From: "E.J. Totty", [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>Just recieved the following reply from Charles Clark MP regarding the HAC
>report. Anyone with any doubts that ACPO are behind proposals for
>restrictions need only read on.
--snip--
Steve, & Neil,
Somebody, or some group, needs to sit down and rebut
that load hog wash, point-by-point.
Like for instance:
[...]
The Governments over-riding concern is to ensure pubic safety and
we believe that strong controls on firearms are absolutely essential
to achieve this. Our firearms controls are already among the
strongest in the world, and these new proposals will increase their
effectiveness.
[...]
Okay, the main thought is safety. So, where is all that time
and money being spent on the awareness and safety training?
How is depriving law abiding people, who by the way, have
a safety record far and above the government's in this regard, going
to improve safety?
And why, above all else, is such an emphasis being placed
on one singular item, which happens to have a better safety record
than the ownership of other things that have a much greater impact
on 'public safety'?
If the community of law abiding citizens has proven to
everyone their qualifications time and again, and it has been shown
that it isn't them whom are the problem, but the miscreants who
disregard the laws, then how in the name of the Queen, is depriving
those law abiding citizens going to have an impact on the criminals?
You cannot 'increase' the effectiveness of something which
has been shown not to be effective: laws that prohibit only invite their
own demise.
[...]
The Government recognizes that this is an emotive subject and sought to
strike a balance and to target our controls fairly and proportionately.
[...]
By totally banning an object which you can't control?
By treating the law abiding <as> criminals whenever they
seek to comply with the laws?
By application of the laws in such an unequal way as to make
discovery of just what is and isn't acceptable, a veritable maze that varies
from location to location?
[...]
It is right in principle that anyone who wants to own a shotgun should be
able to do so provided that they can demonstrate that they have a good
reason. It is not right that shotguns and other firearms should be treated
differently, as at present, and the Government therefore proposes to
rationalizes the situation, while rot restricting the present range of
lawful shooting activities.
[...]
Yet another attempt at equivocation. One wonders just what
deceptive intent was ever engendered by the phrase "good reason".
The English Bill of Rights ought be good enough reason for
any person who isn't a criminal, or decidedly insane.
[...]
The Government believes that the ages at which young people should be
permitted to handle firearms under varying degrees of adult supervision
should be reformed and simplified. However, we do not believe that a lower
age limit for young people being taught to handle firearms responsibly under
adult supervision would be appropriate or would benefit pubic safety.
[...]
Hearken! A ray of hope?
Did a Cybershooter sneak that one in there somehow?
[...]
The Government or course is also aware that illegally held firearms and
their use in crime is a significant threat to public safety The Government
is currently examining a range of measures to support the police in dealing
with this problem.
[...]
Hint: All men are armed with probes of conception. Some men
misuse their probes by attacking others with them.
Do we outlaw all men's probes because of the few who misuse
them, or do we properly punish those whom misuse them?
If the concept worked wonderfully before, in the British Isles,
then why not now?
[...]
In seeking to amend our control on firearms, the Government will consult
widely with all Interested parties- The Government is grateful for the view
of your constituent and will wish to take these into account in deciding how
to carry these proposals forward.
[...]
By all means, please do!
However, it should be understood that a (6) person group headed
by a person whose initials are 'GMA', should not have the power to trump the
total power of all of the shooters whose lives were unfairly and cruelly
affected by totally unnecessary and extremely misdirected disaffection,
brought about by a self seeking political minority.
[...]
Te address the second of Mr. Robert's points, I can confirm that we have
received representations from the Association of Chief Police Officers
(ACPO) about long barrelled revolver guns and powerful long-range sniping
rifles ACPO have expressed grave concerns about these weapons which we fully
understand. We have sought the advice of the Firearms Consultative Committee
(FCC) about these classes of weapons and whether any further controls on
these might be needed.
[...]
One can only wonder at the political mind.
It sees phantoms in every shadow, skeletons in every closet,
and assassins behind every trigger. With regard to the ACPO report, I can only
say is that somebody really needs to get that organization to completely
validate its assertions on every matter it has commented upon, and if any are
found to be shaky at all, they need to be attacked for all they are worth.
Mere suppositions should never be allowed to make law, but rather
concrete facts, case histories, and solid criminological data should be
asserted as the only acceptable inputs to law making, and even then, with
great care. But this piddling fiasco of an organization called "ACPO" needs to
be taken to task for weaseling its way into a self-important role that never
backs down one iota even when it has been shown to have been wrong in
its pronouncements. There is something dreadfully wrong with an
organization, when all it can perceive of is nothing but ever more incrementally
restrictive laws as an answer to a problem for which they cannot admit
there is no easy answer to, especially when their suggestions have proven
time and again to have had no net effect upon the problem they pronounced
upon.
And, rather than suggest that their propositions were defective,
and that shooters rights ought be restored to their former levels, they
hide behind the criminal's acts, and escalate the war upon the law abiding
as convenient patsies to cover for their own inability to 'get it right' the
first time.
--
=*= =*= =*= =*= =*= =*= =*= =*= =*=
=*= Liberty: Live it . . . or lose it. =*=
=*= =*= =*= =*= =*= =*= =*= =*= =*=
ET
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
