Summary Of Responses On Adding Further Weapons To The Offensive Weapons Order

[FGYT]

Possession in private isn't an offence unless you have it in your possession with a view sale, lend or hire. The thrust of the order is an attempt to stop manufacture, import and sales. It's the same with the samurai swords.

The violent crime and disorder act actually (but not really helpfully) added specific defences other than lawful excuse. It made it defence for use in films and other productions. The consultation document actually asked if there should be any other specific areas for a legitimate defence. Education and reanactments where suggested. It's time we set up a bushcraft re-enactment society.

As Red said Hunting knives may now also be considered. It will be interesting to see what they will define as a hunting knife. Length may be a feature.

Pablo.

thats alright then they arnt obviously banning anything

though it is now illegal to import Coffe tables from Egypt


i bet they wont point this out when it comes in and have a massive amnesty for handing in your ILLEGAL swords how many will say no thanks i can still actually own it just not sell lend or hire it to Criminals any more


Oh
Should curved, single edged swords (sometimes known as “samurai swords”) be added to
the Offensive Weapons Order?


that description covers a lot of machetties and Bush style tools when is a machette not a sword ????? etc



And for the Martial arts types saying its oks we only want guenuine swords for our stuff etc

The gov said originally they didnt want to stop sports users and destroy tareget clubs for pistols so wrote up a whole exemption for small calibre pistols used at special clubs to show this good intent then promptly scrapped it and banned the lot
you might not get your Martial arts exemption at all
the only exemption I can see definatly happening is for museums

ATB

Duncan

 

[Martyn]

now where else have i seen that sort of attitude

You've lost me on that, what are you getting at?

 

[Bernie Garland]

You've lost me on that, what are you getting at?

a harmless dig about free speech

 

[mr dazzler]

I know this is not a vote, just a solicitation of opinion, but I wonder why they bothered asking the public? They may as well of just asked the 4 police officers as they apparently speak for 140,000 people.

Isnt this what they call proportional reprsentation, or proxy representation, or basically genteel authoritarianism? Thats why they go through those phony "public consultation excercises in the local council's etc, they already decided what to do, just want the public to appear to have aked for it.

Well said my friend, however it's a bit of a leap from what I posted my point was that there is no point singling out BBC/Guardian types, IMHO there's plenty of room in the woods for all opinions.

Your right of course, a healthy democratic nation SHOULD have room for views and opnions from every spectrum, and not be afraid to have free and robust debate, its just dodgy when some views are elevated and other's legally supressed as being politically correct or otherwise.

...in fact I do know why they asked the public, because if by chance there was resolute support, they could use the consultation as a political tool to justify restrictive legislation. However, if as in this case, the vast majority do not agree, they will simply ignore the results of the consultation and do what they want anway.

Too cynical? Remember Iraq?

The people who run brita now dont like elections they would like to explore ways to do away with them altogether. 4 police say the "right" thing and they are prepared to change laws, thousands show support for hunting, yet they ignore there "wrong" views. Same with the downing street fuel on line petition, and other issues which cannot be discussed here. Its the onset of totalitarianism, imposition of state dogma on the majority by the undemocratic actions of a power mad minority

 

[Martyn]

a harmless dig about free speech

Ahhhh.

Sometimes people dont understand the nature of privately owned forums like BB, SoTP and BcUK. Free speech doesnt exist on them - none of them.

When it comes to my country, my liberty and the people in it, freedom of speech is a right that I will fight tooth and nail to preserve, but when it comes to my living room, the passenger seat of my car or any other space that I own and pay for, then the rules are mine and it's "do as I say". Is that not the case in your house too?

Forums like these are not run by the government, they are not branches of the DHSS, they are not public services, they are privately OWNED spaces on the internet that allow access under ther owners terms and conditions. They are not democracies, they are dictatorships, just like the living room of your house is "Bernie's dictatorship" - what you say goes. That's life.

Back to the thread eh?

 

[Martyn]

Isnt this what they call proportional reprsentation, or proxy representation, or basically genteel authoritarianism? Thats why they go through those phony "public consultation excercises in the local council's etc, they already decided what to do, just want the public to appear to have aked for it.

Absolutely.

The people who run brita now dont like elections they would like to explore ways to do away with them altogether. 4 police say the "right" thing and they are prepared to change laws, thousands show support for hunting, yet they ignore there "wrong" views. Same with the downing street fuel on line petition, and other issues which cannot be discussed here. Its the onset of totalitarianism, imposition of state dogma on the majority by the undemocratic actions of a power mad minority

Ahhh, but they are in the best position to make decisions for us and we should therefore trust their judgement should we not?





NOT!!!

 

[Bernie Garland]

Ahhhh.

Sometimes people dont understand the nature of privately owned forums like BB, SoTP and BcUK. Free speech doesnt exist on them - none of them.

When it comes to my country, my liberty and the people in it, freedom of speech is a right that I will fight tooth and nail to preserve, but when it comes to my living room, the passenger seat of my car or any other space that I own and pay for, then the rules are mine and it's "do as I say". Is that not the case in your house too?

Forums like these are not run by the government, they are not branches of the DHSS, they are not public services, they are privately OWNED spaces on the internet that allow access under ther owners terms and conditions. They are not democracies, they are dictatorships, just like the living room of your house is "Bernie's dictatorship" - what you say goes. That's life.

Back to the thread eh?

no probs get drift

 

[FGYT]

I know this is not a vote, just a solicitation of opinion, but I wonder why they bothered asking the public? They may as well of just asked the 4 police officers as they apparently speak for 140,000 people.

by that token the other views represent the other 60 Million plus people in various sections

but as you say the Gov arnt interested so its a pointless argument as is this thread as it really wont make any diffence
every body says (even the police) it wont make any differnce but lets do it any way

 

[loz.]

Ireland needs a ban !!!

 

[andy_e]

Ireland needs a ban !!!

Please tell me there's a YouTube of that idiot getting wiped out by the firehose

 

[nickg]

Ireland needs a ban !!!

So now the guy with the sword can sue the firefighters for assult & battery, assult with intent, defamation by conduct not to mention the loss of earnings while hes in nick.
Course if there had been a ban on swords there would have been nio problem since the nutter would have just stood there with his hands in his pockets whistling a tune whilst the property burned to the ground - maybe taking a firefighter with it - but that would have been ok - I suppose!!

Rant #3 etc

Edit S orry loz that sounded like a shot at you personally which I did not mean it to be. No offense meant

 

[FGYT]

So now the guy with the sword can sue the firefighters for assult & battery, assult with intent, defamation by conduct not to mention the loss of earnings while hes in nick.
Course if there had been a ban on swords there would have been nio problem since the nutter would have just stood there with his hands in his pockets whistling a tune whilst the property burned to the ground - maybe taking a firefighter with it - but that would have been ok - I suppose!!

Rant #3 etc

Sok the ban on high explosives Machine guns and balaclaves has been working for over 30 yrs

 

[nickg]

Yeah - actually i was alluding to the Tony Martin Situation more that anything

 

[loz.]

So now the guy with the sword can sue the firefighters for assult & battery, assult with intent, defamation by conduct not to mention the loss of earnings while hes in nick.
Course if there had been a ban on swords there would have been nio problem since the nutter would have just stood there with his hands in his pockets whistling a tune whilst the property burned to the ground - maybe taking a firefighter with it - but that would have been ok - I suppose!!

Rant #3 etc

Edit S orry loz that sounded like a shot at you personally which I did not mean it to be. No offense meant

no worries

 

[loz.]

Sok the ban on high explosives Machine guns and balaclaves has been working for over 30 yrs

Is that a dig at the Irish ?

 

[mr dazzler]

No not at all, I didnt think so .
We keep coming back to the same point really, its not the fact that actual weapons designed as such, or item's that can be improvised and pressed into service as weapon's (eg fire hose's) are present. What is more significant, and what modern liberal culture absolutely and utterly fails to deal with, is the motivation or intent that someone display's. They cannot compel someone to change there values or moral framework (ie enforced collectivism) just by passing the latest knee jerk "pseudo populist" law, human nature isnt that rosy and utiopian. EG as in Ireland, If someone wants to fight the govt with sufficient commitment and determination, then any weapon wil do wether it was legal/banned/licensed/registered/approved or otherwise. There motivation informs there action, they arent going to play by marquiss of queensbery rules are they Just like on the road's, even though the law says if you drive you need tax/insurance/mot etc, a criminal (who by definition thinks themself above the law and so ignore's it) wont be at all bothered, its the least of there worries, they'll take there chances. And even then the risk's are lower now because the penalties for crime are laughable in many instace's.

 

[FGYT]

Is that a dig at the Irish ?

no a Dig a the laws and terrorists pointing out that Banning dosnt stop things

was your link a dig at the Irish or Samuri swords or fire men etc No didnt think so

ATB

Duncan

 

[andy_e]

Taking a light moment to look at the story loz posted, it is an interesting play on the Chinese elemental system: Metals hits Earth, defeated by Water carried by Fire - but who got Wood?



.. I'm gonna stop wearing a jacket, I have to slope off and Get Me Coat far too often.

 

[John Fenna]

Taking a light moment to look at the story loz posted, it is an interesting play on the Chinese elemental system: Metals hits Earth, defeated by Water carried by Fire - but who got Wood?



.. I'm gonna stop wearing a jacket, I have to slope off and Get Me Coat far too often.

 

[waylander]

I can just see all the criminals who use this type of thing to commit a crime running to the police station to hand theirs over whilst all the law abiding citizens who wouldnt use it for such a crime keeping theirs, the same as with happens with guns I mean its never a career criminal who is in possesion of one. Wait have I got something backwards their. The only attacks I can seriously see this stopping is crimes of passion, which mean anything from a srewdriver to ball point pen will be used instead.