To ban crossbows & Military style knives in UK?

[StarryIsabella]

First time poster, long term reader!

So I've been following the horrific news today about the monster who killed his ex partner, her sister and mother yesterday in Enfield (London).

Louise Hunt- (25) Hannah Hunt- (28) Carol Hunt- (61)

Reports state that he used a crossbow and other weapons (mainly knives) apparently he killed them in quick succession all at once at their home yesterday.

It shocks me how someone can obtain a weapon like a crossbow that fires arrows rapidly with immense force that can easily break through bone and kill. It's literally a gun, it loads and fires to kill if that's your intention.

Does anyone think these kind of weapons should be banned? What purpose do they serve? If it does serve a purpose then at least install a licence to own one where they can do background checks and interview the person for their reasons to owning one.

Alas! Another woman who wanted to be independent was brutally murdered along other her sister and mother for it.

Just a quick edit: killings with crossbows have happened before in the UK

In 2010, 40-year-old Stephen Griffiths killed 3 women in Bradford that he didn't know. He later admitted he was obsessed with killers and had a hatred for women. All 3 women were complete strangers to him.

A lot of the arguments for these weapons in this thread seem to come from the same genre of excuse Americans use for allowing easy access to guns.

You have to have a license to drive a vehicle.

And what if someone without a licence steals one for the purpose of causing harm?

It's reasonable to not be in support of self-defence, but that will very quickly change if you or friends and family find yourselves in a situation that you all could have handled a lot better if you had the means to protect and defend. If you have no effective means of defence, you face the consequences, however horrific they are. You can always change the outcome of a situation if you're prepared to defend and protect.

Just to be clear I'm very anti-gun ownership. We have very few firearms deaths in the UK partly because our laws are pretty good and partly because the police aren't routinely armed. But extending bans to various items misses the fundamental point which is that there is a significant and growing problem with male violence against women and girls. And that won't be addressed by banning things.

You can't ban everything which can be used to kill people. You can kill someone with a kitchen knife or a regular bow and arrow. Do we ban those too?

We are responsible licensed gun owners.
I think that crossbows should be licensed in the same way.

However, this isn't a knee jerk reaction to yet more male violence against women and gang violence; (the real problems in the UK today)
it's just sense to treat the new modern crossbows similarly to guns.

As for knives, several of the more alarming types are already banned.
Which doesn’t affect their use in gang and drugs violence one iota.

The kind of people who are going to commit knife crime won't be affected by bans.
I would, for one. I have some beautiful knives.

Way back further than that, you used to be on first name terms with your beat bobby and you probably owned a revolver. If your beat bobby got into a spot of bother and needed a weapon, they'd knock on your door and ask to borrow your revolver. Now, police have CS gas, batons, tasers and if they are city police and patrol busy places like St. Pancras International Station, they'll have MP5s (which are lovely guns in my opinion).

Oh yeah, most Londoners owned a revolver! Except I never met a single one of them. Wasn’t on first name terms with the ‘local Bobby’ either nor knew anyone who was. Except someone who was married to a policeman! What sort of company did you keep?

I have Bowie type knives in three sizes and a hatchet and a mini folding saw. I used to go wild camping a lot and used them for preparing food, whittling, cutting firewood, making shelters etc.
No reason for this post except to say that not everyone with survival kit or sports weaponry is a violent psychopath. It just isn't possible to stop these occasional horrific crimes by banning the weapon: the police acting on reports sooner in almost all cases would be more effective.

RIP Louise, Hannah and Carol.

Sadly this is just deflection from the real problem.

I would rather see police, politicians and influencers (eg football players) actively discussing male violence.

I would like to hear how men are being directly targeted in campaigns to end male violence. All men, as it will take the good ones to be involved too.

I want society to foster a culture of deep shame applied to violent and abusive men. Led by men and linked to the sports, social activities and image men care about.

Far far too much emphasis on what women can do and how we restrict society as a whole by taking away freedoms for everyone. Turn the focus to the group of people known to be causing 90% of the problem.

I’m assuming your purpose would be to reduce the injury and death of people when such thugs are used violently, and possibly to reduce accidental injury and death.

What would the cost of legislating, introducing and maintaining such a ban be? I have no idea, but I’m betting it’d be expensive. Presumably you’d need some sort of permit system, which requires ongoing expense. I’m not sure what a “military style” knife is, but there’s a lot of legitimate uses of large knives for farming, hunting, rural work (I use machetes in search and rescue work, fruit pickers use larger blades) - so there’s potentially a large number of permits and management needed. Given that there’s already legal restrictions on carrying knives in public - this ban would have to include ownership and safe storage requirements to be different.

Now compare the injuries and lives saved with that achieved by other investments into domestic and family violence prevention and response. If it’s not substantially more (given legitimate use that will be curtailed) it’s a political or knee jerk response to a horrific situation.

While this would likely win political support cause it sounds great, I doubt it would achieve much. Investment in housing, financial and legal support of victims, training police, behaviour change programs, would likely do more. On a legislative front, DV advocates likely have many ideas for things that will provide genuine legal protection for victims and survivors, and I suspect a crossbow register isn’t their first wish. Although I’d proper research shows it’s the best investment then happy to be wrong.

How anyone could look at the US and think it’s a ‘polite society’ is completely beyond me!

The US? I don't recall mentioning the US. Although since you mentioned the US, I do notice the state of Wyoming has very low crime in general, despite very lax gun controls. In contrast, the state of Chicago, there are shootings and homicides every day, and they have strict gun controls. The numbers speak for themselves, really.

Absolutely agree they should be treated as a gun and licenced as such.

Banning something doesn't mean it no longer exists though.

Why would a permit system add any cost when a) you could charge for them and b) the permit system already exists for guns so would be a simple extension?

I think knives are a different category, as I agree you may need knives for bushcraft etc, but I think weapons which "kill at a distance" i.e. guns, bows etc are perfectly legitimate to require licencing.

My kids do archery as a winter sport. They set up indoors in a big sports hall. They have trained on cross bows but prefer normal bows. It’s actually a really positive sport, it’s predominantly an adult group but they are keen on younger people joining and developing, so it’s social. It’s very much about discipline and safety, keeping cool under pressure. These are skills young people should be learning.

Obviously it’s horrible what has happened but there is this knee jerk response to ban everything whenever something bad happens. Emotional decision making create bad laws.

The real issue is male violence. I would absolutely support laws restricting access to weapons that can kill. Sports clubs, locked cabinets, police checks the same as for guns. It won’t deal with the underlying issue of women being othered and reduced until some man thinks he’s entitled to kill them because they failed to pander to his ego, or disappointed him or just to find out what it feels like. This is what happens when there is misogyny to the point rape is arguably decriminalised.

US, I do notice the state of Wyoming has very low crime in general, despite very lax gun controls. In contrast, the state of Chicago, there are shootings and homicides every day, and they have strict gun controls. The numbers speak for themselves, really.

Wyoming is the least populated States and has one of the lowest population densities . If it had the population of Chicago packed into a similar space and had Chicago’s poverty and gang problems I’d expect to see much more gun crime. The two are really not comparable.

Crossbows can't really fire "rapidly", they take time to pull back the string and reload another bolt.
Just because one person out of million does something bad with an object, why should that object be banned for the other 999,999 people?

Kitchen knives are used in a large majority of knife crime attacks, shall we ban those?
Vehicles are used as weapons to run people over intentionally, shall we ban those?

Using a crossbow, or a bow for that matter is seen as a sport. Although, they can be used for hunting game and also for pest control.

Why would a permit system cost?

They need a database. Those cost money to build and maintain.

You cannot sell someone a permit without that database built and with enough people to run/maintain it already in place, so those costs are upfront, before you start to recoup your money in any way.

They also require policing, which again costs money and takes people away from policing other things.

I actually agree that owning even a simple bow should require some sort of registration - but it isn't a quick fix and it won't stop one person using such a weapon from murdering another.

I think this is way back when. I remember a historical account of the local constabulary asking for the use of a revolver from a crowd after a robbery. Several were forthcoming including a pearl handled ladies derringer. Pretty sure it was Victorian.

You're missing the point. Chicago is a violent state, Wyoming is not. I am aware of that, hence I mentioned them. Not only is Wyoming less populated, it's also not diverse. It's 88% white and most everyone knows everyone.

We have shotguns and obviously the correct licensing and storage facilities that go along with it, as we should do. I am 100% behind the restrictions in place for owning these weapons, and I cannot actually believe that crossbows aren't licensed and regulated given their capacity. I've shot one a few times - those things can (and have here) do serious damage. They are incredibly powerful.

But so is a knife. An axe. The list is endless, I’m not saying they shouldn’t be regulated, I am saying it will not save any women. No one needs a cross bow to kill. There are hundreds if not thousands of other ways to murder, they are very different to guns, have we ever seen mass killings by cross bow?

They are used for sports. We need to ban the men who use them for any other reason.

That doesn't make it ok... I absolutely guarantee this will keep happening! Just because men can kill women with other weapons and even their hands doesn't mean we shouldn't try to ban these weapons.

I'm actually shocked by some of the responses on here.