GlockTalk.com
Home Forums Classifieds Blogs Today's Posts Search Social Groups



  
SIGN-UP
Notices

Glock Talk
Welcome To The Glock Talk Forums.

 
  
Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 04-12-2010, 13:43   #301
Tempest UK
Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Bucks, England
Posts: 24
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cody Jarrett View Post
... "gun facts 4.0" ...
Good read, thanks.
Tempest UK is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-28-2010, 23:00   #302
alaskacop556
Senior Member
 
alaskacop556's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Alaska
Posts: 199
I wish I could have read through all 13 pages of this thread but this UK vs US gun situation is always interesting to listen to.

Never been to the UK but have talked to several visiting tourist and active military personel. Their responses can be quite interesting, espeically seeing me on duty (and armed). Of course pro and anti gun comments vary but one thing I always try to make them understand is that criminals could care less about laws prohibited firearms. UK's sharp rise in violent crime is testimate to that fact (criminals don't care). For me, it comes down to a simple truth...if you believe that a person is innocent of a crime until they are proven to be quilty in a court of law, they why would you find millions of gun owners guility of "possible" crimes? Someone earlier on this thread stated that legalizing firearms in the UK would just make the problem worse. I don't agree. In the US, some of the worse places of gun violence have some of the strictest laws...a high ranking member of the New York police department once said in a public statement he was very concerned about gun violence in New York and blamed the violence on less restrictive gun laws in surrounding states...meaning he felt that criminals were getting firearms there and bringing them back into New York. He urged surrounding states to adopted tougher laws on firearm ownership because of the violence they brought back to New York. Like any true politican, this is a "knee jerk" reaction to a problem with a somewhat simple solution, carry stiffer penalties for people convicted of crimes involving firearms. Dont make the general population suffer (guilty) for the actions of a select few.
alaskacop556 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-29-2010, 05:57   #303
stevemc
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 482
Alaska Cop,

The argument that banning guns causes crime to go up doesn't always hold water. Sometimes the crimes are so bad, with such frequency, that the only thing for local legislators to do is restrict firearms. If you live in a relatively low crime area, that may be hard to understand. I would not give up my guns if they became illegal locally, because I am a firm believer in 2A, and the right for us to protect ourselves. I am not looking for a philosophical argument, just stating a fact that local circumstances can affect local protocol. Trying to push our way of life on other countries is an asinine thing to do. It is not better or worse, it is just different.

Steve.
stevemc is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-29-2010, 08:02   #304
Cambo
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Texas
Posts: 2,805
Quote:
Originally Posted by stevemc View Post
Alaska Cop,

The argument that banning guns causes crime to go up doesn't always hold water. Sometimes the crimes are so bad, with such frequency, that the only thing for local legislators to do is restrict firearms. If you live in a relatively low crime area, that may be hard to understand. I would not give up my guns if they became illegal locally, because I am a firm believer in 2A, and the right for us to protect ourselves. I am not looking for a philosophical argument, just stating a fact that local circumstances can affect local protocol. Trying to push our way of life on other countries is an asinine thing to do. It is not better or worse, it is just different.

Steve.
How does restricting citizens from getting guns keep criminals from getting guns? Have you ever heard of the black market? England had a problem a few years ago with full auto MAC 10s showing up on their streets. Those guns weren't sold in gun shops or owned by law abiding citizens. You should quit defending those on the other side. If you need help understanding the more guns = less crime argument, check FBI and DOJ statistics on such matters and you will see that you are wrong.
__________________
Browning Hi Power, the Ultimate 9mm
Cambo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-29-2010, 23:25   #305
alaskacop556
Senior Member
 
alaskacop556's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Alaska
Posts: 199
Quote:
Originally Posted by stevemc View Post
Alaska Cop,

The argument that banning guns causes crime to go up doesn't always hold water. Sometimes the crimes are so bad, with such frequency, that the only thing for local legislators to do is restrict firearms. If you live in a relatively low crime area, that may be hard to understand. I would not give up my guns if they became illegal locally, because I am a firm believer in 2A, and the right for us to protect ourselves. I am not looking for a philosophical argument, just stating a fact that local circumstances can affect local protocol. Trying to push our way of life on other countries is an asinine thing to do. It is not better or worse, it is just different.

Steve.
I am not trying to push our way of life onto others but just trying to point out the illogical reasoning behind certain laws. I know the UK has never been a "gun culture" (as evident in most LEO's there are not armed....because it gives the appearance of being too aggressive, but that is another topic of disscussion). Remember that our judical process was modeled after their's (innocent until proven quilty).

An example I will use involved an earlier thread concerning a man charged with a firearm crime in the UK. I cannot remember all the details but the issue was that he had found a shotgun on his property in a plastic bag. Thinking this was a stolen firearm and may have been used in a crime, he decided to take it to the local police station to turn in. After arriving to the police department and handing over the firearm, he was charged (and convicted) of criminal pocession of a firearm. At his sentencing it was never in question that he had just found the firearm to turn in but that strict interpretation of the law required the judge to charge the man with a crime, regardless of his intent (this actual article appears somewhere in GT). With laws (and the common sense; or lack there of) concerning firearms ownership in the UK, it is no wonder that they are having issues.

Last edited by alaskacop556; 11-29-2010 at 23:26..
alaskacop556 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-30-2010, 18:25   #306
stevemc
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 482
@alaskacop,

You missed my point entirely. Not surprising. I will not waste the good members of this boards' time further. By the way, the case you gave as an example is one of two that are frequently referred to regarding the law in GB. The other is the man that was jailed for defending his farm. The detail that nobody mentions, is that the kid was running away and was shot in the back. That would be manslaughter here as well. To understand the reference you made, you should read up on it. It is old news, and well documented.
You should also drop the attitude. More guns does not always mean less crime in all cases, whether you believe it or not is irrelevant. Not everyone should have a firearm, and your way is absolutely not the only way.
stevemc is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-30-2010, 18:37   #307
Cody Jarrett
Senior Member
 
Cody Jarrett's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 4,613
Quote:
Originally Posted by stevemc View Post
@alaskacop,

You missed my point entirely. Not surprising. I will not waste the good members of this boards' time further. By the way, the case you gave as an example is one of two that are frequently referred to regarding the law in GB. The other is the man that was jailed for defending his farm. The detail that nobody mentions, is that the kid was running away and was shot in the back. That would be manslaughter here as well. To understand the reference you made, you should read up on it. It is old news, and well documented.
You should also drop the attitude. More guns does not always mean less crime in all cases, whether you believe it or not is irrelevant. Not everyone should have a firearm, and your way is absolutely not the only way.
Have to agree with alaskacop. You're missing the point. America is a nation founded on freedom. That freedom was won by using firearms to end the oppresive rule of England. ALL freedom exists at the end of a gun. No government, not even the American, may take away the freedom of those who will not allow it. How should a law-abiding citizen in England defend herself from a home invasion rapist with a knife? Well, since the rape is inevitable she might as well lay back and enjoy it.

Statistics from the English ministry of defense show that violent crime has increased since England's gun ban. Our crime stats show that violent crime has decreased steadily in America for the past decade. We don't make good victims. Those without means of defense make excellent victims.
Cody Jarrett is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-25-2011, 02:03   #308
OldCurlyWolf
Senior Member
 
OldCurlyWolf's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 745
Quote:
Originally Posted by stevemc View Post
Alaska Cop,

The argument that banning guns causes crime to go up doesn't always hold water. Sometimes the crimes are so bad, with such frequency, that the only thing for local legislators to do is restrict firearms. If you live in a relatively low crime area, that may be hard to understand. I would not give up my guns if they became illegal locally, because I am a firm believer in 2A, and the right for us to protect ourselves. I am not looking for a philosophical argument, just stating a fact that local circumstances can affect local protocol. Trying to push our way of life on other countries is an asinine thing to do. It is not better or worse, it is just different.

Steve.
Steve

The highlighted statement is not only in violation of the constitution, it is asinine in the utmost.

UNDERSTAND THIS: CRIMINALS DON'T CARE!!!!!! THEY WILL NOT OBEY THEY LOCAL LEGISLATION!!!
__________________
I won't be wronged, I won't be insulted, and I won't be laid a hand on. I don't do those things to other people and I require the same of them.

Politicians should serve two terms, one in office and one in prison.(borrowed from RioKid)
OldCurlyWolf is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-25-2011, 07:21   #309
dugo
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 936
Quote:
Originally Posted by stevemc View Post
@alaskacop,

You missed my point entirely. Not surprising. I will not waste the good members of this boards' time further. By the way, the case you gave as an example is one of two that are frequently referred to regarding the law in GB. The other is the man that was jailed for defending his farm. The detail that nobody mentions, is that the kid was running away and was shot in the back. That would be manslaughter here as well. To understand the reference you made, you should read up on it. It is old news, and well documented.
You should also drop the attitude. More guns does not always mean less crime in all cases, whether you believe it or not is irrelevant. Not everyone should have a firearm, and your way is absolutely not the only way.
That the example pointed out by Alaskacop is frequently used does not make it any less relevant, or less unjust. Does it?

In your post (above), you seem to subscribe to: "I said it, so that's the way it is, end of discussion". So, not sure what you mean by "attitude".

Do you also seem to claim that the only thing some local politicians "can" do about crime is take away victims' ability to protect themselves? Since such laws don't take guns from criminal hands, that claim (even the waqy you worded it) seems instead to point out a failure by politicians who are inadequate to the task, not a constructive solution to problems of violence.

It seems some politicians just don't know what to do, and trump up controversy about guns because they want to appear competent.

Others may want to accomplish something not acceptable, so they disguise it as though they were really interested in preventing violence, while they actually seek something else.

Some people are merely rationalizing irrational fears, which often may stem from lack of education and/or lack of understanding.

I imagine there are some people who really believe that gun restrictions for people who are not likely to commit illegal acts, potential victims, are disarmed, it will mean the criminals will eventually be unable to get guns: sort of an erratz "trickle-down" theory. But disregarding the threat of violence in order to address the threat of violence...?? Even people who bought in to this might ask what victims should do in the mean time. Unfortunately, some people may have been misled. To discover whether one has been misled, one must take an objective step back, seek objective facts (not just propaganda, "common-sense" guesses, or the opinions of others), and re-assess the issue. Many people swear they do that, but most do not.

The way you present your position makes it seem to fit that last paragraph, by the way.

At best, none of these seem very well thought out, and none are constructive. Can you think of any better way to handle the problem?

Last edited by dugo; 03-26-2011 at 15:38..
dugo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-23-2013, 13:13   #310
pawprint2
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2013
Posts: 27
The brits are liars of the highest order. The IRA killed a lot of brits with guns, these are not reported at all as gun crime in the UK! If they were they may have to look at themselves-something subjects don't like to do, we are not subjects, but rather citizens, the price of liberty is eternal vigilance! Why should they have reported these killings as gun crime? They [the british gov] locked up, after Criminal trials many members of the IRA-on one hand it was a crime, on the other it was a war etc. Their arrogance is only eclipsed by their ability to lie, and defend the lies.

Last edited by pawprint2; 05-23-2013 at 13:59..
pawprint2 is offline   Reply With Quote

 
  
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On

Forum Jump




All times are GMT -6. The time now is 22:08.




Homepage
FAQ
Forums
Calendar
Advertise
Gallery
GT Wiki
GT Blogs
Social Groups
Classifieds


Users Currently Online: 1,316
313 Members
1,003 Guests

Most users ever online: 2,244
Nov 11, 2013 at 16:42