No, there isn't a massive airgun problem in Scotland; there are problems with airguns though, and in an urbanised society there is a perception/determination that it's time to licence all firearms.
That's it really; and it's happening.
As for England following along ? watch this space.
Those who are arguing agin it aren't doing so effectively, and they don't want to hear that. They're still under the illusion that their arguments (see cars/bikes/baseball bats ) will sway opinion.
Opinion says guns are dangerous; we all know that it's the intent of the gun user that decides how dangerous the gun might be or not.....so licencing the guns to only those users who somehow or other pass muster becomes the next step. This step seems very, very rational, and it's reinforced every single time some cretin behaves badly/stupidly/murderously with a gun.
It doesn't even need to be here; any gun crime event reported by the media reinforces the belief that gun ownership needs to be controlled.
Maybe that's why the NRA are so vociferous, but while it reinforces the opinions of the gun owners, and entrenches their limited arguments, it totally ignores the reassurances that are actually necessary for a worried society. In our society, where gun ownership is not widespread, is not common, those NRA type argument are actually a huge negative to those people.
I repeat, I am not agin guns, I am agin numpties having ownership/access to guns.
Not one argument posted here has persuaded me otherwise......how the hang do you expect to change the majority opinion when most folks are agin gun ownership ?
If licencing reassures those people that there is some control; get on board folks, work with it, make it effective and stop bleating about bikes/cars/chisels/baseball bats
Cut out those who would/do abuse with guns.
M
That's it really; and it's happening.
As for England following along ? watch this space.
Those who are arguing agin it aren't doing so effectively, and they don't want to hear that. They're still under the illusion that their arguments (see cars/bikes/baseball bats ) will sway opinion.
Opinion says guns are dangerous; we all know that it's the intent of the gun user that decides how dangerous the gun might be or not.....so licencing the guns to only those users who somehow or other pass muster becomes the next step. This step seems very, very rational, and it's reinforced every single time some cretin behaves badly/stupidly/murderously with a gun.
It doesn't even need to be here; any gun crime event reported by the media reinforces the belief that gun ownership needs to be controlled.
Maybe that's why the NRA are so vociferous, but while it reinforces the opinions of the gun owners, and entrenches their limited arguments, it totally ignores the reassurances that are actually necessary for a worried society. In our society, where gun ownership is not widespread, is not common, those NRA type argument are actually a huge negative to those people.
I repeat, I am not agin guns, I am agin numpties having ownership/access to guns.
Not one argument posted here has persuaded me otherwise......how the hang do you expect to change the majority opinion when most folks are agin gun ownership ?
If licencing reassures those people that there is some control; get on board folks, work with it, make it effective and stop bleating about bikes/cars/chisels/baseball bats
Cut out those who would/do abuse with guns.
M