Here’s how shooters can force Home Sec Amber Rudd to drop UK gun ban plans

9 Oct 2017 – Shooters can cost Home Secretary Amber Rudd her Parliamentary seat if her plan to ban “rapid-fire rifles” and .50″ rifles goes ahead, UKSN can reveal.

Earlier this month the Home Office announced a “crackdown” on sales of various items. Most of the “crackdown” is just repeating current laws and makes no practical difference. However, tacked on the end were plans to ban “rapid fire rifles” and rifles chambered in .50″.

Amber Rudd is the MP for Hastings and Rye, in East Sussex. Her majority is just 346 votes, with the Labour candidate for the seat finishing an extremely close second.

Meanwhile, Sussex Police had 22,391 FACs and SGCs on issue, according to 2016 figures compiled by UKSN. Firearm and shotgun certificate holders alone can easily unseat Rudd at the next General Election by changing their votes.

A quick look at Google reveals at least three rifle clubs are based in Hastings alone – the 1066 Rifle & Pistol Club, Target Shooting Hastings (formerly known as Hastings Smallbore RC), and Hastings & St Leonards R&PC. A BASC-affiliated shotgun shoot, the Romney Marsh Association for Shooting and Conservation, is also based on the far side of the constituency’s eastern boundary.

Certificate holders (and rifle club members who may not be certificate holders themselves) have it in their power to halt the gun bans – in fact, any threatened gun bans during the life of this Parliament – by writing to Rudd and threatening to vote for her Labour rival unless she withdraws her plans and reigns in her civil servants and police employees.

The current ban plan seems to have been sneaked into the Home Office announcement simply because someone decided they could get away with it, rather than being based on evidence of any threat or harm. .50 rifles owned by certificated target shooters have never been used in any crime in Great Britain.

UKSN urges East Sussex shooters in Rudd’s constituency to start writing to their MP immediately, urging her to drop the ban plan completely on threat of being sacked at the next general election. With the political landscape as uncertain as it has been over the last couple of years – particularly with this year’s snap poll – there is no telling when the next general election might happen.

15 thoughts on “Here’s how shooters can force Home Sec Amber Rudd to drop UK gun ban plans

  1. Animus

    Interesting idea, although I’m sure at least some shooters will have to seriously weigh up which is the least worst option overall: Rudd or Labour. It would be great if the threat alone worked.

    Like

    Reply
  2. Jim McArthur

    Voting these anti-gun legislators out of office is the only way to handle this problem. Here in the US, the NRA leads the way. In the UK, the shooting groups are not assertive enough, and the majority of gun owners seem to take the position that “I don’t like it but there’s nothing you can do about it. ” 😦

    Like

    Reply
      1. Jim McArthur

        It shouldn’t be that way, though. Being retired gives you more time to stay informed, to vote, and to campaign politically. Being older means you’re more likely to have grandchildren, maybe great-grandchildren, whose future rights you should be concerned about.

        Like

  3. Kevin Gray

    Between a rock and a hard place. The BASC petition to repeal the pistol ban was supported by a little over 21000 signatures, not even reaching the number of issued FAC and SG licenses/ certificates in Sussex alone, not to mention the rest of the UK. A 100,000 supported petition will only see discussion by a back bench business committee. None of the previous attempts to bully MP’s with threats of loosing their seat has worked in the past, not with Hungerford FB semi auto ban, not with the Conservative FB pistol ban and subsequent Labour.22 pistol ban. That doesn’t mean we don’t fight the good fight to keep the sport we love, but the the government do not want joe public to have firearms, and we as a group of shooters are far to fragmented to have any clout within government, and they know it. Government are continually making it more difficult and expensive to participate in this great sport. Fight for it, enjoy it, support it. I personally have had meetings with my MP’s and signed every petition going doing my bit, but l suspect if chuffing in the wind.

    Like

    Reply
    1. Animus

      Kevin, you make some good points. It reminds me of the old boycott tactic, which rarely works.

      Talking to some shooters, it’s surprising and disappointing to me that many don’t care about disciplines they’re not involved in, like pheasant-shooters not interested in supporting the repeal of the handgun ban, so your description of shooting as fragmented is accurate.

      To show how selfishness drives people, I often use the example of car owners, who would never give up their cars, no matter how many thousands of people died on the roads. That being so, if more people took up shooting, they’d be more likely to oppose bans – at least in their field – and their families are more likely to stick up for them. At present, most people are utterly detached from guns, and this has allowed firearms to be stigmatised by control-freak governments.

      Shooting isn’t as open as it could be, although BASC does a lot. Clubs should be inviting people every week to try shooting. Even if the visitors don’t pursue it, they’ll lose that irrational fear, and perceive guns as more like tools rather than weapons.

      Like

      Reply
  4. Jim McArthur

    Animus, you’ve got the right idea! The UK shooting community needs to grow. There’s nothing to be gained by hiding and hoping for the best.

    Like

    Reply
  5. Tom Stone

    I’d like to echo Jim McArthur . I am from a rabidly anti-gun State in the US , and active in Hun Rights.

    Don’t just talk about maybe voting against these office holders , DO it . Period .

    The only thing politicians care about is reelection, and fear of losing office is the only thing they take seriously.

    It doesn’t matter if their replacements are just as bad or worse.
    1. Their replacement will have less senioriy and influence, thus less ability to do harm.
    2. Other politicians will notice. Do harm to ( Rights of particular group ) and it could endanger their political careers also .

    Like

    Reply
  6. Steve Bowler

    Problem with getting rid of Amber Rudd is that the alternative would likely be Dianne Abbot, who I wouldn’t trust to run a bath, let alone our side of things

    Like

    Reply

Leave a comment...

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s