GIVE US LAW ABIDING CITIZENS BACK OUR GUNS!

The horrific massacres that we have witnessed over the years have prompted successive governments to use knee-jerk reactions to tighten up the already strict gun laws. As predicted, the gun crime figures continue to rise apace, proving that the law abiding, resposible shooters were not to blame for these outrages. Those wonderful people who wish to participate in the 2012 Olympics have to practice in a foreign country as their own country, the UK, does not allow them to shoot here. We are at a disadvantage and no gold medals are predicted. The shooting centre will be closed after tha games, wasting public money. We should be promoting shooting sports and teaching our children and young people the responsible use of firearms rather than see them buy an illegal gun in the pub.

Why is this idea important?

The horrific massacres that we have witnessed over the years have prompted successive governments to use knee-jerk reactions to tighten up the already strict gun laws. As predicted, the gun crime figures continue to rise apace, proving that the law abiding, resposible shooters were not to blame for these outrages. Those wonderful people who wish to participate in the 2012 Olympics have to practice in a foreign country as their own country, the UK, does not allow them to shoot here. We are at a disadvantage and no gold medals are predicted. The shooting centre will be closed after tha games, wasting public money. We should be promoting shooting sports and teaching our children and young people the responsible use of firearms rather than see them buy an illegal gun in the pub.

Withdraw the ban on Olympic target pistol shooting.

Tony Blair used this ban to gain publicity at the start of his first government.  All it did was to make it de-rigueur for every criminal to want access to a handgun and to stop all law abiding citizens who had safely and happily followed an international sport from continuing with their often lifelong hobby of target pistol shooting.  Armed crime figures went through the roof as a result meaning that everyone was in more danger not less.  The only losers in all this were the honest reponsible private gun owners and the businesses that supplied them.

Restore the pre-ban status quo. 

Meddling around the edges with special squads and other hair-brained ideas just creates an even messier situation and does nothing for the competitive sport.  Anything is dangerous in the wrong hands.  Demonising inanimate objects is for the imbeciles in our society. 

Why is this idea important?

Tony Blair used this ban to gain publicity at the start of his first government.  All it did was to make it de-rigueur for every criminal to want access to a handgun and to stop all law abiding citizens who had safely and happily followed an international sport from continuing with their often lifelong hobby of target pistol shooting.  Armed crime figures went through the roof as a result meaning that everyone was in more danger not less.  The only losers in all this were the honest reponsible private gun owners and the businesses that supplied them.

Restore the pre-ban status quo. 

Meddling around the edges with special squads and other hair-brained ideas just creates an even messier situation and does nothing for the competitive sport.  Anything is dangerous in the wrong hands.  Demonising inanimate objects is for the imbeciles in our society. 

Remove requirement to shoot animals from the Hunting Act

The Hunting Act defines a form of hunting called 'flushing out of cover'.  It states that this is exempt from the law if five conditions are met.  The last of these conditions is:

"reasonable steps are taken for the purpose of ensuring that as soon as possible after being found or flushed out the wild mammal is shot dead by a competent person"

The previous Government have states that this condition is needed because otherwise the exemption would be used as an excuse to chase and kill animals that had been flushed out.  This makes no sense.  If someone wanted to claim that they had accidentally chased and killed a fox or a deer then they would also claim that they had accidentally flushed out the animal.

The use of dogs to disperse and deter wild deer is an effective conservation method and is an alternative to culling them.  It is also recommended by the British Trust for Conservation Volunteers.

There is no reason that deer should have to be shot in the circumstances outlined by the Hunting Act and this condition should be removed from the law.

It has recently been suggested by the RSPCA that actually animals can be flushed out of cover without being shot – if true the condition becomes meaningless anyway.  We should not have laws we don;t have to obey.

 

Out on a trip to flush deer with more than three dogs without shooting them.

It should be legal to deliberately flush deer without shooting them.

Why is this idea important?

The Hunting Act defines a form of hunting called 'flushing out of cover'.  It states that this is exempt from the law if five conditions are met.  The last of these conditions is:

"reasonable steps are taken for the purpose of ensuring that as soon as possible after being found or flushed out the wild mammal is shot dead by a competent person"

The previous Government have states that this condition is needed because otherwise the exemption would be used as an excuse to chase and kill animals that had been flushed out.  This makes no sense.  If someone wanted to claim that they had accidentally chased and killed a fox or a deer then they would also claim that they had accidentally flushed out the animal.

The use of dogs to disperse and deter wild deer is an effective conservation method and is an alternative to culling them.  It is also recommended by the British Trust for Conservation Volunteers.

There is no reason that deer should have to be shot in the circumstances outlined by the Hunting Act and this condition should be removed from the law.

It has recently been suggested by the RSPCA that actually animals can be flushed out of cover without being shot – if true the condition becomes meaningless anyway.  We should not have laws we don;t have to obey.

 

Out on a trip to flush deer with more than three dogs without shooting them.

It should be legal to deliberately flush deer without shooting them.