Poll: gun rights but how much is too much?

Recommended Videos

Superbeast

Bound up the dead triumphantly!
Jan 7, 2009
669
0
0
Kathinka said:
criminals who commit crimes with their weapons will always get their hands on some, no matter how strict the law is. check england, where they have one of the strictest gun laws of the world, and yet one of the highest gun crime rates. the crime rate with firearm related incidents even INCREASED after the further tightening of the law a couple of years ago!
[sub]emphasis mine[/sub]

Bull.

SHIT.



Ah bugger, you can't read it.

pic from
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_violence
Make sure you sort the per-capita tables to go from highest-lowest (click the icons in the column headings)

2nd from bottom - UK. Bottom - Singapore. 9th from top - US. Top - Colombia. Of 37 entries.

How is the UK "One of the highest" when it's in 35th-from-top, behind of all the other European countries, and way behind the USA in terms of deaths-per-capita?

1997 was the last firearms legislation, so it wasn't really "a few years ago", and you will notice that every single piece of modern legislation (ie post 1950) on firearms has been in response to some sort of massacre, which then hasn't re-occurred.

Gun crime took a bit of a rise as gang violence started to impact the UK, but it's tailing off these days thanks to the legislation and decent policing on the matter.

As for the main topic...I'm not getting involved. This has been done hundreds of times and over hundreds of pages. I tend to be anti-gun except for in cases of hunting. But I would like to own my own firearms, so eh. Do a fecking search if you want my in-depth opinions, I don't want to slug this one out *again*.

Just calling someone out on pertinently false claims.
 

Zykon TheLich

Extra Heretical!
Legacy
Jun 6, 2008
3,506
850
118
Country
UK
I don't really give a crap what the gun laws are in the US, but for my home country, the UK I think things are about right. A strict licensing procedure and once you have one you can buy manual action rifles and shotguns.
Personally I think the legistaltion before the Hungerford and Dunblane massacres, which had similar strict license procedures but allowed semi auto rifles and handguns, was generally adequate, if it had been left as it was I don't think it would have affected the country negatively. If the old legislation was still in place I would be quite happy with it.

Also, on the firearms crime in the UK, it went up steadily until 2000, since then it has remained pretty much stable. But given that all crimes have been steadily rising across the board anyway since far before the banning of semi automitic rifles in 1987 and handguns in 1997 I don't think the legality of firearms has made any difference to UK crime rates, guns never featured for self defence in the UK anyway, even when handgun ownership was legal you couldn't carry them on you.

Check out the links on this page for actual figures, rather than bullshit from the tabloids or pro gunners in other countries trying to use the UK to bolster their position.

http://www.homeoffice.gov.uk/rds/crimeew0708.html


Also...nice one Superbeast, it really annoys me when people parrot bullshit about the UK's crime rates to justify their gunlaws. I don't care what their laws are, I just wish they'd stop using false information about the UK.
 

Drexler

New member
Nov 20, 2009
31
0
0
Guns don't kill people, people kill people, they are just tools, their is nothing inherently wrong with them.

I for one, own 7 shotguns, 2 hands guns, and 9 rifles, all have a purpose, I for one have never killed a human being.... But those deer on my wall atest to my marksmanship
 

thylasos

New member
Aug 12, 2009
1,920
0
0
The UK rules seem pretty reasonable, to me.

Join a gun club, then you can apply to the police for a firearms license which covers rifles and long-barrel revolvers, or a shotgun permit (the process of applying requiring various documentation relating to your identity and club membership, as well as character references, then an interview by the police's local firearms safety officer). No pistols, without long-barrel, and no full-automatic anything, outside of the military and special units of the police. Limits on ammo you can own at one time.

You have to attend the gun club relatively regularly to continue to hold your license, and it'll get taken away if you break any rule whatsoever, pretty much.

Better to be safe than sorry.
 

Kathinka

New member
Jan 17, 2010
1,141
0
0
Superbeast said:
Bull.

SHIT.

Just calling someone out on pertinently false claims.
you could do so in a little mor civil maner though, allright? ;)

that covers homocide, but most gun crimes are not homocides but armed robbery, threatening and non-homocide-attacks.

the tightening of gun laws was 1997 in england.
1997 there were 4900 gun-related crimes in the uk and wales
2000 there were 7360
2003 already 10300
2004 more then 11000

you see the number of gun related crimes is sharply on the rise since the new gun law. number of homocide did not go down by that much as you can see.

source: this [http://www.file-upload.net/download-2199444/England-und-Wales--Delikte-mit-Feuerwaffen_1264531704184377643.pdf.html]
yeah i know it's german, but you will get it..
 

Superbeast

Bound up the dead triumphantly!
Jan 7, 2009
669
0
0
scumofsociety said:
Also...nice one Superbeast, it really annoys me when Americans parrot bullshit about the UK's crime rates to justify their gunlaws. I don't care what their laws are, I just wish they'd stop using false information about the UK.
Thank you.

I believe that Americans are totally free to do what they want about blowing each other away.

Just don't bullshit about my country.

Just like in the healthcare debate, it's really annoying that the USA keeps twisting facts about the UK to make their own policies seem like the "smart choice" - facts that are so twisted they are simply untrue (death panels), yet the majority of the voting American public won't bother to check their claims.

Remember "Stephen Hawking would have died if he was British and cared for in England!" - that continued after Hawking pointed out to the American media that he was, in fact, English and alive because of the NHS system.

Anyways, I'm wandering off topic...so yeah - believe what you like guys, just accept that others have differing opinions...and don't make up bullshit to support your ideas.

++EDIT++

Kathinka said:
you could do so in a little mor civil maner though, allright? ;)

that covers homocide, but most gun crimes are not homocides but armed robbery, threatening and non-homocide-attacks.

the tightening of gun laws was 1997 in england.
1997 there were 4900 gun-related crimes in the uk and wales
2000 there were 7360
2003 already 10300
2004 more then 11000

you see the number of gun related crimes is sharply on the rise since the new gun law. number of homocide did not go down by that much as you can see.
No, you said "england...which has one of the highest gun crime rates"

Which simply isn't true.

Wikipedia doesn't have the big tables of general gun crime stats so you can compare country-to-country like you used to be able to. Looking for an online source at the moment.

I did not deny that gun-crime rates have risen since the 1997 ban - but *all* crime has risen since then, and as a percentage of total crime the gun-crime rate has remained about the same.

"In the 2007/08 BCS, the use of a firearm14 in violent incidents has remained stable at
one per cent compared with 2006/07. Between 1995 and 2007/08, the proportion of
violent incidents where a firearm was used has remained stable at or below one per
cent (Table 3.06).
"
http://www.homeoffice.gov.uk/rds/pdfs08/hosb0708.pdf

Warning - that's a 238 page source on UK crime.
 

Zykon TheLich

Extra Heretical!
Legacy
Jun 6, 2008
3,506
850
118
Country
UK
Kathinka said:
that covers homocide, but most gun crimes are not homocides but armed robbery, threatening and non-homocide-attacks.

the tightening of gun laws was 1997 in england.
1997 there were 4900 gun-related crimes in the uk and wales
2000 there were 7360
2003 already 10300
2004 more then 11000

you see the number of gun related crimes is sharply on the rise since the new gun law. number of homocide did not go down by that much as you can see.

source: this [http://www.file-upload.net/download-2199444/England-und-Wales--Delikte-mit-Feuerwaffen_1264531704184377643.pdf.html]
yeah i know it's german, but you will get it..
I suggest you read this.

http://www.homeoffice.gov.uk/rds/pdfs09/hosb0209.pdf

page 33 onwards

Sorry, its in english, couldn't read your one, lots of weird instructions and pop ups came up in german and then it went to a page trying to get me to buy a printer (I think) so I gave up. However, our own government records are better for me.

Part of the reason is the crackdown on 'gun crime' the police are so hot on it and the public so jumpy that they will arrest kids with replicas or bb guns. Roughly half the gun crime involves air rifles IIRC. As I said before, handguns were never used for self defense in the UK, you couldn't carry them even when they were legal, banning them made no difference as far as criminals or victims of crime were concerned, it just affected gun club members who owned handguns.

Superbeast said:
Thank you.

I believe that Americans are totally free to do what they want about blowing each other away.

Just don't bullshit about my country.

Just like in the healthcare debate, it's really annoying that the USA keeps twisting facts about the UK to make their own policies seem like the "smart choice" - facts that are so twisted they are simply untrue (death panels), yet the majority of the voting American public won't bother to check their claims.

Remember "Stephen Hawking would have died if he was British and cared for in England!" - that continued after Hawking pointed out to the American media that he was, in fact, English and alive because of the NHS system.

Anyways, I'm wandering off topic...so yeah - believe what you like guys, just accept that others have differing opinions...and don't make up bullshit to support your ideas.
Indeed, although just to point out, I've changed "Americans" to "people" as I've just realised the person you were talikng to isn't American. I just assumed, naughty me, I shouldn't do that.
 

Kathinka

New member
Jan 17, 2010
1,141
0
0
scumofsociety said:
Kathinka said:
that covers homocide, but most gun crimes are not homocides but armed robbery, threatening and non-homocide-attacks.

the tightening of gun laws was 1997 in england.
1997 there were 4900 gun-related crimes in the uk and wales
2000 there were 7360
2003 already 10300
2004 more then 11000

you see the number of gun related crimes is sharply on the rise since the new gun law. number of homocide did not go down by that much as you can see.

source: this [http://www.file-upload.net/download-2199444/England-und-Wales--Delikte-mit-Feuerwaffen_1264531704184377643.pdf.html]
yeah i know it's german, but you will get it..
I suggest you read this.

http://www.homeoffice.gov.uk/rds/pdfs09/hosb0209.pdf

page 33 onwards

sorry, its in english
it's allright, i understand a little english ;D

hmmm just some things page 33 says

Firearm offences (excluding air weapons) were up by two per cent to 9,865
There were 2,562 offences in which the weapon was classified as an imitation in 2007/08, a
two per cent increase compared to 2006/07
Firearm crimes involving any type of injury increased by two per cent in 2007/08
especially the figure on page 34, figure 2.1 is interesting, where you can see the incline of firearm crime over the years.

thanks for the source :)



the pink line is what i'm talking about *point*
 

Superbeast

Bound up the dead triumphantly!
Jan 7, 2009
669
0
0
Kathinka said:
it's allright, i understand a little english ;D

hmmm just some things page 33 says

Firearm offences (excluding air weapons) were up by two per cent to 9,865
There were 2,562 offences in which the weapon was classified as an imitation in 2007/08, a
two per cent increase compared to 2006/07
Firearm crimes involving any type of injury increased by two per cent in 2007/08
especially the figure on page 34, figure 2.1 is interesting, where you can see the incline of firearm crime over the years.

thanks for the source :)
Read on more - page 93 makes the point (I quoted it in my last post)

"In the 2007/08 BCS, the use of a firearm14 in violent incidents has remained stable at
one per cent compared with 2006/07. Between 1995 and 2007/08, the proportion of
violent incidents where a firearm was used has remained stable at or below one per
cent (Table 3.06)."

So it shows that the rise in guncrime is just concurrent with the rise in crime in general. but still a very minimal amount of crime is actually committed with firearms, and thus we certainly *won't* be one of the worst in the world

And read a little more carefully about the 07/08 figures:

"Handguns were used in 4,151 offences during 2007/08, one per cent (or 22 offences)
fewer than in 2006/07. Shotguns were used in 594 offences, down three per cent (or 18
offences) (Table 3.08)." - p92

Your point says that imitation firearms went up 2%. Actual firearms decreased 1%.
 

Kathinka

New member
Jan 17, 2010
1,141
0
0
Superbeast said:
So it shows that the rise in guncrime is just concurrent with the rise in crime in general.
that's exactly my point! the tightening of gun control did not help. criminals don't care about the law, they get guns to commit crimes anyway. and people who go through all the trouble, regulations and paperwork to get guns are usually the most law-abiding and responsible persons.

or should be, some exeptions of course are not...welll...you catch my drift *thinks of some hillbilly rednecks padding heir 500+ shotguns when not putting up burning crosses with their buddies*
 

Superbeast

Bound up the dead triumphantly!
Jan 7, 2009
669
0
0
Kathinka said:
[
that's exactly my point! the tightening of gun control did not help. criminals don't care about the law, they get guns to commit crimes anyway. and people who go through all the trouble, regulations and paperwork to get guns are usually the most law-abiding and responsible persons.

or should be, some exeptions of course are not...welll...you catch my drift *thinks of some hillbilly rednecks padding heir 500+ shotguns when not putting up burning crosses with their buddies*
You say that...but have you seen the figures of automatic firearms-related crime?

Oh yeah, there isn't any since we banned them.

Whilst the gun-crime continued to rise concurrently to the general rise in crime, one has to question *why* the gun-crime rate in general is so incredibly low in this country.

Maybe it has something to do with the fact that the bans make it very difficult to obtain a weapon in the firstplace, so there aren't a lot of guns in circulation. When the only guns being used in crime are illegal ones, then the gun-laws won't help, as criminals don't care...but it does make it harder to obtain the weapon in the first place, and it prevents "crimes of passion" and "accidents" that are so common in many other countries.

I believe the American firearms-related offences are above 1% - and I believe that is because there are so many firearms in the hands of irresponsible people, firearms are so easy to obtain, and because of one, or both, of these factors you have a lot of "ordinary people" shooting "ordinary people" for one reason or the other; whilst in the UK most gun-crime is "gang-vs-gang".

Most of my posts are directed towards Americans, though I realise you are not one, because of the fact that this is about "gun rights" which is a very American thing...that and the outright mention of Texas in the opening post.
 

Zykon TheLich

Extra Heretical!
Legacy
Jun 6, 2008
3,506
850
118
Country
UK
Kathinka said:
Superbeast said:
So it shows that the rise in guncrime is just concurrent with the rise in crime in general.
that's exactly my point! the tightening of gun control did not help. criminals don't care about the law, they get guns to commit crimes anyway. and people who go through all the trouble, regulations and paperwork to get guns are usually the most law-abiding and responsible persons.
Yes, that's fair enough, the banning of firearms didn't make much difference (as I said in my edit). It's just that your original post made it sound like you were directly connecting the banning of handguns to an increase in crime:

Kathinka said:
the crime rate with firearm related incidents even INCREASED after the further tightening of the law a couple of years ago!
My edit to previous post, repeated forr clarity:

scumofsociety said:
Sorry, its in english, couldn't read your one, lots of weird instructions and pop ups came up in german and then it went to a page trying to get me to buy a printer (I think) so I gave up. However, our own government records are better for me.

Part of the reason is the crackdown on 'gun crime' the police are so hot on it and the public so jumpy that they will arrest kids with replicas or bb guns. Roughly half the gun crime involves air rifles IIRC. As I said before, handguns were never used for self defense in the UK, you couldn't carry them even when they were legal, banning them made no difference as far as criminals or victims of crime were concerned, it just affected gun club members who owned handguns.
 

TheDrunkNinja

New member
Jun 12, 2009
1,875
0
0
This reminds me of an argument that many students down in Texas (of course) desired to legally bring their own firearms on campus after the Virginia Tech shooting, for protection, of course. All I could think about is how completely moronic the idea sounded and will ultimately achieve the total contrary of their goal of "self defense".

First of all, imagine if that went through and students could carry firearms and security couldn't stop them. For those of you who can't already see where this is going, let me sum it up: the very maniac they want defense from could carry a gun on campus without being stopped. Even if someone see's him carrying a gun, the security of the campus can't act until AFTER the he starts shooting up the place, or more likely, after he probably deals a lethal shot.

Secondly, it doesn't matter if some of the students ARE trained well in the use of firearms, that doesn't mean they aren't trigger happy. Can you even picture this? It would turn into an old west shoot out with bullets flying everywhere! And I doubt that any student would have the training and control to immediately recognize the attacker and an innocent civilian in a single second, a moment that someone could have easily already pulled the trigger, whether the attacker or the defender.

What annoys me most is that any moron could get a gun after just signing a few papers; so no matter how much time anybody puts in at a firing range, barely anybody can attest to having the mental stability and emotional control that trained professionals use every day.
 

Deathsong17

New member
Feb 4, 2009
794
0
0
Heavy limits that aren't included in your poll. That is, you don't keep guns yourself, but they're stored somewhere where they might be used (gun-specific sport centres, hunting grounds etc.). I mean, do you really need guns in your house?
 

biggles1

New member
Sep 1, 2009
146
0
0
Squidwogdog said:
In Australia the only people who have guns are police, farmers and enthusiests, its not the right to have them that worries me, its how easy it is to get them, in America you can walk into a pawn shop and walk out with a gun 5 minuts later. weren't school shootings blamed on how easy it is obtain a fire arm?

Guns are bad M'kay
actually it's a similar situation is switzerland when it comes to gun purchasing, but their gun crime rate is incredibly low. it's more to do with society.