This one is old, and does thing differently to you, who live in a NEW world.

 

[Member 52301]

Important, subtle and nuanced point you make. I'm definitely not a fan of armed citizens displaying a firearm in attempt to change behavior in most cases, especially if they have not thought through actually using the firearm. But a person's awareness, preparedness and confidence in certain situations make them less of an inviting target. Most criminals do not like attention being brought upon them or know that people see what they are up to. They go and try to find another victim in these cases.

I have found the exceptions, where it can be taken as a challenge and escalate the situation, involve people with certain mental health issues and alpha predators. The former getting more common with the latter, fortunately, still pretty rare. They won't even care if a gun is pointed at them.

I agree with what you said so if you misunderstood my writing - apologies to you.

Showing a gun does not mean pointing a gun directly at a bad guy. SEE my last comment here in this post. Thank you.

You may be carrying a handgun in your holster, open carry, in the woods or wilderness. You may be carrying your rifle or shotgun while in the woods/wilderness especially on a sling. (I do not own a shotgun and never owned one.) You may have your rifle in your house and the bad guy knows that you have a rifle in your home or you are holding it. Same with a handgun.

But in MANY cases if they know that you are armed as in a 'home' situation or around your home or while camping or while HIKING in the wilderness... someone will leave you ALONE.

I am NOT talking about pointing a gun but carrying a gun on your person.

That is what I mean.

Now, I was taught that you are NEVER supposed to POINT A GUN AT ANY THING OR PERSON THAT YOU ARE NOT WILLING TO DESTROY!

And you may point a gun and use it to STOP AN IMMEDIATE ATTACK IN ACTION by the bad man AGAINST YOU or a loved one.

That is what I mean.

Furthermore, most people, INCLUDING ME, avoid or WALK AWAY from situations and try to avoid them at all costs.

I know about NOT asking for trouble from some idiot or crazy person too.

Added more just now.

I am an ADVOCATE for open carry and I have always been that way. I have NEVER made any bones about it LONG before I even bought my own handguns.

Late 90's: I was INTO handguns more before I bought my 3 RF rifles back east too. Out here too. I was a handgun lady when my hands were in good shape even after my horrific fall, learning to use my fingers, one hand, one arm, plaster cast, messed up body, etc. all over again. Broken bones, nerve damage, range of motion which NEVER ever totally came back with one arm.

I know that many people disagree with me there but that IS their choice and DECISION to make or to not make and even if they choose to own or carry a gun at all!

I am and have open carried back east in my rural area. Especially on my own land. Old vicious dog story and attempted break in. Plus another incident. Etc. So I started to carry on my own land. I did it in some other open land, back east, since there was NO conceal carry back there as I have stated in many, many threads.

I have OPEN CARRIED out here more than concealed carry too. Many, many handguns in all brands, calibers, styles, etc. in GOOD QUALITY HOLSTERS too.

I support OPEN CARRY if the person knows what he or she is doing and conducts himself in a SANE and normal manner. And I do believe that a lady or gentleman should NOT COME ACROSS LOOKING LIKE A GANG MEMBER or some WANNABE NUT JOB like those Q - Q ANON freaks and their ILK with their dress and demeanor.

Now, if some dude wants to look like RAMBO - he has the right to do that but I think that they LOOK stupid and half @@@ed crazy when trying to support the RKBA issue.

I am talking about handguns properly HOLSTERED and looking like a normal - sane and respectable citizen.

Now if some of these people CHOOSE to carry a rifle or shotgun... it depends on where they are BUT I believe that there is a time and a place for ALL THINGS and HOW PEOPLE PRESENT THEMSELVES.

ADDED MORE just now. Thanks again.

OPEN CARRY is normal to MANY PEOPLE across this nation and NOT just in those former TOP 7 ANTI CCW STATES even ones who had R governors who LIED TO THEM about CCW laws. That law changed in my former state after I moved out west by a D governor.

I did NOT move for GUN rights but if people choose to do that - it is their choice.

Cate

 

[Member 52301]

Important, subtle and nuanced point you make. I'm definitely not a fan of armed citizens displaying a firearm in attempt to change behavior in most cases, especially if they have not thought through actually using the firearm. But a person's awareness, preparedness and confidence in certain situations make them less of an inviting target. Most criminals do not like attention being brought upon them or know that people see what they are up to. They go and try to find another victim in these cases.

I have found the exceptions, where it can be taken as a challenge and escalate the situation, involve people with certain mental health issues and alpha predators. The former getting more common with the latter, fortunately, still pretty rare. They won't even care if a gun is pointed at them.

See my Post # 128 please and thank you.

I just added some more thoughts.

Cate

 

[RVTECH]

They got a whole BUNCH WRONG in Yellowstone about ranch life, water rights BIG time, and some other things that it just TICKED HIM off royally as a born and raised MT man

Unfortunately, like in a lot of movies or shows, there is little emphasis placed on the accuracy of the details - especially when the show is based on the drama of the people involved and not necessarily where (or when) it is taking place. How often have we in our lives - especially with western or military based movies can point out incorrect weapons and other incorrect items for the time frame of it. Heck I remember a 'Hallmark' produced western a couple years ago and in one scene a guy was shooting a Henry Big Boy !

I heard or read that Sam Elliot (?) is in '1883' and we really LIKE HIM as an actor!

Yes he is and has always been a favorite of mine - and is at his classic 'self' in '1883'.
Interestingly he and his wife, Kate Ross used to live in Lapine, OR a few miles from where I live - but it was before I lived here.
When I was still married my MILs boyfriend knew him well and did a lot of work on his property in Brownsville, OR and at one time was going to take me over to his place to meet them but we never did.

Kevin Costner can be okay in some of his work and not in others.

Barely 'OK' in some and mostly bad in the others. He always appeared to me as though he is trying too hard to act and it appeared overly 'fake' - especially in some of his early stuff. I will admit as he has gotten older he has improved but it took a while. It's like he never had a particular 'character role' he could display repeatedly.

 

[coop44]

I've never been attacked by a paper outline of a human either.

Or a ballistic gel zombie

 

[RVTECH]

only sensible and law-abiding people can get their hands on a gun.

I can understand the law abiding part of the hoops of fire but how does the system in the UK determine if a person is
'sensible' ?

'Sensibility' is most likely an innate, mental proclivity and would likely require some sort of 'psych eval' to determine.

 

[bbbass]

I love John Wayne movies! My husband has many of his movies here and he has NOT donated any of them.

I love JW movies too... except for his diversion into Rooster Cogburn and True Grit.

A bunch of his movies going way way back are available to me on various internet streaming services. There is also an oldies channel OTA UHF, might be a few there.

My fav JW movies are "The Sons of Katie Elder" and "El Dorado" vintage. And a few others where he was Union Calvary etc.

Clint Eastwood... I like his stuff. I tell people he kicked me out of Carmel when da wife and I got caught sleeping in the back of the PU under a canopy top. Cops rousted us and informed us of the local ordnance and that it was not safe due to unsavory types nearby... wut, in Carmel???

Regarding Yellowstone and 1883, PM inbound to you but it will take me a bit to write it...

 

[Cavedweller]

I originally started watching this show but not particularly liking Kevin Costner (or the show overall) I stopped.

I'm with you. I tried watching it because so many people were saying what a great show it was, but I soon as I saw Kevin Costner I said "Nah." Never liked the guy.

Barely 'OK' in some and mostly bad in the others. He always appeared to me as though he is trying too hard to act and it appeared overly 'fake' - especially in some of his early stuff.

About as wooden as an actor can be. Absolutely incapable of portraying any genuine emotion.

 

[tac]

I can understand the law abiding part of the hoops of fire but how does the system in the UK determine if a person is
'sensible' ?

'Sensibility' is most likely an innate, mental proclivity and would likely require some sort of 'psych eval' to determine.

First of all, you have to bear in mind that applying for your Firearms Certificate [FAC] is not the beginning of the process of getting to own guns of your own.

Instead, it's about two-thirds of the way through the process.

Remember that you are not a person who has just decided that you want to take up shooting. You have already gone a long way down the road to making that a reality.

You will have HAD to have been a probationary member of a gun club for up to six months - before gaining FULL membership. Only when you have full membership can you apply for your FAC.

During that time you will have been taught the fundamentals of many different kinds of shooting - of the kind that we do here in UK, that is, and tested, at least three times. Apart from shooting cartridge-firing handguns and semi-auto centrefire rifles and carbine, over here we do pretty much all the same things that you do, sometimes modified to take into account that we have to use a different kind of firearms to do the same thing, but pretty much.

Every probie has access to the club guns - we have a number in different calibres - as well as to any gun that he or she might be offered to have a go with. As I have twenty-one rifles, in different formats, and BP handguns, muzzle loading rifles to Sniders to bolt-action to straight-pull Swiss and Martinis and so on, just shooting their way through my little collection can occupy their time constructively. Even my seven .22rifles are of different formats.

The point I'm getting at is that you are on display as a noobie all the way through that six months. People are watching you - how you are with a gun, how you handle them, how you learn to use the different types, and, of course, getting to know you as a person along the way.

If there is something amiss with the item between your ears, one or other of us might just notice. Have YOU ever come across a person on the range and thought 'I do NOT like being around him and his odd habits where guns are concerned' and moved away?

Well, here, the person like that around here would be quietly made aware that his behaviour was not conducive to being around firearms, and it's best to leave while things are friendly.

So he or she doesn't get to finish their probie time, and doesn't get the chance to apply for his or her FAC. This is because the FIRST referee on the application form is the club secretary. And then, two others - not club members, and not police officers either, but known to the applicant for at least two years. The other person on the application is the person's doctor, who is asked to provide support for the application by stating that he sees no reason why XYZ should not, at that time, be granted a FAC.

Without all that - the FAC application never happens.

 

[Grilling425]

@Grilling425 Starting out your goal is not to shoot the X ,your goal should be to shoot inside of the center box. Placement of shots should be paramount. It may be no comfort to you that when the police fire their weapons they only hit about 40+% of the time. Time and practice will make you a better shot, I'm still working at

Hello @Grilling425. Sounds like you need your friend to get rides to the range. And it sounds like he has some interest but maybe less than you. If you're worried about his reaction to human-like targets, just talk with him about it ahead of time. If its going to be a problem for him, you can choose courses that use other types of targets. Most general firearms courses probably don't use human-shape targets. Many self defense courses probably do use human-shape targets. I think if your friend would object to human-shape targets the rest of a self-defense course would probably be upsetting to him too, as it will include specific info about when and how to shoot people in self defense that is often lots more upsetting to those unfamiliar with self-defense gun use than the target shape. However, your friend might not be upset at either the target or self defense discussion. So just talk with him. If he's going to be upset at a self defense course, you can start with general courses. This may allow you to meet others you can get rides with for self defense courses.

Good to see you staying on the site and responding to participants when you start a thread. A suggestion: Its often difficult to understand which message you are responding to. If you use the reply button on the lower right corner of the message you are responding to, that message will be copied at the beginning of your response so everyone will know what you are answering.

Cheers,
Carol

 

[ma96782]

tac,

I'd like to ask (about the gun ownership rate in the UK)?

Is the firearms-owning community (by numbers) actually......
Growing,
about the same
or getting less and less?

Aloha, Mark

PS......is private gun ownership for a private citizen doomed in the UK? Do you suspect that the Govt is edging towards (maybe, it's their goal of) a total prohibition for private citizens (be it, someday in the future)? And by saying "private citizen" I'm not talking about the "elite and rich".

 

[rabidmullet]

You still don't get it, do you?

In the USA, gun ownership is a RIGHT protected by the Constitution.

In the entire rest of the world, in those places where gun ownership is actually POSSIBLE at all, it is a privilege. I'm not talking about the armpit nations of the planet, of which there are many - Yemen, Syria, Afghanistan, North Korea and so on, but the civilised, Westernised nations of Europe and Scandinavia and Australasia.

In the Republic of Ireland - heaven on earth to a large number of your fellow citizens - you to have to license each and every firearm you own - each with its own individual 3-year license, and be subjected to laws that seem to be interpreted at the whim of the local Gardaí superintendent.

No reloading unless you shoot for the nation - so that's about forty people out of 120,000 shooters. It is carried out in the one location at the Midlands National shooting Centre, under strict supervision by both police and firefighters - in a bunker.

No black powder shooting of any kind.

Restrictions on rifle calibres, too. You CAN have a .300Win Mag, but you can only have a .38cal lever-action as a restricted firearm. 'Ah shure, da tirty-ates a bigger bullet altogether, so it must be a lot more deadly for shure!!'

No bull-pup style rifles or carbines - they look 'too military'.

No IPSC-style shooting with 'movement' - that is judged to be 'paramilitary and terrorist training for nefarious purposes' - the Prevention of Terrorism Acts apply.

No 'three-gun' comps - the Prevention of Terrorism Acts apply.

No 'cowboy action shooting' - the Prevention of Terrorism Acts apply.

No historical re-enactment with actual firing, even of blanks - black powder, y'see? No black powder - it's an explosive and can be used for making bombs.

No IPSC or police pistol shooting - the Prevention of Terrorism Acts apply.

No 'duelling'-style.

No 'practical shotgun'.

No 'practical/tactical' rifle shooting of any kind - the Prevention of Terrorism Acts apply.

No simulation of shooting in a military scenario - the Prevention of Terrorism Acts apply.

No handguns above .22cal - the very few, probably less than TEN 9mmP handguns will not have their licenses renewed when they are due.

No magazines above five-rounds capacity for semi-auto pistols.

No six-round or more cylinders on revolvers - chambers are blocked off to five.

More than two guns, one of which is a rifle? Compulsory home alarms. More than three? Compulsory 24-hour monitored alarms.

No putting up a target on your own land to zero in your gun. 'Target shooting' can only be carried out on an approved target range.

No 'plinking' with an airgun in your back yard - that's 'target shooting' - see above.

ALL airguns over 1 Joule are classed as firearms.

At least all my guns are on one registration document, with a five-year life. I can have any kind of a magazine. I can have a moderator. I can reload. I can shoot black powder to my heart's content - up to 3/4" calibre on my club range. I can shoot on ranges up to 5km. I can hang on to all my empty cases - they are no longer classed as live rounds, as they are in the Republic of Ireland. If I had a mind to do so, I could walk into a gun store and use a forklift truck to take out a million airgun pellets - in Ireland they are classed the same as live ammunition - some poor airgun shooters can only have 200 airgun pellets at any time - any more and they are subject to the full weight of the many-years-out-of-date firearms laws, and could go to prison.

All this in a country that, like the USA, fought for its freedom by use of firearms.

However, I still say that there are some people who should not have guns. Here, it's easy for them not to have them - you have to really WANT to take up legal shooting sports in order to take up legal shooting sports.

The hoops of fire we have to go through, the checks and balances and oversight necessary here these days more or less ensures that only sensible and law-abiding people can get their hands on a gun.

Are you now telling me that EVERYBODY should be able to have a gun in the USA?

Your own Federal laws say otherwise.

I never said everybody in the US should be able to have a gun. I asked if you were suggesting we need more gun laws than we already have so that we too can only have "serious gun owners".

What I did say is the current process is already too difficult. The current laws on the books already go too far and need to be repealed. You are correct that the US fought for its right, but those right is being eroding, and a big reason for that is people who call themselves pro 2A and who make compromises. I was 3 years old when the NRA backed the NFA Act. Thanks to them and others I'm currently on day 280 waiting to take possession of a suppressor I own, and I may never be able to own a machine gun.

Regarding "In the entire rest of the world, in those places where gun ownership is actually POSSIBLE at all, it is a privilege." I couldn't care less. My freedoms have nothing to do with what happens in another country.

I think maybe it is you that still isn't understanding what the 2A is all about. When you say "The hoops of fire we have to go through, the checks and balances and oversight necessary here these days more or less ensures that only sensible and law-abiding people can get their hands on a gun.". You either have the right or you don't. "Sensible" is a very slippery slope and it's thinking like that, that will ensure the US will end up like the "entire rest of the world".

I have a couple questions. When you say "In the USA, gun ownership is a RIGHT protected by the Constitution." do you think that we are currently able to fully exercise that right? And because we don't have it as bad as the entire rest of the world that we should be ok with that right being infringed?

 

[tac]

I am not here to comment on American politics, Sir. Since I've had no formation in their making or implementation I can neither advise not criticise.

However, I will say that from an outsider's POV, all your current problems with regard to the Second Amendment are coming from within the USA, from your current President down.

As for your comment about more gun laws, I never once even hinted at it being a solution to your ever-growing problems.

 

[tac]

tac,

I'd like to ask (about the gun ownership rate in the UK)?

Is the firearms-owning community (by numbers) actually......
Growing,
about the same
or getting less and less?

Aloha, Mark

PS......is private gun ownership for a private citizen doomed in the UK? Do you suspect that the Govt is edging towards (maybe, it's their goal of) a total prohibition for private citizens (be it, someday in the future)? And by saying "private citizen" I'm not talking about the "elite and rich".

Statistics on firearm and shotgun certificates, England and Wales: April 2019 to March 2020.

This release presents statistics on firearm and shotgun certificates issued by police forces in England and Wales under the Firearms Act 1968 (as amended). Scotland and Northern Ireland have their own figures, not yet released.

As at 31 March 2020, there were: • 159,483 firearm certificates on issue – 0.2% decrease, ending the year-on-year increase seen over the past 3 years. • 567,358 shotgun certificates on issue – there has been little variation in numbers over the last 10 years.

Firearm and shotgun certificates on issue as at 31 March 2020 • 586,351 people held a firearm and/or a shotgun certificate, a 0.8% decrease of 4,951 since last year.

In the year ending 31 March 2020, there were: • 7,962 new applications for firearm certificates, of which 97% were granted and 3% were refused. • 18,857 new applications for shotgun certificates, of which 97% were granted and 3% were refused. • 371 firearms certificates were revoked – a decrease of 1% (-5) compared with the previous year and 0.2% of the total firearm certificates on issue. • 1,141 shotgun certificates were revoked – an increase of 2% (+25) compared with the previous year and 0.2% of the total shotgun certificates on issue.

Enquiries: [email protected] 020 7035 3535 Statistical enquiries: [email protected] 97% Granted 371 1,141

No doubt the 100,000 deaths from covid have had some effect on these numbers, with people giving up shooting over the year because of the inability to actually go and do it. Apart from the usual general apathy, there is no real government move to an outright ban - regardless of what you may read elsewhere, this country is still hugely dependent on farming and agriculture as well as meat animals - cows, sheep - and the predators will be there in spite of government 'restrictions'...

I don't know any 'elite and rich'. However, everybody who applies for an FAC is treated the same way and the same question is asked - is this person a safe person in whom to entrust a potentially lethal firearm?

The only person in the whole of the UK who never had a firearms certificate, but certainly owned many, many guns, AND used them, is HM The Queen. Everybody else must have one to legally be in possession of a firearm or shotgun.