[Lilly]

Originally Posted by Retlaw

The nut that shot the kids in Dumblane, although he had aa firearms license was not a member of any gun club, none of them would accept him as a member. When his permit came up for renewal the police were informed of this, and he couldn't show membership of a club, which is the only reason for his possession, yet his cerificate was renewedby the police.

As for Michal Ryan in Hungerford, he was only a probationary member of his local club, and the law at that time, prevented probationary members being granted a certificate, yet the police granted him one, even though he had once been caught in possesion of an illegal firearm.

I was a member of several rifle and pistol clubs for over 40 years, and being the secretary of two of them, you had to be conversant with the fire arms act.
One section, which covered any one who had commited a crime, with a fire arm, and was convicted, could never hold a legal firearm again for LIFE, the 7 year rule doesn't apply to the firearms act.

Why doesn't that apply to those who commit crimes with CARS, theres nothing like the threat of a life ban to keep you on your toes.

More people are killed by cars every day than by fireaarms, yet mention the word gun and every one gets paranoid, you've been brain washed by the media.

Retlaw

I just don't think anyone needs to own a gun, that's all.

My opinion was re-inforced ( I wasn't brainwashed ) when I read a book called Never Forget, written by Mick North, father of Sophie North who was one of the children murdered in Dunblane.

The gun ownership issue is debated at some length and I agree with the author in that guns are designed to kill and people should not be allowed to own them as they cannot be sufficiently controlled.