You are correct that ‘some’ forces want you to use a revolver which is restricted to 2 -3 shots for humane dispatch, but not all forces enforce that. I know someone with a glock semiauto, full mag capacity for humane dispatch held on section 1. I know of others who have .38 revolvers for humane dispatch with a normal capacity.
I think the above is also part of the reason that the new home office regulations are being put through government at the moment, as it stands they are home office ‘guidlines’, that forces interpret and use as a rough guide. Under the new laws, assuming they get through, they will no longer be open to interpretation and will have to be followed to the letter.

Regarding Section 7/7.3 FAC, you can either have them at your home and not shoot them, or keep them at a range and shoot them, but the range has to be locked down with only yourself and other section 7/7.3 and section 5 shooters present. Essentially section 7/7.3 need to be transported to and from the range by a person with a section 5. What you can own on those section 7/7.3 also seems to vary a lot, some people have been refused guns that others haven’t. You have to prove ‘why’ the gun is important in terms of firearms history /development etc. So unique operating mechanisms can be owned regardless of age -for example.

We can still own muzzle loading revolvers on section 1, and long barrel semi auto pistols, and long barrel revolvers such as the taurus 38/44/45 they are no longer made though, so there are limited amounts available and command high prices. I saw a .44 for sale recently for £1500.

I know it effected shotguns, but it didn’t ban them which is what the article states, they were just moved to section 1 from section 2. There is no mag limit on section 1, for SG or rim fire.

Your 1911 would can be purchased now legally as a section 7/7.3. It’s a lot of hoops to jump through really, but they are not ‘banned’. Just heavily restricted.

No5 and no10 are not correct either. The reason the UK appears to have a higher violent crime rate is due to the English law on what constitutes a violent crime, if you only include the same types of crime that the US classes as violent then the UK is nowhere near as far up the list. For example, if someone pushes another person, and that person presses charges, that’s considered and act of violence in mainland UK. Even shouting at someone in an intimidating manner is classed as an act of violence. The way sex crimes are classified in the UK is also totally different to how it’s classified in the US.

In short; If you only count the same few crime types(4 ish if I recall correctly) that the US uses for these statistics, and the UK is suddenly one of the safest instead of the worst. Number 5 and n0 10 are both essentially showing missrepresentation of data, at its finest. I’m pro gun btw, but I’m also pro truth.

p.s- Gun’s were not banned in the UK. ‘Some’ guns had tighter restrictions’ placed on them. Handguns were not explicitly banned, we can still own some handguns. The only thing was ‘banned’ for the majority of the people was semiautomatic centerfire rifles(Semi automatic rimfire and shotguns were not effected), and within a short while engineers came up with a work around, that to this day(Over 20 years later) still hasn’t been banned – google lever release system and MARS action. Both perfectly legal in the UK.

The only people who can’t own guns on mainland UK are people who have been to prison for more than 3 years, fairly recently changed from 5+ years, and people with mental health issues, or who have records for being violent.

Comparing wartime events with civilian ‘mass killings’ during what we can loosely call ‘peacetime’ within a country BY ‘fellow countrymen’ is a really lousy comparison altogether.