Question for people Pro-guns....

[J Tyran]

and have legal traditions that include harsher sentencing, worse prison conditions, and less Civil Rights for the accused than the US. (people always forget that America is completely different from the rest of the world in many, many, MANY ways)

Where on earth did you get this from? Or did you just make it up as you went along. Firstly prison conditions in the UK are much, much milder. Inmates don't murder each other and the guards are not in fear for the lives. Typically inmates enjoy greater luxury's, in some prisons they can decorate their cells etc. Sentences in the UK are also much lighter, bordering on insufficient in fact.

Anyone sentenced to custody will only serve a portion of the sentence, usually half unless they misbehave inside and get added time. Murderers get on automatics life sentence, the judge will also impose a minimum term. If someone serving a life sentence is given a minimum term of 16 years that means in theory they could be released after 16 years. In the US most murders get life without parole, in the UK thats called a whole life order and is incredibly rare. There are less than 50 people with that sentence.

Civil rights are protected by law, in fact they where protected by law several hundred years before North America was even discovered by Europeans.

 

[Arbi Trax]

How come the UK policemen don't carry guns? If they have to respond to a 911 call and it escalates, wouldn't they need to be able to defend themselves and nearby civilians?

We have Armed Response Vehicles containing the equivalent of SWAT teams on patrol in major cities. It's just the standard police constables and PCSOs that don't carry firearms. With the exception of Nottingham, where I believe the rank-and-file carry handguns due to gang violence.

Also OP: You are not making enough allowances for the cultural differences between us and the Traitorous Colonial Separatists.

 

[Dastardly]

The question is this: I live in the UK, where firearms are illegal, even the police do not have them, and the rate of gun crime is SIGNIFICANTLY lower than gun crime in the US.

Your population is also much, MUCH smaller, as well as much MUCH more homogeneous. We have more cultures and races and ethnicities and socioeconomic groups than you could hope to count, and that's on just one city block. Whenever you cram that many different people in one place, you'll have more violent crime.

So, to assume that our crime rate could only be explained by the presence of guns would be silly. You'd do just as well to ask, in a country as unique as ours, how much worse crime would be if only the criminals were armed.

With this being a fact, how can you people who are pro-guns; that don't like the idea of guns being made illegal, even rationalise why it would be a bad thing?

1. Guns are already here. This isn't the same as preventing something from "getting out there." That alone makes it a very different issue than how most people frame it. You're not talking about keeping something out of someone's hands. You're talking about taking something out of their hands.

2. It's a bad thing to take away the handgun that I own, because I have not done anything even bordering on a suburb of a neighboring township in the same area code as Wrong with it. Basically, until I've committed a crime, I deserve not to be treated as a criminal or even a suspect of criminal behavior.

3. Yes, I have it because someday it's possible I'll need to "kill somebody for some reason." That reason being that it's entirely possible someone will try to kill or grievously harm me. And while I have intense respect for every single police officer, I don't take much comfort knowing that when seconds count, the cops are just minutes away.

4. Anytime, ANY time the government wants to impose a new limit on an old freedom, the burden of proof is on THEM. I don't have to prove it's a bad idea, THEY have to prove it isn't. I don't have to assume they have my best interests at heart, THEY have to prove they can enforce this new law without infringing on my existing rights. Because that is how a real government works.

The kind of government that, through its actions, demonstrates suspicion toward its law-abiding citizens has more than earned suspicion from its law-abiding citizens.

 

[Rule Britannia]

I agree with you. When fire arms are needed by the police (when criminals have illegally obtained the fire arms) they can use them. Until then there's no need for the police to carry fire arms either.

I live in Canada, after moving from the UK. It's certainly not as gun crazy as America but it's not unheard of for there to be gun crime.

The method clearly works for the UK (though it's more difficult to smuggle weaponry into the UK since it's an island). Unfortunately I think it's too late for the USA to change or other countries where fire arms are legal (when proper lisencing is aquired).

 

[MrHide-Patten]

Frankly as Dylan Moran once quiped: "Oh no, how could this have happened? Well you've all got guns... and tehy do have a limited number of houshold uses."

But as an Aussie I don't think making them illegal will help the yanks, because then only criminials with the resources will be able to get them, as they do in Aus. Frankly Mankind was buggered when he designed the thing.

 

[Goro]

I think feminist gun control is an issue that should definitely be in the spotlight. It's the only way to change mass effect 3's ending.

 

[poodlenoodles]

Also, how does making guns illegal stop CRIMINALS from getting them? Really, I'm dying to know.

Also, also, whom to trust with my life: myself, who knows how to operate a firearm safely and responsibly; or an incompetent police force? I don't think the decision is a hard one.

because you are obviously much more trustworthy with a firearm than the police force. i'm going to propose to you a situation that you may or may not have heard already: a man pulls out a gun and shoots someone in an alley. you, the armed vigilante, come running, you see the gun man and so you shoot him. now another vigilante comes around the corner after hearing gunshots, sees you standing over two bodies, so shoots you. another vigilante comes around the corner....
also, just as a side note, how did the right to bear arms help all those people who were watching the dark knight rises when a gunman opened fire, killing at least 12 and injuring 59 others

 

[Dastardly]

Firstly, it isn't CRIMINALS who do most of the killing with guns in America. Angry, depressed teenagers massacring their classmates, lone psychos shooting up movie theatres, dumb kids accidentally blowing each others' -or their own- brains out "playing" with daddy's gun- that's the easy-to-prevent problem that you wring your hands over but apparently don't really CARE enough about to bother stopping. The pro-gun lobby make it EASY for people to be killed with guns -not necessarily by criminals, but by ANYONE- and then act surprised when people die.

Wait, what now?

Just how many massacres and firearm suicides do you think there are in America each day? It is in fact, "criminals who do most of the killing with guns." And not just because doing so makes them criminals. Most gun-related deaths, if you do your homework, happen during the commission of a crime. Robbery, carjacking, assault, etc.

And you want to talk prevention? Nearly all of the gun safety measures out there, including gun safety education, are put forth by "pro gun" advocates. They believe that human beings should be treated as responsible, free-thinking organisms, and that if you teach them how to safely use something, they can do that.

Basically, your "pro-gun" and "anti-gun" people are just like the "pro-sex-ed" and "anti-sex-ed" people out there. They're aware that you can't make sex (or guns) disappear, so it's better to teach people to use them responsibly... and the other side foolishly believes you can just will it all away.

That said, I firmly disagree with what that other guy said about the police. They're generally quite competent and willing to go above and beyond to help... it's just, with budget cuts, they're stretched too thin to handle everything as quickly as we need. The failure of the police to stop these crimes isn't the fault of the police officers -- it's the fault of the folks who don't give them the support they need to do the job.

 

[cerebus23]

Frankly as Dylan Moran once quiped: "Oh no, how could this have happened? Well you've all got guns... and tehy do have a limited number of houshold uses."

But as an Aussie I don't think making them illegal will help the yanks, because then only criminials with the resources will be able to get them, as they do in Aus. Frankly Mankind was buggered when he designed the thing.

Wish i lived in samurai times honestly, before guns had any part in combat.

OT Reminds me i want to rally for a sandbox samurai rpg/mod think that would be something nice to see. well other than counting that mod for mount and blade.

 

[Dastardly]

i'm going to propose to you a situation that you may or may not have heard already: a man pulls out a gun and shoots someone in an alley. you, the armed vigilante, come running, you see the gun man and so you shoot him. now another vigilante comes around the corner after hearing gunshots, sees you standing over two bodies, so shoots you. another vigilante comes around the corner....

And you go to jail. Because the law already clearly, and in no uncertain terms, accounts for that. You weren't there for the initial shooting, so you don't have enough information to be "reasonably afraid for your life, or the lives of others." Basically, until that guy points the gun at YOU, or otherwise expresses the intent to harm you or someone else, no law gives you the go-ahead to fire.

What you think you understand about actual gun laws is basically just what you've gathered through hearsay, likely from sources slanted against responsible gun ownership and self-defense laws. Sorry, but even the Old West wasn't as "Old West" as people believe from movies.

 

[J Tyran]

(though it's more difficult to smuggle weaponry into the UK since it's an island)

This is fallacy I'm afraid, border control is a nightmare when you have thousands upon thousands of small boats in the seas around the UK. Then you have thousands of shipping containers entering each day, only a fraction are ever searched. The cargo ships themselves are also almost impossible to search, it would take weeks to search once properly. Overall 2 billion tons of cargo hits UK ports each year. Good luck searching more than a few percent of that.

Finally you have all the ferry traffic and light aircraft. The UKs borders are as porous as they are anywhere else in the world.

 

[Techno Squidgy]

I live in the Uk, I don't believe firearms should be outlawed, but the restrictions behind them should definitely be a lot stricter.For instance, that Assault weapons ban you guys had? Good idea. Bring that back. Who on earth needs an automatic weapon beyond the military? That said, with a bit of know-how and some kitchen supplies I could probably cobble together a STEN gun and well, perhaps properly made auto's are better.. (You do NOT want to drop one of those. It'll fire and spin round on the floor till the mag empties.)

If I lived in 'murica I probably would invest in a concealed carry license and a small revolver, because I'm not going to take the chance of being killed by someone else with a gun. Over here, I don't have to worry about much more than a knife, which I could probably knock out of their hands with a bit of luck.

Tightly controlled but available firearms, good. Loosely controlled/Outlawed, bad. Don't want untracked weapons knocking about the place.

 

[Something Amyss]

The question is this: I live in the UK, where firearms are illegal, even the police do not have them, and the rate of gun crime is SIGNIFICANTLY lower than gun crime in the US.

And if you lived in Canadia, where guns are legal, you could say the same thing. It's almost like firearms don't have a direct correlation here.

Because there's a difference between "crime" and "gun crime", and they respond in opposite ways to gun laws.

Basically, for every person that you spare from death by bullet wound, you're getting a mugging, a rape, and two deaths by knife wound in return.

We're just better at math than you are.

Not sure if serious.

Also, how does making guns illegal stop CRIMINALS from getting them? Really, I'm dying to know.

I'm curious as to how the option to make them widely available to criminals to easily attain is a better option here.

The thing is, firearm restrictions and bans can not stop all gun crime, no. But they do make it harder for the average joe to get a gun on a whim. If someone is dedicated enough, they will get their hands on one. But then again, if someone is dedicated enough, they will murder someone. We're not about to make murder legal just because "criminals will do it anyway," are we?

Also, also, whom to trust with my life: myself, who knows how to operate a firearm safely and responsibly; or an incompetent police force? I don't think the decision is a hard one.

Mmmm...False dichotomy.

 

[poodlenoodles]

i'm going to propose to you a situation that you may or may not have heard already: a man pulls out a gun and shoots someone in an alley. you, the armed vigilante, come running, you see the gun man and so you shoot him. now another vigilante comes around the corner after hearing gunshots, sees you standing over two bodies, so shoots you. another vigilante comes around the corner....

And you go to jail. Because the law already clearly, and in no uncertain terms, accounts for that. You weren't there for the initial shooting, so you don't have enough information to be "reasonably afraid for your life, or the lives of others." Basically, until that guy points the gun at YOU, or otherwise expresses the intent to harm you or someone else, no law gives you the go-ahead to fire.

What you think you understand about actual gun laws is basically just what you've gathered through hearsay, likely from sources slanted against responsible gun ownership and self-defense laws. Sorry, but even the Old West wasn't as "Old West" as people believe from movies.

well, in my hypothetical situation, you are now dead, so you wouldn't go to jail.and i was saying that the law permits you to do that, i simply created a situation for all the people who think along the lines of,"how are we going to keep effective justice if we don't all have guns?"

 

[Jared Domenico]

The only reason for thinking guns are needed, as far as I can tell, is if you think you need to kill somebody for some reason with them.

This is precisely why guns are needed - to kill people who are trying to deprive you of your rights to life, liberty, and property.

 

[thethird0611]

I dont know if anyone has mentioned this before... but...

A big thing about America is about how we revolted from England, violently at that. So one of the big things about being able to bear arms is the right to revolt against the government if we don't like the way its going. Its not just to protect ourselves from criminals, but its also to protect us from the government. Also, the whole ability to have a militia thing would be kinda useless without firearms.

 

[Sheo_Dagana]

Criminals do not obtain guns in a way that is legal. Making them illegal would change nothing. Yes, it really is that simple. Ya know, crack is illegal too. So is downloading movies. So is pot. All of those things still happen.

Captcha: Big Brother

Thanks, Captcha.