Judge wants review of weapons law

[TJ Mason]

Seen the front page of the Daily Mirror this morning?

A nutter who ordered a crossbow and ninja swords by mail order used them to kill his neighbour. He shot his neighbour in the face with the crossbow then finished him off with the swords. He was convicted yesterday (24 May 2005). The judge called for a review of the laws on the sale of weapons, and the press and police are all in favour. (Insert scowly devil icon.)

Guardian/Observer story
Mirror story

What is it about crossbow owners? It seems that 95% of crossbows in the UK are owned by nutters with handgun fantasies or saddoes with handgun fantasies. Will crossbows drag archery down into the same over-regulated state as pistol shooting?

[Gold Flinger]

I wouldn't be surprised if crossbows have an effect on public perception of archery. Only on Monday night whilst unloading my car for a club shoot, some kids approached me to ask if their dad could join in with his crossbow!
Sadly, the public don't seem to distinguish between crossbows and the bows we shoot.

[Barry C]

I don't expect it to have any impact upon our sport. Although I would prefer it if these idiots found it harder to buy dangerous things. That nutter would have killed his neighbour with a kitchen knife if he didn't get the archery kit i would suspect. You can also throw films and videogames into the equation for influencing people too. However I would be ok if they made a law calling for licencing of archery equipment, after all it will not effect users who shoot for sport.

[Armchair Archer]

Barry C - 25/5/2005 12:20 PM However I would be ok if they made a law calling for licencing of archery equipment, after all it will not effect users who shoot for sport.

Whilst I don't have a problem with licensing, how can you say it will not affect any of us??If the licensing laws were similar to gun laws, then we'd all need locked steel cabinets, a visit from the local police (to check out your new cabinet), police checks (to make sure that your not a 'Rambo' type, even though you might have been shooting for 30 years), etc, etc. All of these things take time and money.And all because of a few mindless individuals, who would commit the crime anyway, as was said earlier and the fact that the 'general public' can't distinguish between a crossbow and a bow. In my humble opinion(please forgive me, anybody who shoots crossbow) these nutter types are more likely to want a crossbow than a longbow or recurve, though they may go for a compound. Reason being that they think they look more macho. Thats not to say thats the reason anyone shoots crossbow or compound, but films, etc tend to glorify these disciplines as killing machines - see 'Rambo', 'LOTR', 'Blade', etc, etc, etcMaybe the only way to prevent incidents would be to introduce licensing, but that wouldn't stop the psycho's, you only have to look at the gun craze which seems to be sweeping the country at the moment

[Matatazela]

Sorry for the impending rant, but this subject is very close to my heart.

Making it compulsory to license something makes it more difficult to own, and will at some point begin to hinder your enthusiasm to take part and enjoy your sport.

Already, the UK has been severely shackled by firearms control laws, as has my country, South Africa. If I own weapons, even with very legitimate reasons for owning them, the enjoyment that I derive from owning them would rapidly be eroded, as the requirements to own such a weapon become more and more onerous.

The first step in the legislation process is always to register the weapon. Which means that you can no longer just freely buy a bow, sell one or trade it. You cannot simply throw an old one away or donate it to the Club. The old one must be de-registered and the new one registered. The administrative effort required of the archer (always the archer, and never the legislators) to own a bow begins to increase.

The next step is to legislate how it is stored. The onus of keeping the weapon out of criminal hands becomes your responsibility. You begin to introduce ownership liability at this point. You can also begin to look forward to inspections by the police of your safe, your proficiency and your state of mind. If they feel incompetent to do so, they will make the pay for an assessment by a competent person, such as an archery instructor, security company or pshrink.

Following this, when the first two steps are deemed insufficient, the legislators again shift the burden to the soft target (yes, the archer) and will prohibit you from owning any archery equipment (read: weapon) unless you have done a competency test.

It boils down to taking all the fun out of owning a bow, even for a responsible and level headed person that doesn't go about killing people with a bow (or crossbow or samurai swords, for that matter).

Criminals are called that because they don't abide by the law. They do not give a fig about licensing requirements, because they know that they may not own a deadly weapon and that the state will never sanction their ownership of a plastic teaspoon, were they to assess his mental state. They make use of whatever they can get their hands on and will continue to do so whether it is legal or not.

To make things even more awkward, the type of person that kills his neighbour with a crossbow is unlikely to show up at the club for the introductory course or even a social shoot. They are seldom well adapted people with healthy social skills and outlets for their... "problems", whatever they may be.

Once agian just my opinions, although they are based on real world experiences that have happened the world over.

[Gold Flinger]

I think half the problem with crossbows is that they're easy to shoot accurately - like an air rifle - and they have novelty value. They're also easily concealed and don't need setting up. Contrast this with a recurve bow that's the thick end of 6 feet long, takes 10 minutes to set up and a considerable amount of training and practice to hit a target with any proficiency.
Plus, have you ever tried using a recurve bow for a drive-by shooting? No?
I wouldn't object to needing a licence of some sort if I thought it would make any difference. But it won't; I don't think I've ever heard of a bow being misused or used in a crime. Perhaps it's time to restrict crossbows though.

[Field Archer]

Barry C - 25/5/2005 12:20 PM

However I would be ok if they made a law calling for licencing of archery equipment, after all it will not effect users who shoot for sport.

You’d be a fool if you really thought this were true. Look at the affect the firearm laws had on target pistol shooting.

[Matatazela]

My point, made much more concisely.

Any form of legislative control of bows will have an effect on all archers.

Maybe the best point of departure is the club system, where the archery community becomes self-regulatory. Even this approach becomes exclusive. Only registered members may attend shoots etc and if you contravene a code of conduct, your membership is cancelled. If you are looking to get new members to join, this is a very intimidating approach and doesn't do your cause a lot of good. Besides, the nutters won't want to join a club anyway!

This is a serious issue that does not have an easy solution.

[Gold Flinger]

Matatazela, that's basically what we have in the UK. Sure, if you want to buy a bow and shoot in your back garden, you can. But to compete, or to shoot with a club you need to be affiliated to GNAS etc. GNAS affiliation comes with insurance - as long as you play by the rules. I think this is the best solution.

[Barry C]

I did not mean to have firearm style controls. All I imagined when I posted that was for example, needing a licence to bow and own equipment. One simple example of this might be having to show your gnas card whenever you make a purchase, and to own equipment#- im not saying in practice it would be easy or a good idea. I just meant to say that if something like this was introduced I wouldn't care less.