Conference vmsnet::hunting$note:hunting

    	Rick,
      Very good thought, but I had always thought that the Bill of Rights
    was put there forever. The way our judicial system is set up anything
    can be challenged, in some ways this makes our country great. I
    think the problem lies with people who think they don't need something
    so why should anybody else, when the whole time they should be minding
    their own business and stop worrying about others. Maybe they think
    this makes them powerful, that they are in control, probably because
    they can't control anything else. They are very narrow minded. All
    we can do is stick together and try and get some of them to cross
    the line to our side. I would think if we tried to get a "permanent"
    right to own we would then start to slide to a totalitarion gov't
    and everybody would want some kind of "permanent" law. But if there
    was one law I would like to see that would leave something on a
    permanent basis, that would be it, THE RIGHT TO KEEP AND BEAR ARMS.
    							Bret

    
    I read in Firearms Conference somewhere, (looked but couldn't find it)
    that the 9th amendment to the constitution guarantees that none of the
    US Constitution can be retracted.
    
    As much as I despise restriction, they can never forbid ownership of
    firearms.

    I believe Pennsylvania has a nice version in their state constitution
    
    "The right of the citizen to keep and bear arms shall not be
    questioned."
    
    This way everytime some anti brings it up in the House the motion
    is rejected by point of law.                                     
    
    Bill

    O.K. Now that some of you feel comfortable thinking that you
    will be always guaranteed the right to keep and bear arms,
    think about this for a second:
    
    Many states are banning different models of firearms, how are you
    going to feel when they outlaw your favorite rifle that you hunt
    large game with or your small game rifles that have a capacity
    larger than "X" rounds.
    
    For a long time now many handgun owners have been trying to fight
    a battle against the ANTI'S and have limited support from many
    hunters who feel that they wont go after the shotguns and rifles
    which they use.
    
    Many hunters have even hurt the right to keep and bear arms by
    spouting off at the mouth about how bad assault rifles were even
    when they didn't know the difference of a semi vs. an auto.
    
    Seems as though many people beleive in the one sided media reporting
    and they don't take the time to look into the real truth of what
    is happening if they think it isn't going to affect what they
    presently do.
    
    Maybe soon those Hunters who have voiced against ownership of certain
    firearms will wake up and find out that ultimately they are destroying
    their own rights to keep and bear arms!
    
    
    George

    
    re about not recinding the constitution. This may be false. Remember (
    sorry don't recall amendmant numbers) prohibition. It was an amendmant
    that it was illegal to drink. Then they passed another amendmant making
    the previous amendmant void (clear?). They repealed an amendmant by 
    passing one.
    
    --Bob

    	That's because an amendment cannot be removed, voiding it with
    another amendment is the only method available.
    	If any of you still believe that the anti gun laws being proposed
    won't affect your weapons, or your sport, ask Ian Philpott about the
    progression of laws in Great Britain that have all but disarmed the 
    citizens, and are in the process of finishing the job now.
    	Think it can't happen here? Look around,,it is!
    
    		George

It just took me 4 months to get a shotgun permit...

a friend of mine was just denied a permit for a rifle because his domestic
security wasn't adequate (and he has an intruder alarm system that makes 
automatic silent phone calls to the security company ...)

a friend of mine was denied a permit because he wanted to use a 30-30 to hunt 
deer ("inadegaute calibre...")

You absolutely cannot get a permit for:

a semi automatic rifle or shotgun.

a large capacity (>3 shot) pump action shotgun

a revolver action shotgun.

a pistol for hunting.

any firearm for self defense.

Recent restrictions limit the freedom to be a "day member" at a gun club if
you might be interested in starting shooting. You need to pass a six month
probationary period as a member of a club before you can get a permit.

Permits are issued for specific firearms, and every ammo purchase must be
documented. Limits on amounts you can purchase, and amounts you can possess
at any one time go on the permit.

And, as a footnote, a senior police officer recently told me that he only 
considered (a) single shot rifles, (b) single shot pistols, and (c) single shot 
and double barrel sahotguns, as legitimate sporting arms for which he would 
issue a permit without "significant supporting documentation".

Oh yes: CO2 powered airguns count as firearms too...

/. Ian .\

    Ian...
    
    	What state are you talking about. I haven't heard ANYTHING even
    close to the restrictions you have mentioned.
    
    	Smitty
    

    RE:8
    
    Smitty,
    
    I think Ian resides in England.
    
    Rick

    	Ian is in Great Britain, and he was responding, I think, to my
    comment about the progression of gun control there. It apparently
    came about very much in the way that it's trying to happen here.
    	We'd better be very careful and fight now, before it gets
    to that point.
    
    	George

    
    Since the initiation of the laws you mentioned in a past reply,
    I am curious to know the % of decline in armed robberies and
    people being shot. (killed or wounded or just AT)
    
    Fred

Decline? don't be silly... armed robbery mruder etc are all well up on the days
of lesser controls.

One thing you perhaps should be aware of: I have seen a letter (sent to H&K in
Europe) from the US governmint saying that the intent was to introduce in the
US a gun control position equivalent to Britain's.

I repeat that means target pistols and rifles, legitimate hunting rifles and
double barreled and 3-shot or less single barrel shotguns only. It also means 
long waiting periods, mandatory background checks of criminal and medical 
records, mandatory club membership, and serious domestic security installations 
(safes, alarms etc). Permits are PER GUN and ammo purchases have to be listed on 
the licence (it is not untypical to be allowed to buy say 100 rounds at a time, 
only have 200 in your possession and only buy a total of 5000 rounds a year for 
.22 target shooting: much less for hunting ammo).

I genuinely see a strong parallel between what happened in Britain and what is
beginning to happen in the States.

Please fight - I hope to come back in a few years and want to be able to shoot
when I come. 

/. Ian .\

    	The new American Rifleman and American Hunter have an article
    about an anti-gun public radio broadcast. The subject of British
    gun laws and low crime rate were mentioned. In fact, Great Britain
    does have a lower violent crime rate than the U.S. What is never
    mentioned,though, is that it always has had a lower crime rate, even
    before the present gun legislation. In fact, the per capita violent 
    crime rate was lower BEFORE the restrictive laws were passed.
    	By the way, some people that I know have researched this and
    found the same thing.
    
    	George

Something you should bear in mind when comparing the US and UK gun laws is as
follows:

In Britain we have always drawn a distinction (using American terminology) 
between "felony <x>" and "aggravated felony <x>".

Merely carrying a firearm whilst perpetrating a crime "aggravates" the offense,
and

(a) any death is automatically "murder 1"

(b) any discharge of the firearm is "attempted murder 1"

(c) merely carrying the gun carries a heavy additional penalty.

Typically a crook who carries a gun gets 5-10 extra years in the slammer for
doing it, and if they kill somebody go down for life (they used to get hung).

So: you mug somebody in the street and get 3 years: do it with a gun and get
10 years. Fire the gun and get 15, kill them and go down life...

Now do you see why armed crime isn't that common here?

/. Ian .\

    re .14 Those and tougher laws are what needed here. But it seems
    to me that every time a tougher law is put before a committee or
    legislature they say it will cost too much money but they don't
    think of that when they want to put an anti-gun law in the books
    knowing full well that such legislation will cost more money, and
    probably much more than the tougher laws. We are up against people
    that are anti-gun and not anti-criminal. It is tough to believe.
    						Bret