They have not banned it but they have put down conditions that no one knows how to fulfil yet. Like belonging to an " approved " air gun club but the clubs not knowing how get approval. I for one have no objection to a licence if it were to serve that right purpose. But as I said before , I do not trust that they don't have a political agenda behind this licencing scam. BTW that man can talk sense sometimes which is more often than our politicians who are only interested in advancing their carriers.Originally Posted by Rooti McNote
Well that's not exactly it, because airguns are being licensed rather than banned. And naturally some are sure to be surrendered. There are always people whom (for one reason or another) don't want to apply for a licence.
But otherwise, yes. It's exactly how stupid it is.
If it wasn't so tragic, it'd be funny.
As Prince Phillip said in '96:
"I sympathise desperately with the people who are bereaved at Dunblane, but I'm not altogether convinced that it's the best system to somehow shift the blame onto a very large and peaceable part of the community," he said.
He added: "I mean if ... look, if somebody ... if a cricketer, for instance, suddenly decided to go into a school and batter a lot of people to death with a cricket bat which he could do very easily, I mean are you going to ban cricket bats?" There was "no evidence" that people who used weapons for sport were any more dangerous than people who used golf clubs, tennis racquets or cricket bats. Prince Philip said in an interview for an Inside Edge programme to be broadcast this evening that he believed that transferring the blame for Thomas Hamilton's murder of 16 children and their teacher on to "sport shooters" was "a little unreasonable".
Calling for MPs and campaigners to pause and think before the measure finally became law, he continued: "I think one's got to make a difference between what the weapons can do and what the people can do."
Regards,
A.G
Reply With Quote
