2aguy
Diamond Member
- Jul 19, 2014
- 112,560
- 52,812
- 2,290
This month in the NRA magazine they have an article by Charles C.W. Cooke on how the British lost their right to self defense...and their guns.....this is the actual slippery slope...how it was implemented, and how long it took...
anti-gunners are long term thinkers....they don't care if they can't get the guns today or tomorrow, they just know that they want them and will do whatever it takes to get them....
1903-2006.....the long march to disarmement......
Not With A Bang, But A Whimper
Step by step, the attitudes of the people had been reshaped and transmuted, such that by the time the coup de grace was inflicted, they didn’t know—or care—what they were losing.
Before 1903, there were no gun laws to speak of in the UK. (Readers of a literary bent will recall that Sherlock Holmes frequently accosts passers-by on the streets of London and asks to borrow their pistols.) By 1997, they were manifold. In the interim, a culture was lost.
To review the relevant history is to notice that there was no obvious turning point in the history of British gun control—no dramatic hinge on which the eventual collapse could be hung.
Every decade, things just got worse, until eventually there was no road left to travel.
In 1903, the British government broke with history and required those who intended to purchase pistols to obtain permission from the police before doing so.
(Hmmmm...I wonder where this is being pushed today?)
In 1920, the right to keep and bear arms—which had been protected within the British constitutional order since 1689—was relegated to a privilege, and the police and the home secretary were accorded control over who was permitted to exercise it.
In 1937, the police were granted more power to decide who was eligible for a firearms certificate, and, disgracefully, “self-defense” was removed from the list of acceptable justifications.
In 1968, standard long-barreled shotguns were added to the certification regime.
In 1988, a national gun registry was introduced and all semi-automatic rifles and pump-action shotguns were prohibited.
(Hmmmm.....registration of guns.....I wonder who is pushing for this in the United States....)
In 1997, the parliament banned all handguns, including .22s. I
(1903-1997.......94 years to finally ban guns.......and each step was simply common sense gun control.....and each step led to the next step....)
n 2006, it added airsoft replicas to the list of heavily regulated items. There are even those who push for bans on kitchen knives
At what point should the British have stood up and said, “No”? In 1937? 1968? In 1989? In truth, they should have resisted at the outset—in 1903.
anti-gunners are long term thinkers....they don't care if they can't get the guns today or tomorrow, they just know that they want them and will do whatever it takes to get them....
1903-2006.....the long march to disarmement......
Not With A Bang, But A Whimper
Step by step, the attitudes of the people had been reshaped and transmuted, such that by the time the coup de grace was inflicted, they didn’t know—or care—what they were losing.
Before 1903, there were no gun laws to speak of in the UK. (Readers of a literary bent will recall that Sherlock Holmes frequently accosts passers-by on the streets of London and asks to borrow their pistols.) By 1997, they were manifold. In the interim, a culture was lost.
To review the relevant history is to notice that there was no obvious turning point in the history of British gun control—no dramatic hinge on which the eventual collapse could be hung.
Every decade, things just got worse, until eventually there was no road left to travel.
In 1903, the British government broke with history and required those who intended to purchase pistols to obtain permission from the police before doing so.
(Hmmmm...I wonder where this is being pushed today?)
In 1920, the right to keep and bear arms—which had been protected within the British constitutional order since 1689—was relegated to a privilege, and the police and the home secretary were accorded control over who was permitted to exercise it.
In 1937, the police were granted more power to decide who was eligible for a firearms certificate, and, disgracefully, “self-defense” was removed from the list of acceptable justifications.
In 1968, standard long-barreled shotguns were added to the certification regime.
In 1988, a national gun registry was introduced and all semi-automatic rifles and pump-action shotguns were prohibited.
(Hmmmm.....registration of guns.....I wonder who is pushing for this in the United States....)
In 1997, the parliament banned all handguns, including .22s. I
(1903-1997.......94 years to finally ban guns.......and each step was simply common sense gun control.....and each step led to the next step....)
n 2006, it added airsoft replicas to the list of heavily regulated items. There are even those who push for bans on kitchen knives
At what point should the British have stood up and said, “No”? In 1937? 1968? In 1989? In truth, they should have resisted at the outset—in 1903.
Last edited:
