'Ban Guns'- Daily Mirror Article and Poll

[Bonnox]

Problem is with these daily rags, they will do a poll then say it was overwhelmingly in favour of banning them, irregardless of the actual result, and as the old saying goes, guns don't kill people, people kill people, take away their right to own guns, they get them illegally, which is where the majority of gun crime comes from, not the sensible peeps who have a legitimate use for them, if the freaks didn't use a gun to kill people they would use a sharp stock or heavy club, like we did many years before guns were invented, why not ban rocks and trees too, or any sort of plastic, rope, metal, any blade type thing, anything sharp, fists, feet, hammers, screwdrivers....
Let's all live in cotton wool land and we will be fine, until someone figures out how to kill someone with cotton wool !

Rant over

[DickM]

What a ridiculous article, voted NO!!! Now 91%

[FRANKIE]

Sounds like the onset of psychosis

[WILBA]

Voted no. 91% no vote at the moment.

[malcolmbevan]

don`t forget this keep voting

[WillW]

Done- still 91%.

Yes, there are only a few areas where guns have a place, but that's true for most things. Doesn't mean that people who don't know anything about something should be allowed to ban it. It's like asking vegans to decide if farming should be allowed.

[512k]

No reply to date from either the publication concerned or the IPSO, barring the generic acknowledgement e-mail.

[TORNADOS7]

92% no !!!

[marci]

No! Standing on 92% for no's

[Dan944]

Voted no now mid 90's

[GATMAN]

92% no now - LOL !

[hwkai]

92

[Milkybarkid]

92 BIG NO from me

[stealth2000]

Just voted NO. Such a very bias article. There is no mention of what good a gun does,vermin control dear cull etc,etc. It just takes one Muppet to misuse a firearm and the rest of society is tarred with the same brush in the medias eyes. That is SO wrong. We are all responsible airgun/firearms users and abide by the law every step of the way. Get rid of the Muppet's and the world would be a better place. DON'T TAR EVERYBODY WITH THE SAME BRUSH. Rant over.

[512k]

Reply, in full, from IPSO:

"Thank you for contacting the Independent Press Standards Organisation (IPSO) regarding your complaint about the article headlined “How do you get fewer gun-nuts? Fewer guns would be a start”, published by the Daily Mirror on 21 October 2014.

We have now completed our assessment of your complaint under the terms of the Editors’ Code of Practice. Having considered the points you have raised in full, we have concluded that your complaint does not raise a possible breach of the Code.

We noted your concern that the article was inaccurate in stating about guns that “they're very rarely bought by people who are perfectly sane and just want to live in peace and quiet”. We should make clear that columnists are entitled to express their personal views and comments – however robust or controversial they might be – provided that they are clearly distinguished from fact. We could fully understand that many readers would find the pseudonymous columnist’s views highly provocative and would strongly disagree with her views on guns and the people who buy them. However, under Clause 1 (Accuracy) and, indeed, in accordance with his freedom of expression, the columnist was entitled to air her views. The question under Clause 1 was whether readers would be misled by the article.

We considered that readers would understand that the column reflected the personal views of the columnist. We acknowledged that you strongly objected to the statement that guns are rarely bought by people who are “perfectly sane” and the implication that the police and registered fire arms dealers are knowingly allowing guns to be sold to people who are insane. However, we considered that readers would be aware that this description reflected the columnist's own opinion of people who buy guns, expressed in strong terms. As such, we did not consider that readers would be misled by the article such as to raise a breach of Clause 1.

You are entitled to request that the decision to reject your complaint be reviewed by IPSO’s Complaints Committee. To do so you will need to write to us within seven days, setting out the reasons why you believe the decision should be reviewed. Please note that we are unable to accept requests for review made more than seven days following the date of this email.

We would like to thank you for giving us the opportunity to consider the points you have raised, and have shared this correspondence with the newspaper to make it aware of your concerns."