From: "IG", [EMAIL PROTECTED] <<I don't think it's as difficult to do as IG makes it out to be, all the questions of who should be allowed to carry and what the criteria should be can be thrashed out by the usual methods Parliament uses in all legislation designed to regulate something. It's done all the time. >> So leave it to parliament, then. That will be OK. We trust them, dont we? If so, then you must accept and agree with the current laws they have passed, i.e. the 97 amendment? Do us a favour! IG -- Parliament has already decided and stated it in law - it's whomever has a "good reason", and in the case of a handgun, who also has the authority of the Secretary of State. There is no absolute legal bar on granting authority to a person to carry a gun for self-defence. I forget his name now (McGartland?) but he applied for an FAC for self-defence and already held one in Northern Ireland. Northumbria Police unfortunately followed Home Office Guidance and Mr McGartland had a visit from some IRA terrorists. As far as I know he is the first person in recent history to apply, be turned down, and subsequently be shot. In this particular case Northumbria Police acted incorrectly, although it is more the fault of the Home Office for shoddy, narrow-minded and outdated Guidance. Members of the UUP and DUP have applied for visitor's permits to the HO for personal protection and been turned down as well. Steve. Cybershooters website: http://www.cybershooters.org List admin: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___________________________________________________________ T O P I C A http://www.topica.com/t/17 Newsletters, Tips and Discussions on Your Favorite Topics
