Look, all you got is paranoid bullshitters like TW Scott saying how many times a gun saved his life or prevented a crime. It's paranoid bullshit, not facts. It's simple. UK, strict gun control, low gun crime. USA, lax gun laws, high gun crime. It's right in front of you.
I am especially amused by politicians who call for total population disarmament because they serve no useful purpose... yet those very same assholes walk around with bodyguards, police officers and military escorts who use what and why, again? Oh right... BECAUSE THEY SERVE A USEFUL PURPOSE. Naturally, the 'simple folk' aren't granted the same privilege of being able to defend themselves properly. Fuckin' hypocrites. Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
So if we pass a few new laws, all of the existing criminals will obey those news laws and lay down their guns? ...just like that? ...because you say it's the facts? Geez, just think ...if we pass such laws in Iraq, all the insurgents and the violent militias will just lay down their guns and stop killing. Wow! I like it. Baron Max
Well, maybe they're right? I mean, if all us simple folks just bow our heads and hold our hats in our hands, the bad guys would take over everything. Then if we just did whatever they said, they wouldn't need their guns and they wouldn't kills us. Hey, sounds like a good plan to me, how 'bout you? Baron Max
Yes tell me how safe Great Britain is? International Gun Control symposium That was the time in Great Britain when its gun crime and its overall violent crime was at its absolute nadir historically. Since then, British gun controls ... http://www.davekopel.com/2a/LawRev/lrnylstk.htm Top Gun Firearms - Editorials In Great Britain, licensed owners forfeited a total of 160000 registered ... "Gun Crime Rise in London"… "Gun Crime Trebles as Weapons and Drugs Flood ... http://www.topgunfirearms.com/editorials.htm Guardian Unlimited | Special reports | Black churches in move to ... Britain's black churches have urged the terrified witnesses of gun crime to use their ... Gun Control Alliance · National Rifle Association of Great Britain ... http://www.guardian.co.uk/gun/Story/0,2763,1051611,00.html Gun Crime Soaring in Britain Despite Gun Ban gun crime. We recognise there is a continuing problem ... Our hopes and prayers are with our friends in Great Britain, and with our more visionary lawmakers ... http://www.gunblast.com/British_Crime_Soars.htm The Observer | Special reports | Gun crime spreads 'like a cancer ... According to the Association of Chief Police Officers, gun crime is 'growing like a ... Gun Control Alliance · National Rifle Association of Great Britain ... http://observer.guardian.co.uk/crimedebate/story/0,,1056411,00.html Almost One in Three People Affected by Gun Crime / Control Arms ... Even in Britain and Canada more than one in three people (39 and 36 percent ... had been affected by gun crime (30 percent and 28 percent respectively). ... http://www.amnesty.ie/content/view/full/6052/ The Problems with Government Gun Control Great Britain passed draconian gun control laws in 1997. Since then, violent crime (including GUN crime) has skyrocketed, at a rate that will cause the ... http://www.angelfire.com/pa/sergeman/issues/firearms/control.html Gun crime rockets to record high -- in Britain [Free Republic] Great Britain banned all handguns after the "Dunblane massacre." If someone can direct me to an incident where gun confiscation has reduced crime, ... http://www.freerepublic.com/forum/a3a5757a350e1.htm Guardian Unlimited | Special reports | Gun crime spreads 'like a ... Gun crime spreads 'like a cancer' across Britain ... Gun Control Alliance · National Rifle Association of Great Britain ... http://www.guardian.co.uk/gun/Story/0,2763,1056412,00.html
Blah blah blah Buffalo. 46 gun homicides per year in the UK, vs 16,000 in the USA is all we have to say. You are desperately trying to prove something that just isn't there. As hand guns in the UK were only ever allowed for sporting purposes, and had to be kep locked away in a gun safe at all other times, attempting to draw some causal link between post Dunblane legislation and any rise in gun crime is just pathetic. There are peaks and troughs in gun crime; Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! So before you start making correlation about the incredibly low rate of gun crime in the UK, where one incident can radically affect the statistics, why don't you tackle something closer to home? Please explain the peaks and troughs in the above graph, because I could claim that the drop since 1994 was due to the Brady bill and assault weapons ban, and claim this as proof that restrictions work! What you don't seem to understand, is that if we have 46 gun homicides in the UK one year, a few extra are significant, and affect the percentages. People make wild claims that gun crime rate are 'soaring', it could double, and still not hit a hundred per year! If there were an extra 250 gun deaths (adjusted per capita) in the USA, would that affect your stats much? NO! The facts stand, that despite the claim that guns keep people safe, you have four times the total homicide rate, are 70 times more likely to get shot dead in the USA, and women are 13 time more likely to get raped. This is the society you have built, are you proud?
Again Max, you deliberately ignore everything I've said in a pathetic attempt to make a point. If a law abiding citizen will not sell guns or ammo to people who cannot prove they too are law abiding, by means of a granted firearms certificate, it will become increasingly more hard for criminals to get guns and ammunition. These are the procedural changes we need to make Max. As you point out, criminals don't obey the law, so law abiding citizens are charged with the responisibility for not fuelling crime, by delivering guns to criminals, and to keep them safe, so they cannot be easily stolen.
So you think that criminals buy their guns from law-abiding citizens??? ...LOL! That's the silliest, dumbest, most ignorant statement that I've ever heard on this forum!! No, Phlog, criminals get their weapons through major theft of gun shipments, gun distributors, gun retailers and gun manufacturers. The few weapons that they might get from law-abiding citizens, they don't fuckin' BUY, they steal ...which is already against the law!!!!! Which is already a law in most states. I can't believe, really, that you think that criminals get their guns by buying them from legal, law-abiding citizens. Just think about that for a minute ......okay, now, since your entire premise is based on that principle, please provide us with valid, reliable info to prove that that's what occurs. You should also read carefully some of the info that Buffalo has posted ...it's pretty interesting. I didn't realize that Britian had such a problem with guns and murder and crime. Hmmm? Baron Max
Homicides in the UK are tallied differently than they are in the USA. You should check that out a bit more closely, Phlog. So compariing those statistics is like comparing oranges to apples! Baron Max
People sell weapons to 2nd hand shops. 2nd hand shops do not perform checks, nor do gun fairs. This is one way the law abiding aid criminals getting guns. "About 211,000 handguns and 382,000 long guns were stolen in noncommercial thefts in 1994." (http://www.ncjrs.gov/txtfiles/165476.txt) That's a lot of guns, Max. If these were secured properly, as is required under UK law (less than 3,000 thefts per year), that number would be far lower. Adjusted per capita, around 15,000 ish You didn't realise it, because the UK doesn't have those problems, Max. Wehave one quarter the homicide rate of the USA. 1/70th of the gun homicide rate, and 1/13th the rate of rape. btw, this bullshit about how the stats are compiled about convictions only being counted in the UK? If a coroner delivers a report of murder, it counts as a murder. We don't have to convict anyone; "Even if the accused was found not guilty the death may still be regarded as a homicide by ONS, on the basis of information in the associated Form 120, and assigned an appropriate code." (http://www.statistics.gov.uk/STATBASE/xsdataset.asp?vlnk=5681&More=Y)
I've tried to buy guns in such places and the choices are pretty meager! If those gun sales were shut down altogether, it wouldn't even put a dent in the guns available to criminals! Do you actually, really, think that criminals go to such stores and sales to buy their guns????? So you think the owners of those guns want them stolen? ...so they just leave them lying around to be picked up?? And you think one lousy law will stop any of that theft? C'mon, Phlog, you're just stretching now ...and losing the discussion. "About 211,000 handguns and 382,000 long guns were stolen in noncommercial thefts in 1994." Did you notice the word "stolen", Phlog? That usually means that it was against the law. But you want to add one more law?? ...as if it would make any difference to the theives??? Wow! Baron Max
In all honesty, I'm way passed trying to debate whether or not citizens should be allowed guns: to me, it's a given and a guarantee that I still have the ability to defend myself with the most efficient means possible, along with having the opportunity to participate in challenging and fun sporting activities. It's also clearly obvious that firearms ownership provides a powerful deterrent in states and countries where concealed and open carry is allowed. Simple logic also covers many of the reasons why banning the object won't solve the root problem: for example, cars, cigarettes, alcohol, swimming pools and stairs cause more deaths individually than firearms, so should we ban them as well? I don't need to dwell on the reasons to support firearms ownership: it's a ridiculously obvious positive and the overwhelming amount of studies and statistics show it. The bottom line, as far as I am concerned, is this: you have every right to deny yourself a firearm, but don't you dare attempt disarming me and leaving me defenseless when it's patently obvious that criminals will always be there to prey on law-abiding citizens.
I was just going to vote and not say anything but after reading this I had to respond. Both 2nd hand shops and gun shows have to by law do background checks. I know this first hand as a matter of fact where I live you need a firearm owners I.D. before you can even buy a gun. Look it does not matter which side of the argument you are on they both have an agenda and there are people on both sides that will make stuff up or repeat false facts. I believe people have a right to defend them selves, property, family, etc... and one of those ways is with a gun.
Second-hand/pawn shops ARE required to have the buyer fill out the appropriate forms to be filed by with the federal authorities - it's the same forms that new-gun dealers use. Only PRIVATE individuals are not required to do that. So you can see that that argument above is not only silly, but it's lying and misleading and false and untrue and probably libelous! Yep! I see no valid reason why anyone on Earth would not permit someone to defend themselves or their loved ones ...it makes no sense! Again, I'll say that if we could find a way to keep handguns out of the hands of criminals, I'd be all for it. But not at the expense of self-protection. Baron Max
Whoopedy-doo. Those countries have less "gun crimes" but higher "overall crimes". Gee, real nice exchange. I think I'll keep my gun and deal with the 600,000 or so crimes that happen each year involving a gun, but also the 2.5 million crimes prevented each year thanks to a citizen having access to a firearm. Notice how my decision is based on a more positive outcome rather than a negative? More crimes being prevented here thanks to guns instead of more crimes happening in the UK/Australia/Canada thanks to banning them. And murders would still happen regardless of a criminal using a gun or not. According to the numbers below, about half of the murders commited here are by guns. Even cutting that number in half and using other methods to say we can no longer own guns, that still puts us ahead of other countries by double their amounts. We're simply more violent and getting rid of guns won't stop those murders. And hey, getting rid of guns also won't stop the UK/Australia/Canada from having the same amount of assaults as us, two times to triple the amount of burglaries as us, double the car thefts as us, double the rapes as us, more property crimes than us, the UK having more robberies than us, or the UK having more overall crimes than us. All it'd do is make the citizens of the U.S. bigger victims than we already are which would increase our crime stats big time as they blew up when the UK and Australia's gun bans went into effect. Despite guns being practically banned in the UK and Australia, those two countries along with Canada still have the same amount of violent crimes per capita as the U.S. Most all other crimes are actually higher in those countries than the U.S. Firearms are just a tool and it's not the only tool you can kill with. Criminals in those other countries, while they still have guns and why gun crimes still exist there, they just choose to use other means to kill, rob, or assault you with. Even in the U.S. with our numerous gun-wielding thugs, knives are still the weapon of choice. At least with guns out of the hands of law-abiding citizens, it puts everything in favor of criminals. You no longer have the great equilizer of a firearm. Why choose to make our people bigger victims than they already are? I don't want our crime rates to increase by that happening as they did to your countries. That's whacked out logic. Stats linked from a page from an anti-gun person in the morality forum where I decided to actually show all the information rather than cherry-picking: What you fail to realize is that those people rely on their government to live, and by that, I mean food and water -- that's how those governments have control over there. Same with North Korea, Africa, and other hellholes. In the U.S., many areas can survive on their own without the aid of their government. We have so much food and resources that craploads go to waste each year. We export so much food and other aid to other countries too. However, in those dictatorships, there's very little essential supplies in the hands of the people as it's all government controlled. That's not the way it is over here. The only places that would be like that in the U.S. in a government collapse would be desert communities or cities with no agriculture around. Thankfully, I won't have to worry about any of that where I live. Well, yeah, obviously, but keyword is "training video" that show professionals doing the work, heh. I've also seen knife-training videos where a guy with a knife was able to kill another starting out with a 10 foot distance between them, rushing the guy before the other could even pull his handgun out of his holster. Thank goodness the majority of criminals are just average joes and not some kind of highly trained assassin. Facts, the U.S. is a more violent country period, even though the UK/Australia/Canada has the same amount of violent crimes as us. The U.S. are rebels. How do you think this country was founded in the first place? Heck, just look at us ignoring international law in current events. Facts, even though the UK has less firearm deaths or murders than us, their crime rates are higher than ours, period. Thanks, but no thanks. Yep. If the U.S. has no guns anymore, our numbers would be even higher than they are now. At least our people are actually able to stop criminals whereas people in the UK gotta run and hide calling for their bobbies unable to do jack squat. With the arsenal of firearms that exist in the U.S., criminals will always have access to them even if a gun ban happened. That'd just make us easier and bigger targets and would increase crime rates as they did in other countries. Without our citizens and their guns, that'd be 2.5 million more successful crimes added each year. Actually it'd be higher because the 2.5 milliom crimes that weren't stopped, the criminal would be free able to do even more harm. I have graphs too: http://www.fraserinstitute.ca/admin/books/files/FailedExperiment.pdf The Failed Experiment: Gun Control and Public Safety in Canada, Australia, England and Wales. - Fraser Institute And what is the point of your graph? Do you even realize it? Do you know what your graph is actually showing? The point is the effects that Prohibition and the War on Drugs had on us. Take note what happens when someone tries to ban a common item that people like. If you were to ban guns, porn, video games, fast food, the internet, sex, pets, cars, music, or anything else that should be every person's god-given right, you will see the uprisings that happen due to it. Uh, no, I'd say those are facts. Paranoid bullshit would be a pro-gunner living in an ivory tower that has never been victim to a crime and never will be yet preaches on and on about needing a firearm for his safety. Yep, and the reason why private individuals aren't required to do so is because what these people don't realize is that there's no way you can prove a private citizen owns/sells/or have sold something. It's the reason why restrictive laws are pretty stupid. Nobody knows until someone screws up. Why do you think so many people have drugs or even grow marijuana in their home even though they're illegal? Why do you think people illegally download music on the internet? Why do you think so many people jaywalk or drive without a seatbelt? It's very hard to know what people do with their own private lives when the authorities aren't watching unless someone screws up and makes it public for the authorities to find out. What, you want the police to search everyone's homes periodically to make sure they have no illegal music on their computer, no guns, no drugs, married couples are sleeping in separate beds in whacky states that still have that law, etc etc? It's the same reason why you don't know if a criminal owns a gun even though it's illegal for them to. It's the same reason why you don't know if a person is carrying a firearm on them without a permit. It's the reason why in Finland you can't own a gun for self-defensive reasons and have to take it apart and put in a safe, but a person can still use that gun for defensive purposes and not have it disassembled in their safe because nobody is there to check up on it. People in the UK have no problem with their privacy rights anyways. I mean hey, they have a camera for every 14 people watching them. Laws mean nothing if they aren't able to be enforced. And laws can only be enforced once someone screws up and makes something public. It's the same reason why the police won't be able to protect you from having a burglar break into your home and kill your child until AFTER the crime has been commited for you to dial 911 for them to first know about it.. but then it's too late. So hey, if you want your rights to privacy gone, then go right ahead. Let's put cameras on every street corner and hey, even in every home, and how about RFID implants in everyone as that outta stop crime, yea? Oh wait, I forgot that even with all the big brother cameras and no access to guns, the UK still has a higher overall crime rate than all those countries, even the oh-so-horrible United States. See? A stupid, idealogical, and theorhetical idea with so-called noble intent that looks good on paper and in people's heads, but flat out fails when put into effect. Why isn't the UK dead last in regards to crime with everyone watching them and people having no access to guns? I mean, hey, guns cause crime, right? Obviously not people. Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! - N
Aren't you an anarchist? How do you plan on overthrow of the government when they take aware your guns?
Violence is for species that exist. All the pacifist ones were devoured by predators millions of years ago. As for handguns, they're a luxury, not a necessity.
