Anti gun nuts pop out of the woodwork again

WHY WAS A THIRD MANIAC FREE TO KILL?

A third maniac was not 'free to kill'. Killing is against the law and he committed a criminal act. He didn't do it because he had access to guns, he did it because something was wrong in his head.

ANTI-GUN campaigners have accused the Government of ignoring warnings they made two years ago that could have helped prevent Michael Atherton from killing three people.
Members of the Gun Control Network told MPs on the Home Affairs Committee looking into firearms law in 2010 that urgent changes were needed. It followed Derrick Bird’s killing spree across Cumbria which left 12 dead in June 2010 and the gun rampage of Raoul Moat on Tyneside a month later.
The MPs agreed to “explore” their proposals, which had significantly cut domestic gun violence in other countries. Despite that, no change to the law was made.

Deaths and injuries involving legally owned firearms are very rare in England, yet you wouldn't know that because every time there is an incident it gets so hyped up by the media that is worries the sheep. Every time something like this happens, the anti gun lobby pop out of the woodwork and demand that legal gun owners like myself and others face a new raft of restrictions and bans.

Britain already has the most draconian gun laws in the world, way beyond what could really be deemed necessary. Every British citizen has had all means of armed self defence taken from them by the Government; not just firearms but anything that could be used in defence is illegal to carry.

Apart from the odd isolated incident, the only guns used to attack people are illegally owned ones. Illegal guns in the hands of criminals who use them against defenceless citizens.

The proposed changes included police interviews with current or ex-spouses and partners of anyone applying for a firearms licence, to ensure anyone guilty of domestic abuse would be blocked from getting a gun.

Anyone guilty (under law) of domestic abuse will have a record with the police and will not be granted a firearms licence. Approaching an ex-spouse or partner will not guarantee accurate information. Such a person may harbour bitter resentment to their ex and may use the opportunity to do them a mischief.

It has emerged that Atherton was allowed to keep an arsenal of six weapons (Six does not make an arsenal) despite a long history of domestic violence.
Durham Police confirmed they attended four domestic incidents at their home in Horden between 2002 and 2004.
His guns were taken off him in 2008 after police were told he had made threats to kill himself. But he denied it and the guns were returned.

If all this is true and documented then it would suggest a failing on the part of the police, not an excuse to ramp up restrictions on everyone else

Nick Herbert, Criminal Justice Minister, is to meet with the GCN, which was set up after the Dunblane massacre in 1996. Gill Marshall-Andrews at GCN said: “Every year we get a killing like this and the Government response is weak. 

I'm sorry but every year is not all that often in the grand scheme of things, and if you look at the stats for gun deaths, it's also a lie.

I know, I know, if it was my [insert family member] etc, etc...

The Government do not approach every single murder in the country with a strong response. Unfortunately murders occasionally happen. Only a tiny fraction of legally held firearms are ever used in a crime. The large majority of legal guns are used for their intended sporting or work purposes

We will be pushing for a much more rigorous firearms licensing process.” GCN also wants the firearms licence fee raised from £50 to £250.

Why? What could possibly justify that? Do you only trust rich people with guns? Do you want to price plebs like me out of shooting because you think I'm too stupid to handle a firearm?

And we all know it won't stop at 250 quid. The next time something goes wrong it will have to be raised again won't it?