Well, I haven't got into researching to much on these matters except it seems that Britain war on private ownership of weapons has been going on a very long time.
Unfortuantely, this War is not limited to Britain.
I noted that the NRA said that the British pistol team had to take the Chunnel to pratice in France.
I don't think the French are very far behing, perhaps, Jorvik, you can at least tell us your impression of the Gun Laws in Britain and France and continue your discuss regarding Najavas etc..
We had a contributor that knew a great deal about these weapons, but I think his contribution would not be easy to find.
When I remember his---oh ----his name for the Forum was 'Snickersnee', at cut and thrust weapon when the word is not used for a handles on a forum.
In the people's Republic of Massachussetts, assisted opening blades are legal and, similar to your situation, 'Switch Blades" are not.
In point of fact i do not think that the so called Commonwealth of Massachusttes (it is not technically a state--this goes back to the way the colonies were chartered) is very far behind in its quest for the Utopia of an Unarmed Citizen State.
But, as I said, when I was an FFL dealer (which privilege was taken from me by one line in the so called "Assualt Rifle" bill in 1998) I came into possession of a Colt Military and police revolver.
Apparently the campaign on Private ownership of sidearms in Britain had, as far back as 1940, become rather successfull, because Britain had to appeal to the ordinary citizens in the US to assist in arming the Home Guard.
Well, this is a true story, but you will have to look up the numbers, but the story is true.
I have posted it a long time ago.
In any event, when I purchased the M&P from the individual, it was worn free of blusing and had a tag attached to which said "returned to the donor with thanks, the card was then signed by an officer of the unit of the Home Guard.
I am sure I have a picture in the file.
I am afraid if we picked and chose our allies on the REAL status of weapons control, we would run short of Allies quicky. Not that I disagree with what your're saying.
Australia's laws on gun control have been repugnant since the "Tasmanian" massacre some years ago.
In America it can fairly be said, that in many states and on the broadband national scene, candidates have been advised to "Keep Quiet" on Gun Contol.
So then we get a presidential candidate actually campaigning in a Gun store.
As chance would have, when I was a dealer (I apologize as I hae told this story before) a client in Virginia (Roanoke) who bought many fine collectibles and restored weapons from me. The arms in question had to be sent to and passed thru the FFL books of an FFL dealer, In this case, R-------- Firearms in Roanoke.
As luck would have it (bad luck) , the killer at the Virginia Tech shootings purchased hi weapons at tha shop.
The dealer had not done anything wrong in either case.
Virginia did not at the time require checks, in their instant background check system, on self admission or court ordered admision to a mental facility or that that the 'finding' of the court requiring the admission.
Of course, since I am not totally against gun control, just leery of those who propose it, what should have happened was that his 'check' should have put his purchase on hold at the state level.
The Federal Instant background check system operated as NCIS by the FBI may only address Federal matters.
But that didn't happen.
FWIW in the Commonwealth of Mass. if you admit yourself to a mental institution under certain statutes (might not apply to self admissions to private insitutions)your License to Carry becomes an endangered species.
J (smiley deleted, not appropriate)
Last edited by JOHN THURSTON
on Sun Jan 13, 2008 3:53 pm, edited 1 time in total.
"All Enlightenment Gratefully Accepted"