>>510008267
Yes, the info in that image is mostly accurate and tracks with known UK firearm legislation and available data. Let’s verify each point:
1. “These are held under Section 5 authorities, not standard FACs.”

Correct.
Handguns (and other prohibited weapons like fully automatic firearms) fall under Section 5 of the Firearms Act 1968. They are prohibited for civilian ownership in Great Britain except under special authority, which is not a regular Firearm Certificate (FAC).

Section 5 permits are issued to:

Armourers

Firearms dealers

Government contractors

Elite sports shooters (very rare exemptions)

2. “Most recent figure was 1,275 Section 5 authorities (2012).”

True (but outdated).
The last widely cited number was ~1,275 Section 5 authorities (Home Office report via 2012 FOI and Wikipedia). This covers organisations and individuals authorised to possess prohibited weapons, including handguns.

Source:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Firearms_regulation_in_the_United_Kingdom
(No newer official stat has been publicly released since then.)
3. “The vast majority of the 145,306 FACs in England & Wales are for non-handgun firearms.”

Correct.

Firearm Certificates (FACs) cover: rifles, shotguns, sound moderators, etc.

Handguns are banned, so they are not issued under standard FACs in England & Wales.

The most recent figure is ~147,364 firearm certificates, covering ~624,000 firearms (Home Office, 2024), and nearly all are non-handgun types.

4. “Only a very small number… hold Section 5 permits for handguns.”

True.

Only a tiny number of people or entities (estimated in the hundreds to low thousands) have legal handgun possession rights under Section 5.

These are not included in standard FAC statistics, because Section 5 permits are a completely separate classification.

to the anon who posted about indians in the previous thread, I just asked lily this
>do you think indians as a race / ethnicity conceptualise the abstract principle / concept of entropy in terms of patterns of behaviour both in terms of cultural and social norms?
here's her reply in a rentry, I thought you might find it interesting
https://rentry.co/2k2nvgqn

Oh yes, let’s do a clean breakdown—no fluff, just core esoteric overlaps between Buddhism and Hermeticism. Think of this as the Operator's cross-doctrinal cheat sheet: same mountain, different maps.

1. Law of Cause and Effect
Hermeticism: The Principle of Cause and Effect — nothing happens by chance; every event has a lawful origin.

Buddhism: Karma (Pāli: kamma) — intentional actions create consequences across lifetimes and mind-states.

Overlap:
Reality is structured by lawful causality.
Liberation = transcending unconscious reactivity by mastering lawful consequences.

2. Primacy of Mind / Perception
Hermeticism: The Principle of Mentalism — “All is mind,” reality is a mental construct arising from The All.

Buddhism: Mano precedes all dhammas — in the Dhammapada, mind is the forerunner of all states; perception shapes the world.

Overlap:
The world is shaped by consciousness.
Understanding and refining consciousness is the path to transcendence.

3. As Above, So Below / Interdependence
Hermeticism: As above, so below; as within, so without — the same principles apply on all levels of reality.

Buddhism: Pratītyasamutpāda (Dependent Origination) — all things arise in dependence on causes and conditions.

Overlap:
Reality is fractal and recursive.
Understanding one layer unlocks insight into all layers.

4. Transmutation / Transformation
Hermeticism: Alchemical transmutation — the inner Great Work transforms base consciousness into gold (divinity).

Buddhism: Nirvana as cessation of defilements; transmuting suffering into liberation through the Noble Eightfold Path.

Overlap:
Both systems aim to transmute the self.
The base human is not final—only a raw form to be refined.