Registered User
I sympathise with all of the comments above..
However, I really do urge all those who have not completed the form to do so. There will be no point complaining after the govt has taken action, which could have ruinous consequences for our hobby/sport. It is not necessary to complete the parts relating to shotguns and firearms, although there will be those who will wish to do complete those parts as well.
It might well be that the govt and civil servants have decided they want to ban air rifles and are using this as a means to do so, as Dave2345678 says, but we can at least point out and record in writing the erroneous nature of their illogical claims and make them jump through a few more hoops to justify themselves.
As I understand it, incidentally (and I forget where I learnt of this), the Norwegian Govt has reversed its ban on lead in shooting because it was so entirely counter productive and with adverse consequences.
As for climate change, I also agree with the remarks here and would observe that the climate was far warmer under the Romans, when vines and olives were being grown in Northumberland, and also during parts of the Middle Ages. The Chinese navy sent ships to the N Pole in 1420 and discovered no ice. And yet, there were no combustion engines in those days and a small world population compared with today. So, I think the debate here has not been thoroughly convincing. As BC312 says, unfortunately we all keep voting for our own demise.
Rgds to all
A
Registered User
Filled it in to the best of my Knowlege that i could answer i think we are just getting sold down the river i will not be surprised if their minds are already made up just a waiting game now --we live in a stinking country where shooting and gun ownership is --they just make it harder and harder for us
Registered User
Looks like they are taking guns from the shooting community in Canada, will do the same here which apparently happening in the west country. Like i said stop voting for it, both sides out to get you and it doesn't stop at shooting.
Registered User
Paranoid rubbish, those cases I've heard of are all occurrences where you would fully expect it.Originally Posted by BC312
Registered User
Who on earth do you vote for to avoid a ban?
Why can’t these bleeding politicians sort out the disgusting state of our rivers and coastal waters rather
than harassing the shooting community?
Registered User
Doesn't matter, it's not a UK gov idea, it's the damn EU, but we agreed to follow their environmental clap trap.
Registered User
Apart from the clean rivers & sea's bits eh?
Registered User
That is quite easy to answer: not for the 'uniparty' (ie Lab/Lib/Con). The best method is to cast a spoiled paper, with choice remarks alongside each of the candidates. The Returning Officer shows the spoiled ballots to the candidates and, this way, one gets more bang for one's buck (pun intended)! There is no point voting for policies of which one does not approve. If everyone did this, the 'spoiled ballot' vote would win in each constituency and that would have interesting ramifications!
Rgds
A
Go ahead,,, String that bow
I have read that you must write ' none of the above ' Clearly at the bottom of the paper, otherwise the returning officer could void it or even a candidate claim it is one of their votes.
The more I think I know, the more I realise the less I know.
Registered User
Apologies for the late response.
It does not matter if the vote is 'void'. It is not cast for any candidate and that is the point. No candidate could claim it as one of their votes. The Returning Officer has to show the spoiled ballots to the candidates, in a group, afterwards. The candidates can then see what voters are saying about them.
Rgds
A
Registered User
Agreed. We have done just this on many an occasion, i.e. written None of the above or UKIP only voter where there were no appropriate candidates.
J&J
Currently looking for Baikal Makarov pistols with the following prefixes to the serial number: 98, T01,
Prefer boxed or cased but will consider loose examples too.
Registered User
It’s not really a party political matter. You had the opportunity to have your say in the consultation which was open to all.
Generally the response from shooters was pathetic. Miraculously there were enough responses for REACH to extend the review period.
Re rivers and coasts, that’s another issue altogether but agreed, needs urgently addressing.
Owns three Roy orbison albums
Politicians jump on lead ammo and guns in general under the guise of improving public safety, yet ignore the fact that up to half our kids are suffering mental health damage due to internet use, even suicide. Money is the difference.
Registered User
After a recent visit to a RFD in Lincoln, it was suggested that any lead free replacement pellet will be detrimental to a air rifle/ gun barrel, what are your thoughts on this?
Gary
Registered User
Don't get me wrong, I've tried loads, they're garbage & I'm not a fan but I can't see them causing any damage or otherwise being detrimental to the barrel,
but it's the sort of attention grabbing, lying c**p the 'fringe' youtube morons come out with to grab viewers.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote