I reckon a lot of this comes down to trust. Obviously *I* am entirely trustworthy with a gun, but do I trust everyone else to be? And the answer has to be no, I do not. I acknowledge this is a very anti-libertarian stance but the fact is I still don't trust them.
On the other hand, I am willing to trust them with cars, shotguns, knives and numerous other devices which can kill and maim, so its not exactly a consistent stance. So what may in fact be being observed in the UK is just a widespread fear of guns arising from a culture that has very little experience of them. I know the first time I saw an armed policeman I freaked out.
But then there is pretty much no desire for handgun ownership in this country. The only people who cared when it was made illegal were the tiny number of people who shot competitively. It's been a long time now so I presume most of them have gone over to rifle shooting or taken up knitting or something.
Shotguns and rifles are another matter. If those were made illegal there would be an outcry. You can have a shotgun or a rifle if you can show you have a legitimate use for it - that means showing that you either shoot competitively in a club or shoot game. Just wanting one at home to scare off burglars isn't considered a legitimate reason (and anyway if you used it you would be done for assault or worse). You also have to keep it in a secure cabinet (hah hah - that is definitely more observed in the breach) and the police have to interview you to try to judge if you are a steady reliable sort of person. That means upper middle or upper class, or if working class an obvious countryman. I'm not sure how much discretion the police have to refuse a licence, probably more these days than they used to, they certainly seem to visit people who are renewing their licences quite often.
If someone on an inner city housing estate wanted a gun they would almost certainly be refused. Kids can have them if they are older than 12 (I think - it might be a year or two older or younger) but again they have to show they have a legitimate reason which comes down to class and/or where you live.
I also think it's worth remembering that the concept of someone being sane or responsible enough to handle a gun is a dodgy one. Obviously some people will have shown by their past actions that they are not responsible but that is no guarantee that the remainder are responsible. Mental health problems can strike anyone at any time. So can being drunk or stoned, or just having been pushed too far past your limit of tolerance for the actions of others. The police just have to do their best. And crime with licensed guns is minuscule in this country so by and large they probably get it right.
Incidentally I know or know of lots of people with tanks - they are quite often used for recreational purposes.
![[community profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/community.png){kind=small}
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2010-03-16 03:14 pm (UTC)On the other hand, I am willing to trust them with cars, shotguns, knives and numerous other devices which can kill and maim, so its not exactly a consistent stance. So what may in fact be being observed in the UK is just a widespread fear of guns arising from a culture that has very little experience of them. I know the first time I saw an armed policeman I freaked out.
But then there is pretty much no desire for handgun ownership in this country. The only people who cared when it was made illegal were the tiny number of people who shot competitively. It's been a long time now so I presume most of them have gone over to rifle shooting or taken up knitting or something.
Shotguns and rifles are another matter. If those were made illegal there would be an outcry. You can have a shotgun or a rifle if you can show you have a legitimate use for it - that means showing that you either shoot competitively in a club or shoot game. Just wanting one at home to scare off burglars isn't considered a legitimate reason (and anyway if you used it you would be done for assault or worse). You also have to keep it in a secure cabinet (hah hah - that is definitely more observed in the breach) and the police have to interview you to try to judge if you are a steady reliable sort of person. That means upper middle or upper class, or if working class an obvious countryman. I'm not sure how much discretion the police have to refuse a licence, probably more these days than they used to, they certainly seem to visit people who are renewing their licences quite often.
If someone on an inner city housing estate wanted a gun they would almost certainly be refused. Kids can have them if they are older than 12 (I think - it might be a year or two older or younger) but again they have to show they have a legitimate reason which comes down to class and/or where you live.
I also think it's worth remembering that the concept of someone being sane or responsible enough to handle a gun is a dodgy one. Obviously some people will have shown by their past actions that they are not responsible but that is no guarantee that the remainder are responsible. Mental health problems can strike anyone at any time. So can being drunk or stoned, or just having been pushed too far past your limit of tolerance for the actions of others. The police just have to do their best. And crime with licensed guns is minuscule in this country so by and large they probably get it right.
Incidentally I know or know of lots of people with tanks - they are quite often used for recreational purposes.