Amnesty nets 220 guns

astrojax said :

True, but that’s 220 less guns

fewer, tooks. ‘fewer’ guns… ‘less’ of stuff that isn’t divisible by single amounts, like ‘less sand’ or less trouble’ and ‘fewer’ things of a whole number division, like ‘fewer bricks’ or ‘fewer politicians’…

[]

Me fail english? That’s umpossible.

220 less guns can only be a good thing.

Maybe the police need to offer a service to deceased estates, to get rid of guns. My family had to get rid of a number of hunting rifles, and they were eventually sold via a gun mag. I’d have preferred to just take them out of circulation though.

True, but that’s 220 less guns

fewer, tooks. ‘fewer’ guns… ‘less’ of stuff that isn’t divisible by single amounts, like ‘less sand’ or less trouble’ and ‘fewer’ things of a whole number division, like ‘fewer bricks’ or ‘fewer politicians’… []

jakez said :

Yeah, that should add at least a few bucks to the cost of purchasing a black market gun.

TAKE THAT CRIMINALS!

If anyone thinks it is not easy to get a black market gun they are living in a magical world of plum drops and ice cream mountains.

it is a magical world?? damn. i thought that this was the magical world…

Yeah, that should add at least a few bucks to the cost of purchasing a black market gun.

TAKE THAT CRIMINALS!

If anyone thinks it is not easy to get a black market gun they are living in a magical world of plum drops and ice cream mountains.

peterh said :

jessieduck said :

Where do 220 guns come from?

not criminals.

True, but that’s 220 less guns that can potentially be stolen by criminals in burglaries.

Well I was going to make a smart arse comment about how the Rebels aren’t so scary now that they’ve (I assume) handed in all their guns but Peterh already made the point I would have been alluding to.

Instead I’ll simply say that I’m greatly heartened that so far the replies to this thread have either been in opposition or at best indifferent. I consider this directly attributable to my incessant (and political future destroying) ranting on the subject.

jessieduck said :

That would be so aweful if you think you’re only doing the right thing and you get yourself into trouble.

Happens all the time with all the crazy laws we have.

You can surrender them to the Firearms Registry, but many people simply don’t know what to do in that situation. I imagine some people might be reluctant to walk into a police station carrying a weapon.

I know the Sporting Shooters Association occasionally gets bereaved relatives contacting them for advice and I think there has been occasions where the SSAA has taken the firearms, sold them through the normal legal channels and passed the cash back to the family.

That would be so aweful if you think you’re only doing the right thing and you get yourself into trouble.

jessieduck said :

But if there are situations like that, can’t you just hand them over without getting in to trouble? If I was doing a deceased estate clean out I wouldn’t want to hold on to a gun until an amnesty came along. Or would I have to to avoid trouble?

Your best course of action in such a situation would be to obtain legal advice before you consider doing anything else.

The fact that there are occasional amnesty drives leads me to speculate that they may frown upon people turning up at police stations with unregistered or illegal firearms, even if they are to be handed in. It might be slightyl different if you call them up and say you’ve found something you don’t think is right, but even then I wouldn’t want to take any chances.