UK Madness Regarding Gun Control

User avatar
anastrophe
Posts: 3135
Joined: Tue Jul 27, 2004 12:00 pm

UK Madness Regarding Gun Control

Post by anastrophe »

Angiepangie wrote: I haven't moved to the States, nor would I ever, rest assured.



Cultural change comes with time and to bully and preach at other cultures in terms of how they should behave is pretty damn hypocritical of a nation that has oppressed many of it's own minority groups for so long.
not really. damn near every nation on the planet does this. the british. the french. the japanese. you name it. so, while it would ultimately be great if all nations stopped all preaching, it's not likely to change any time soon.





However, some Americans seem to feel that it is only right and proper that the whole world becomes Americanised. That is the objection.
well, again. substitute french, english, german, japanese, australian, whatever. we aren't forcing you or other cultures to become 'americanized'. i don't see any 'mcdonalds' in downtown baghdad.







And who is the USA to tell any other culture how to behave? again. as any country.



France has always had a secular education system and the recent ruling was to reinforce that.so that's the only one of the examples you can counter? good! kind of proves my point.





The sooner the American Government and the more narrow-minded of the people stop seeing themselves as separate from the rest of the world, instead of part of it, the better, in my opinion.
yet again. we are hardly unique in having some degree of isolationism.





I never said Britain was a shining example of superiority, so please do not put words in my mouth.
fair enough.



I know all too well of Britain's shameful history and things here are far from perfect. I don't see how allowing gun ownership is going to solve any of our problems though. Our crime problems are about poverty, lack of opportunity and inequallity. Not about whether or not it is possible to legally own a gun or not.
fair enough as well. britain has a different culture than we have here. you deal with your problems differently. we deal with our problems differently. whether or not the draconian gun control in britain is right for you or not, it's your problem. my counter-argument continues as it always has - i want other countries to stop criticizing us because we have a different culture, and we deal with violence differently. a great many people feel that britain has 'effective gun control' and that it needs to be put in place here. well, i ask that they mind their own business. don't claim that we have different cultures when it's expedient to your argument, then claim that your culture's values should be imposed on ours. in this respect, i feel the same way about the article that started all this - it's a flawed perspective.
[FONT=Franklin Gothic Medium][/FONT]
gmc
Posts: 13566
Joined: Sun Aug 29, 2004 9:44 am

UK Madness Regarding Gun Control

Post by gmc »

anastrophe

the UK has draconian gun control. that's your business. if you're all happy with it, great. my complaint is with chuckleheads who point to the UK as an example of 'effective gun control', and suggest that applying it here is what is needed. it is not. the fact is, without banning guns, our violent crime rates have been dropping for nearly the last ten years - while yours have been steadily rising. if the goal is less violence, you are failing miserably. so, enough with the UK's own 'thoughts of superiority'. your gun control isn't working. so holding yourselves up as superior in that respect is tedious, at the very least.


On this we have very different cultures and its a bit pointless comparing the two, there is over two hundred years of different history and custom to look at to try and explain the difference and it's pointless.

We see the problem as criminals with guns, owning guns ourselves is not the answer we'll take the guns off the B%^&*&^T and make it as difficult as possible for them to get hold of as possible, that is our choice.

For you gun ownership is tied up with your right to freedom to defend yourself from oppression it's a different perspective that i would personally not lecture you on You have to find your own solutions.

gun ownership here does not affect your life over there, does it?


your gun control isn't working. so holding yourselves up as superior in that respect is tedious, at the very least


It does for us which is rather the point.

This post started out asking what we thought of the article. Now you know, it's a load of rubbish. When you see articles about how the poor british have been disarmed by their nasty government I hope you have a better understanding that it is a load of rubbish, credit us with some say in the matter.

To us gun control isn't about preserving our freedoms, we are free. Gun control is about making sure any B%^%%& that uses gun goes to jail and stays there. The problem is not the law but some of the ridiculously light sentences being given out.

You may have seen news reports about a fourteen year old beimng gunned down in Nottingham. Arming everybody won't solve the problem. What will is now the public ids so pissed off when they catch the perpetrators they will have a good chance of being lynched. Don't confuse a desire to live in peace without guns with a reluctance to defend yourself or to take action if necessary.

but we aren't simply taking over countries for the fun of it, as britain did. in fact, we've not taken over any countries at all.


It wasn't for fun it was to build an empire just like the germans, the French, the dutch the spanish, the japanese the chinese, we've all been at it, even the US started out with only thirteen states.

In the past it was quite blatant imperialism and all about controlling resources and trade by force just because we could. We know we are nasty shits we have a proud military history to prove it. Mind you if we hadn't been so good at it you would be speaking French :D (sorry couldn't resist)
User avatar
anastrophe
Posts: 3135
Joined: Tue Jul 27, 2004 12:00 pm

UK Madness Regarding Gun Control

Post by anastrophe »

gmc wrote: For you gun ownership is tied up with your right to freedom to defend yourself from oppression
freedom to defend ourselves, period. from oppression, tyrrany, crime, civil unrest, foreign invaders, whatever.
[FONT=Franklin Gothic Medium][/FONT]
User avatar
Bill Sikes
Posts: 5515
Joined: Fri Aug 20, 2004 2:21 am

UK Madness Regarding Gun Control

Post by Bill Sikes »

anastrophe wrote: britain is no shining light of superiority. you have a lavish history of supressing and destroying cultures all over the world.


You've got a "thing" about us, haven't you? That's OK - never mind. However,

you repeatedly imply that it's some sort of defence to say that other countries

have done something bad in their *history*, so it's OK for you. It isn't.
User avatar
Bill Sikes
Posts: 5515
Joined: Fri Aug 20, 2004 2:21 am

UK Madness Regarding Gun Control

Post by Bill Sikes »

gmc wrote: We know we are nasty shits we have a proud military history to prove it. Mind you if we hadn't been so good at it you would be speaking French :D (sorry couldn't resist)


Ooooh, you bitch! ROFL.
User avatar
anastrophe
Posts: 3135
Joined: Tue Jul 27, 2004 12:00 pm

UK Madness Regarding Gun Control

Post by anastrophe »

Angiepangie wrote: But at least we don't allow any fool to own a gun.
i have no problem with any fool owning a gun*, i do have a problem with anyone using a gun criminally.





It's the not guns that worry me, it's how they would be used.
i agree. so if its the use, not the gun, then why do you say 'but at least we don't allow any fool to own a gun'?



*the word "fool" is difficult to precisely assess. there are lots of stupid people in the world, but stupidity is not criminality. it is illegal in this country for anyone who is mentally ill to own a gun. it is illegal for anyone to use a gun to harm others criminally. it is illegal for children to own guns. it is illegal for felons to own guns.



there are a great many very imprecise estimates of how many guns there are in the united states. the estimates range from 150 million to 350 million. what is known however is that approximately half of all homes have guns in them.



if guns themselves were the problem - then there wouldn't be anyone alive in the united states, as 150 million guns is more than enough to kill every living person in this country (and every living animal for that matter). so, with all those guns out there - if guns are the problem - why is there anyone left alive here? because guns themselves are not the problem. criminal use is the problem. okay, so one says 'but yes, if we get rid of all the guns, then the criminals won't have any'. sorry, life doesn't work that way. if you pass a law banning all guns in this country (or any country), all you wind up doing is disarming the very people who are not the problem: law abiding citizens. only law abiding citizens are going to turn in their guns - that's a binary proposition, with no room for any ambiguity. pass a law banning guns; law abiding citizens abide by the new law and are disarmed. the criminals, who by their very nature are not law abiding, are not going to turn in their guns. so the net effect is that those who are not the problem are disarmed (and made into easier victims because they cannot defend themselves) and those who are the problem turn into the only class of people who have guns (thus having even greater power over their potential victims).



personally, i'd like to see every single gun on earth disappear. that's right: i'd love it if every firearm on earth simply vanished. the world would be a much better place.



problem: that cannot ever happen. the only way to get rid of every firearm on earth is to enforce a complete, global, totalitarian regime, that would search every single person, and every single place on earth, in order to get all the guns. and of course, to do so, those who would be doing the searches would have to be armed, otherwise they might be killed by criminals who don't want to give up their weapons. kind of a problem there.



so, while i, or anyone, can fantasize about a world without firearms, reality sticks it's big size 14 foot into the formula and ruins everything. the cat, as they say, is already out of the bag - we cannot makes guns disappear.



in the UK, they have decided to voluntarily disarm themselves (only the law abiding have done so, of course). since then, violent crime, and gun-related crime, has risen steadily. if the voluntary disarming was effective, violent crime and gun-related crime woudl have gone down.



here in the US, with no significant changes in our gun laws, the violent crime rates have been going down, steadily, for many years now. violent crime rates were at an all time low in 2003.



that's my coffee-induced rant for this morning!
[FONT=Franklin Gothic Medium][/FONT]
gmc
Posts: 13566
Joined: Sun Aug 29, 2004 9:44 am

UK Madness Regarding Gun Control

Post by gmc »

n the UK, they have decided to voluntarily disarm themselves (only the law abiding have done so, of course). since then, violent crime, and gun-related crime, has risen steadily. if the voluntary disarming was effective, violent crime and gun-related crime woudl have gone down.

here in the US, with no significant changes in our gun laws, the violent crime rates have been going down, steadily, for many years now. violent crime rates were at an all time low in 2003.


Originally tombstone asked what we in the UK thought. It's a load of cobblers, a carefully stitched together mish mash of spurious statistics and anecdotal evidence from history to reinforce a particular point of view and give the inoression that we all live in terror if violent crime. We don't.

The gun culture among criminals round nottingham and palces is largely caused by yardie gangs, their rivals arm themselves ouit of fear and the whole thing escalates. We have a tabloid press that loves stirring things up. It is rare enough that it hits the headlines nationwide, bingo 55 million people who don't live anywhere near these areas are worried sick. There is a gun culture in glasgow as well. It will be dealt with by the police with the full backing of the general public.

Our answer is not to start carrying guns because that would just escalate the problem. The odds of my meeting anyone with an anti personnel weapon are slim to non existent and the same goes for wll the UK people posting. We do not want to see our police being armed in the normal course of their duties. We have armed police if necassary and they are extyremely good.

Be wary of statistics if our death by gun rises from 1 per 1,000 to 2 per 1,000 that is a 50% increase in gun crime but it is still only 2 per 1,000. (no I'm not quoting actual statistics just making a point) the average man in the planet has less than two legs, another statistics and a true one are you better informed?

It's not UK madness concerning gun control it's the way we want it. On the other hand some americans come across as being terrified of their fellow americans and their government and feel the need to carry guns. I don't think you're mad but you are welcome to your point of view. I don't worry about my freedoms because I can say what I damn well like and do something about it.

We don't have kids walking in to school with machine guns and slaughtering their schoolmates just because they are having a bad day. They can't get their hands on the weapons. One nutter with a rifle got the law changed, another with a hand gun got them banned, end of discussion politicians did what they were told by the electorate because they had to.

Please stop feeling sorry for us. I think you have enough problems of your own to worry about. It looks, from an outside perspective like america is about to take a sleigh ride in to an era that will make the McCarthy one look like a pleasant interlude. with every one afraid of each other and convinced that the whole world is out to get them. You lose freedom little by little,
User avatar
anastrophe
Posts: 3135
Joined: Tue Jul 27, 2004 12:00 pm

UK Madness Regarding Gun Control

Post by anastrophe »

Bill Sikes wrote: You've got a "thing" about us, haven't you? That's OK - never mind. However,

you repeatedly imply that it's some sort of defence to say that other countries

have done something bad in their *history*, so it's OK for you. It isn't.
that is what you are inferring from what i've written. it is not what i have indeed written, nor is it what i've implied.



you lose that rhetorical turn. :yh_bigsmi



no, what i am implying is that i'm sick and tired of hearing about the big, bad, mean old united states, as if we are the tyrant of the world, incarnate.



i use britain as an example, old chap, because it seems i'm exchanging posts with brits, am i not?



if i were discoursing with russians, i'd probably bring up stalin. fair enough?
[FONT=Franklin Gothic Medium][/FONT]
User avatar
anastrophe
Posts: 3135
Joined: Tue Jul 27, 2004 12:00 pm

UK Madness Regarding Gun Control

Post by anastrophe »

gmc wrote:

Be wary of statistics if our death by gun rises from 1 per 1,000 to 2 per 1,000 that is a 50% increase in gun crime but it is still only 2 per 1,000. (no I'm not quoting actual statistics just making a point) the average man in the planet has less than two legs, another statistics and a true one are you better informed?
you miss the point. we can use your informal statistic as the example - the point is, it's not just gone from 1 per 1,000 to 2 per 1,000. it has gone, year after year, from 1 per 1,000, to 2 per 1,000 to 3 per 1,000 to 4 per 1,000 etc.. It is rising steadily and inexorably. now, it's true, 2 per 1,000 is still "only" 2 per 1,000 (tell that to victim number 2). but if this rise in crime continues, i'd hazard to say you'll be looking at things differently over there.



am i proposing anything? not at all. you'll manage your country as you see fit. god bless, god save the queen, move along nothing here to see, etc.. :p





We don't have kids walking in to school with machine guns and slaughtering their schoolmates just because they are having a bad day.
neither do we. there's never been a case of that here in the U.S.. Apparently the foreign press has distorted things just a tad, which isn't surprising, since the U.S. press has done the same!





They can't get their hands on the weapons. One nutter with a rifle got the law changed, another with a hand gun got them banned, end of discussion politicians did what they were told by the electorate because they had to.
so nobody has been killed with a rifle or handgun since they were banned? not one? interesting.





Please stop feeling sorry for us.
er, um, i certainly don't. you folks have emma thompson and elizabeth hurley. how could i possibly feel sorry for you? :yh_bigsmi



It looks, from an outside perspective like america is about to take a sleigh ride in to an era that will make the McCarthy one look like a pleasant interlude. with every one afraid of each other and convinced that the whole world is out to get them. You lose freedom little by little,
from an inside perspective, it doesn't look that way at all. freedom can be lost little by little. there are some definite problems right now. there are legions of people working to mitigate those problems now as well.
[FONT=Franklin Gothic Medium][/FONT]
gmc
Posts: 13566
Joined: Sun Aug 29, 2004 9:44 am

UK Madness Regarding Gun Control

Post by gmc »

no, what i am implying is that i'm sick and tired of hearing about the big, bad, mean old united states, as if we are the tyrant of the world, incarnate.


I thought you wanted a british view on gun control, in particular tombstone asked for an opinion on an article. Load of cobblers seems impolite so he got a lot of opinions that basically said the same thing, load of cobblers

from the oxford english dictionary

cobbler // n.

1 a person who mends shoes, esp. professionally.

2 an iced drink of wine etc., sugar, and lemon (sherry cobbler).

3 a a pie topped with scones. b esp. US a fruit pie with a rich thick crust.

4 (in pl.) Brit. slang nonsense.

5 Austral. & NZ slang the last sheep to be shorn.

[Middle English, of unknown origin: sense 4 from rhyming slang cobbler's awls = balls: sense 5 with pun on last3]


I'm worried about australians, last sheep? I thought they called them all dearie or is that the Welsh

On other words it's nonsense, codswallop, tosh, piffle, rubbish. Incredibly biased selective writing by a moron that just wants to back up what he believes with no attempt to be objective and does not appreciate the fundamental difference in the two countries.

i use britain as an example, old chap, because it seems i'm exchanging posts with brits, am i not?




At least you didn't call us all english, thank god an american that knows that the other name for the UK is in common parlance is britain and not england. I am impressed maybe you are learning something after all :D :D
User avatar
anastrophe
Posts: 3135
Joined: Tue Jul 27, 2004 12:00 pm

UK Madness Regarding Gun Control

Post by anastrophe »

gmc wrote: At least you didn't call us all english, thank god an american that knows that the other name for the UK is in common parlance is britain and not england. I am impressed maybe you are learning something after all :D :D:D



i do routinely get flummoxed though. let's see there's



Britain

Great Britain

GB

United Kingdom

UK



all of those seem to be used in common parlance to mean, well, the whole lot of you. but is there a difference between Great Britain and the United Kingdom?



and of course, often times, the term 'brits' is used most specifically to mean the english. i rarely hear people refer to irish or scots as brits.



it's so confusing!
[FONT=Franklin Gothic Medium][/FONT]
gmc
Posts: 13566
Joined: Sun Aug 29, 2004 9:44 am

UK Madness Regarding Gun Control

Post by gmc »

Britain

Great Britain

GB

United Kingdom

UK

all of those seem to be used in common parlance to mean, well, the whole lot of you. but is there a difference between Great Britain and the United Kingdom?

and of course, often times, the term 'brits' is used most specifically to mean the english. i rarely hear people refer to irish or scots as brits.




Britannia was the roman name for, well britain, Britain became more common after the scots and english joined parliament as they needed a name to call the united nations of the english,welsh scots and irish great britain when we had an empire, uk or united kingdom is more PC that GB. nodody really bothers that much. If you want to be pedantic the original british got beaten and taken over by the angles, saxons, vikings, normans. someone who is anglo saxon in origin is not british, being pedantic about it, since they were invaders although there may be the odd british maiden in there somewhere. We really a nation of mongrels and you can have great fun worrying about it if you want to.

Was in the house of one of my clients recently, she had one on her wall one of the old schoolmaps you used to get with the British Isles the same size as France, ah how things change. Nowadays they show actual size and you need a magnifying glass.

Brits as used in ireland is a euphenism for Eng8998 B^&%$£"s i rarely hear people refer to irish or scots as brits. That's why.

much like you should call the english english the scottish scotts and the welsh watever u want it dont matter about them..


stick with british or uk that way you are safe from giving offence-not that you do anyway. :D

You really can't take the UK and use it to make policy in the US any more than we should copy your example. You have a nightmare of a problem.

I watched bowling with columbine, one of the main points he seemed to be making that it is a climate of fear and paranoia that your media encourage that is responsible for a lot of your problems. Race and the legacy of slavery seem to echo throuih the generations. How valid a point of view that is I haven't a clue, tis intriguing though.

It is rising steadily and inexorably. now, it's true, 2 per 1,000 is still "only" 2 per 1,000 (tell that to victim number 2). but if this rise in crime continues, i'd hazard to say you'll be looking at things differently over there. :-5 :-5

Dare I say a sense of proportion and common sense. Our media hype it up, in reality most people are not victims of violent crime and remain unlikely to be so unless they go binge drinking in the town centres (that is a major problem here) and get in to fights, but then because we don't all carry guns very few get shot otherwise our streets would be bloodbaths.

It won't continue because we will take steps to curb it. It is unlikely to involve arming everybody so they can shoot burglars.
User avatar
anastrophe
Posts: 3135
Joined: Tue Jul 27, 2004 12:00 pm

UK Madness Regarding Gun Control

Post by anastrophe »

i'm not sure why i'm responding to this. i find it intolerable to deal with 'u' instead of 'you' (how hard is it to type three letters?) and all the run-on sentences, etc.



but i'm a glutton for punishment.





gregady wrote: america

us

united states of america

the states



whats ur point how do u get confused heres the thing we dont call u the stateish or us'ish we call you americans much like you should call the english english the scottish scotts and the welsh watever u want it dont matter

about them
i'm just curious which, if any, is the 'right' term. what is the formal, official name? the united kingdom, or great britain? and are they used completely interchangeably, or are there nuances to their use.







...now thats not why i am posting, i have quite alot of respect for u anastrophe your a clever guy and much like any other american you stick up for your country with patriotism....but this is where things get bad you are a patriot this word is more or less obsolete for us english, we dont have patriotism but we are proud of our country uch like most citizens in the world, ur point about is going around kiking peoples heads in that dont like the same team as us is about a close to patriotism as it gets for us atleast we vent it with sport and not destroying countries....
people are maimed and killed in these absurd brawls. england has a splendid history of going around destroying countries. so lets get off that pedestal.





the post is about 1 guy that thinks we are a bit silly to not have guns in the uk...guns in the hands of any person is very much dangerous and your country seems to want to arm themselves to protect themselves from themselves so not only did you kill yourselfs for your own independance from yourselfs you have carried this along to protect yourselfs from yourselfs and as i quote u anastrophe "foreigners" which is a very deisturbing quote wether u said it in jest or not, but it is funny that most gun crime is blacks on blacks and you lot dont give a flying monkey but if u had hood control and drive bys in a washington rural areas between whites and whites then you would be well against it
i'm sorry, but your ability to express your thoughts is completely obscured by the run-on sentences and interweaving of concepts. for one thing, i have no idea what you mean about quoting me about "foreigners". there is a quoting function here in the forums, so rather than claiming to quote me, with one word, perhaps you could clear this up with an actual quote. because i've never said or expressed what you claim i have.





......it is also pissing me off that a man of ur intelectural level anastrophe is using other countries to compare urself against to justify what you are doing


what is it i'm justifying doing? one of the major themes i've tried getting across here is that it is irrational and uninformative to suggest that the policies of one country apply to others, without taking into account different cultures and histories.





dont do that it pulls ur credibilty down just fight the aligations back with an answer to a question


i make no claims to credibility, nor do i expect any. we're people discussing things. that's all.





...(dont think i am singling u out anastrophe it just u are the only one that says something with any real meaning all the other posts against us in this discussion are of no conciquence)....heres a question for you...if arming yourself is a good idea and morally correct, then why do you have the highest amount of gun crime in the world....(outside thirdworld countries)...(also please do not use the size and population of your country as a bench mark because you could take 1 state alone and that would still be 1 of the highests in the world)....?
there is much that is incorrect above. for one thing, there are many states in this country with murder rates lower than other countries. and many with murder rates higher than other countries.



one thing i will always reject is the omission of 'third world countries' when talking about murder. all that suggests is that apparently we are to consider murders in third-world countries of less consequence than in 'industrialized' countries. that's offensive.



the united states has historically had higher murder rates than other countries. the important comparison, if i might be allowed without losing 'credibility', is that our murder rate was high back when everyone tended to have guns, at the turn of the century. at the same time, in the UK, the murder rate was about what it is now - at a time when just about everyone tended to have guns as well. so clearly it isn't the number or availability of guns that influences murder rates here in the US.. If you eliminate murders committed using guns, our murder rate would *still* be higher than the UK's murder rate. If it's guns that are responsible for our high murder rate, then how do you explain that?



bottom line: violent crime and murder rates in the UK have been rising steadily since the ban in 1997. since 1996 the serious violent crime rate has soared by 69%: robbery is up by 45% and murders up by 54%. Before the law, armed robberies had fallen by 50% from 1993 to 1997, but as soon as handguns were banned the robbery rate shot back up, almost back to their 1993 levels.

the murder rate is at the highest it's been in 100 years.



in the US, our violent crime and murder rates have been falling steadily since 1993 - down 25%. we haven't banned guns here.



there are no easy answers or explanations for the issues of crime and violence. it's quite clear however that what may seem to work in one country is certainly not an 'answer' to apply to another country. particularly when what is claimed to have 'worked' in the UK has in fact been a colossal failure - without making any comparison to other countries.
[FONT=Franklin Gothic Medium][/FONT]
User avatar
anastrophe
Posts: 3135
Joined: Tue Jul 27, 2004 12:00 pm

UK Madness Regarding Gun Control

Post by anastrophe »

gmc wrote:

Dare I say a sense of proportion and common sense. Our media hype it up, in reality most people are not victims of violent crime and remain unlikely to be so
exactly the same is the case here in the US. you've said as a matter of proportion that if the rate rises from 1 per 100K to 2 per 100k, to keep it in proportion - it's only 2 per 100,000 people.



well, in the US, our murder rate is about 5.5 per 100K. so by the same sense of 'proportion' - that's only 5.5 per 100,000 people.





but then because we don't all carry guns very few get shot otherwise our streets would be bloodbaths.
interestingly enough, many states here in the US have passed 'concealed carry' laws, where anyone who has no criminal history can get a license to carry a concealed weapon in public. across the board, crime rates have fallen faster in those states than in other states. so rather than increasing violence (which is what the anti-gun-nuts in this country were certain would happen) the opposite obtains.





It won't continue because we will take steps to curb it. It is unlikely to involve arming everybody so they can shoot burglars.
i will only quibble that the principle is not that we can all start shooting burglars. the principle is one of deterrence. in the US, burglars know very well that *every other house* in this country is likely to have an armed homeowner. that is an incredible deterrent.
[FONT=Franklin Gothic Medium][/FONT]
User avatar
Bill Sikes
Posts: 5515
Joined: Fri Aug 20, 2004 2:21 am

UK Madness Regarding Gun Control

Post by Bill Sikes »

gmc wrote: Brits as used in ireland is a euphenism for Eng8998 B^&%$£"s


Quote someone: i rarely hear people refer to irish or scots as brits.

Oh! Puh-lease! "the Scotch"
User avatar
Bill Sikes
Posts: 5515
Joined: Fri Aug 20, 2004 2:21 am

UK Madness Regarding Gun Control

Post by Bill Sikes »

illuminati wrote: Anyone from the UK looking at this thread? I too, would like to know what is really happening there.

Don't be shy - post up!


Well, a quick look at the paper this morning shows this:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jh ... altop.html

Extract:

Farmer who shot burglar backed by judge

By Ben Fenton

(Filed: 26/10/2004)

A 73-year-old farmer who shot a burglar after being broken into three times "could not be criticised" for the way he defended his property, a judge said yesterday.
gmc
Posts: 13566
Joined: Sun Aug 29, 2004 9:44 am

UK Madness Regarding Gun Control

Post by gmc »

what is it i'm justifying doing? one of the major themes i've tried getting across here is that it is irrational and uninformative to suggest that the policies of one country apply to others, without taking into account different cultures and histories.


I wholeheartedly agree with you. However, you do seem to unable to get beyond your mind set. You seem unable to accept that somebody might not be concerned about the inability to own a gun

i will only quibble that the principle is not that we can all start shooting burglars. the principle is one of deterrence. in the US, burglars know very well that *every other house* in this country is likely to have an armed homeowner. that is an incredible deterrent.


It's a deterrent that has all sorts of other complications to it that we don't need.

Back in the 19th century when we were reforming our penal code and setting up what became the police in London and later on other parts of the country there were two main areas of change.

1) a lot of juries were not convicting because the penalties for minor crimes were draconian and seen as being too harsh (hung for a sheep as for a lamb has a historical basis) The pounishment had to fit the crime

2) the best deterrent was the certainty of being caught.

Re guns, the best deterrent in a UK context is to make sure the perpatrators get caught and receive suitable punishment, the gun culture arises when people think they can get away with, if they weren't so sure thay had everybody terrorised to the point where they won't give evidence they would be more worried about being caught. Burglaries tend to be in clusters and the police often have a fair idea of who is responsible the diffuculty is catching them and proving it in court.

We have obvious problems in policing and many feel the punishments handed out for violent crimes are too light-you get a bigger sentence for burglary than you do for assault. Times change situations change and techniques have to be modified to cope but the basic principle is sound.

The best deterrent is the certainty that you won't get away with it, obviously that won't stop the occasional nutter that wants to kill, but they are realatively rare, or killings in the heat of the moment, crimes of passion.

Everybody having a gun would just escalate the violence.

one of the major themes i've tried getting across here is that it is irrational and uninformative to suggest that the policies of one country apply to others, without taking into account different cultures and histories


Stop doing it then. we have a very different culture, only a complete idiot would want to see american gun culture imported to the UK. Gun lobbyists in this country are a lunatic fringe

1 per 100K to 2 per 100k, to keep it in proportion - it's only 2 per 100,000 people.


But when that gets reported as a 50% increase in gun crime-which it is-that is what i mean by getting it out of proportion. That is the way our tabloid press reports beacuse they like to hype things up and in so doing greate a climate of fear. If our crime rate falls from 2 to 1 per 100k they don't report it as a fifty percent drop.

bottom line: violent crime and murder rates in the UK have been rising steadily since the ban in 1997. since 1996 the serious violent crime rate has soared by 69%: robbery is up by 45% and murders up by 54%. Before the law, armed robberies had fallen by 50% from 1993 to 1997, but as soon as handguns were banned the robbery rate shot back up, almost back to their 1993 levels.

the murder rate is at the highest it's been in 100 years.


Statistics are pieces of information not fundamental truths, you need to looka a bit deeper. That original article was written by somebody that wanted to make a point, the most annoying thing about it is he seems incapable of understanding that we feel safer without having guns than a lot of americans seem to feel with them and we are not helpless people who have been deprived of the means of self defence by our government

To quote from the article;

If people have guns, this allows them to resist the state, and under no circumstances can this be permitted. The need to secure the state outweighs the desire to halt crime.

Malcolm's book has shown me that I radically underestimated the danger of gun control. Her detailed study of British legislation on the topic shows the real aim of the disarmers. They wish to abolish the right to armed self-defense entirely. The point is not only to block armed resistance to the state, as I had previously thought; in addition, everyone is to be made totally dependent on the state for protection..




That is someone starting out with the assumption that our government can do what it likes without our agreement. Wwe do not live in a totalitarian state. Do not confuse social democracy with totalitarianism. She's an idiot and doesn't know what she is talking about.

well, in the US, our murder rate is about 5.5 per 100K. so by the same sense of 'proportion' - that's only 5.5 per 100,000 people.


There must be several areas in the states where the death rate is much higher. I would be willing to bet the gun ownership level isn't any higher than in an area with a low death rate. There are other reasons, owning guns or not is not really the main issue, it's part of the problem not the cause. Guns play a different part in your history than they do in ours we are not alike in this respect stop thinking we are.
User avatar
anastrophe
Posts: 3135
Joined: Tue Jul 27, 2004 12:00 pm

UK Madness Regarding Gun Control

Post by anastrophe »

gregady wrote: a colossal failure how in gods name is banning guns and this gun crime falling a failure i really need to ask where you get your "facts" from because they are crazy, the fact of the matter is again you going of topic about violent crimes and robberies, this is not the point the point is we have banned guns and gun crime has fallen there is no way you can imply that is a failure.
you are free to ignore the reality, and live in fantasy. the statistics as presented by your own Home Office show that all crime is up. gun crime is up. murder is up. all since the gun ban.



the argument most commonly made is that 'if we ban guns, we'll reduce crime, and reduce murder, and make for a safer country' (this argument is applied everywhere, not just the uk or us). if crime and violence - of all kinds, including gun crimes - goes up after banning guns, then how does that not cancel out the fundamental argument that was used to justify it? the response we get in the states is 'it just means we need even MORE gun control laws'. which has never worked.



my question is, if the guns have been banned and gun crime has risen, is it possible to 'double ban' them? 'extra special really and truly ban them'? 'super duper this time for sure ban them'?
[FONT=Franklin Gothic Medium][/FONT]
User avatar
Tombstone
Posts: 3686
Joined: Mon Aug 02, 2004 12:00 pm

UK Madness Regarding Gun Control

Post by Tombstone »

Agreed. In addition, what the anti-gun club will never acknowledge is that gun crime falls dramatically in states where there are liberal gun laws. This is especially true in states where you have the right to carry a concealed weapon.

The hand-wringing and un-checked gun violence happens the most in states and cities with strict gun control laws. It's crazy, but true.



anastrophe wrote: you are free to ignore the reality, and live in fantasy. the statistics as presented by your own Home Office show that all crime is up. gun crime is up. murder is up. all since the gun ban.



the argument most commonly made is that 'if we ban guns, we'll reduce crime, and reduce murder, and make for a safer country' (this argument is applied everywhere, not just the uk or us). if crime and violence - of all kinds, including gun crimes - goes up after banning guns, then how does that not cancel out the fundamental argument that was used to justify it? the response we get in the states is 'it just means we need even MORE gun control laws'. which has never worked.



my question is, if the guns have been banned and gun crime has risen, is it possible to 'double ban' them? 'extra special really and truly ban them'? 'super duper this time for sure ban them'?
Please use the "contact us" button if you need to contact a ForumGarden admin.
gmc
Posts: 13566
Joined: Sun Aug 29, 2004 9:44 am

UK Madness Regarding Gun Control

Post by gmc »

my question is, if the guns have been banned and gun crime has risen, is it possible to 'double ban' them? 'extra special really and truly ban them'? 'super duper this time for sure ban them'?


Agreed. In addition, what the anti-gun club will never acknowledge is that gun crime falls dramatically in states where there are liberal gun laws. This is especially true in states where you have the right to carry a concealed weapon.

The hand-wringing and un-checked gun violence happens the most in states and cities with strict gun control laws. It's crazy, but true.


Bet you most of the states with high gun crime have large urban populations with equally large scale social deprivation and other problems. The prescence of guns just makes the viloence more deadly.

We do have crime in those kind of areas, funnily most of the gun crime is in those kind of areas as well.

The thing is you are talking about gun control in a country where they have always been freely available and everybody is used to the idea that they have a right to the gun.

you are free to ignore the reality, and live in fantasy. the statistics as presented by your own Home Office show that all crime is up. gun crime is up. murder is up. all since the gun ban.


We on the other hand have a completely different culture and attitude. We did'nt go fom everybody having guns to nobody having them overnight it's a completely different history and attitude we were not deprived of them by a nasty government determined to take away our freedoms however much some american commentators would like to believe it. You can't really compare the two. Stop trying to.

For god's sakes you are obviouisly intelligent you can surely read statistics and know to look beyond the bald figures. A 1 in 1000 rise to 2 in 1000 may be a 50% rise in gun crime but ut is hardly an epidemic. The gun ban is not really a factor the vast majority of the population does not have a gun in the first place. Our tabloid press hype up the statistics to generate a story, you get interviews with people in incredibly deprived areas with high crime as if they were typical of the country as a whole. They barely even report it when crime stats fall

If the crime rate drops at the next report will that be because of the gun ban or because of other factors? Probably pundits such as the writer of the article will convenienly gorget to use statistics in future articles.

Americans seem to live in a perpetual state of fear in case they are attacked, now you also seem convinced the rest of the world wants to attack your way of life. It almost seems at times to verge on paranoia.

Put quite simply we do not see gun ownership as being necessary to preserve our freedom, the fact that some criminals have them does not mean that we should also have them instead we expect the police to take action and the courts to deal appropriately with the situation. Armed police on our streets is not something we want to see. What youi need to understand is that in the uk most people feel that way about it. The pro gun lobby are viewed as a bunch of nutters who are exactly the type of people who should not have a gun in the first place.

Stop trying to extrapolate UK statistice to the american situation and stop telling us we have rising crime because we have an unarmed population. The first is a waste of time and the second is so bizarre it's hard to comment.

You clearly have a problem in the states but you are going to have to find a solution yourselves. This post atarted out asking what did we think. Load of rubbish might not be the answer you expected or maybe even ewant to hear but it is a load of rubbish.
Bothwell
Posts: 1037
Joined: Thu Nov 25, 2004 1:35 am

UK Madness Regarding Gun Control

Post by Bothwell »

I had to hand in 7 legally owned guns when we had the amnesty, all apart fron one were historical military weapons which was why I had them really, after the ban they all had to be handed in.

Comparisons between the USA and the UK are not as good as maybe the USA and Canada. I have no link to back this up but I remember reading that Canada does have a large gun ownership (admittedly mostly hunrting weapons) but a fraction of the gun deaths. this sort of proves the poverty/inner city link. Why would you need a gun in an inner city ?

No criminals handed in weapons during the amnesty as we all knew but the break up of eastern europe has made weapons readily available to those that wish to use them. It is the "Glamourising" of guns that has contributed in large part to any rise in gun crime.
"I have done my duty. I thank God for it!"
lady cop
Posts: 14744
Joined: Wed Nov 24, 2004 1:00 pm

UK Madness Regarding Gun Control

Post by lady cop »

i would agree with Bothwell that the criminals did not of course hand over their weapons, and that guns are very much "glamorous" items to many. who needs a mac-10 or AK-47? my sheriff dept. now has to have mini-14s as well as the more traditional firepower. south florida is armed to the teeth. and i mean kids along with the druggies. it's "cool" to have a gun. but this thread relates to the UK and i wonder if you think British bobbies will ever carry? by pure necesssity?
gmc
Posts: 13566
Joined: Sun Aug 29, 2004 9:44 am

UK Madness Regarding Gun Control

Post by gmc »

We already have armed police ready if needed. The police aren't completely unarmed they carry clubs and do use them if necessary. Despite what you read incidents with armed criminals are still comparatively rare which is why it gets such publicity when it does. It makes a good tabloid story. Most of the violence here is drink related which is a problem in itself, but since nobody habitually carries a gun the violence, while serious doesn't become wide scale slaughter.

Judging from some of the posts americans seem to live in a perpetual state of fear of attack. we have our problems but you are not comparing like with like. Forget this idea we have all been deprived of the means of self defence against our will. Try and imagine a society where nobody carries a gun, again to most americans it seems inconceivable, I live near Glasgow, there are bits of the city I would be wary of being in at certain times, there are pubs I would avoid but being shot at is not one of the concerns. I've lived in london as well there were bits of london I would avoid just like any other big city anywhere on the planet but like most of my countrymen I am not exactly living in terror of attack. Arming the police wouldn't solve the problems and probably make things worse.
lady cop
Posts: 14744
Joined: Wed Nov 24, 2004 1:00 pm

UK Madness Regarding Gun Control

Post by lady cop »

GMC...thankyou for your reply. i admire that the UK does not have the wild west atmosphere that we do. i am thinking like LE, i would feel naked and helpless without my gun, but that is due to our history and high crime rate. however, i suppose if i were a bobbie in England i would feel comfortable with what i always had known .....ps i love Edinburgh and the Black Watch!
gmc
Posts: 13566
Joined: Sun Aug 29, 2004 9:44 am

UK Madness Regarding Gun Control

Post by gmc »

posted by ladycop

ps i love Edinburgh and the Black Watch!


The Black Watch are no more.
lady cop
Posts: 14744
Joined: Wed Nov 24, 2004 1:00 pm

UK Madness Regarding Gun Control

Post by lady cop »

gmc wrote: The Black Watch are no more.
i am not certain that is the case, didn't a Black Watch unit recently go to Iraq? i have seen them in the past and loved them dearly.
User avatar
abbey
Posts: 15069
Joined: Tue Nov 16, 2004 1:00 pm

UK Madness Regarding Gun Control

Post by abbey »

[QUOTE=lady cop]i am not certain that is the case, didn't a Black Watch unit recently go to Iraq? i have seen them in the past and loved them dearly.[/QUOTE

I believe you're right L.C, think they lost 5 soldiers in Iraq & left to go home to Scotland in time for xmas last week.
User avatar
Bill Sikes
Posts: 5515
Joined: Fri Aug 20, 2004 2:21 am

UK Madness Regarding Gun Control

Post by Bill Sikes »

lady cop wrote: i am not certain that is the case, didn't a Black Watch unit recently go to Iraq? i have seen them in the past and loved them dearly.


http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/scotland/4099989.stm

The stinker Hoon seems to be the prime mover. Hopefully he'll drop dead of

something quite soon, along with the rest of the sleazeballs. I'm not sure

that his proposals *will* go ahead - but with the Govt's apparent desire to

reduce our armed forces to 6 personnel in total, it would not surprise.
gmc
Posts: 13566
Joined: Sun Aug 29, 2004 9:44 am

UK Madness Regarding Gun Control

Post by gmc »

posted by bill sikes

The stinker Hoon seems to be the prime mover. Hopefully he'll drop dead of

something quite soon, along with the rest of the sleazeballs. I'm not sure

that his proposals *will* go ahead - but with the Govt's apparent desire to

reduce our armed forces to 6 personnel in total, it would not surprise.


At the moment it is definitely going ahead. Be interesting to see if it has any eccedt on the polls.

Return to “Gun Control”