Posted on 12/02/2004 5:44:47 PM PST by Mr. Mojo
"...not the criminals that liberals want to take guns away from..."
Quite right. They want to take guns away from the American Legion. Should another revolution ever occur, it will not be the criminals who are a danger to the slave-masters in the police state. Once again, the 2nd Amendment is the Enforcement Clause of the Bill of Rights.
There are obviously a number of ways to skin a cat. How you load the question - whether it is "gun-crime", "violent-crime", "gun-homicide" - will each time give you a different perspective. Perhaps you should learn that yourself.
YES the UK is undergoing a violent crime epidemic, which is exactly why we do not want to flood our supermarkets with easily available guns.
PS - the source of my "propaganda" comes from your side of the pond.
http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/glance/tables/guncrimetab.htm
I thought Britain confiscated all guns awhile back. It is against the law to carry a gun anywhere, I believe.
It makes the obvious saying, If you take away guns; only criminals will have the guns,an obvious truism.
Meanwhile, back at the ranch, I'm loading another 15 round mag in the Hi-Power.
Don't worry my friend, the Americans will bail you out again; this time; but not the French.
At least the Brits are loyal to the colonists even though you relinquish self respect and personal rights to the government. BTW, I'm 7th generation English and Welsh descent.
Why do you think that epidemic is happening? Amazing.....you still don't get it. Let's try again. Criminals will always have access to guns, so the fact that firearms are not widely available in your "supermarkets" won't make a bit of difference. That being the case, law-abiding citizens are the only ones disarmed. How, pray tell, would the disarmament of those good citizens lower the crime rate? It wouldn't, of course. It would have the exact opposite effect, and the UK's sharply-rising crime stats since strict gun-control measures went into effect in '96 bear that out.
Hoplophobia is mentally debilitating, but there appears to be hope for you and your ilk.
But Britain has never had a widespread culture of gun ownership, the bans therefore only affect a small minority of people such as farmers and collectors. Why would this cause an increase in gun crime.
More likely is that any rise would be attributed to organised crime. Also being in possession of a prohibited gun is in itself a gun crime, hardly a surprise.
That said, you're right about gun-control not being the only factor in the gun-crime rate rise. Organized crime, massive third-world immigration, and a breakdown in values are culprits as well. ......the same crap we have to deal with here in the U.S.
See this is what I can't understand about the gun-fetish lobby - a complete disregard for the real facts. Pray tell, where has this "disarmament" taken place? This was never a society of gun ownership.
I don't believe in taking away law-abiding citizens weapons - all that the laws did was punish sportsmen and farmers - and was a knee jerk reaction to the massacre by a (legal) gun owner in Scotland. But as you may well know, politicians in BOTH our countries will sadly go for the easy targets rather than chase the real criminals.
However my point is this, the UK is such a low gun owning culture anyway, that, at the moment, legal gun ownership has no bearing on crime rates (either up or down). These crime rates would have increased anyway - because of a growing underclass, a thuggish society, politically correct policing, organised criminal immigration etc.
I'm more than happy to give back those Reverends and Lords their hunting rifles and clay pigeon shotguns because they're not the ones driving around the inner cities blasting eachother to death over drug turf (and neither are they "preventing" crimes with their weapons).
However, what you're suggesting is that we introduce freely available weapons to a progressively thuggish society. The result will be like pouring petrol on an already out of control bonfire. It will just create more problems than it will solve. Yes you might get the occasional story of "man defends his home against burglars" - but more likely you'll see "drunken thugs shoot dead kids outside pub".
I'm not one for blaming crime on guns. But it seems just as rash to ADD guns to a thuggish society as it does to GRAB them. I would rather spend my time campaigning for more aggressive policing against the drunken vandalistic culture in our towns and cities than for a 2nd Amendment equivalent.
Morals, not guns, are the solution.
I think the statistics show gun-crimes not gun-deaths. So no need for the decimal point there.
You're right though, the Government is looking at the cheap, easy option to fiddle the crime figures and instead of going after criminals they go after the citizens. By banning every type of weapon they can shout out loudly "Look we are doing something about the crimewave!"
Oh and u bailed us out did you? LOL if it wasn't for our Redcoats you'd be speaking French... ;-)
Où est le magasin de pistolet le plus proche?
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/711949/posts
Do Guns Save Lives?
-Empty-Barrel Gun Policies-A legacy of nonsense from Clinton, Blair, and the Left--
-A Problem With Guns (Long... but SOOOO good)--
Shooting More Holes in Gun Control
HCI Aussie Style (read it and weep-or laugh)
The Great Australian Gun Law CON!
Through the Looking Glass and Back Again - From Anti-gunner to Firearms Instructor in Four Months
The best reply on the UK history and views on gun ownership I have read. Nice one.
Nationwide amnesty programs that "allow" citizens to turn in their guns to police. And now (since '96) there's a mandatory five-year prison sentence for anyone found in possession of a handgun.
I don't believe in taking away law-abiding citizens weapons - all that the laws did was punish sportsmen and farmers - and was a knee jerk reaction to the massacre by a (legal) gun owner in Scotland. But as you may well know, politicians in BOTH our countries will sadly go for the easy targets rather than chase the real criminals.
We're in total agreement here.
at the moment, legal gun ownership has no bearing on crime rates (either up or down). These crime rates would have increased anyway
So you believe the soaring crimes rates since the harsh restrictions in '96 to be completely unrelated to those restrictions? As I mentioned in an earlier post, I believe other factors to be involved as well (massive immigration, organized crime, breakdown in morals, etc). But completely ignoring the gun control angle is a bit naive.
I'm more than happy to give back those Reverends and Lords their hunting rifles and clay pigeon shotguns because they're not the ones driving around the inner cities blasting eachother to death over drug turf
As you know, we're not just talking about thugs killing other thugs here. Many innocents have been both caught in the crossfire and targeted themselves (in their homes and on the street).
However, what you're suggesting is that we introduce freely available weapons to a progressively thuggish society.
All I'm suggesting is that law-abiding citizens have access to tools - firearms - they can use to help protect themselves and their loved ones from the progressively thuggish society you speak of.
I understand that because of your firearms-averse culture relatively few of your good citizens would take advantage of such access and purchase these personal-defense tools, but that might change if the attacks on these citizens continue to increase at the current alarming rate.
Here in the U.S. the cities with the toughest gun control laws also have the highest crime rates. .....not coincidentally. And implementing even tougher laws invariably results in even higher crime rates.
I would rather spend my time campaigning for more aggressive policing against the drunken vandalistic culture in our towns and cities
And that would be time well spent. As you correctly pointed out, politically-correct policing makes a bad situation far worse.
Fact remains, you are over 5 times more likely to be murdered & 60 times more likely to be shot in America than in the UK.
We don't want to ban your guns, but we don't want them legalised here either.
It is interesting though that whenever this subject comes up (quite often) on here, so many Americans seem to mind so much that Britons don't have guns, when we really don;t want them. And we don't mind you guys having them either. (I've never heard a Brit suggest that Americans should be disarmed). Odd psychology that.
No further comment (on this subject) will be forthcoming from this gun-less Limey, by the way.
Oh and I would appreciate it if you people could refrain from trying to tell me that I'd be speaking German if it wasn't for you or your grandad.
Auf Wiedersehen!
Well we seem to agree about the problem, but only partially about the solution.
We shall see what will happen. As you correctly point out out, I do not think the majority of the law abiding British public would take up an option to possess legally owned firearms. It's just not in our blood.
Perhaps we need our American friends to come over and educate us... :-)
Thank you for your insight.
Something that the firearms-rights lobby has to address is the issue of irresponsible and criminal misuse of firearms.
Detroiter arraigned in death of girl, 7
Judge denies bond for truck driver
December 2, 2004
BY CECIL ANGEL and SUZETTE HACKNEY
FREE PRESS STAFF WRITERSA Detroit man who allegedly fired a gun into a home, fatally striking a 7-year-old girl, was arraigned Wednesday on murder and assault charges.
Ronald Brown, 42, a truck driver with a criminal history, was charged with first-degree, premeditated murder, three counts of assault with intent to murder, felon in possession of a firearm, committing a felony with a firearm and being a habitual offender.
Police say as many as four shots from a handgun were fired at Deva White's east-side home and at least one went through a window. The second-grader at Detroit's William Beckham Academy was an unintended victim of a dispute that police say started over a video game.
She was struck in the chest about 5 p.m. Monday while sitting in the front room of the house in the 14300 block of Glenfield near Chalmers. Her 8-year-old brother, grandmother and a family friend were home at the time of the shooting.
At his arraignment in 36th District Court in Detroit, Brown's lawyer argued before Magistrate Robert Costello that his client should be released on bond because he had not been in trouble with the law in 15 years. Attorney Randall Upshaw also argued that there's no evidence linking his client to the crime.
"I haven't seen a statement from anyone saying my client fired a gun at anyone," Upshaw said after the arraignment.
Assistant Wayne County Prosecutor Patrick Muscat said Brown was convicted in 1997 of a controlled substance violation, in 1983 of attempted burglary and in 1980 of attempted robbery, not armed. He could receive up to life in prison if convicted of being a habitual offender. Costello denied bond for Brown, who is being held in the Wayne County Jail. A preliminary examination is set for 1:30 p.m. Dec. 8.
Upshaw said there are rumors about the case that Brown's sons and Deva's brothers were angry over a video game -- "Grand Theft Auto."
Upshaw said he's read the police reports. "They believe his children and the victim were arguing over a video game. Somehow from that accusation it gathered hearsay to believe that Ronald actually did the shooting," he said. "There was rumor about the kids being into a fight -- not the adults -- the children." The game series is popular and controversial. It puts players through missions as up-and-coming criminals. To reach goals, players have to steal cars, execute rivals and successfully flee from police. Critics decry the game's violence; fans rave over the soundtracks and innovative game play.
After the shooting, Deva was taken to St. John Hospital and Medical Center where she was pronounced dead. Ferguson Funeral Home in Detroit is handling the arrangements, which were not completed Wednesday.
Securing citizens against criminal violence is a duty of government. We firearm owners and advocates must somehow devise a way to prevent such tragedies as this girl's death, not just stand around and wank on about "being able to defend ourselves."
I'm all for rolling back firearms laws, but the vast majority of people in the U.S. are not - at least not until they can be assured that their security is not going to be adversely affected immediately.
Higher crime rates - for all crimes, or for the old crimes plus the new ones?
We need to clarify that - make certain that we can show that when we say crime rises after gun control, that it means the crimes the gun control was meant to stop.
I should point out that most of the people who are opposed to relaxing firearms laws aren't very firm in that opinion. They believe that firearms laws protect them from criminals; without a doubt, it is slightly more difficult (although clearly not impossible) for criminals to arm themselves and the enhanced penalties for crimes committed with a firearm do play into criminals' decisions about which crimes to commit in what manners.
If we can convince that vast majority of the people who are opposed to rolling back firearms laws, that such further roll-backs wouldn't result in the "rivers of blood in the streets" and "shootouts at the OK Corral" that the gun-grabbers keep claiming... Then we'll make progress. The recent success of licensed concealed carry laws provides a very good model, and good data, to support this effort, but the problem still remains of convincing the majority of people who aren't paying attention...
Hey, at least our local papers (even the rags)don't start voter registration drives in your country.
I could care less if you're all disarmed. If you trust your government that much-that's your problem.
Where did you find these statistics? I've never seen them before. We don't want to ban your guns, but we don't want them legalised here either.
You couldn't ban them, and I personally could care less whether you have guns or not.
It is interesting though that whenever this subject comes up (quite often) on here, so many Americans seem to mind so much that Britons don't have guns, when we really don;t want them. And we don't mind you guys having them either. (I've never heard a Brit suggest that Americans should be disarmed). Odd psychology that.
Yeah, I'm sure you're right, and I just bet all those Brits who have been assaulted, robed, raped, or murdered because they were defenseless would agree with you. You seem to be speaking for ALL Brits, so I assume you have a link to the polls that show ALL Brits would agree with your statement that Brits don't want to be armed?
No further comment (on this subject) will be forthcoming from this gun-less Limey, by the way.
Of course not, because you can't back up your claims and it's easier to NOT deal with the truth. Btw, you pinged me!!
Oh and I would appreciate it if you people could refrain from trying to tell me that I'd be speaking German if it wasn't for you or your grandad. Auf Wiedersehen!
Oh, I wouldn't say that. That's the LEAST of your problems. What you REALLY have to worry about is that you will all be Muslims in the next decade or two. So, you might want to pick up a copy of the Quran and learn about what all the Clerics will force all of you defenseless Brits to do. LOL
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.