From: Edward Beck, [EMAIL PROTECTED] >First of all, it is the duty of every FAC holder to do >what they can to own the guns they wish to own for lawful >purposes. If that means you have to become a race starter, >vet, hunter, collector or whatever to own a pistol on >exemption, that is what you must do rather than complain >about the situation. Very well written, they're "generally prohibited" (very hard to get, but not impossible to get) rather than banned (totally prohibited). How can normal civilians become crown servants? The crown servant clause is a potentially interesting loophole in the Acts. Can parish police carry guns? MPs can, I think? Who else is a crown servant? Forestry Commission are Crown Servants? And the Queen's gamekeepers and her farm staff etc.? Who else? > >The British shooting team have demonstrated a good reason >for obtaining an authority from the Secretary of State to >possess prohibited weapons - for competition. That is a vital start in the pistol shooting argument. It'll set a very important legal precedent in justifying pistols in the future. Who cares what licence you get, it's only a different title (e.g. Section 1 or Section 5). It's getting the licence that's the important part! > >The current position for having a Section 5 has always >been restricted to some business, military, police or >heritage purpose since the Home Office took it over in >the sixties. The granting of an authority for competition >is breaking new ground. Not only should the lucky >recipients use it and compete, they would be lawfully >entitled to have their expiration and subsequent refusal >to renew Judicially Reviewed. This would result in a >precedent being set for the grant of Section 5 authorities >for training and competition purposes which would deservedly >weaken the underlying excuse for the ban in the first place. >It would be better still if they actually won. Very well said, and very important too! It would set a legal precedent for granting Section 5 licences! You can get Section 5 ammo (expanding ammo) on normal FACs, so why not get the gun too without too much hassle? > >Do not forget Justice For Shooters have cases running in >both the ECHR and the ECJ with a 70% chance of having both >the 1997 and 1988 bans struck down. Sulking about the >situation will acheive nothing, supporting our competitors >and helping them to help us all, is infinitely more beneficial. And everyone should at least try to help too! -- Edward Beck Cybershooters website: http://www.cybershooters.org List admin: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___________________________________________________________ T O P I C A The Email You Want. http://www.topica.com/t/16 Newsletters, Tips and Discussions on Your Favorite Topics
