Looks like the U.K. will never be able to have freedom of gun ownership now

As you should well know that has no relationship at all to the skill of the average civilian gun owner and probably not to the average LE. As a certified firearms instructor you probably know what percentage of civilians actually spend any not to mention a significant time at a gun range or with a qualified instructor.

 

Are those civilians carrying guns in public?

 

Not here to impress you.
However, you made a statement I refuted with facts,
Hence my observations of shooters at the Range I worked at.
If you believe something, prove it with facts.
It is akin to saying 2+2=5,
when everyone knows it is 4
Truth is, you dislike admitting you are wrong.

 

I think Britain could loosen their gun regulations somewhat, without many negative consequences. Repeal the handgun ban, but still keep the licensing and registration. This way the sport shooters would still be able to do their sport properly.

Gun control in the UK works, in that criminals rarely get hold off guns anyway, even the ones already legal. It works because Britain is an island, and smuggling arms into it is way harder than smuggling arms into other European countries. And you've got a lot other stuff going for you, like the best health care in the world, so you've already fixed most of the issues relating to gun violence.

That whole self defense approach to guns is rare all over the world. The Czechs practice it, and have even lower murder rate than Britain, but they also have a lot more going for them, like a really healthy gun culture, and a much lower gang crime rate than eastern and western European nations.

 

Many of your posts and opininions seemed like those of U.K. residents.
People living in Florida are ussually well aware of the many cases of defensive gun use every day.

 

I wouldn't have a problem with changing the handgun laws for sports shooters. No reason they couldn't have them back so long as they keep them at the range. No need for them to ever take them home with them.

 

Wow. Why are you so afraid of law abiding citizens having handguns?

 

I'm not.It's criminals and the mentally ill getting hold of them that I don't want.

 

Ok... so why limit the law abiding?

 

Because criminals steal guns.
Why do you care what happens in the UK?

 

Yeah... and they can steal them from gun clubs. Why does that matter?

People from all over the place comment on US gun laws - should that not happen?

 

UK gun laws requires gun owners to lock down their firearms in a safe, so it's actually safer to bring the guns home, than store them all at an equivalent safe at a gun club, where people could break in and steal them all. Especially since everyone and their mother know where that particular gun club is, and when there's noone there, while it's way harder to get the location of all the gun safes of all the gun club members.

Requiring gun owners to store their stuff at centralized location will increase the probability of them getting stolen, and in large numbers, it will create an unnecessary hassle for the members, and will to nothing at all to improve safety.

 

In the US, such a requirement violates the constitution.
Telling, isn't it?

 

In the US there are around 30 gun related homicides per day, telling isn't it?

 

Well obviously there would have to be very tight security measures at the ranges. Much tighter than people could have in their own homes.

 

23.
And for each of those guns used in those homicides, 16.000,000 are not.
To be clear, that's a ratio of 1:16,000,000 << sixteen million
Somehow, to some, this equates to a problem with the number of guns in the US and the laws pertaining to same.

 

Gun deaths in the UK around 70 per year. Enjoy your rights.....

 

Which currently is, and always has been, one of the weakest arguments against private firearms ownership being legal. Simply because criminals may steal something, is not sound reason for denying legal ownership of said product.

 

I do. Every day. And I so do not living under the irrational fears of some of my fellow Americans (and most Europeans).

 

What's the rate of gun deaths in Russia?

 

What security? Armed guards? The costs would skyrocket, so who would pay for it?

If the gun owners themselves, then it would be too expensive to own firearms for anyone but the top 1%. It's practically banning handguns all over again.

Gun owners in both Britain and Norway are required to keep their guns in bolted down gun safes anyway. That's more than good enough as a preventive measure against thieves. And it's already pretty expensive and limiting to many people. A centralized Fort Knox for gun owners would be WAY too expensive, WAY too much of a limit on gun owners, and wouldn't actually do much good.

And it wouldn't do any good, if any of those gun club members decided to shoot up some place, they'd take their guns home with them after a range trip anyway.

 

Sod it then, we'll just keep things as they are.

 

Which is resulting in more and more motor vehicles being utilized for the purpose of murdering others. Pray tell what is going to be done in response to this, since motor vehicles cannot be regulated in the same manner that firearms have been?

 

By Criminals.
In Ghetto neighborhoods, areas of intense street crime and sales of illegal drugs.

 

Will those gangs also be required to store their illegally possessed firearms in a central location? Given that Heller explicitly protects the right of the citizen to maintain a firearm in their home for self-defense, how do you propose to take the guns out of the home?