‘Dead hand’ of Whitehall blamed as airguns ban ruled out
 |
| KENNY MacAskill: Veto left Labour's approach to devolution threadbare |
The "dead hand of the Scotland Office" was yesterday blamed for a decision by
UK ministers to block any attempt north of the border
to bring in legislation to ban airguns.
Justice Secretary Kenny MacAskill said the veto left Labour's approach to devolution "threadbare and confused". The minister said his Westminster counterpart Jack Straw had given sympathetic consideration at a meeting in July to the possibility of Scotland going it alone in toughening the firearms regulations.
But now the Home Secretary, Jacqui Smith, has vetoed this, claiming that any variation of the laws between Scotland and England would be "confusing and potentially damaging".
Mr MacAskill said yesterday: "I am extremely disappointed that the Westminster Government has not recognised that Scotland needs responsibility for firearms legislation to deal with this extremely serious problem in Scotland, particularly air weapon crime.
"There is no doubt that when I met Jack Straw in July he was very sympathetic to the issue, as indeed he was on the important point that any prisoner transfer agreement with Libya must abide by the wishes of the Scottish Government.
"However, I detect the dead hand of the Scotland Office behind this. With the Scotland Office dogmatically against any further form of devolution - they have even talked about clawing powers back - not only are they ignoring the serious problem of air weapon crime in Scotland, they are leaving the Labour Party's commitment to further
devolution threadbare and confused."
The Home Secretary, in her letter to Mr MacAskill, states: "I do not believe it would be sensible to devolve responsibility in the way you suggest.
"I think it would be confusing and potentially damaging to create a situation in which the entire body of firearms law in Scotland could ultimately differ markedly from that in England and Wales.
"There is no impediment to cross-border movement and it would be very difficult to enforce separate regimes and to prevent organised criminals from exploiting differences."
Holyrood ministers would like to see the Scotland Act opened up to have firearms legislation removed from the the list of subjects reserved to Westminster, but given the seriousness of airgun crime in Scotland they would settle for a one-off deal on that issue.
More than 1000 Scots have been injured by airguns in the past eight years and there have been three deaths. One, of Easterhouse toddler Andrew Morton two years ago, led to a petition with more than 11,000 signatures being submitted to MSPs demanding that airguns be outlawed.
The convener of Solidarity, Tommy Sheridan, yesterday called on the SNP government to defy Whitehall and proceed with its own Holyrood bill banning airguns, challenging MPs to veto that.
He said: "I am enraged that Labour at Westminster should try to dictate to Scotland how we protect our communities. Two children and one adult have died recently and thousands more have been injured by airguns.
"When I was an MSP I introduced a bill to ban airguns and commissioned an opinion poll from System 3 that showed over 80% of Scots favour a ban. I believe the SNP should defy the Westminster ban and introduce a bill in parliament and let Labour try to veto this. The people of Scotland will back the Scottish Government in defying this disgraceful London ban."
© All rights reserved. Reproduction in whole or in part without
permission is prohibited.
Posted by: Gorgeous George, Glasgow on 12:09am Mon 24 Dec 07
"...There is no impediment to cross-border movement and it would be very difficult to enforce separate regimes and to prevent organised criminals from exploiting differences."
[bold]A definition of the EU perhaps.... no aparanetly this is unique to the UK.....c'mon Labour... get yer heids oot yer erse....[/bold]
"...There is no impediment to cross-border movement and it would be very difficult to enforce separate regimes and to prevent organised criminals from exploiting differences."
A definition of the EU perhaps.... no aparanetly this is unique to the UK.....c'mon Labour... get yer heids oot yer erse.... Posted by: ptdoug, EK on 12:38am Mon 24 Dec 07
George, #1
Exactly.
Every single State in the United States of America has its own, seperate, firearms legislation.!!!
Jacqui Smiths veto is just one more example of Westminsters obstructive policy towards the SNP Scottish Government.
Its Londons way of reminding us that, in their opinion, the Scottish Government is no more than an irritating, uppity "parish council" (to quote Tony Blair) and that they can, and will, put us in our place should we at any time attempt to rise above our station.
George, #1
Exactly.
Every single State in the United States of America has its own, seperate, firearms legislation.!!!
Jacqui Smiths veto is just one more example of Westminsters obstructive policy towards the SNP Scottish Government.
Its Londons way of reminding us that, in their opinion, the Scottish Government is no more than an irritating, uppity "parish council" (to quote Tony Blair) and that they can, and will, put us in our place should we at any time attempt to rise above our station.
Posted by: Tired of excuses, Galashiels on 12:50am Mon 24 Dec 07
Hmmmm so it was OK to introduce poll tax in Scotland with different laws , it was OK for Scots to ban smoking in public places before the English laws changed, I could go on and on with example after example but we already have different laws in Scotland on many things.
In fact we have a different legal system too, different banking system and indeed different parliament.
This is a tantrum by Westminster which can only hurt the labour shambles further.
How many (innefective and badly written many of them are too) laws have labour enacted in the last 10 or 15 years ?
Like the laws on political donations for starters.
Hmmmm so it was OK to introduce poll tax in Scotland with different laws , it was OK for Scots to ban smoking in public places before the English laws changed, I could go on and on with example after example but we already have different laws in Scotland on many things.
In fact we have a different legal system too, different banking system and indeed different parliament.
This is a tantrum by Westminster which can only hurt the labour shambles further.
How many (innefective and badly written many of them are too) laws have labour enacted in the last 10 or 15 years ?
Like the laws on political donations for starters.
Posted by: Mike, Edinburgh on 12:59am Mon 24 Dec 07
What a petty bunch of little people this lot are. Lets hope the Scottish People remember this crap when Election Time comes around. I suppose the deaths of a few Scots is not as important as spiting the SNP Scottish Government. Lets hope that there are no more deaths or serious injuries to Scots in the meantime. Never mind we will fix the crimes of the London Controlled New Labour Traitors come Independance day.
What a petty bunch of little people this lot are. Lets hope the Scottish People remember this crap when Election Time comes around. I suppose the deaths of a few Scots is not as important as spiting the SNP Scottish Government. Lets hope that there are no more deaths or serious injuries to Scots in the meantime. Never mind we will fix the crimes of the London Controlled New Labour Traitors come Independance day.
Posted by: Los Angeles, Edinburgh on 1:26am Mon 24 Dec 07
Ptdoug Fires A warning Volley[quote]Every single State in the United States of America has its own, seperate, firearm legislation.!!![/quote] Correct.
Could Westminster be bowing to the firearm lobby?
Ptdoug Fires A warning Volley
Every single State in the United States of America has its own, seperate, firearm legislation.!!!
Correct.
Could Westminster be bowing to the firearm lobby?
Posted by: doonhamer on 1:45am Mon 24 Dec 07
Just one more confirmation that the so-called Constitutional Convention of the Unionists is a wheeze. If you cannot get approval for something as minor as banning airguns, how will you get fiscal autonomy or other more serious powers.
It seems you will have to pry the powers from the cold, dead fingers of the Labour corpse. Thank God, they are doing everything in their power to commit political suicide.
The Tories and the Libdems should get as far away as possible from this sinking ship before they are sucked down with them.
Just one more confirmation that the so-called Constitutional Convention of the Unionists is a wheeze. If you cannot get approval for something as minor as banning airguns, how will you get fiscal autonomy or other more serious powers.
It seems you will have to pry the powers from the cold, dead fingers of the Labour corpse. Thank God, they are doing everything in their power to commit political suicide.
The Tories and the Libdems should get as far away as possible from this sinking ship before they are sucked down with them.
Posted by: Bwoken pwomithes on 1:59am Mon 24 Dec 07
[quote][bold]Gorgeous George[/bold] wrote:
"...There is no impediment to cross-border movement and it would be very difficult to enforce separate regimes and to prevent organised criminals from exploiting differences." [bold]A definition of the EU perhaps.... no aparanetly this is unique to the UK.....c'mon Labour... get yer heids oot yer erse....[/bold] [/quote] Well spotted, GG. This action by the UK Government is particularly typical of their petty attitude to the new politics of Scotland since.
Some form of further [italic]fiscal[/italic] responsibility is obviously all that the Labour Party is able to consider for Scotland. There would have been no harm done to their precious Union in allowing firearms legislation to be dealt with by Holyrood.
Unionists like Jacqui Smith still exercise a nineteenth century concept of territorial nationality and jurisdiction. It stinks.
Gorgeous George wrote:
"...There is no impediment to cross-border movement and it would be very difficult to enforce separate regimes and to prevent organised criminals from exploiting differences." A definition of the EU perhaps.... no aparanetly this is unique to the UK.....c'mon Labour... get yer heids oot yer erse....
Well spotted, GG. This action by the UK Government is particularly typical of their petty attitude to the new politics of Scotland since.
Some form of further
fiscal responsibility is obviously all that the Labour Party is able to consider for Scotland. There would have been no harm done to their precious Union in allowing firearms legislation to be dealt with by Holyrood.
Unionists like Jacqui Smith still exercise a nineteenth century concept of territorial nationality and jurisdiction. It stinks.
Posted by: Gregor Addison, Scoltand on 3:58am Mon 24 Dec 07
There should be no need for anyone in Scotland or anywhere else in the United Kingdom to be armed. The American ideal of 'the right to bear arms' has no relevance here. I do not believe that we have to be 'tooled up' to keep the state in check. Electoral power should be sufficient to remove governments from power - it may take four years - but hey...that's the system we support.
At the present moment it is possible to buy knives, swords, crossbows, air rifles, etc. in Glasgow for under £30. These are not being bought by patriots. They are being bought mainly by young men. That the Scottish Government has to defer to Westminster over this reveals the extent to which we have to wait until there is sufficient interest in Westminster to deal with issues like these in Scotland. AM2 and his pals would tell you this is acceptable. I don't believe it is. Scotland has a parliament. That parliament must have the right to make decisions that directly affect the safety of the Scottish people. The sale of knives, crossbows, airguns, etc. should be banned in Scotland. Let us lead the way.
There should be no need for anyone in Scotland or anywhere else in the United Kingdom to be armed. The American ideal of 'the right to bear arms' has no relevance here. I do not believe that we have to be 'tooled up' to keep the state in check. Electoral power should be sufficient to remove governments from power - it may take four years - but hey...that's the system we support.
At the present moment it is possible to buy knives, swords, crossbows, air rifles, etc. in Glasgow for under £30. These are not being bought by patriots. They are being bought mainly by young men. That the Scottish Government has to defer to Westminster over this reveals the extent to which we have to wait until there is sufficient interest in Westminster to deal with issues like these in Scotland. AM2 and his pals would tell you this is acceptable. I don't believe it is. Scotland has a parliament. That parliament must have the right to make decisions that directly affect the safety of the Scottish people. The sale of knives, crossbows, airguns, etc. should be banned in Scotland. Let us lead the way.
Posted by: Scunnert, Returned After Staging Peter Pan - and the weans loved it! on 4:29am Mon 24 Dec 07
I thought Scotland had it's own legal system - aren't we always bragging about it? Apparently we have to, as Doonhamer puts it, "get approval" from Westminster to vary legislation between Scotland and England..
And this is about - [bold]bold[/bold] AIRGUNS[bold]bold[/bold] .
If we cannae even ban airguns - Ah'm loast fur wurds!
Tired of excuses, Galashiels on 12:50am today writes:
"In fact we have:
a. "different legal system" - that cannae pass a law re: airguns?
b. "different banking system" - whose currency isnae legal tender?
c. "different parliament" - where maist MSP's want tae keep
Scotland and the Scots subjugated to
Westminster control?
As Alex said tae Nicol (efter he geid um a leatherin) "Happy Christmas".
BTW - I think banning airguns is nonsense.
"More than 1000 Scots have been injured by airguns in the past eight years and there have been three deaths."
That's a death rate of 0.00000008 pa. Hardly of pressing national significance. What is significant is we don't have the authority to legislate on the matter.
Pathetic - ye caw this a parliament?
Ah think mair Scotsmen should go watch Peter Pan - the might recognize thursells: The Lost Boys of Neverland!
I thought Scotland had it's own legal system - aren't we always bragging about it? Apparently we have to, as Doonhamer puts it, "get approval" from Westminster to vary legislation between Scotland and England..
And this is about - AIRGUNS .
If we cannae even ban airguns - Ah'm loast fur wurds!
Tired of excuses, Galashiels on 12:50am today writes:
"In fact we have:
a. "different legal system" - that cannae pass a law re: airguns?
b. "different banking system" - whose currency isnae legal tender?
c. "different parliament" - where maist MSP's want tae keep
Scotland and the Scots subjugated to
Westminster control?
As Alex said tae Nicol (efter he geid um a leatherin) "Happy Christmas".
BTW - I think banning airguns is nonsense.
"More than 1000 Scots have been injured by airguns in the past eight years and there have been three deaths."
That's a death rate of 0.00000008 pa. Hardly of pressing national significance. What is significant is we don't have the authority to legislate on the matter.
Pathetic - ye caw this a parliament?
Ah think mair Scotsmen should go watch Peter Pan - the might recognize thursells: The Lost Boys of Neverland!
Posted by: Scunnert, Whit? on 4:52am Mon 24 Dec 07
Gregor Addison, Scoltand on 3:58am today writes:
"The sale of knives, crossbows, airguns, etc. should be banned in Scotland. Let us lead the way."
Gregor would you lead us naked into a den of wolves? Oh! I forgot - we're getting Biometric ID Cards, compulsory stop and searches, universal CCTV. Who needs weapons? Shall we remove metal cutlery from the market - who knows what mischief can be achieved with a steak knife.
Gregor - you're a Doukhobor - bit yer nae Son ae Freedom
http://www.doukhobor
.org/Soukeroff.htm
Gregor Addison, Scoltand on 3:58am today writes:
"The sale of knives, crossbows, airguns, etc. should be banned in Scotland. Let us lead the way."
Gregor would you lead us naked into a den of wolves? Oh! I forgot - we're getting Biometric ID Cards, compulsory stop and searches, universal CCTV. Who needs weapons? Shall we remove metal cutlery from the market - who knows what mischief can be achieved with a steak knife.
Gregor - you're a Doukhobor - bit yer nae Son ae Freedom
http://www.doukhobor
.org/Soukeroff.htm
Posted by: R MacLeod, Glasgow on 6:26am Mon 24 Dec 07
There are several points of annoyance in this spiteful behaviour of The Labour bosses in London.
It is a fact that the first and prime duty of any legally elected government is the protection of its subjects(as per our staus in this country not CITIZENS)
in scoring a cheap political point the Westminster cabal is preventing our government taking the steps it feels necessary to protect us.
Westminster yet again picking a fight with Holyrood.
Scunnert @4.29am one death is one too many how you can possibly be so flippant is outrageous.
There are several points of annoyance in this spiteful behaviour of The Labour bosses in London.
It is a fact that the first and prime duty of any legally elected government is the protection of its subjects(as per our staus in this country not CITIZENS)
in scoring a cheap political point the Westminster cabal is preventing our government taking the steps it feels necessary to protect us.
Westminster yet again picking a fight with Holyrood.
Scunnert @4.29am one death is one too many how you can possibly be so flippant is outrageous.
Posted by: donald, glasgow on 6:37am Mon 24 Dec 07
Bah Humbug! Let's all fire oor airguns over the Boarder on Xmas Day.
Bah Humbug! Let's all fire oor airguns over the Boarder on Xmas Day.
Posted by: pehman, sussex on 7:30am Mon 24 Dec 07
Perhaps if we were to redefine what FIRE ARMS are then AIR GUNS could be removed to an other catagory.
Is an air gun a fire arm ?
Perhaps if we were to redefine what FIRE ARMS are then AIR GUNS could be removed to an other catagory.
Is an air gun a fire arm ?
Posted by: Angus McCLoud, near on 7:38am Mon 24 Dec 07
The comment above about Lib-Dem and Labour getting clear from there Main Party's in Westminster is of the most sage advise indee the Scotsman should pull its head from out of its arse,so supporting its political pals,instead of carrying along this ridiculous path of Union Jack fluttering.
The comment above about Lib-Dem and Labour getting clear from there Main Party's in Westminster is of the most sage advise indee the Scotsman should pull its head from out of its arse,so supporting its political pals,instead of carrying along this ridiculous path of Union Jack fluttering.
Posted by: Mercutio on 8:03am Mon 24 Dec 07
Mr MacAskill might at least have made the dead hand allusion clear, somehow I don't see Jacqui Smith standing at the Dispatch box doing a Charlton Heston impression “From My Cold Dead Hands" and brandishing an air rifle or was he referring to "Mortmain " from his time studying law.
Mr MacAskill might at least have made the dead hand allusion clear, somehow I don't see Jacqui Smith standing at the Dispatch box doing a Charlton Heston impression “From My Cold Dead Hands" and brandishing an air rifle or was he referring to "Mortmain " from his time studying law.
Posted by: The West Awake, Argyll on 8:49am Mon 24 Dec 07
Has anyone else noticed that, while most politicians battle to get their opinions across in the media, especially if they are SNP and have a positive message of course, there is one who appears in print and person with surprising regularity - Tommy Sheridan.
No harm to Tommy, but he basically has no party, no real credibility and isn't even an MSP.
Why nonetheless do the media find it impossible to ignore him?
Incidentally, if you read the Brit press, while ground-breaking things happen up here, they are routinely ignored, but all Tommy has to do is open his mouth and he is guaranteed a jounalist will be there to record his every thought for posterity!
Why?
Has anyone else noticed that, while most politicians battle to get their opinions across in the media, especially if they are SNP and have a positive message of course, there is one who appears in print and person with surprising regularity - Tommy Sheridan.
No harm to Tommy, but he basically has no party, no real credibility and isn't even an MSP.
Why nonetheless do the media find it impossible to ignore him?
Incidentally, if you read the Brit press, while ground-breaking things happen up here, they are routinely ignored, but all Tommy has to do is open his mouth and he is guaranteed a jounalist will be there to record his every thought for posterity!
Why?
Posted by: Watchman, North Lanarkshire on 9:21am Mon 24 Dec 07
Would banning airweapons actually achieve anything or is it just another knee jerk reaction ?
After Dunblane handguns were banned, has that actually reduced the number of firearms incidents in Scotland, how many people have been killed in the last couple of years by handguns which are already illegal ?
The idiots who take delight in firing air weapons at human beings are the cause of the problem not the weapons themselves and while I would support stronger gun control surely its a much bigger problem in society which isnt going to be fixed by a "unilateral" Scottish ban ?
Would banning airweapons actually achieve anything or is it just another knee jerk reaction ?
After Dunblane handguns were banned, has that actually reduced the number of firearms incidents in Scotland, how many people have been killed in the last couple of years by handguns which are already illegal ?
The idiots who take delight in firing air weapons at human beings are the cause of the problem not the weapons themselves and while I would support stronger gun control surely its a much bigger problem in society which isnt going to be fixed by a "unilateral" Scottish ban ?
Posted by: Watchman, North Lanarkshire on 9:27am Mon 24 Dec 07
Pehman
Technically airweapons are classed as firearms as I understand the legal definition (and I dont claim to quote it exactly) relates to something ommiting a projectile, however confusingly you do not need a firearms certificate unless the striking force/energy of the projectile of the air weapon is over a certain limit, (the figure 12ft/lbs calculated by the mass of the projectile multiplied by the velocity divided by a constant which I cant remember, springs to mind.)
Pehman
Technically airweapons are classed as firearms as I understand the legal definition (and I dont claim to quote it exactly) relates to something ommiting a projectile, however confusingly you do not need a firearms certificate unless the striking force/energy of the projectile of the air weapon is over a certain limit, (the figure 12ft/lbs calculated by the mass of the projectile multiplied by the velocity divided by a constant which I cant remember, springs to mind.)
Posted by: Stephen, Glasgow on 10:00am Mon 24 Dec 07
I think it is sensible that gun laws are the same across the UK. However, why does the UK government not wish to ban airguns in England and Wales?
I think it is sensible that gun laws are the same across the UK. However, why does the UK government not wish to ban airguns in England and Wales?
Posted by: Retired...........bu
t still switched on, Fed Up To The Teeth on 10:34am Mon 24 Dec 07
[quote][bold]Gregor Addison[/bold] wrote:
There should be no need for anyone in Scotland or anywhere else in the United Kingdom to be armed. The American ideal of \'the right to bear arms\' has no relevance here. I do not believe that we have to be \'tooled up\' to keep the state in check. Electoral power should be sufficient to remove governments from power - it may take four years - but hey...that\'s the system we support. At the present moment it is possible to buy knives, swords, crossbows, air rifles, etc. in Glasgow for under £30. These are not being bought by patriots. They are being bought mainly by young men. That the Scottish Government has to defer to Westminster over this reveals the extent to which we have to wait until there is sufficient interest in Westminster to deal with issues like these in Scotland. AM2 and his pals would tell you this is acceptable. I don\'t believe it is. Scotland has a parliament. That parliament must have the right to make decisions that directly affect the safety of the Scottish people. The sale of knives, crossbows, airguns, etc. should be banned in Scotland. Let us lead the way.[/quote] GREGOR ADDISON
I agree with every word here Sir !!...........and thought it was worth seeing in print again to re-inforce the points made!!
Gregor Addison wrote:
There should be no need for anyone in Scotland or anywhere else in the United Kingdom to be armed. The American ideal of \'the right to bear arms\' has no relevance here. I do not believe that we have to be \'tooled up\' to keep the state in check. Electoral power should be sufficient to remove governments from power - it may take four years - but hey...that\'s the system we support. At the present moment it is possible to buy knives, swords, crossbows, air rifles, etc. in Glasgow for under £30. These are not being bought by patriots. They are being bought mainly by young men. That the Scottish Government has to defer to Westminster over this reveals the extent to which we have to wait until there is sufficient interest in Westminster to deal with issues like these in Scotland. AM2 and his pals would tell you this is acceptable. I don\'t believe it is. Scotland has a parliament. That parliament must have the right to make decisions that directly affect the safety of the Scottish people. The sale of knives, crossbows, airguns, etc. should be banned in Scotland. Let us lead the way.
GREGOR ADDISON
I agree with every word here Sir !!...........and thought it was worth seeing in print again to re-inforce the points made!!
Posted by: Ronald, Glasgow on 10:43am Mon 24 Dec 07
The NEW LABOUR Govenment has upset many of its leading far-right supporters with its legislation to ban hunting with dogs.
Should legislation appear which might impede shooting
"sports" then the participants in these deathsports, , many of whom work in the City, are captains of industry, and have bankroled THE NEW LABOUR PROJECT - re cash for honours etc - would withdraw that support IMMEDIATLY. And as the grassroots support are leaving NEWLABOUR in droves, well................
.....
The NEW LABOUR Govenment has upset many of its leading far-right supporters with its legislation to ban hunting with dogs.
Should legislation appear which might impede shooting
"sports" then the participants in these deathsports, , many of whom work in the City, are captains of industry, and have bankroled THE NEW LABOUR PROJECT - re cash for honours etc - would withdraw that support IMMEDIATLY. And as the grassroots support are leaving NEWLABOUR in droves, well................
.....
Posted by: davie on 10:45am Mon 24 Dec 07
Stephen,
The reason why there is no desire to ban air guns in England because, fortunately, there has been no high profile killing of an innocent young child at the hands of a junkie drug dealer.
In England the parochial 2nd rate politicians are settling down to enjoy the festive break whereas up here, our 2nd rate politicians are scurrying around with indecent haste in order to get their names in the papers and create "non-stories".
Banning airguns will not reduce poverty, it will not provide heat and warmth to our vulnerable, it will not put food into the bellies of hungry weans and it will not help to provide a decent education for them either.
If any of our 2nd rate politicians had actually wanted to do something constructive why not do something for the people affected by these issues.
Just run the country, please.
Stephen,
The reason why there is no desire to ban air guns in England because, fortunately, there has been no high profile killing of an innocent young child at the hands of a junkie drug dealer.
In England the parochial 2nd rate politicians are settling down to enjoy the festive break whereas up here, our 2nd rate politicians are scurrying around with indecent haste in order to get their names in the papers and create "non-stories".
Banning airguns will not reduce poverty, it will not provide heat and warmth to our vulnerable, it will not put food into the bellies of hungry weans and it will not help to provide a decent education for them either.
If any of our 2nd rate politicians had actually wanted to do something constructive why not do something for the people affected by these issues.
Just run the country, please.
Posted by: Joe, Glasgow on 11:38am Mon 24 Dec 07
[quote][bold]davie[/bold] wrote:
Stephen,
The reason why there is no desire to ban air guns in England because, fortunately, there has been no high profile killing of an innocent young child at the hands of a junkie drug dealer.
In England the parochial 2nd rate politicians are settling down to enjoy the festive break whereas up here, our 2nd rate politicians are scurrying around with indecent haste in order to get their names in the papers and create \\\"non-stories\\\".
Banning airguns will not reduce poverty, it will not provide heat and warmth to our vulnerable, it will not put food into the bellies of hungry weans and it will not help to provide a decent education for them either.
If any of our 2nd rate politicians had actually wanted to do something constructive why not do something for the people affected by these issues.
Just run the country, please.[/quote] Hear Hear.
Absolutely spot on!
At last some commonsense instead of the blatherings of the deluded, paranoid and downright scary!
Merry Christmas!
davie wrote:
Stephen,
The reason why there is no desire to ban air guns in England because, fortunately, there has been no high profile killing of an innocent young child at the hands of a junkie drug dealer.
In England the parochial 2nd rate politicians are settling down to enjoy the festive break whereas up here, our 2nd rate politicians are scurrying around with indecent haste in order to get their names in the papers and create \\\"non-stories\\\".
Banning airguns will not reduce poverty, it will not provide heat and warmth to our vulnerable, it will not put food into the bellies of hungry weans and it will not help to provide a decent education for them either.
If any of our 2nd rate politicians had actually wanted to do something constructive why not do something for the people affected by these issues.
Just run the country, please.
Hear Hear.
Absolutely spot on!
At last some commonsense instead of the blatherings of the deluded, paranoid and downright scary!
Merry Christmas!
Posted by: John, Leicester on 11:39am Mon 24 Dec 07
"How many (innefective and badly written many of them are too) laws have labour enacted in the last 10 or 15 years ?"
More than 3200 last time I checked.
"How many (innefective and badly written many of them are too) laws have labour enacted in the last 10 or 15 years ?"
More than 3200 last time I checked.
Posted by: Rab Jones, Pollok # on 11:51am Mon 24 Dec 07
Airguns are not dangerous, its the idots pulling the triggers that are dangerous.
What shall we ban next?
Cigarette lighters, steak knives, cars etc, all of these are dangerous when the wrong person is in control.
Airguns are not dangerous, its the idots pulling the triggers that are dangerous.
What shall we ban next?
Cigarette lighters, steak knives, cars etc, all of these are dangerous when the wrong person is in control.
Posted by: The Grand Master, Scotland on 11:59am Mon 24 Dec 07
[quote][bold]The West Awake[/bold] wrote:
Has anyone else noticed that, while most politicians battle to get their opinions across in the media, especially if they are SNP and have a positive message of course, there is one who appears in print and person with surprising regularity - Tommy Sheridan. No harm to Tommy, but he basically has no party, no real credibility and isn't even an MSP. Why nonetheless do the media find it impossible to ignore him? Incidentally, if you read the Brit press, while ground-breaking things happen up here, they are routinely ignored, but all Tommy has to do is open his mouth and he is guaranteed a jounalist will be there to record his every thought for posterity! Why?[/quote] Tommy is one of us a mason and that is how he gets all the papers eating out of his hands and how he will win his case again. The real power of Scotland is with us the masons come and join us most of the Scottish Government have. After a couple of months in office they have realised where the real power is.
The West Awake wrote:
Has anyone else noticed that, while most politicians battle to get their opinions across in the media, especially if they are SNP and have a positive message of course, there is one who appears in print and person with surprising regularity - Tommy Sheridan. No harm to Tommy, but he basically has no party, no real credibility and isn't even an MSP. Why nonetheless do the media find it impossible to ignore him? Incidentally, if you read the Brit press, while ground-breaking things happen up here, they are routinely ignored, but all Tommy has to do is open his mouth and he is guaranteed a jounalist will be there to record his every thought for posterity! Why?
Tommy is one of us a mason and that is how he gets all the papers eating out of his hands and how he will win his case again. The real power of Scotland is with us the masons come and join us most of the Scottish Government have. After a couple of months in office they have realised where the real power is.
Posted by: Grumpywull, Beegee on 12:17pm Mon 24 Dec 07
I guess Browne and Cairns in the "Scottish Office" are not too bothered about what the people in Scotland want in this matter.
I guess Browne and Cairns in the "Scottish Office" are not too bothered about what the people in Scotland want in this matter.
Posted by: sam, greenock on 12:21pm Mon 24 Dec 07
[quote][bold]Watchman[/bold] wrote:
Would banning airweapons actually achieve anything or is it just another knee jerk reaction ? After Dunblane handguns were banned, has that actually reduced the number of firearms incidents in Scotland, how many people have been killed in the last couple of years by handguns which are already illegal ? The idiots who take delight in firing air weapons at human beings are the cause of the problem not the weapons themselves and while I would support stronger gun control surely its a much bigger problem in society which isnt going to be fixed by a "unilateral" Scottish ban ? [/quote] Watchman, the post dunblane banning of handguns was to prevent the slaughter of people by LEGALLY held handguns.
You'll find that if you open your eyes that Dunblane and previously Hungerford were carried out by nutters who had a large cache of LEGALLY held weapons.
Ileagally held guns, of whatever type, are another matter all together.
Watchman wrote:
Would banning airweapons actually achieve anything or is it just another knee jerk reaction ? After Dunblane handguns were banned, has that actually reduced the number of firearms incidents in Scotland, how many people have been killed in the last couple of years by handguns which are already illegal ? The idiots who take delight in firing air weapons at human beings are the cause of the problem not the weapons themselves and while I would support stronger gun control surely its a much bigger problem in society which isnt going to be fixed by a "unilateral" Scottish ban ?
Watchman, the post dunblane banning of handguns was to prevent the slaughter of people by LEGALLY held handguns.
You'll find that if you open your eyes that Dunblane and previously Hungerford were carried out by nutters who had a large cache of LEGALLY held weapons.
Ileagally held guns, of whatever type, are another matter all together.
Posted by: PC Engineer, Glasgow on 12:24pm Mon 24 Dec 07
[quote][bold]Watchman[/bold] wrote:
Would banning airweapons actually achieve anything or is it just another knee jerk reaction ? After Dunblane handguns were banned, has that actually reduced the number of firearms incidents in Scotland, how many people have been killed in the last couple of years by handguns which are already illegal ? The idiots who take delight in firing air weapons at human beings are the cause of the problem not the weapons themselves and while I would support stronger gun control surely its a much bigger problem in society which isnt going to be fixed by a \\\"unilateral\\\" Scottish ban ? [/quote] Ban them all you want, you just go on to the internet and buy them this is the age of the internet and no politcian has the answer to this, could always pass a members bill banning the internet.
Watchman wrote:
Would banning airweapons actually achieve anything or is it just another knee jerk reaction ? After Dunblane handguns were banned, has that actually reduced the number of firearms incidents in Scotland, how many people have been killed in the last couple of years by handguns which are already illegal ? The idiots who take delight in firing air weapons at human beings are the cause of the problem not the weapons themselves and while I would support stronger gun control surely its a much bigger problem in society which isnt going to be fixed by a \\\"unilateral\\\" Scottish ban ?
Ban them all you want, you just go on to the internet and buy them this is the age of the internet and no politcian has the answer to this, could always pass a members bill banning the internet.
Posted by: TheGlaswegian, Edinburgh on 12:32pm Mon 24 Dec 07
Rab Jones, Pollok -c'mon you are more intelligent that your post suggests....
The difference is that an airgun can be fired from behind a curtain 30ft above ground level. Being a dumb object, it is not dangerous in itself but it makes it easy for dumb humans to injure or kill people. Remove them and you remove the risk of people getting shot by them. Aint too difficult to understand.
Knives are tools used by almost every human on a day to day basis. We need knives whilst we do not need airguns.
To use your argument, my bedside cabinet is dangerous. I could take it outside and batter someone's head in with it. However, I'd find it much easier (and less risky) to get my airgun out and shoot my victim from afar.
Rab Jones, Pollok -c'mon you are more intelligent that your post suggests....
The difference is that an airgun can be fired from behind a curtain 30ft above ground level. Being a dumb object, it is not dangerous in itself but it makes it easy for dumb humans to injure or kill people. Remove them and you remove the risk of people getting shot by them. Aint too difficult to understand.
Knives are tools used by almost every human on a day to day basis. We need knives whilst we do not need airguns.
To use your argument, my bedside cabinet is dangerous. I could take it outside and batter someone's head in with it. However, I'd find it much easier (and less risky) to get my airgun out and shoot my victim from afar.
Posted by: Observer on 12:45pm Mon 24 Dec 07
You can't ''ban'' anything, if there is a market for it, it will be sold. I presume the thinking behind it is to ensure that there will be longer sentences handed out for use of an illegal weapon. I think it is probably more symbolic than anything else as part of the drive to root out violence. Well meaning I am sure but doomed to failure in my cynical opinion.
You can't ''ban'' anything, if there is a market for it, it will be sold. I presume the thinking behind it is to ensure that there will be longer sentences handed out for use of an illegal weapon. I think it is probably more symbolic than anything else as part of the drive to root out violence. Well meaning I am sure but doomed to failure in my cynical opinion.
Posted by: Rab Jones, Pollok # on 12:55pm Mon 24 Dec 07
[quote][bold]TheGlaswegian[/bold] wrote:
Rab Jones, Pollok -c'mon you are more intelligent that your post suggests.... The difference is that an airgun can be fired from behind a curtain 30ft above ground level. Being a dumb object, it is not dangerous in itself but it makes it easy for dumb humans to injure or kill people. Remove them and you remove the risk of people getting shot by them. Aint too difficult to understand. Knives are tools used by almost every human on a day to day basis. We need knives whilst we do not need airguns. To use your argument, my bedside cabinet is dangerous. I could take it outside and batter someone's head in with it. However, I'd find it much easier (and less risky) to get my airgun out and shoot my victim from afar.[/quote] Your arguements a bit daft, is it not? Airguns are used as a sport.
I could easily kill someone with a cricket bat, tennis racket or a dumbell weight. Lets not ban sports because of a minority of idiots.
And why would you kill someone with a bedside cabinet? Don't use it if you bought it from IKEA, it'll fall apart after the first blow.
TheGlaswegian wrote:
Rab Jones, Pollok -c'mon you are more intelligent that your post suggests.... The difference is that an airgun can be fired from behind a curtain 30ft above ground level. Being a dumb object, it is not dangerous in itself but it makes it easy for dumb humans to injure or kill people. Remove them and you remove the risk of people getting shot by them. Aint too difficult to understand. Knives are tools used by almost every human on a day to day basis. We need knives whilst we do not need airguns. To use your argument, my bedside cabinet is dangerous. I could take it outside and batter someone's head in with it. However, I'd find it much easier (and less risky) to get my airgun out and shoot my victim from afar.
Your arguements a bit daft, is it not? Airguns are used as a sport.
I could easily kill someone with a cricket bat, tennis racket or a dumbell weight. Lets not ban sports because of a minority of idiots.
And why would you kill someone with a bedside cabinet? Don't use it if you bought it from IKEA, it'll fall apart after the first blow.
Posted by: Mal on 12:55pm Mon 24 Dec 07
[quote][bold]davie[/bold] wrote:
Stephen, The reason why there is no desire to ban air guns in England because, fortunately, there has been no high profile killing of an innocent young child at the hands of a junkie drug dealer. In England the parochial 2nd rate politicians are settling down to enjoy the festive break whereas up here, our 2nd rate politicians are scurrying around with indecent haste in order to get their names in the papers and create "non-stories". Banning airguns will not reduce poverty, it will not provide heat and warmth to our vulnerable, it will not put food into the bellies of hungry weans and it will not help to provide a decent education for them either. If any of our 2nd rate politicians had actually wanted to do something constructive why not do something for the people affected by these issues. Just run the country, please.[/quote] I thought 50 years of Labour rule in Scotland was meant to eradicate poverty,
If the majority of the electorate wish Airguns to be banned in Scotland and we have a Parliment that is supposed to have some power then it should happen without interference from our Colonial masters.
Replace the word Airguns with the word Poverty from the paragraph above and you`ll see why Independence is a must.
davie wrote:
Stephen, The reason why there is no desire to ban air guns in England because, fortunately, there has been no high profile killing of an innocent young child at the hands of a junkie drug dealer. In England the parochial 2nd rate politicians are settling down to enjoy the festive break whereas up here, our 2nd rate politicians are scurrying around with indecent haste in order to get their names in the papers and create "non-stories". Banning airguns will not reduce poverty, it will not provide heat and warmth to our vulnerable, it will not put food into the bellies of hungry weans and it will not help to provide a decent education for them either. If any of our 2nd rate politicians had actually wanted to do something constructive why not do something for the people affected by these issues. Just run the country, please.
I thought 50 years of Labour rule in Scotland was meant to eradicate poverty,
If the majority of the electorate wish Airguns to be banned in Scotland and we have a Parliment that is supposed to have some power then it should happen without interference from our Colonial masters.
Replace the word Airguns with the word Poverty from the paragraph above and you`ll see why Independence is a must.
Posted by: David, Gretna on 1:12pm Mon 24 Dec 07
I think you will find that the westminster government is taking the very sensible approach that anything coming out of Kenny McCaskill's mouth is liable to be complete rubbish.
I think you will find that the westminster government is taking the very sensible approach that anything coming out of Kenny McCaskill's mouth is liable to be complete rubbish.
Posted by: David, East Kilbride on 1:29pm Mon 24 Dec 07
[quote][bold]David[/bold] wrote:
I think you will find that the westminster government is taking the very sensible approach that anything coming out of Kenny McCaskill's mouth is liable to be complete rubbish.[/quote] EH !!.
David wrote:
I think you will find that the westminster government is taking the very sensible approach that anything coming out of Kenny McCaskill's mouth is liable to be complete rubbish.
EH !!.
Posted by: TheGlaswegian, Edinburgh on 1:32pm Mon 24 Dec 07
Rab Jones, guns allow people to assault others anonymously. if you can't accept that there's more risk to people if airguns aren't banned then no sweat. I'm not going to try to teach a pig to sing...
Rab Jones, guns allow people to assault others anonymously. if you can't accept that there's more risk to people if airguns aren't banned then no sweat. I'm not going to try to teach a pig to sing...
Posted by: Watchman, North Lanarkshire on 1:39pm Mon 24 Dec 07
Sam, the point I am making is that banning them isnt going to achieve anything, I agree the Dunblane and Hungerford tragedies were caused by legally held weapons since the ban firearms incidents have increased and the weapons are all by definition illegal.
Ban airguns and that wont stop the ned on the scheme high or stoned taking potshots at someone or something they shouldnt.
Sam, the point I am making is that banning them isnt going to achieve anything, I agree the Dunblane and Hungerford tragedies were caused by legally held weapons since the ban firearms incidents have increased and the weapons are all by definition illegal.
Ban airguns and that wont stop the ned on the scheme high or stoned taking potshots at someone or something they shouldnt.
Posted by: Rab Jones, Pollok # on 2:00pm Mon 24 Dec 07
[quote][bold]TheGlaswegian[/bold] wrote:
Rab Jones, guns allow people to assault others anonymously. if you can't accept that there's more risk to people if airguns aren't banned then no sweat. I'm not going to try to teach a pig to sing... [/quote] How many people were killed by knives last year?
How many people were killed by airguns last year?
Knives also allow people to assault one another IFIN THE WRONG HANDS, DOH! But I'm not going to teach an ar$e how to speak French.
TheGlaswegian wrote:
Rab Jones, guns allow people to assault others anonymously. if you can't accept that there's more risk to people if airguns aren't banned then no sweat. I'm not going to try to teach a pig to sing...
How many people were killed by knives last year?
How many people were killed by airguns last year?
Knives also allow people to assault one another IFIN THE WRONG HANDS, DOH! But I'm not going to teach an ar$e how to speak French.
Posted by: steve, perth on 2:10pm Mon 24 Dec 07
[quote][bold]sam[/bold] wrote:
[quote][bold]Watchman[/bold] wrote: Would banning airweapons actually achieve anything or is it just another knee jerk reaction ? After Dunblane handguns were banned, has that actually reduced the number of firearms incidents in Scotland, how many people have been killed in the last couple of years by handguns which are already illegal ? The idiots who take delight in firing air weapons at human beings are the cause of the problem not the weapons themselves and while I would support stronger gun control surely its a much bigger problem in society which isnt going to be fixed by a "unilateral" Scottish ban ? [/quote] Watchman, the post dunblane banning of handguns was to prevent the slaughter of people by LEGALLY held handguns. You'll find that if you open your eyes that Dunblane and previously Hungerford were carried out by nutters who had a large cache of LEGALLY held weapons. Ileagally held guns, of whatever type, are another matter all together. [/quote] wrong, the people who carried out these attrocities had there firearms certificates removed before they carried out the shootings, it was a failing of the police as they did not remove the firearms from them as soon as the certificate was revoked. On an other point both of these people were reported to police by members of there club as unsutible to own firearms.
Airguns should not be banned there are far more reasons to own an airgun that there is to own say, a golf club a golf club you can play golf with an air gun can be used for target shooting for pest control, crop protection just to name a few
glof clubs are responsible for more deaths than air guns therefore it would make more sense to ban golf clubs. Out of the 3 deaths and 1000's injured did anyone bother to think that many of these injures happen while carrying out a legal activity e.g. finger caught in barrel, gun droped on foot etc. and 2 out of those three deaths were suicides. Bans don't work there is now far more hand gun crime that there was pre-ban, laws need to be enforced, the minimum sentence for a firearms offence is 5 years in prision recently someone who took a pot shot at someone got 225 hours community service, I firmly belive if he got 5 years and so did everyone who commits these crimes got hte same the number of crimes commited would drop like a stone. the people who belive that airguns are "high powered" (there is more power in a cricket ball throwen by a child) and should be banned don't have a clue what they are talking about and have been brainwashed by the press, I say to anyone who wants them banned should go to an airgun club and learn about the sport before they scream ban them.
sam wrote:
Watchman wrote: Would banning airweapons actually achieve anything or is it just another knee jerk reaction ? After Dunblane handguns were banned, has that actually reduced the number of firearms incidents in Scotland, how many people have been killed in the last couple of years by handguns which are already illegal ? The idiots who take delight in firing air weapons at human beings are the cause of the problem not the weapons themselves and while I would support stronger gun control surely its a much bigger problem in society which isnt going to be fixed by a "unilateral" Scottish ban ?
Watchman, the post dunblane banning of handguns was to prevent the slaughter of people by LEGALLY held handguns. You'll find that if you open your eyes that Dunblane and previously Hungerford were carried out by nutters who had a large cache of LEGALLY held weapons. Ileagally held guns, of whatever type, are another matter all together.
wrong, the people who carried out these attrocities had there firearms certificates removed before they carried out the shootings, it was a failing of the police as they did not remove the firearms from them as soon as the certificate was revoked. On an other point both of these people were reported to police by members of there club as unsutible to own firearms.
Airguns should not be banned there are far more reasons to own an airgun that there is to own say, a golf club a golf club you can play golf with an air gun can be used for target shooting for pest control, crop protection just to name a few
glof clubs are responsible for more deaths than air guns therefore it would make more sense to ban golf clubs. Out of the 3 deaths and 1000's injured did anyone bother to think that many of these injures happen while carrying out a legal activity e.g. finger caught in barrel, gun droped on foot etc. and 2 out of those three deaths were suicides. Bans don't work there is now far more hand gun crime that there was pre-ban, laws need to be enforced, the minimum sentence for a firearms offence is 5 years in prision recently someone who took a pot shot at someone got 225 hours community service, I firmly belive if he got 5 years and so did everyone who commits these crimes got hte same the number of crimes commited would drop like a stone. the people who belive that airguns are "high powered" (there is more power in a cricket ball throwen by a child) and should be banned don't have a clue what they are talking about and have been brainwashed by the press, I say to anyone who wants them banned should go to an airgun club and learn about the sport before they scream ban them.
Posted by: steve, perth on 2:11pm Mon 24 Dec 07
[quote][bold]sam[/bold] wrote:
[quote][bold]Watchman[/bold] wrote: Would banning airweapons actually achieve anything or is it just another knee jerk reaction ? After Dunblane handguns were banned, has that actually reduced the number of firearms incidents in Scotland, how many people have been killed in the last couple of years by handguns which are already illegal ? The idiots who take delight in firing air weapons at human beings are the cause of the problem not the weapons themselves and while I would support stronger gun control surely its a much bigger problem in society which isnt going to be fixed by a \"unilateral\" Scottish ban ? [/quote] Watchman, the post dunblane banning of handguns was to prevent the slaughter of people by LEGALLY held handguns. You\'ll find that if you open your eyes that Dunblane and previously Hungerford were carried out by nutters who had a large cache of LEGALLY held weapons. Ileagally held guns, of whatever type, are another matter all together. [/quote] wrong, the people who carried out these attrocities had there firearms certificates removed before they carried out the shootings, it was a failing of the police as they did not remove the firearms from them as soon as the certificate was revoked. On an other point both of these people were reported to police by members of there club as unsutible to own firearms.
Airguns should not be banned there are far more reasons to own an airgun that there is to own say, a golf club a golf club you can play golf with an air gun can be used for target shooting for pest control, crop protection just to name a few
glof clubs are responsible for more deaths than air guns therefore it would make more sense to ban golf clubs. Out of the 3 deaths and 1000's injured did anyone bother to think that many of these injures happen while carrying out a legal activity e.g. finger caught in barrel, gun droped on foot etc. and 2 out of those three deaths were suicides. Bans don't work there is now far more hand gun crime that there was pre-ban, laws need to be enforced, the minimum sentence for a firearms offence is 5 years in prision recently someone who took a pot shot at someone got 225 hours community service, I firmly belive if he got 5 years and so did everyone who commits these crimes got hte same the number of crimes commited would drop like a stone. the people who belive that airguns are "high powered" (there is more power in a cricket ball throwen by a child) and should be banned don't have a clue what they are talking about and have been brainwashed by the press, I say to anyone who wants them banned should go to an airgun club and learn about the sport before they scream ban them.
sam wrote:
Watchman wrote: Would banning airweapons actually achieve anything or is it just another knee jerk reaction ? After Dunblane handguns were banned, has that actually reduced the number of firearms incidents in Scotland, how many people have been killed in the last couple of years by handguns which are already illegal ? The idiots who take delight in firing air weapons at human beings are the cause of the problem not the weapons themselves and while I would support stronger gun control surely its a much bigger problem in society which isnt going to be fixed by a \"unilateral\" Scottish ban ?
Watchman, the post dunblane banning of handguns was to prevent the slaughter of people by LEGALLY held handguns. You\'ll find that if you open your eyes that Dunblane and previously Hungerford were carried out by nutters who had a large cache of LEGALLY held weapons. Ileagally held guns, of whatever type, are another matter all together.
wrong, the people who carried out these attrocities had there firearms certificates removed before they carried out the shootings, it was a failing of the police as they did not remove the firearms from them as soon as the certificate was revoked. On an other point both of these people were reported to police by members of there club as unsutible to own firearms.
Airguns should not be banned there are far more reasons to own an airgun that there is to own say, a golf club a golf club you can play golf with an air gun can be used for target shooting for pest control, crop protection just to name a few
glof clubs are responsible for more deaths than air guns therefore it would make more sense to ban golf clubs. Out of the 3 deaths and 1000's injured did anyone bother to think that many of these injures happen while carrying out a legal activity e.g. finger caught in barrel, gun droped on foot etc. and 2 out of those three deaths were suicides. Bans don't work there is now far more hand gun crime that there was pre-ban, laws need to be enforced, the minimum sentence for a firearms offence is 5 years in prision recently someone who took a pot shot at someone got 225 hours community service, I firmly belive if he got 5 years and so did everyone who commits these crimes got hte same the number of crimes commited would drop like a stone. the people who belive that airguns are "high powered" (there is more power in a cricket ball throwen by a child) and should be banned don't have a clue what they are talking about and have been brainwashed by the press, I say to anyone who wants them banned should go to an airgun club and learn about the sport before they scream ban them.
Posted by: TheGlaswegian, Edinburgh on 2:58pm Mon 24 Dec 07
Rab Jones[quote]I'm not going to teach an ar$e how to speak French[/quote]
LOL. Your best post!
FYI, "Never try to teach a pig to sing . . .because it wastes your time and annoys the pig", Robert Heinlein, Time Enough for Love.
Then Rab's:-
I'm not going to teach an ar$e how to speak French... it's much too smart for me and I like it better when it farts, Rab, Pollock. LOL
Rab Jones
I'm not going to teach an ar$e how to speak French
LOL. Your best post!
FYI, "Never try to teach a pig to sing . . .because it wastes your time and annoys the pig", Robert Heinlein, Time Enough for Love.
Then Rab's:-
I'm not going to teach an ar$e how to speak French... it's much too smart for me and I like it better when it farts, Rab, Pollock. LOL
Posted by: Kinghob on 6:41pm Mon 24 Dec 07
Man there have been some really stupid comments here.
The labour lovers that come on in their (non) droves to say 'hear hear' when another labour style numpty says 'run the country and forget about air guns' are exceptionally sad people and I am proud we don't have their favoured inept amateurs in government in Scotland.
Man there have been some really stupid comments here.
The labour lovers that come on in their (non) droves to say 'hear hear' when another labour style numpty says 'run the country and forget about air guns' are exceptionally sad people and I am proud we don't have their favoured inept amateurs in government in Scotland.
Posted by: maragdubh, lewis on 9:15pm Mon 24 Dec 07
[quote][bold]pehman[/bold] wrote:
Perhaps if we were to redefine what FIRE ARMS are then AIR GUNS could be removed to an other catagory. Is an air gun a fire arm ?[/quote] Why don't you stand in front of one and then ask the same question.
the airguns made today are very powerfull. why not make a personal field test. I will await your report.
pehman wrote:
Perhaps if we were to redefine what FIRE ARMS are then AIR GUNS could be removed to an other catagory. Is an air gun a fire arm ?
Why don't you stand in front of one and then ask the same question.
the airguns made today are very powerfull. why not make a personal field test. I will await your report.
Posted by: maragdubh, lewis on 9:22pm Mon 24 Dec 07
[quote][bold]Watchman[/bold] wrote:
Would banning airweapons actually achieve anything or is it just another knee jerk reaction ? After Dunblane handguns were banned, has that actually reduced the number of firearms incidents in Scotland, how many people have been killed in the last couple of years by handguns which are already illegal ? The idiots who take delight in firing air weapons at human beings are the cause of the problem not the weapons themselves and while I would support stronger gun control surely its a much bigger problem in society which isnt going to be fixed by a "unilateral" Scottish ban ? [/quote] Well I can agree that it is not weapon that kill but the person who pulled the trigger, ot would be great if those trigger pullers could be banned, culled or put on a dessert island. Im afraid the easier option is banning the weapons.
Watchman wrote:
Would banning airweapons actually achieve anything or is it just another knee jerk reaction ? After Dunblane handguns were banned, has that actually reduced the number of firearms incidents in Scotland, how many people have been killed in the last couple of years by handguns which are already illegal ? The idiots who take delight in firing air weapons at human beings are the cause of the problem not the weapons themselves and while I would support stronger gun control surely its a much bigger problem in society which isnt going to be fixed by a "unilateral" Scottish ban ?
Well I can agree that it is not weapon that kill but the person who pulled the trigger, ot would be great if those trigger pullers could be banned, culled or put on a dessert island. Im afraid the easier option is banning the weapons.
Posted by: maragdubh, lewis on 9:27pm Mon 24 Dec 07
[quote][bold]The Grand Master[/bold] wrote:
[quote][bold]The West Awake[/bold] wrote: Has anyone else noticed that, while most politicians battle to get their opinions across in the media, especially if they are SNP and have a positive message of course, there is one who appears in print and person with surprising regularity - Tommy Sheridan. No harm to Tommy, but he basically has no party, no real credibility and isn't even an MSP. Why nonetheless do the media find it impossible to ignore him? Incidentally, if you read the Brit press, while ground-breaking things happen up here, they are routinely ignored, but all Tommy has to do is open his mouth and he is guaranteed a jounalist will be there to record his every thought for posterity! Why?[/quote] Tommy is one of us a mason and that is how he gets all the papers eating out of his hands and how he will win his case again. The real power of Scotland is with us the masons come and join us most of the Scottish Government have. After a couple of months in office they have realised where the real power is.[/quote] Is Wendy a mason? that would explain why she has not been arrested.
The Grand Master wrote:
The West Awake wrote: Has anyone else noticed that, while most politicians battle to get their opinions across in the media, especially if they are SNP and have a positive message of course, there is one who appears in print and person with surprising regularity - Tommy Sheridan. No harm to Tommy, but he basically has no party, no real credibility and isn't even an MSP. Why nonetheless do the media find it impossible to ignore him? Incidentally, if you read the Brit press, while ground-breaking things happen up here, they are routinely ignored, but all Tommy has to do is open his mouth and he is guaranteed a jounalist will be there to record his every thought for posterity! Why?
Tommy is one of us a mason and that is how he gets all the papers eating out of his hands and how he will win his case again. The real power of Scotland is with us the masons come and join us most of the Scottish Government have. After a couple of months in office they have realised where the real power is.
Is Wendy a mason? that would explain why she has not been arrested.
Posted by: Clare, Lanarkshire on 10:32pm Mon 24 Dec 07
[quote][bold]John[/bold] wrote:
"How many (innefective and badly written many of them are too) laws have labour enacted in the last 10 or 15 years ?" More than 3200 last time I checked.[/quote] John, well the one on illegal funding certainly confused them eh? : )
John wrote:
"How many (innefective and badly written many of them are too) laws have labour enacted in the last 10 or 15 years ?" More than 3200 last time I checked.
John, well the one on illegal funding certainly confused them eh? : )
Posted by: Master Flash on 1:28am Tue 25 Dec 07
The Grand Master says,
"Tommy is one of us a mason and that is how he gets all the papers eating out of his hands and how he will win his case again. The real power of Scotland is with us the masons come and join us most of the Scottish Government have. After a couple of months in office they have realised where the real power is"
A lot of good it done him then. I don't believe TS is a wash hand basin. And I don't believe you are either.
It's supposed to be secret, some secret eh? Fuds.
The Grand Master says,
"Tommy is one of us a mason and that is how he gets all the papers eating out of his hands and how he will win his case again. The real power of Scotland is with us the masons come and join us most of the Scottish Government have. After a couple of months in office they have realised where the real power is"
A lot of good it done him then. I don't believe TS is a wash hand basin. And I don't believe you are either.
It's supposed to be secret, some secret eh? Fuds.
Posted by: Los Angeles, Edinburgh on 7:40am Tue 25 Dec 07
Rab the Pillock Has His Own Logic[quote]Airguns are not dangerous, its the idots pulling the triggers that are dangerous.[/quote]LoL
Somehow I think guns help.
Just standing there shouting, "bang" doesn't really hurt anybody.
Rab the Pillock Has His Own Logic
Airguns are not dangerous, its the idots pulling the triggers that are dangerous.
LoL
Somehow I think guns help.
Just standing there shouting, "bang" doesn't really hurt anybody.
Posted by: jim, airdrie on 10:33am Tue 25 Dec 07
When will you lot get it? Bean WILL NOT countenance ANY change in legislation proposed by Scotland. NEVER NEVER NEVER!
He detests the SNP and his blinkered approach combined with his mental instability will not change this.
Only upside for the Scots is that he is the best recruiting sargeant ever for the SNP.
Other leaders would realise this and give way occasionally, but NOT Bean!
When will you lot get it? Bean WILL NOT countenance ANY change in legislation proposed by Scotland. NEVER NEVER NEVER!
He detests the SNP and his blinkered approach combined with his mental instability will not change this.
Only upside for the Scots is that he is the best recruiting sargeant ever for the SNP.
Other leaders would realise this and give way occasionally, but NOT Bean!
Posted by: R Pettigrew, Glasgow on 3:13pm Tue 25 Dec 07
Banning Air Guns, will have the following effect:
1. severly damages our possibility of competing in the shooting sports in the Olympics and Common Wealth Games.
2. consolidate government power over the population by reducing the ability of the suffrage to defend themselves against potential despotism from a government, and the government use of force over a population.
3. blanket bans NEVER work. (this includes drugs)
Banning Air Guns, will have the following effect:
1. severly damages our possibility of competing in the shooting sports in the Olympics and Common Wealth Games.
2. consolidate government power over the population by reducing the ability of the suffrage to defend themselves against potential despotism from a government, and the government use of force over a population.
3. blanket bans NEVER work. (this includes drugs)
Posted by: Steve, Sheffield on 5:32pm Tue 25 Dec 07
I totally agree with the vast majority of posts here. Banning airguns means crminals can be stopped before anyone gets hurt. What sort of vile criminals want to carry them anyway? This is a case of England stopping Scotland doing something sensible because England would have no excuse for not doing it
Scottish parliament - do it anyway and force the issue. It could have a very welcome outcome.
I totally agree with the vast majority of posts here. Banning airguns means crminals can be stopped before anyone gets hurt. What sort of vile criminals want to carry them anyway? This is a case of England stopping Scotland doing something sensible because England would have no excuse for not doing it
Scottish parliament - do it anyway and force the issue. It could have a very welcome outcome.
Posted by: Los Angeles, Edinburgh on 5:34pm Tue 25 Dec 07
R Pettigrew[quote]2. consolidate government power over the population by reducing the ability of the suffrage to defend themselves against potential despotism from a government, and the government use of force over a population.[/quote] You took tha
Politics
INDEX
Comment | Read Comments (62)
