COMMENT: Total ban on guns is not the answer (From Worcester News)
Get involved! Send your photos, video, news & views by texting WN NEWS to 80360 or e-mail us
COMMENT: Total ban on guns is not the answer
8:30am Thursday 3rd June 2010 in News
COMMENT: Total ban on guns is not the answer
DERRICK Bird’s deadly shooting spree in Cumbria yesterday has shocked the nation.
For reasons that may never be fully known or understood, taxi driver Bird went on the rampage yesterday with two guns, killing 12 people in addition to himself.
First and foremost, our thoughts and sympathies go to the families and friends of those who died yesterday, and to those injured.
Yesterday’s events carried with them haunting echoes of previous gun massacres in Hungerford and Dunblane.
Those mass murders led to Britain having some of the toughest gun laws in the world.
Yet despite those laws, condemned as draconian by some, Derrick Bird was able to set about his killing spree yesterday.
There will no doubt now be calls from some quarters for a further tightening of gun laws or even a complete ban on firearms posession.
There are, of course, people who have legitimate reasons for owning guns, whether they be farmers or those who shoot for sport.
For that reason, a total ban could not work. We also doubt if such a move would stop incidents like the Cumbrian killings.
It has now been revealed that Derrick Bird had a gun licence.
Unless the system has gone badly wrong, this proves that even the most stringent of checks cannot legislate for someone simply going mad.
The harsh reality is it is the person with their finger on the trigger who is a potential killer rather than the weapon itself.
Comments(46)
Avante
says...
9:07am Thu 3 Jun 10
I agree that there are certain people who do have a legitimate need to own a gun, but when you look at the three killers involved in Dunblane, Hungerford and now Whitehaven, can any of them really claim a legitimate need? Or are guns something of a fascination with them?
Tightening up the gun laws would not make a difference though to anyone with a fascination. I'm sure a quick trawl of a few pubs around Worcester, and someone somewhere could supply me with a gun with very few questions asked.
Unfortunately, these things sometimes happen, luckily they are very rare, but sometimes the wires just get crossed inside someones head, and this happens.
Malvern
says...
10:12am Thu 3 Jun 10
Biggles
says...
10:25am Thu 3 Jun 10
.
Silly point, but I just thought I'd ask (it's been a long time since I went to school), wouldn't you license a gun, but hold a gun licence ?
helen donovan
says...
10:30am Thu 3 Jun 10
The only way to do that is to ban gun ownership with the exception of the police and the armed forces.
I dread to think how many more potentially unhinged people are sitting on these lethal weapons legally at home.
Biggles
says...
10:43am Thu 3 Jun 10
helen donovan wrote:I'm not sure I can agree with you on this, and I dislike guns, and find myself "wondering" about those that seek to own them for so called pleasure.
When someone flips, the difference between life and death for innocent people in the surrounding areas, is if they have "legal" access to the sort of mass destructive weaponry that evil Derek Bird had and callously used yesterday. The only way to do that is to ban gun ownership with the exception of the police and the armed forces. I dread to think how many more potentially unhinged people are sitting on these lethal weapons legally at home.
.
Prohibition has been shown time and time again to not work, I'd suggest that the nice people would adhere to it, and the one's you worry about would find it even more desireable to have a gun in their possesion.
.
We really must try to get away from this "banning culture"
helen donovan
says...
12:13pm Thu 3 Jun 10
The easier you make it for people to own or access guns, the easier it is for them to pick it up in a moment of anger / madness and use it against innocent people (made worse if they have spent many hours practicing at targets).
Why should anyone have a need in this country, to hold a certificate which allows them to own and hold in their own home a long range, semi automatic hunting rifle with a telescopic view on it?
How can a prohibition not have worked?
We've never tried it, just watered down versions of a ban to keep the gun owning lobby happy, which has never worked because it's never been tackled properly.
As long as people are allowed to own these weapons in their own homes, there is always the chance they will be used to devastating effect as per yesterday.
MrStJohns
says...
12:40pm Thu 3 Jun 10
Oh Helen how can prohibition not have worked? Come on, remember prohibition of alcohol in America that worked a treat didn’t it? Forcing alcohol production into the hands of gangsters. Oh and drug prohibition works very well doesn’t it? Marijuana is smoked on a regular basis by millions in this country alone, prohibition has worked well in that instance as well hasn’t it?
And all prohibition of guns will do is drive the supply of them under ground, with no enforceable regulations. Then we really will be in trouble. Wouldn’t you rather educate and regulate gun use. Rather than pretend it doesn’t happen, which would be the case with prohibition.
And america is very different in thier relationship with guns, the NRA, is one of the largest unions in the world.
Vox populi
says...
12:49pm Thu 3 Jun 10
This is simple:
GUNS DON'T KILL PEOPLE, PEOPLE KILL PEOPLE.
Drugs are illegal yet we still have a drug problem that kills more than this murderous rampage every week!
If you ban things like seems to be the trend, you end up with a generation of socially under developed morons who have never taken responsibility for themselves or anything in their life.
Recognise them? - It's the "youth of today" that most of you complain about on here all the time.
It's about time the advocates of "cotton wool" and banning everything remotely "dangerous" took a look at the generation they are creating with this attitude.
Worcesterman
says...
2:45pm Thu 3 Jun 10
I agree with both of you, the idiots who come out of the paperwork, with their Ban this,Ban that, it never works. Scenario, I want to kill someone, oh dear I cannot get a gun, what can I do,
I cannot get a knife, they are banned,
again what can I do, I know, I will make a bomb, believe it of not, they are easy to make if you put your mind to it.
So all you ban the gun merchants, are making me do something else.
So on the W/N front page, 160 dead from a bomb blast, in Worcester High
st, Hmm, not very good is it?, yes but you did want to ban all guns did you not?, but as the other two said guns do not kill, its the person pulling the trigger, so what are you going to do? cut everybodies fingers off, thats a bit stupid isn't it.
Its come out that he was a shy man, and other cabbies took the micky out of him, saying he could not get any girl friends, this has been going on for some time, so there is the crux of the matter, Bullying caused him to go over the top.
So if you think hard about it, if they did not Bully him, none of this may never have happened.
And a few innocent people would be alive today, says it all does it not?.
helen donovan
says...
5:53pm Thu 3 Jun 10
Can you answer what I asked?
Why should anyone have a need in this country, to hold a certificate which allows them to own and hold in their own home a long range, semi automatic hunting rifle with a telescopic view on it?
What possible reason could anyone give for having one of these in their house?
He was a taxi driver. What does a taxi driver need a lethal weapon like this for?
helen donovan
says...
6:21pm Thu 3 Jun 10
Worcesterman
says...
6:35pm Thu 3 Jun 10
I too get writers disagreeing with me, and so do others, but go with the flow, dont let get into you, otherwise you will feel giving it all up.
I respect your right to say what you want, wether I like it or not, but you have to expect that others will not agree with you, and so will say it.
Helen if you are leftwing, and you say anything I dont agree with, I will say my piece, wether you like it or not. (But I will respect your right, to say what you want).
Now your question, is a hard one to reply to, as the Police will only give you a licence, if you have a legitimate reason to have one, I dont think that semi-auto rifles, would be allowed, shotguns,handguns, within reason,
but you must realise, that if you really want such a gun, you can get them unlawfully.
If you read my previous letter, at the end, I did say that he had reached the point of going overboard
and doing what he did, and of course
people are calling him a monster, but you have to ask, who made him that monster in the first place.
helen donovan
says...
10:29pm Thu 3 Jun 10
No-one should has need of or should be able to get hold of a semi automatic hunting rifle with a telescopic range on it at all!
Those 12 people were murdered in cold blood by someone who had been given full approval to own those guns.
That makes me feel sick to the core.
Who made Bird that monster? No-one. Lots of people have many problems, but they don't use it as an excuse to go out and commit mass murder.
The sole responsibility for this outrage lies with HIM and no-one else. No one MADE him do it. It was planned, evil and he showed absolutely no mercy to his victims, shooting many in the face. He could have stopped at any time, but he didn't.
The fault of all of this lies with Bird and Bird alone. I am not particularly religious, but after all of this I sincerely hope that there really is a hell.
And I am not left wing, I just disagree with guns, gun clubs and shooting.
Biggles
says...
11:30pm Thu 3 Jun 10
helen donovan wrote:Helen
I knew I would get bombarded with criticism, but it is my view and I ask you to respect it, as I do yours, and be reasonable in your response, after all that is what debate is about. Can you answer what I asked? Why should anyone have a need in this country, to hold a certificate which allows them to own and hold in their own home a long range, semi automatic hunting rifle with a telescopic view on it? What possible reason could anyone give for having one of these in their house? He was a taxi driver. What does a taxi driver need a lethal weapon like this for?
I dissagree with your stance, but I have not been rude to you.
.
Mr Bird did not need a gun, he wanted one, so he had one, we all have many things we don't need, but just wish to own.
.
If you ban guns, you will just make them more desirable to exactly the people you'd rather not have them.
.
You'll also increase their value on the black market, this will lead to criminal elements controlling the supply, just as it was with alcohol in the states, and just as it is with drugs all over the world.
.
I believe it is also very important to our society that we move away from this "new labour" lead, almost craze, we seem to have with banning things that we may personally dislike or find distasteful.
.
We are all different, I for example, like a good many others, have served in HM armed forces, and I, like most (but not quite all of my "ex" collegues), actually dislike guns, almost as if I've had my fill (and I didn't handle these kind of weapons very often).
.
My younger brother however, who didn't serve, used to love guns, he was licensed and collected them, fired them on ranges, and in competitions, he like the vast majority of people licensed, never hurt a soul, he never even hunted with them.
.
Guns are, I'm afraid, are mostly designed to take life, we can of course seek to control them more closely, but I believe we mustn't even think about going down the route of banning their ownership.
.
Crossbows and the like are almost as lethal, and when my younger brother was still alive, he used to tell me that they were almost uncontrolled, I'm not sure if that is still the same, but I always thought it odd.
.
No matter how sad and shocking this is, getting on for ten people a day, everyday, die on our roads ....... now if you want to preserve life, I'd suggest that as a cause worthy of your time.
.
My best wishes, and please remember this is just a website, there are an awful lot of "keyboard warriors".
Worcesterman
says...
7:00am Fri 4 Jun 10
Helen, seems to have a one track mind, I am trying to wonder why.
Helen, why are you trying to ban guns?
when you can kill with, as biggles put it, with crossbows, even catapaults, and many other things.
we also have carnage on our roads,why not ban all transport, what about all the innocents, who lose their lives, dont you care about them? many are children, who sadly never live to have a decent life.
Helen,its my personal view that many of the people, who say how terrible all this, they just say it, just as the major newspapers who spread it all over the front pages, do they care? no, they want to sell more papers, and then its whats the next news, and all this will be forgotten, untill the next time, so to me the only ones who will remember, will be the ones who lost parts of their families.
Logowizard
says...
10:15am Fri 4 Jun 10
We do not, necessarily, need a change in laws but our Government needs to look at how most of us are struggling on a day to day basis and find viable solutions to improve the quality of our lives and reduce our daily stresses and frustrations.
With an improved quality of life we will be generally happier and then, with time, violent crime and mental health issues should start to decrease (not that these two subjects are necessarily related).
There will, however, always be those who commit crime or suffer with mental health issues that quality of life improvements will not change or help. We have systems in place for these people, some of which are good and some which need improving, but they are there.
helen donovan
says...
1:03pm Fri 4 Jun 10
People don't just say it is terrible, it IS terrible.
I can't think of anything worse than innocent people being deliberately lured to a car and then shot indsicriminately in the face at close range.
Why should we all be accept that we are all potential complete sitting ducks, when some unhinged, evil individual runs amock murdering indiscriminately, for whatever reason?
Biggles
says...
2:15pm Fri 4 Jun 10
.
Are you as concerned for all the people being killed, by whoever, due to actions in our name in Iraq and Afganistan ?
.
I know this is going to sound much more heartless than I intend , but give it a few weeks, maybe months, or actually less if something happens now to excite the news teams, and the poor people killed in this incident will be gone from the vast majority of our minds.
.
It's is not that they don't matter, but except to their family and friends, they are a very small percentage of people killed on that day.
.
What is it about their deaths that concerns you so much (assuming you don't know any of them) ?
MrStJohns
says...
2:22pm Fri 4 Jun 10
Worcesterman
says...
2:35pm Fri 4 Jun 10
I am begining to think that you are irrational, the way you talk about that person.
There is a saying," there but for the grace of God go I".
And what annoys me is that people like you will not answer questions,
as to, what would you do to stop all this going on, there is no answer, so just carry on with your life, but if you do have an answer, then let us all know, come to that, the whole World would also like to know.
Dereck
says...
7:49pm Fri 4 Jun 10
Hymie
says...
8:38pm Fri 4 Jun 10
Those that then obtained more (illegal) weaponry would have only theirselves to blame for the consequences. Those that say cars are dangerous and can kill but we do not ban them I say that automobles serve a purpose to all our lives be it to transport us or goods to local shops etc. Guns held by individuals do not serve any communial or collective good and they come about
with the function to kill which is the problem.
Olga
says...
9:36pm Fri 4 Jun 10
I would struggle to say this directly to a victim's relative, but the we have to take some consolation that on a percentage scale this type of crime doesn't even figure in a risk factor - hand guns were banned years ago and yet the criminal owners still use them on a daily basis.
Hymie
says...
10:08pm Fri 4 Jun 10
Olga
says...
10:41pm Fri 4 Jun 10
Which ever way you look at it they will always be going to someones home - almost certainly safer than locked up in an unmanned club.
- We do own a legal air-rifle now and despite my original reservations (like vowing never to have any sort of gun in the house - including kids toy guns) this has been good fun and enjoyed for various sorts of targets, I would shoot something like Rabbit or Pigeon but only on the understanding that it will actually be eaten. I have a problem with the mentality that shoots anything that moves.
Dereck
says...
6:36am Sat 5 Jun 10
The fact that previously Olga did not want any weopon in her home shows that there is something about access to guns that is unhealthy and compells people to want these things around them all the time. Guns are safer on club premises in purpose build stronger rooms or cabinets In preference to the possibility of been stolen and illegally insecure in
the home.
New Kid on the Block
says...
6:53pm Sat 5 Jun 10
If you store a large number of weapons in the same place you create a target that becomes of interest to organised criminals. Clay shooting grounds are likely to be in fairly remote areas a long way from the nearest police station.
If people take their guns home and store them in proper approved double locked steel cabinets in accordance with the law they are far less likely to be stolen.
There is also the logistical nightmare that would result from trying to find space to store them. There are well over one million licenced guns in England and Wales with more in Scotland. Plus all the associated ammunition. How many storage sites would be needed? who would pay for them? Who would accept responsibility for the first large scale theft of Guns and Ammunition?
Vox populi
says...
1:41pm Mon 7 Jun 10
Rubbish! A gun is a tool like anything else. I have served in the forces and used one everyday for many years. I now no longer do that job so I don't have one, simple. I don't hunt either so I have no need for one.
Access to guns is not unhealthy - Some people with access to guns can be unhealthy as shown by this tragic event.
The person is the problem not the gun!
Worcesterman
says...
4:35pm Mon 7 Jun 10
Thats a good answer.
Dereck
says...
5:27pm Mon 7 Jun 10
the shadow of fear that proliferation of guns, 'in over a million homes' there are guns, brings. Guns should be only kept where they are used - in secure club premises. I do not think we would be having this debate if for Cumbra we read Worcester. Would locally people dare espouse the current laws on holding a gun if it had had happened here?
Worcesterman
says...
6:23pm Mon 7 Jun 10
If this did happen in Worcester, I still would not change my viewpoint, are you saying we would be frightened to say what we wanted to say, who's a bully now?
You are quick to be intolerant, of writers such as me, who don't agree, with your profound sayings.
New Kid on the Block
says...
12:59am Tue 8 Jun 10
Dereck Bird owned a rifle of the type often used for rabbit shooting and lived in a rural area. He was not going to find rabbits at his local shooting club. The same argument would also apply to rifles used for Deer culling.
Clay Pigeon shooting is a competitive sport where competitions are held the length and breadth of the country. Are you going to ban clay shooting competitions?
Shotguns are also used to shoot rabbits, pigeon and pheasants. Once again this does not occur at a shooting club.
Vox populi
says...
1:19pm Tue 8 Jun 10
Derek Bird owned a 0.22mm hunting rifle. This is a very small calibre rifle used for shooting rabbits and game. Yes is could kill a human from close range hence why he shot people in the face. It is a sporting weapon and not the big scary thing portrayed in the press. To give you a comparison the standard L85A1 used by british forces has a standard round of 5.56mm (to stop humans!) That is a round (bullet) over ten times bigger than that of the murder weapon.
A reality check is needed - not a knee jerk reaction.
I hope that goes some way to helping your fear Dereck that we live in a murderous world where everyone has guns because quite simply we do not. I think you have been reading the Daily Mail too much. Ever had a rifle pointed at you? Every seen anyone carrying one? Walk down the streets picking up cartridge cases do you?
You sir are being led by everything you read in the press - not experience or knowledge,
If you have a licence the weapons are required to be locked up. Banning everything only serves to create a population that know no responsibility. I still use guns and if I fancied one I would buy one I am a responsible adult which is my free will and choice.
We could ban all guns but not sure who is going to deal with the current "baby mauling foxes" problem we now have according to the press!!!!!!!!!!!!
Hymie
says...
2:08pm Tue 8 Jun 10
Guns need to me locked up. Yes but are they always? You can not use them in your garden so why store guns in your house?
I do not often read the daily mail so it's is daft to refer to that newspaper. I do not walk down the path picking up cartridges and I never have had a rifle pointed at me that I am aware of. You assume a lot and wonder where you got your 'information' about the rifle from? The facts are simple and while I can understand you enjoy the power your guns give you and you want to protect your continued access to them the furber the gun lobby displays to keep firearms in their homes worries many
none gun owners. On the other page dealing with this issue on the WN malvern malvern sums it all up with few words.
New Kid on the Block
says...
2:20pm Tue 8 Jun 10
A .22 rifle has a calibre of .22 inches. A military 5.56 rifle is 5.56mm which equals .222 inches. But there is still a huge difference between these rounds.
The military round has a much larger brass case behind the bullet, more propellant gives a higher velocity. The bullet itself is also heavier at 62 grains not 40.
The result is that the military round has a muzzle energy of 1325 foot pounds at a velocity of 3,000 feet per second compared to 85 foot pound at 1020 feet per second for the .22 round. (That is assuming the subsonic .22 ammunition normally used with a silencer.)
As you said the .22 is a very different weapon to the military rifle with a much lower power and very much shorter range not designed to kill anything much bigger than a rabbit at relatively short range. The military round is a high velocity one designed to do maximum damage at maximum range.
All licensed firearms stored at home are required by law to be kept locked away in an approved cabinet. Every gun owner I know obeys this rule without question. When you have been shooting you come come and lock the gun away safely.
With the exception of the calibre mix up I am in total agreement with vox populi. Banning all guns would not solve anything.
Vox populi
says...
4:34pm Tue 8 Jun 10
Hymie you seem to have a "power" issue that all gun owners are power crazed loons. I have never felt power and I have killed things far bigger than rabbits in the name of this country. All I ever felt was a responsibility. This is an issue with right and wrong and taking a life, not how you do it. It is easier with a gun yes, but also can be done with a knife, crossbow or bare hands. Would this make me feel any different….no.
Banning things simply does not stop or legislate against loons. If this had been an illegal gun what would you ban then?
And yes you are entitled to use guns on your own land so why not keep them at home
Vox populi
says...
4:35pm Tue 8 Jun 10
Hymie you seem to have a "power" issue that all gun owners are power crazed loons. I have never felt power and I have killed things far bigger than rabbits in the name of this country. All I ever felt was a responsibility. This is an issue with right and wrong and taking a life, not how you do it. It is easier with a gun yes, but also can be done with a knife, crossbow or bare hands. Would this make me feel any different….no.
Banning things simply does not stop or legislate against loons. If this had been an illegal gun what would you ban then?
And yes you are entitled to use guns on your own land so why not keep them at home
littleblackdogs
says...
3:55pm Wed 9 Jun 10
Welcome to America.
And no whinging when you get your way.
Vox populi
says...
4:28pm Wed 9 Jun 10
2 or 3 serious incidents in 30 years kind of supports that.
Worcesterman
says...
4:37pm Wed 9 Jun 10
Dereck
says...
1:18pm Thu 10 Jun 10
It has been reported that in the USA that in certain districts if you knock on someones door you can, no questions asked, be shot.
We are along that road with laws that allow people to keep guns at home. By the way for most gun owners it is illegal and dangerious to shoot in
their gardens as they are to small and near the highway.
Vox populi
says...
4:22pm Thu 10 Jun 10
Do you really have an imagination that suggests postmen will be shot on doorsteps throughout the UK in the next few years due to our "lax" gun laws just for ringing the bell?! - Sensationalist rubbish.
Anyway by the time the owner has found the cabinet key, gone to the locked cabinet, got the rifle out, found the ammunition which is stored seperately, locked up too, loaded the weapon and taken the shot, the postman has finished his deliveries.
Worcesterman
says...
5:11pm Thu 10 Jun 10
Dereck
says...
7:55pm Thu 10 Jun 10
Birds rifle killed 12 people. You say it was suited and held to shot rabbits nothing like deer. Are you so warped so not to see that was not the case? Birds legally held guns killed and badly injured 37 humans!
Worcesterman
says...
7:27am Fri 11 Jun 10
Who's calling the teapot black? you and your twin soothsayer, are like two vultures, waiting to pounce, on anyone whom you think, does not conform to your way of thinking.
You are quick to tell writers, to go back and read your letters, treating them like idiots, and yet you call me warped, I suggest you go back and see if I mentiond, rabbits or deer, I am beginning to think that you two, are so paranoid, that you are starting to see words that do not exist, in my letters to everyone, and not to you two.
Mr Ward, told us to treat others with respect, but I find it hard to treat you two with respect.
I said, in one of my letters, that I dont care, when people do not agree with me, after all I may not be right all the time, and if they tell me,
I will check to see if they are right, and if they are I will write back tell them, but if I think its rubbish, I will say that too.
So get off your perch, and stop repeating what others write about.
Vox populi
says...
8:25am Fri 11 Jun 10
Dereck wrote:Warped? - I don't consider myself to be warped but a realist. Yes a mixture of his shot gun and rifle killed human beings but your argument takes the line that anything that could kill a human being needs banning otherwise the world will be full of crazed murderers. I assure you this is not the case and a rare event and was merely commenting that the over the top sensationalist attitude coupled with calling for bans etc is not the answer in my opinion. As a member of the public I feel safe and do not find myself cowering in my cellar because I am worrying that somebody in my street who I consider to not be capable or sound of mind may have a gun in their home.
Why waste my time, you would not treat anything with respect or proper consideration anyone says on any subject, unless it mirrors your seniments. In debate you hear the facts presented then judge .. ... Birds rifle killed 12 people. You say it was suited and held to shot rabbits nothing like deer. Are you so warped so not to see that was not the case? Birds legally held guns killed and badly injured 37 humans!
Do we really have a gun problem in this country??! erm....no
I respect you opinion - thats mine I apologise but I cannot see the logic to yours.
Comment now! Register or sign in below.
Log in with us
Fields marked with * are mandatory.
Or
Log in with