Which did the prosecution focus more upon? The dinky .22 rimfire, or the perps criminal background?
It sounds to me like they focused on the gun, so as to continue to justify their own draconian gun laws, while publicizing "guns are bad". Well I guess MEAT CLEAVERS are bad too! Do you have one in your kitchen? It's there to do maximum damage to flesh, I'd bet. You might even have a sausage grinder. You are a potential mass murderer!
More soberly;
In the U.S. a convicted felon can go straight to jail for gun possession. A convicted felon out on parole will go straight to jail for gun possession.
But let's not have everyone disarmed, or else we'll all be left as prey to those whom would rob and harm us, armed with meat cleavers... which was one of the perps previous weapons of choice, was it not?
If you are in Scotland, perhaps you could use this incident to talk some sense into the heads of your United Kingdom countrymen.
It's not the blasted .22 that is the problem, any more than a meat cleaver itself was the problem.
it is THE CRIMINAL that IS THE PROBLEM. Could there be any better example? If you cannot see that, go to your kitchen right now, and remove all knives, even the butter knives. Replace them and all the other flatware with the flimsiest plastic eating utensils made. And get rid of all razor blades too, least you or someone else be tempted to use them for a weapon.
Might as well throw out all the iron frying pans, too. Check your closet, there may be a dangerous cricket bat hiding in there. Who knows when it's going to leap out of there and bash some poor slob!
I think the long sentences pretty much reflect the fact that the men jailed were career criminals and gang members, one was already out on licence yet went and committed this serious crime. Focusing on the .22 weapon/ammunition misses that these men are serious gang members and multiple offenders/career criminals. And as been pointed out by others, .22 weapons and ammo are not quite as weak as posters are making out.
I have no problem with the sentences. BECAUSE they are for the men’s continued criminal acts, not this single crime. Had the men not been career criminals with criminal records, they I can assure you would never have got anywhere near 16 yrs. Jailed yes, but probably a sentence of a third of what was handed out. Probably 6 rather than 16.