Today's Mass Shooting

Status
Not open for further replies.
Ian Osborne said:
Would Monkseaton count? Only one person died.
Click to expand...

Fifteen shot, that is a mass shooting and it was luck only one died. It fits the mass shooting definition used in the USA, of 4 or more shot, either killed or injured and excluding the shooter.
 
smartcooky said:
This is why I don't think he would have bought it legally

From your link...
"Shotguns and rifles may be licensed by applying for a certificate through the local police force, according to the government's guide on gun-licensing law.

The local authority will carry out a series of checks — including interviews, criminal-records checks, and a visit to the person's property — before granting permission."​
Click to expand...

You would be surprised how lax it can be for shotguns.
 
Nessie said:
The Plymouth shooter was a firearms licence holder according to police.

https://twitter.com/Fhamiltontimes/status/1426133902997999616

There will now be an enquiry to ensure all checks were done and whether or not procedures need to be changed.

Edit - he apparently got his licence in 2020 and it is not know if the "pump action" shotgun was his or not. So long as it cannot be fired more than 3 times before being reloaded, a "pump action" shotgun is legal in the UK. A UK shotgun licence holder can have as many shotguns as they want, shotgun licences are not as strict as recording gun details as "Section 1" firearms (rifles and handguns) due to the aristocracy wanting lots of shotguns for grouse shoots.
Click to expand...

Also for farmers for use in pest control.
 
Captain_Swoop said:
You would be surprised how lax it can be for shotguns.
Click to expand...


Each force has its own procedures, but in Scotland the only differences between a Sec 1 firearm and a shotgun were

1 - a reason did not need to be given for getting a shotgun, but, since the applicant still needs to show they have somewhere suitable to shoot, the reason would be obvious anyway. If the shotgun holder was a member of a clay pigeon shoot, or had permission to shoot on farmland, or was shooting game, or a combination, the reason for having the shotgun is now obvious.

2 - the shotgun licence allowed as many guns held as the applicant wanted. But details of each gun held still needs to be listed on the certificate. A shotgun certificate just did not have a column "reason" compared to a Sec 1 firearm.

The differences are minimal and it is certainly not lax for shotguns. The applicant still need to prove they are of sound mind, can be safe with guns and has a secure place to keep them.
 
Any restrictions on ammo types? Shotguns are notoriously versatile. Someone shooting small game and clays would have no legitimate need for buckshot or slugs. Getting shot with birdshot is no picnic, but is much more survivable compared to other loadings.
 
SuburbanTurkey said:
Any restrictions on ammo types? Shotguns are notoriously versatile. Someone shooting small game and clays would have no legitimate need for buckshot or slugs. Getting shot with birdshot is no picnic, but is much more survivable compared to other loadings.
Click to expand...

No. A shotgun certificate does not record ammo held, unlike a Sec 1 certificate, which details how much ammo is allowed to be purchased and held at any time. Normally that was allowed to buy 20/50 and hold 80/100 maximum, due to the size of the boxes.
 
Nessie said:
The Plymouth shooter was a firearms licence holder according to police.

https://twitter.com/Fhamiltontimes/status/1426133902997999616

There will now be an enquiry to ensure all checks were done and whether or not procedures need to be changed.

Edit - he apparently got his licence in 2020 and it is not know if the "pump action" shotgun was his or not. So long as it cannot be fired more than 3 times before being reloaded, a "pump action" shotgun is legal in the UK. A UK shotgun licence holder can have as many shotguns as they want, shotgun licences are not as strict as recording gun details as "Section 1" firearms (rifles and handguns) due to the aristocracy wanting lots of shotguns for grouse shoots.
Click to expand...

I know you've been a FEO in the past but I've never been able to casually amass my shotguns without completing the relevant section and having the gun referenced on my shotgun licence.

ETA - I see you clarified things in a later post, although I would correct your assertion that a "reason" column exists on the Sec 1 FAC. This is not the case here in Scotland although a reason had to be given as part of the application back in the day and that was checked for veracity. My mind is addled but I don't ever recall a "reason" column.
 
Last edited:
If only there had been a good guy with a gun!

In all seriousness though, this shows that every cop doesn't need a gun to be effective. People like Bogative talk about how US police put their lives out there everyday. All the articles I've read with regards to this shooting have said that both armed and unarmed police showed up. THAT takes some real balls. You know you don't have a gun, but you still think you can do something. Not that it matters, but that impresses me a lot.

As to the rest, even with our heavily armed society, and the citizenry of the UK being completely caught by surprise with this, there was a minimal body count. I'm glad more weren't hurt.
 
plague311 said:
If only there had been a good guy with a gun!

In all seriousness though, this shows that every cop doesn't need a gun to be effective. People like Bogative talk about how US police put their lives out there everyday. All the articles I've read with regards to this shooting have said that both armed and unarmed police showed up. THAT takes some real balls. You know you don't have a gun, but you still think you can do something. Not that it matters, but that impresses me a lot.

As to the rest, even with our heavily armed society, and the citizenry of the UK being completely caught by surprise with this, there was a minimal body count. I'm glad more weren't hurt.
Click to expand...

UK police don't really have a choice in the matter. Showing up armed or unarmed is what we pay them for.

Getting them to show up at all is, sometimes, a task so credit where credit's due in this case.
 
Last edited:
bluesjnr said:
UK police don't really have a choice in the matter. Showing up armed or unarmed is what we pay them for.
Click to expand...

Ours don't have a choice either but in one of the Florida school shootings the man\officer\security ran outside...quickly. Walking into an active shooting situation with little more than your wits, desire to protect others, and a baton is, to me, very courageous and admirable.

Our cops generally can't approach a car without their hand on their gun.

bluesjnr said:
Getting them to show up at all is, sometimes, a task so credit where credit's due in this case.
Click to expand...

I think that's SOP throughout all countries.
 
Nessie said:
The shooter was a nutter.
Click to expand...

We have no idea what his mental state was.
https://www.sciencemediacentre.org/...o-shot-and-killed-multiple-people-in-plymouth

“There are virtually no benefits to public, mainstream speculation about someone’s mental health, particularly if they’re responsible for an extremely violent act, and many dangers and risks of doing so.

“It is simply not possible to accurately and fairly diagnose someone without professional training and without extensive knowledge of the individual and what they’re experiencing, both internally and externally in their wider daily life. Trained psychiatrists and psychologists have many tools and procedures to develop the required understanding for diagnosing a person. One act, however extreme and violent, coupled with some speculation by friends and family, is by no means sufficient to make any conclusions about someone’s mental health, especially if you’re not trained in such matters, and especially if your speculations will reach a large audience of similarly uninformed people. “
Click to expand...
 
We're not seriously going to dissect motivations for this particular shooting while showing no interest in the motivations for dozens of pages of the other mass shootings ITT, are we? Bit on the nose.

And no, being in the UK has nothing to do with it, except the question of how he got a hold of a gun and high brass shells. Mass shootings are mass shootings.
 
Thermal said:
We're not seriously going to dissect motivations for this particular shooting while showing no interest in the motivations for dozens of pages of the other mass shootings ITT, are we? Bit on the nose.

And no, being in the UK has nothing to do with it, except the question of how he got a hold of a gun and high brass shells. Mass shootings are mass shootings.
Click to expand...

Why should anyone else care about the black crime spam posted to this thread when the poster themselves has no interest in exploring their causes?
 
SuburbanTurkey said:
Why should anyone else care about the black crime spam posted to this thread when the poster themselves has no interest in exploring their causes?
Click to expand...

What an individual poster has interest in frankly doesn't interest me much. I'm more into the wider sociological observation on what the board as a whole deems worthy. Or not worthy, if you catch my drift.

Also, the majority of his articles show report no race at all. Some do picture white shooters.
 
Captain_Swoop said:
Apart from he went on a shooting rampage that started with his mother and then random members of the public including a small child.

Of course he was a nutter!
Click to expand...

I'm sure it was just gang related, and therefore of no consequence, despite absolutely no evidence of that. You know how his kind are, despite no reporting of his race. That's how this thread has been rolling, right?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom