Posted: 9/20/2006 7:53:46 PM EDT
|
Hello, Over here in the US, we read in the news claims that all guns are outlawed in the UK. We read that crime is rampant and that self defense is illegal. What is the truth? How does a fellow purchase a rifle in the UK? What can one possess? What is outright illegal? What happened to your great grandfather's Colt revolver and your grandfather's war trophy nazi machinegun? I realize this is a bit broad. Thanks in advance for any response. |
|
Hi there It's a question we get asked alot, Basically we can have firearms, In order to have them we need to join a shooting club and be there for a probationary period ( 3 months ) then we can apply for out firearms licence. We can then specify how many weapons we want and we also have to specify what calibers we want them in, For instance, My ticket has on it 3 x .22LR rifle 1 x .223 rifle 1 x 6.5 rifle 1 x .308 rifle 1 x .44 long barreled revolver we also have a seperate shotgun licence, this allows you to keep shotguns, 3 shot pump actin, 3 shot semi auto and the usual side by side and over under, any highr capacity shotguns go on you firearms licence. we also have a set allocation of ammo we can purchase and have in our homes. We cant have semi auto rifles, unless its .22 rimfire and there is no way we can have full auto rifles, All rifles have to have a barrel length of at least 12" and the rifle's full length has to be over 24". we can and do own AR's but they have to be cocked after each shot ( No gas blowback like yours ) single shot only ! we cant have any decent pistols, but we can have long barreled revolvers, again they have to have a barrel length of at least 12" and overall 24". A similar rule for our shotguns, we can semi auto's and pump action, but we ned to prove use if we want more than 3 round capacity. I'm sure i've missed lots out but someone will add this im sure. As for crime being rampant, i wouldnt say it was as bad as that we do have lots of crime but it's not as wide spead as it's made out to be. We have really crap self defence laws over here, nothing is etched in stne about self defence, but the way i see it is, If someone enters your home and is a threat to you of your family you can defend them or you, unfortunatly this means you can only use reasonably force . You could smack someone with a baseball bat ONCE, but as soon as you take another swing your breaking the law, ( you can only react in fear, and once you take a second shot, your breaking the law for thinking about it ) Like i say there's no hard and fast rule here, so someone else might see it different. It's a case of when it gets to court you have to hope the judge is one of the good guy's, becasaue it seems like all of the rights go the the criminals these days. I think i've covered pretty much everything. Regards Steve |
|
section 139 Criminal Justice Act 1988 Offence of having article with blade or point in public place. 139.—(1) Subject to subsections (4) and (5) below, any person who has an article to which this section applies with him in a public place shall be guilty of an offence. (2) Subject to subsection (3) below, this section applies to any article which has a blade or is sharply pointed except a folding pocketknife. (3) This section applies to a folding pocketknife if the cutting edge of its blade exceeds 3 inches. (4) It shall be a defence for a person charged with an offence under this section to prove that he had good reason or lawful authority for having the article with him in a public place. (5) Without prejudice to the generality of subsection (4) above, it shall be a defence for a person charged with an offence under this section to prove that he had the article with him— (a) for use at work; (b) for religious reasons; or (c) as part of any national costume. (6) A person guilty of an offence under subsection (1) above shall be liable on summary conviction to a fine not exceeding level 3 on the standard scale. (7) In this section "public place" includes any place to which at the material time the public have or are permitted access, whether on payment or otherwise. (8) This section shall not have effect in relation to anything done before it comes into force. I believe there have been subsequent court rulings that may affect the terms of a folding or locking knife...but i'd have to do a more detailed search for you. And self-defense is not an acceptable reason to be carrying a knife in public. Taffy |
|
And there's more...... 1 Sections 139–142 of the Criminal Justice Act 1988 which are printed here came into force on the 29 September 1988. For other provisions of the Criminal Justice Act 1988, see in particular Part I: Magistrates’ Courts, Procedure, 2 Part XI contains ss 133–167. 3 For a knife to be a folding pocket-knife within the meaning of this section, it must be readily and immediately foldable at all times, simply by the folding process. A lock-knife, which required a further process, namely activating a trigger mechanism to fold the blade back into the handle, was held not to be a folding pocket-knife (Harris v DPP [1993] 1 All ER 562); followed in R v Deegan [1998] Crim LR 562,[1998] 2 Cr App Rep 121. The section applies to articles which have a blade or are sharply pointed, falling into the same broad category as a knife or sharply pointed instrument; it does not apply to a screwdriver just because it has a blade (R v Davis [1998] Crim LR 564). 4 Once the prosecution has discharged the burden of proving the ingredients of the offence against s 139(1), the defendant is guilty unless he can discharge the burden imposed by s 139(4) of the Act; see Godwin v DPP (1993) 96 Cr App Rep 244. 5 The fact that a defendant has forgotten that he has with him an article to which s 139 applies does not constitute a defence of good reason within s 139(4)(DPP v Gregson (1992) 157 JP 201). 6 Interpretation of the ordinay everyday use of “for use at work” is not a matter of law but it is for the justices to decide for themselves what the phrase means in the context of the case. Therefore possession of a bladed article by an unemployed mechanic to do some repairs on his car that was parked in the road could come within this defence, see R v Manning [1998] Crim LR 198, CA. 7 For procedure in respect of this offence which is triable either way, see the Magistrates’ Courts Act 1980, ss 17A-21, in Part I: Magistrates’ Courts, Procedure, . 8–22681 139A Offence of having article with blade or point (or offensive weapon) on school premises (1) Any person who has an article to which section 139 of this Act applies with him on school premises shall be guilty of an offence. (2) Any person who has an offensive weapon within the meaning of section 1 of the Prevention of Crime Act 1953 with him on school premises shall be guilty of an offence. (3) It shall be defence for a person charged with an offence under subsection (1) or (2) above to prove that he had good reason or lawful authority for having the article or weapon with him on the premises in question. (4) Without prejudice to the generality of subsection (3) above, it shall be a defence for a person charged with an offence under subsection (1) or (2) above to prove that he had the article or weapon in question with him— (a) for use at work, (b) for educational purposes, (c) for religious reasons, or (d) as part of any national costume. (5) A person guilty of an offence— (a) under subsection (1) above shall be liable1— (i) on summary conviction to imprisonment for a term not exceeding six months, or a fine not exceeding the statutory maximum, or both; (ii) on conviction on indictment, to imprisonment for a term not exceeding two years, or a fine, or both; (b) under subsection (2) above shall be liable— (i) on summary conviction to imprisonment for a term not exceeding six months, or a fine not exceeding the statutory maximum, or both; (ii) on conviction on indictment, to imprisonment for a term not exceeding four years, or a fine, or both. (6) In this section and section 139B,“school premises” means land used for the purposes of a school excluding any land occupied solely as a dwelling by a person employed at the school; and “school” has the meaning given by section 4 of the Education Act 1996 |
|
Sorry, missed this thread. In the UK there are three main categories that a knife might fall into. There are knives that you can carry as much as you like (with certain restrictions on some premises, such as schools if memory serves) without needing any other reason than "I want to". This would be a knife that is (i) not fixed (in other words a folder) and (ii) has a blade length under 3". I am fairly sure that assisted openers and "gravity" knives fall under the prohibited items list. Later court rulings have since defined a locking folder as a fixed blade knife, so any kind of lock (liner lock, axis lock etc) would make the knife illegal for "every day carry". This court ruling is universally regarded as stupid and even the judge who made it, displayed reservations. here Bad reasons include "just in case I need it", or "the locking mechanism makes it safer to use". Really bad reasons include "self defence". The final category is a specified list of prohibited items such as balisongs and a range of other goodies. As the story goes, they sat down with a copy of some generic combat/martial arts magazine, looked at the advert on the back page (legend has it, a Battle Orders advert) and banned everything mentioned in the advert! I'm too lazy to find th exact list. As far as self defence goes, you cannot go out equipped for self defence. You can use the amount of force necessary to protect yourself but it needs to be proportionate. Using a gun to defend yourself from an attacker waving a stick of celery - even a sharpened one - may be effective but it is certainly disproportionate Hitting The rule in the UK is that the minute you use something in an offensive way, it becomes an offensive weapon. Hit someone with a rolled-up newspaper and it is treated as an offensive weapon, just like a knife, or gun, or sharpened stick of celery. On a final note, the finer points of law are not best debated with the policeman who stops you. If he thinks you're a danger then his job is to make things safe. Maybe have a polite word with the desk sargeant. Argue the toss with the courts later, not the policeman Any help? |
|
Its also worth pointing out that for hunting you can have pretty much whatevers sensibly necessary as long as it conforms to the mechanism restrictions above. I have 3 x .22LR, 1 x .17HMR, 1 x .222, 1 x .223, 1 x .22-250, 1 x .308 Rifles 1 x .357 12" Revolver, 1 x .44 Muzzle loading Revolver 8 x Shotguns I've also got suppressors for pretty much all the rifles  Essentially here if you can satisfy the following a licence is forthcoming 1- Somewhere to use it (Club member or hunting land) 2- Somewhere to store it (Gun Safe) 3- Mentally sound 4- No serious recent criminal record While its hassle its not the end of the world, we just miss out on semi auto centrefires and pistols, oh and we cant shoot burglars  Richard |
|
You can legitimately use anything to defend yourself at home as long as it 'comes to hand'… running to the kitchen to fetch your 14" carving knife is a no-no, but if you picked up a poker that was sitting by the fireplace that would be OK. And contrary to popular opinion, you can use a firearm against an intruder that is armed. Self defence 101 for England, Scotland and Wales (Northern Ireland is different, you can keep a gun over there specifically for self defence and shoot on sight).   |
It's only the 'self-loading' part that is against the law in centrefire form. Semi-auto .22 rimfire is permitted . Minimum barrel length is 12" Folding stocks are ok too. Detcahable hi-cap mags are also OK. Handguns are out, unless you want a black powder revolver Mark |
How about a broad sword or a Roman Gladis? Is it possible to use a sword to defend ones self? Or is any self defence out of the question? 
|
WRONG! Yes you can if you believe your life or those of your family to be in danger. Just because the Police keep trying to claim you can't don't make it so. I have repeatedly posted the Attorney Generals guidance and case law on this matter. There are numerous cases were householders have shot burglars and no charge was brought. A recent case also accepted the right to premption as valid in self defence if you believed the burglar was armed with a firearm. ANdy |
You mean like this?  I keep it in the drawer in the bedroom to keep it away from the Grandchildren… ANdy |
Yeah, that might do the job. What kind of trouble would you get into using it?
|
Indoors… If I heard a noise and went to investigate I could perfectly reasonably take it with me as it 'came to hand'. Indoors you can use any degree of force you feel is neccessary to defend yourself. If he goes for you and you stick him, sucks to be him in the eyes of the law. ANdy |
|
Homeowners and self defence - DPP issues further details of cases 13 January 2005 Examples of cases where householders have not been prosecuted for attacking intruders have been given by the Director of Public Prosecutions, Ken Macdonald QC. Mr Macdonald said: "In the current debate about the rights of householders to protect themselves against burglars and intruders, I believe it is important for people to understand what the law says and how prosecutions take place. "The law is on the side of householders. Being burgled is a very frightening experience and householders who react instinctively and attack intruders will only be prosecuted if they use very excessive force. "It is only in the most extreme circumstances that householders are prosecuted for violence against burglars. Prosecutors recognise that householders confronted by intruders are entitled to use violence to protect themselves, their families and their property. "Furthermore the law understands that when people are under attack in their own homes they cannot judge precisely the level of their response. They are not expected to do so. So long as they do no more than they honestly and instinctively feel is necessary in the heat of the moment, that will be the strongest evidence that the householder has acted lawfully. "Indeed we routinely refuse to prosecute those reacting in the heat of the moment to finding intruders within their homes. So householders who have killed burglars in this situation have not been prosecuted. Householders who have shot burglars have not been prosecuted. Householders who have stabbed burglars have not been prosecuted. Householders who have struck burglars on the head, fracturing their skulls, have not been not prosecuted. "On an informal trawl the CPS has only been able to find 11 cases in the last 15 years where people have been prosecuted for attacking intruders into houses, commercial premises or private land. Only 7 of these appear to have resulted from domestic household burglaries." One man lay in wait for a burglar on commercial premises, caught him, tied him up, beat him, threw him into a pit and set fire to him. One caught trespassers on private land and shot a boy in the back with 40 shotgun pellets as he ran away. Others shot burglars in the back as they were escaping. Another appears to have been a drug dealer involved in a knife fight on private premises. Mr Macdonald gave examples of cases where the CPS decided not to prosecute people for attacking intruders. He also gave examples of where prosecutions had been brought. These examples include: Householder/other victim not prosecuted Robbery at a newsagent's. One of the two robbers died after being stabbed by the newsagent. The CPS did not prosecute the newsagent but prosecuted the surviving robber who was jailed for six years (Greater Manchester); A householder returned home to find a burglar in his home. There was a struggle during which the burglar hit his head on the driveway and later died. No prosecution of householder who was clearly acting in self-defence (Derbyshire); Armed robbers threatened a pub landlord and barmaid with extreme violence. The barmaid escaped, fetched her employer's shotgun and shot at least one of the intruders. Barmaid not prosecuted (Hertfordshire); Two burglars entered a house armed with a knife and threatened a woman. Her husband overcame one of the burglars and stabbed him. The burglar died. There was no prosecution of the householder but the remaining burglar was convicted (Lincolnshire); A middle aged female took a baseball bat off a burglar and hit him over the head, fracturing his skull. The burglar made a complaint but the CPS refused to prosecute (Lancashire). Examples of Prosecutions A man laid in wait for a burglar on commercial premises, caught him, tied him up, beat him, threw him into a pit and set fire to him (Cheshire); A number of people trespassed on private land to go night-time fishing. They were approached by a man with a shotgun who threatened to shoot them. They ran away but one of the men was shot in the back with a mass of 40 shotgun pellets (South Wales); A householder lay in wait for a burglar who tried to burgle his shed. The householder shot him in the back (South Yorkshire). Mr Macdonald said: "These examples show that prosecutors take great care over their decisions and have done for many years. So long as a householder is not acting in retribution or revenge, the force used in self defence would have to be wholly excessive and out of proportion before a prosecution would be contemplated. "We are working with ACPO and the Home Office to publish plain guidance to the public on these issues. We want the law as it stands to be clearly understood." http://www.cps.gov.uk/news/pressreleases/archive/2005/106_05.html |
The set of clubs standing in corner of the room is fine, as is the baseball bat, baseball and glove set in the corner as well, along with the 6cell maglight incase of powercuts.(all on recommendation from local police officers) But for true HD then the hunting spear your uncle brought back from Africa, hanging on the wall is about as good as it gets without unlocking the gun safe  If you believe you or others close to you are in danger then 'first strike' is also justified. |
It would be 'resonable' to drop them without shouting a warning if they started up the stairs. As they are armed with a firearm the only 'reasonable' way to match that under the rules of 'proportionate force' is with another firearm. As you cannot retreat and they are by definition willing to use deadly force on you, you can reply in kind. Farmer in a recent case saw intruder in his yard, went outside, thought he had a shotgun, and shot him in the leg without shouting a warning. Police as usual arrested the farmer, Judge as usual found him not guilty, pointing out that blowing your cover by shouting a warning, when confronted by a 'firearm', is clearly putting yourself at severe risk, and in the circumstances, pre-empting the attack was 'reasonable'. However, and hopefully the situation never arises!, make sure you ring the Police as soon as you notice the intruders and tell them the intruders are armed and your situation to cover yourself. ANdy |
| Would you have to fire a warning shot, say, into the wall above them or over their heads first?. You're right though, I'd never want to be in a situation like that - fortunately we have a heavy front door with 3 locks which I always keep locked, so no easy way in for anyone using force. |
You could if you want to, but then you've handed the inniative to them… as I undertand the situation now, if someone comes towards you with a gun you can remove the threat. However, if they are not coming upstairs or are leaving the house, wacking them would be a no-no. Basic rule of thumb is that if the hole is not in the front of the 'assailant' you are in deep poo. ANdy |