# This is what we may be in for!



## Phil (Mar 18, 2003)

Sorry Allen but thats' *NOT TRUE*


----------



## 460461whatever (Jan 22, 2005)

*Worse than that?*

If I'm not mistaken, the farmers in England would have to use archery or slingshots to shoot at those pesty birds. Aren't all firearms banned in England?


----------



## Tim4Trout (Jul 10, 2003)

460461whatever said:


> If I'm not mistaken, the farmers in England would have to use archery or slingshots to shoot at those pesty birds. Aren't all firearms banned in England?


I don't know about all firearms -- Criminals probably still have 'em.

I do recall hearing something that members of their olympic shooting team had to practice in another country cause the guns they used were banned in England.


----------



## derekm (Feb 19, 2004)

460461whatever said:


> If I'm not mistaken, the farmers in England would have to use archery or slingshots to shoot at those pesty birds. Aren't all firearms banned in England?


And thats not true either.

Its only handguns that are banned. You can still get a shotgun to use on your farm to shoot crows or rabbits or foxs or to shoot clays or rough shoot. You can still get a rifle to hunt deer.

You are not allowed to use a Bow and arrow or a slingshot to kill any wild bird or animal.

If I'm not mistaken, In the U.S. The police shoot you then beat you up and then ask questions and if they find out you are a muslim they imprison you for ever with out trial. And dont go on to farm land cos they'll shoot you as well


----------



## 460461whatever (Jan 22, 2005)

*Be Careful*



derekm said:


> If I'm not mistaken, In the U.S. The police shoot you then beat you up and then ask questions and if they find out you are a muslim they imprison you for ever with out trial. And dont go on to farm land cos they'll shoot you as well



You know, most rumors start from some amount of truth. :wink:


----------



## the-ghost (Sep 11, 2004)

i think that was his point


----------



## ftshooter (Jul 26, 2003)

derekm said:


> And thats not true either.
> 
> Its only handguns that are banned. You can still get a shotgun to use on your farm to shoot crows or rabbits or foxs or to shoot clays or rough shoot. You can still get a rifle to hunt deer.
> 
> ...


that is not true..


----------



## bowhunter806 (Jan 14, 2005)

Then after they shoot the animal with their shotgun they have to pay the VAT and local taxes so they can keep the local lockin open (LMAO). Just taking the piss mate. Cheers!


----------



## derekm (Feb 19, 2004)

bowhunter806 said:


> Then after they shoot the animal with their shotgun they have to pay the VAT and local taxes so they can keep the local lockin open (LMAO). Just taking the piss mate. Cheers!


British cultural education bulletin
----------------------------------
if you mean by lockin , jail or gaol use the word "lockup"
if you mean illicit out of hours drinking in a country pub the "lockin" is correct
however we dont have local "lockups"and we dont have local taxes on foodstuffs, hunted or otherwise and food is VAT exempt and if they did they wouldn't have owt to do with "lockup" or "lockin".. so that one fell a bit flat :teeth: :teeth:


----------



## TJ Mason (Mar 25, 2004)

This story was half-true. Here's the clarification:
http://www.defra.gov.uk/news/2005/050309c.htm
_______
*GENERAL LICENCES - CHANGES EXPLAINED*

Defra has today published changes to its guidance on the control of bird species under the so-called "general licence" following some misinterpretation of the new system. 

Some landowners and other stakeholders had interpreted new guidance published to coincide with the recent review of the Wildlife and Countryside Act to mean that they would have to try non lethal means of pest control and to demonstrate the fact before resorting to shooting species on the general licence. 

This is not the case and was not the intention of the new guidance. It has always been the case under the 1981 Act that the killing of birds on the general licence has only been permitted where there is no other satisfactory solution for specific purposes, for example, preventing damage to crops or protecting public health and safety. That is because of legal obligations under the 1979 EC Birds Directive. In an attempt to clarify this in the new guidance, the impression was given of a change in how the general licences may be used. In order to clear up this misunderstanding the Department has changed, with immediate effect, the wording of paragraph four of the WLF 18, WLF 100085, WLF 100088 general licences to - 

"This Licence can only be relied on in circumstances where the authorised person is satisfied that appropriate non-lethal methods of control such as scaring are either ineffective or impracticable."

Nature Conservation Minister, Ben Bradshaw, said:

"I hope that by making this change it is now clear to those who use general licences that there has been no change in how they may deal with pest species. Landowners, gamekeepers and others will continue to be able to shoot species listed on the general licence if they believe that to be the most sensible course of action. " 

British Association of Shooting and Conservation, the UK's largest shooting organisation representing 122,000 people said " BASC welcomes this clarification which makes it very plain that lawful pest control can continue".


----------



## derekm (Feb 19, 2004)

TJ Mason said:


> This story was half-true. Here's the clarification:
> http://www.defra.gov.uk/news/2005/050309c.htm
> _______
> *GENERAL LICENCES - CHANGES EXPLAINED*
> ...


I wish I understood why i cant hunt rabbits with a recurve and blunts in the UK.


----------

