Horden Shootings

The MP, Grahame Morris, and the Daily fascist (along with oh so many others) get it totally wrong. Then again what can I say but no surprise there. Morris in a totally uniformed kneejerk response (if the newspapers are to be believed) has called for tighter 'gun control' but thankfully David Cameron has come back with the right response in his assessment that this is not necessary.

Seems to me that the Prime Minister has got it absolutely right. Mind you the same boring and overbearing people who successfully called for the removal of handguns after Dunblane (and if he'd run them over with a car they would have called for a ban on motor vehicles I suppose?) are now trying, once again, to peddle their ignorance and take away the 'oh so scary' firearms from people who have a legitimate right to have them.

Now for those who will witter on about those who have the right to hold firearms (with the ambition of seeing this right removed) let me tell you what being a shooter means.

First and foremost it must be taken as a given that those who have rights also have responsibilities (whoops, there goes the animal rights lobby I guess) and there is no place where this is more true than the area of shooting. Had I a gun cabinet at home then I would have the responsibility to ensure it was safely affixed to walls such that it could not be jemmied off. Not only that but the cabinet would be of a design that resisted being forced open and were you successful in so doing would have to repeat the arduous task of breaking doors open at least a couple more times before you had the actions and the ammunition in the same place such that you might use the illegally accessed weapons held within it (and do it whilst the alarm got on your nerves to boot!). Now, picture a set of really nice Sabatier knives of a chunky set of golf clubs, which are potentially more lethal as the former could be hidden and the latter could be taken along a street without much consternation and people running away (well not until you started swinging anyway).

Secondly, being a shooter means that there are people in the community who are weapons savvy and it has been my experience that it is these very people who got a knock when granddad's 'war memento' was found wrapped in an oilskin up in the loft (and I know this to be true). It is also these people who spot the 'nutters' long before they can ever get anywhere near being issued with an FAC and it is because of this that some, who would have been problems, never make it to the front pages.

Thirdly, rather than call for increased measures and yet also saying that the use of psychiatrists as anything other than exceptional circumstances (as Mr Morris has done) many of the shooters I know from past contact were most happy for this if it proved helpful in keeping the sport/hobby of shooting more secure.

Lastly, when you consider the common denominator in pretty much all of the 'mad shooter' incidents in this country is maladministration by our overworked and under-resourced Police and ask why a man who was reported for an obvious metal health problem, or had come out of prison and was known to be dangerous (even without weapons) and yet was allowed to keep his weapons - this tells you where the real problems lie.

SOME FACTS

Shooters (generally) aren't in love with weapons in weird and wacky ways and those who came into my club and drooled at magazine pictures whilst mumbling, "Heckler & Koch MP7, oooh want one!" were destined never to shoot in our, or any other club and their cards were marked with the excellent Police officers what did firearms related work.

Six weapons in the possession of a shooter isn't 'an arsenal' any more than a bag of golf clubs, a box of Sabatier or a set of Le Creuset kitchenware is a collection of lethal weapons. Mind you, in the wrong hands and with the wrong intent all of these can be exactly that (and add the cooking of some as a credible fourth option in some cases).

Six weapons in a gun cabinet, especially when some are shotguns represents lots of firepower if there were six people, but not a lot when there is but one pair of hands available, but for one person it can be legitimised quite quickly by pointing to the different disciplines that different weapons are fit for. Target shooting, vermin, game, clays and the like quickly make the list as rational as having many clubs in your bag (or can you play with just a sand wedge?).

The idea of getting all the weapons and storing them in one place is great until you realise you have created a mega-arsenal and where there might be six (I used to have but four) there are now sixty! Rationalise that one for me.

My last point is the Ryan (Hungerford) wasn't such a non-shooter that all he managed to hit with his automatic weapons was road signs and yet they were taken away because of what he'd done (road sign protectionism?). Handguns were taken away because of Hamilton (Dunblane) and yet (a few odd practical pistol sorts aside) I would have said that these were treated with more security consciousness and greater control within shooting that even the most strict weapons banning type would have required. The reason for this is purely and simply ignorance and because they don't know they legislate.

So here's a bit more for you and a plea to politicians to actually understand what the needs and the realities are regarding shooters i.e. why not go to a club and ask questions (an MP would get you if they knocked, an ordinary mortal generally wouldn't unless they'd made appointments and stuff!

Pax

ps. Sorry it's long but I just had to keep sucking until the spaghetti was gone :)