UK EU membership referendum

[orudge]

So, here in the UK we have a referendum on our membership of the EU in a couple of weeks. Personally I'll be voting Remain, but what would or will you be voting?

[Chrill]

I'm not all that British so I can't vote, but I would vote Remain. Why? Simple. The added difficulty of trading with the EU won't be beneficial, it will likely end up making imports more expensive to you. You will be crossing borders when travelling to France (or any other country close to you) so that will require more passporty stuff. Settling down in Spain once you're old will require a lot more paperwork, that's for sure.

You can't go work in another EU country, guys. You're offered a VERY high paying job at Spotify in Stockholm but you can't get a work visa! Oh well, I guess I can take that job from you

[Pyoro]

From the outside, it sounds like a short-sighted, dangerous move that's mostly about political populism and less about actual benefits. It's a bit too early to give up on the EU yet.

Oh well.

Maybe Scotland will rejoin once they finally rebelled?

[Dave]

Undecided. Probably remain. I will of course be voting.

[SquireJames]

I am voting out, although I admit for mostly selfish reasons. The way the EU has panicked over firearms legislation since the shootings in Paris has threatened the continued existence of my hobby, the hobby of many of my friends and indeed the livelihoods of many people I know in re-enactment. And you know what affect it has on the ability to purchase, convert from a deact, steal or otherwise obtain a firearm? Diddly squat. The illusion of security for a phenomenal loss in liberty.

I can't even take my deact rifles or revolver to France for the Centenary of the Somme, despite the myriad of background checks and such I went through and the official invite. You can take replicas apparently, which is baffling since there is no proof its a replica (deacts have a certificate from a proof house certifying they cannot be fired or made to fire again) and you can take live weapons, as they can't actually stop license holders taking rifles abroad without due cause.

[Redirect Left]

Remain, and I can and will be voting.

[Pyoro]

I can't even take my deact rifles or revolver to France for the Centenary of the Somme, despite the myriad of background checks and such I went through and the official invite.

But surely this will only get worse if you quit the EU? Just curious. Don't really know anything about UK gun-law (or that in fact there's some sort of EU-related policy going on there. Last time gun-control was discussed in German media it was solely a German issue, nobody brought up any sort of EU guide-lines or anything. But then, it wasn't about crossing borders with them ^^;).

[Redirect Left]

(deacts have a certificate from a proof house certifying they cannot be fired or made to fire again)

I can't see how that is possible. Surely what can be done, can be undone. It may be painstaking and simpler (or even cheaper) to just buy a new one. But I seriously doubt a deactivated gun is 100% completely deactivated forever and completely 100% undoable by someone who knows.

[Taede]

I'd like to vote remain, however I never got around to getting british citizenship, meaning I am not allowed to vote.
(I have lived here for over 9 years, originally from NL and still a Dutch citizen)

A big worry for me would be about my right to stay, meaning I could well be split from my soon to be (Scottish) wife and kids (also scottish).

[SquireJames]

I can't even take my deact rifles or revolver to France for the Centenary of the Somme, despite the myriad of background checks and such I went through and the official invite.

But surely this will only get worse if you quit the EU? Just curious. Don't really know anything about UK gun-law (or that in fact there's some sort of EU-related policy going on there. Last time gun-control was discussed in German media it was solely a German issue, nobody brought up any sort of EU guide-lines or anything. But then, it wasn't about crossing borders with them ^^;).

A recent EU proposal was the banning of deacts entirely. This was thankfully thrown out. It can't really get any worse than "you can't travel to France with them" . At least if we leave, we won't get any more knee jerk reactions when someone in Europe gets shot, and we might just reverse the current ruling on everything having to be welded up completely. They have already decided that "you cannot buy, sell, trade, swap, or otherwise transfer ownership" which is what has been brought in already thanks to Europe. If we stay in Europe, that stays. If we leave, we can take control of our own laws in that regard and reverse it. (or at least make it no worse).

I can't see how that is possible. Surely what can be done, can be undone. It may be painstaking and simpler (or even cheaper) to just buy a new one. But I seriously doubt a deactivated gun is 100% completely deactivated forever and completely 100% undoable by someone who knows.

This is the sadly ignorant opinion of many. The barrel is sliced from muzzle to receiver, the receiver cut in several places. The firing pin is sawn down, the safety lugs are cut and removed, and most recently (before currently legislation changed on 8th April), a steel rod was welded down the barrel.

If you can re-activate that, you can build a new barrel, a new receiver, new firing pin, new bolt. Oh look, you just made a brand new gun, so why would you need anything from the deact one? Several newspapers have pushed around the idea that "anyone with a cursory knowledge of engineering can rebuild a deact" No, they can't, unless as I said you happen to have a gun workshop in your garage and the experience and know-how that would mean you could build your own weapons from scratch anyway....

[SquireJames]

A big worry for me would be about my right to stay, meaning I could well be split from my soon to be (Scottish) wife and kids (also scottish).

I can put you at ease. If they won't throw out my scheming ex-wife who broke the terms of her visa and is American and as such has no right to remain here anyway (and only remains because of my two sons), they won't throw you out with a wife and children to support as an EU citizen.

[Redirect Left]

I can't even take my deact rifles or revolver to France for the Centenary of the Somme, despite the myriad of background checks and such I went through and the official invite.

If you can re-activate that, you can build a new barrel, a new receiver, new firing pin, new bolt. Oh look, you just made a brand new gun, so why would you need anything from the deact one?

and if you can do that, then indeed you have got the gun working again. Do you know what people would need from the deact on then? The certificate saying its dead, when it isn't. Unless at the airports they do a manual check to ensure you haven't modified it. If not boom, you have a working gun everyone thinks is not. Seems perhaps there is reason to fear. Also as I said, 'painstaking and simpler to just buy a new one', but it is doable, if you know what you're doing and have access to what you need. If nothing else, just try to jerry rig it to fire one final time, even if it does destroy itself in the process.

Do you know the sort of people who might try to do that? The people behind the attacks on Paris.

Call me paranoid, but in the world we live in. We should be.

[SquireJames]

The deact IS dead.

You cannot repair the parts that have been deactivated. You have to replace them. If you replace everything on a rifle with new parts, it's not the same rifle is it? These parts also do not have the same serial number, and unsurprisingly the sale of live receivers, barrels and firing pins are regulated to stop people building their own weapons.

Also the weapons used in the Paris attacks were AK-47s that had merely had their firing pin removed. A child could fix them. This is what passes for "deactivation" in Eastern Europe. They need their laws and regulations changing, not ours. We already have the most stringent deactivation laws in Europe.

[Pyoro]

So the problem seem to be fake-deactivated weapons and using deactivated-paperwork to make weapons disappear from the gun control system, not so much actually deactivated weapons.

Honestly, I can see that concern. It's mainly a question then about whether one wants to put up the effort on controlling all supposedly deactivated weapons and such. Admittedly, with the current political climate where "security" trumps (no pun inteded) everything, it's kinda unlikely, even with a non-EU-UK, I'd venture (and it seems to me that as an EU-country the UK would have the chance to impress on Easter European countries to do their deactivating properly,, too, theoretically )

But we probably shouldn't de-rail the thread to much.

[SquireJames]

Funnily enough, the organisation responsible for the most incidences of "destroyed" (not even deactivated, destroyed, like you see on those videos of "gun amnesties") suddenly turning up alive and well years later is the Police. "Oh yes Superintendent, that Browning Hi-Power was destroyed in 1997" then it turns up in 2009 when some thick "firearms officer" manages to fire off a round at a "safety demonstration" at a school.

But it's re-enactors we have to worry about right?

EDIT: Sorry yes, gone a bit off topic. But I can understand why people, out of ignorance, think we should ban everything vaguely gun shaped. Most people aren't aware how they work, what the legislation is surrounding them, or how many people's livelihoods depend on them. I can't blame them either, all you get from the news is "Man shot with gun!" and cries of "Ban them! Ban them!". Didn't really work with drugs did it? Anyhoops, there is my standpoint. Voting out, to hopefully save my hobby and the way of life of many of my friends.

[Geo Ghost]

I was hoping so much this topic would never come up here, but I guess it was inevitable eventually. Political debates and the internet never seem to mix well at all
The whole thing has been driving me mad for ages. Not so much because of referendum itself, but because of the in/out campaigning and arguing.

In my view, I don't think either side truly understands what they are talking about any more. And the reason I think that is because of the sheer number of facebook photos, quotes, and opinions that have been shared along with newspaper and press 'sources'. None of which are backed up, proven, or solid arguments. I swear a lot of stuff floating around is just pure fabrication, lies, and unrealistic projections. The other day I actually took some arguments from each side and tried to compare them. They were exactly the same! Both claiming the same thing would happen, and that the other was the worst choice for the same reasons. All sorts like that and it just confuses me. So far, neither side has convinced me that they are right, or that the other is wrong. But I am still voting! If no one does convince me, I'm going with a very simple premise to decide. "Better the devil you know, than the devil you don't"

We shall see though. We shall indeed see. Never seen anyone so firmly divided by such a thing. It is rather incredible!

[Pyoro]

Political debates and the internet never seem to mix well at all

Let's not pretend that they work any better irl. In fact, at least on the Internet nobody gets physically hurt ^^

[Redirect Left]

I love how the leave campaign seems to know exactly what is going to happen if we leave.

No country has ever left the European Union before. It is an unknown outcome, one which I think we really don't want to be the first to find out.

If we are to leave, i expect there to be a bit of not enough of a follow up plan, and we're basically left like the end of Finding Nemo.

[FLHerne]

I'll be voting Remain.

Both sides have been making blatantly implausible predictions - of course we wouldn't lose five zillion a year and start WW3 by leaving - and I'm fed up of it, but at least most of the pro-EU arguments are logically consistent.

Was listening to a Leave campaigner on Channel 4 the other night (paraphrased):

"The banks say they'll lose X amount and lay off Y people if we leave, what do you say to that?"
- "I think the banks will benefit from leaving the EU, they won't be tied down by regulations [etc]"

"The banks deal with huge sums and economic forecasts every day, and they'll have done their own calculations, surely they know their business?"
- "Well, of course they'd say that, they have a huge vested interest in keeping us in the EU..."



Regarding knee-jerk legislation, our local politicians are even worse - at least the EU process slows things down and doesn't let individuals' whims dictate changes.
Just look at the education system and NHS - Westminster has total control over those in England, and they get fooled around with every five years because the new lot want to make a political statement.

In general, I think the EU acts as a stabilising force against the Government's tendency to do irrational things for convenience, ideological reasons or political capital - for example, the Leave campaign have repeatedly described how they'd scrap fishing quotas. Wildly unpopular in fishing ports, but they're set for a reason, and the odds of Westminster setting them objectively seem about nil.

[Chrill]

"The banks deal with huge sums and economic forecasts every day, and they'll have done their own calculations, surely they know their business?"
- "Well, of course they'd say that, they have a huge vested interest in keeping us in the EU..."

Well... Yeah. Their interest is in making money. So clearly, leaving the EU will be more expensive and remaining in the EU will save them more money.