It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Is The Gun Ban In The UK Working???

page: 4
0
<< 1  2  3   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 8 2005 @ 06:09 PM
link   
I can tell you most of what you are looking for, Being a Yank and all.


Statistics are VERY hard to trust when it comes to something as regional as that chart. The Northeast has some VERY HIGH crime areas as well as some of the lowest. The south generally has a lower crime rate as people are a bit more polite overall and there arent any major metropolitan areas such as New York and L.A..
The presence of those two cities in the regions can seriously skew the results, in my opinion.

There also needs to be a distiction between gun ownership and those who carry guns on a regular basis. If you own a gun but keep it locked up in your closet it won't much help you while being robbed at a gas(petrol
) station. The fact is that very few Americans actually carry a gun on a daily basis. In the states that grant permits to law abiding people, the few of us that DO carry provide a deterrent to the criminal element for everyone else as they don't know who can shoot back
.
There are TONS of studies that show higher gun ownership by legally eligible, responsible adults reduces many types of crime from home invasion to burglary to murder.
I see the biggest problem as the so called "gangsta" look and lifestyle that many inner city kids are emulating and it's spreading.
These kids should NOT have access to firearms. First they are kids. Second they are not normally legally eligible to do so.
This is where the biggest problem comes in.
A HUGE demand for "glocks" so the seventeen year old, "gangsta" wannabe can look cool to his friends. Here come the smugglers with all of the hardware an over testosteroned boy can dream of with one catch....You have to pay, A LOT, for them. How does an inner city youth come up with $1500 for a gun thats worth $250 on the LEGAL market?
Sell CRACK. Now that shiny new glock has a new purpose, to fend off the competition. Now kids are dying and the cycle continues.

Sure, we have a lot of guns here. We always have. The only thing I see that has changed is the growth of metropoli along with an increase in poverty driving a black market that seems self sustaining anyway.




posted on Jun, 9 2005 @ 07:00 AM
link   

Originally posted by AceOfBase

BTW, do you have per state figure on gun ownership in the US?
The best I could find was a survey from 1996 on regional ownership.

It looks like gun ownership is lower in the North East than it is in the South and I think crime is lower in the New England than it is in the South.

If anyone has better regional gun ownership data please post it.


I'll try and hunt out some accurate statistics of gun ownership in the U.S.A. it's nearly impossible to find it though as the way they do it is by phoning someone up and asking them. Now if you had a stranger phone you up and ask you if you had a gun this is going to make the answer biased.

But the difference between the North and South might be the population, states like California have one of the largest populations and so more guns; same goes for Texas, etc. But Cali has one of the lowest crime rates about 5.9/100,000 last I checked and texas is also below 7.0/100,000.

You also need to look at the State Laws, a lot of the northern States have very relaxed laws on gun control especially in states like New Hampshire where you only need to get a permit to carry a firearm, not to buy one or to register owning one. Iowa again is another, with laws which lack. Teh trend goes on, a few states such as N.C. are exceptions to this but the majority with less strict gun rights tend to have lower homicide rates.


Originally posted by Badger
I find it quite bizarre that some people are still clinging to the belief that introducing more lethal weapons into a society can have any other impact than increasing the possibility that said weapons will be used.

You can pull statistics out of your backside all you like, but the basic premise is rather simple.


Don't get involved in this then? It's clear that to display if something works you need to talk about statistics. It's fairly simple to see, otherwise we just go on our opinion which has no place on ATS and also goes against the Terms of Service.


Originally posted by Badger
More cars on the roads- more road traffic accidents
More planes in the sky- more airplane disasters
More people take up surfing- more people drown in the surf
More people have access to firearms- more people end up dead as a result


Really? Then why does France have one of the highest traffic accident rates in the World? Why does Britain have more people per-100,000 in Prison then China? (139/100,000 and 118/100,000 respectivly) Oh wait...this is statistics...damn. I like what you've done, this way nothing you say can be wrong because it is all facts. Good idea.


Originally posted by Badger
Sure Switzerland has a lot of guns and a low homicide rate, big deal. That's an argument for Swiss society, not an argument for more access to firearms. If gun crime in the UK is increasing can anyone with even a modicum of common sense seriously argue that the way to address the issue is to introduce an even greater number of firearms?!


So anyone who thinks different to you lacks common sense now? Also, the fact your above statement claiming: "The more of one thing, the more that thing causes" is clearly disproven with Nations like Switzerland, Norway, etc. Otherwise they would have a higher homicide rate then the U.K. does.

The reason gun crime is increasing in the U.K. is because of:
A) The Growing gun culture
B) Ability to get ahold firearms (which is easy).
C) Ability to get away with the crime in both the short-term and the long-term and;
D) Lack of education from Schools on violent crimes.


Originally posted by Badger
Having personal knowledge of law enforcement in the UK I can assure you that you can forget your Hollywood BS about defending yourself with a concealed weapon if someone tries to assualt or rob you in the street. Anyone doing so with the intent to use the firearm they are pointing at you will shoot you dead before you can draw your concealed weapon. Anyone who doesn't never had it in them to do so in the first place.


Then why are there statistics in the U.S. from the department of Justice claiming otherwise? Oh #...statistics again. I do like this idea, where you say what you want and deny statistics. Makes it easy to be right. So which area of Law Enforcement did you work in? Which area of the U.K?


Originally posted by Badger
So is a firearm useful for defending your property and family during a burglary for example? Well I guess this might be the one area where there may be something in this gun ownership idea. But in my opinion it isn't much. If you disturb an intruder they are FAR more likely to flee the property than confront you. There is a simple logic to that, they don't want to be apprehended or injured, and they generally don't want to be facing a more serious charge.


It has also been shown to help in over 50% of rape cases, attempted burglary, etc, etc, list goes on.


Originally posted by Badger
Gun control in a society that isn't already flooded with guns does work. The rise in firearms offences in the Uk has been significant,but really only when you compare it with a rather low starting point, and a significant proportion of these offences don't actually involve "firearms" at all but often replica weapons, which are often included in the overall statistics, and in my opinion cause a false representation of the real situation.


That's why we were using the statistics that didn't involve replica weapons. We also looked at the start and then the rise, which helps to display that once guns are taken away only criminals have them. The low starting point of course was when people were able to get firearms such as pistols, semi-automatic rifles, etc, prior to 1997. Also the thing people seem to be forgetting is the fact you can still get firearms in England and Wales; shotguns and single shot rifles. So if someone is wanting to rob a bank, kill someone, etc, they can legally get a firearm and it isn't that hard. It just takes 6months.

It's fairly simple to understand what needs to be done; firearms should be legal as long as people have a back-ground check and the gun is registered, even with new technology we can get a sample of every bullet from guns before they are sold and if that gun is used in a crime it is easy enough to trace. It has been shonw World over that if you educate children that guns are not toys and not to be used in such a manor the effect it has on the Society. It has been shown World over that it helps prevent Burglary, Rape and other crimes. Otherwise we will just turn into a Nation where the population are taken advantage of by the growing gun culture; which won't be stopped while illegal firearms are easy to purchase.

Sources:
www.kcl.ac.uk...
www.guardian.co.uk...
www.nraila.org...#
www.disastercenter.com...



posted on Jun, 21 2005 @ 05:03 PM
link   
Something I came across seems somewhat relative to this discussion;

LONDON -- The British government has ordered the army onto the streets to join an all-out summer campaign against anti-social drunken and violent behavior by rowdy youths.

LINK

So, i guess, the question of "Is the gun ban in the UK working?" could be answered with a resounding YES!!! There are troops in the streets and a curfew in place with no chance of resistance.
Repeat after me RESPECT
Where are your papers?



posted on Jun, 21 2005 @ 06:17 PM
link   

Originally posted by Fry2
Something I came across seems somewhat relative to this discussion;

LONDON -- The British government has ordered the army onto the streets to join an all-out summer campaign against anti-social drunken and violent behavior by rowdy youths.

LINK


- Er, interesting story but there's just one thing.

This Sunday Telegraph story has been catagorically and publicly denied (on the record) by the Prime Minister, the Minister for Defence and the Home Secretary here in the UK.
In Parliament itself and in the national media.

It's simply not true.

What it is is and a total distortion of the usual rules regarding the deployment of MP's (that's Military Police, not Members of Parliament!) in trouble-spots (around the larger British Army/Forces, bases usually).



posted on Jul, 21 2005 @ 11:47 AM
link   
Reported today on the BBC:
Gun Crime up 6%
Violent crime (excluding sexual offences) up 7%.



posted on Jul, 21 2005 @ 04:51 PM
link   
The gun ban is a resounding success. Next on the list is a knife ban and replica guns and who knows what else:

Knife Crime Google Search

Doctors' kitchen knives ban call

Replica Gun Ban



posted on Jul, 21 2005 @ 05:37 PM
link   

Originally posted by GradyPhilpott
The gun ban is a resounding success. Next on the list is a knife ban and replica guns and who knows what else:

Knife Crime Google Search

Doctors' kitchen knives ban call

Replica Gun Ban


But if it was such a success why has gun crime gone up and not down?



posted on Jul, 21 2005 @ 10:02 PM
link   

Originally posted by djohnsto77
Well if you're all unarmed sheep being led to the NWO slaughterhouse, I'd say it's working...


Spot on......



I mean the criminals love it, they would think twice in Tennessee.



posted on Jul, 22 2005 @ 08:09 AM
link   
I see the fact that we have hardly any actual 'gun crime' (taking out the replica stuff etc etc) and 853 fatalities out of 60millions is just to be ignored when you make these 'isn't working' claims.

BTW does anyone have the figures for how our total gun fatalities (approx 853 or so) compare with, ummm, say the 10 largest US cities?

I'll be happy to be proved wrong but my bet is our entire UK nation has less gun murder (and that even includes the hang-over from the Irish problems still inflating our figures.......which also have been ignored in this).



posted on Jul, 22 2005 @ 10:52 AM
link   
Gun Crime has gone up 7times now, since 1997.

How is the ban solving the problem?

If it was solving it, it would have gone down not up.

"According to statistics compiled through mid-February, police had investigated 44 homicides in 2002. At the current rate, homicides for 2002 could top 300. The last time London experienced such high rates was in the 19th century."

www.jointogether.org...

"In 2000, there were 28,663 firearm deaths in the United States, including 16,586 (58%) suicides, 11,071 (39%) homicides (including 270 deaths due to legal intervention), and 1,006 (4%) undetermined/ unintentional firearm deaths. "

www.jointogether.org...

www.bloomberg.com...

[edit on 22/7/2005 by Odium]



posted on Jul, 22 2005 @ 11:08 AM
link   
Why is it that in relation to the UK are you using perfection as your 'yardstick'?

We know it's not a perfect world, we also ought not blind ourselves to reality either.

The fact is that despite gun crime going up from one extremely small amount to another extremely small amount (hell, with actual rates like ours it could shock, horror! double, a 100% increase no less) and it would still be a tiny amount......thats what you can do with such small numbers and playing with %'s.

Actual gun crime rates in the UK are a damned sight better than most comparable places.

.......and I await a comparison between our approx 850 annual deaths and the ten largest US cities alone (never mind the actual numbers for all of the US!).



posted on Jul, 22 2005 @ 11:23 AM
link   
It's simple to understand really.

If the ban was working. Gun crime would not be going up. It would be going down. Would it not?

In America it is easier to get a hold of a gun, so people will be shot instead of being stabbed like they are in the U.K.

Yet again you use America instead of Europe.

Yet Finland has shown gun bans not working. Switzerland has shown gun ownership can work perfectly and easily enough.

Switzerland is roughly 656miles from the U.K.
America is roughly 3510miles from the U.K.

We share a lot more in common with Europe then people wish to believe.

Or I can start using Africa or Asia or the Middle East to display how a gun ban doesn't work? Enough innocent people been killed through their lack of ability to own a firearm.

Simple fact is we are part of Europe. Look at Europe and the only nation which used a similar gun ban to ours and then had to remove it.



posted on Jul, 22 2005 @ 12:12 PM
link   

Originally posted by Odium
It's simple to understand really.

If the ban was working. Gun crime would not be going up. It would be going down. Would it not?


- Er no, not necessarily.

It could be, as it is here, that gun crime is maintained at a low level with margin movement around that very low level.


In America it is easier to get a hold of a gun, so people will be shot instead of being stabbed like they are in the U.K.


- Serious crime levels are also low in the UK, irrespective of small movements in the figures.


Yet Finland has shown gun bans not working. Switzerland has shown gun ownership can work perfectly and easily enough.

Switzerland is roughly 656miles from the U.K.
America is roughly 3510miles from the U.K.


- Sadly 'popular culture' in the UK is a lot closer to the USA than either Finland or Switzerland.

IMO introducing more guns into the UK would be disasterous and see levels of gun crime (and not forgetting injury accidents etc etc) go through the roof.


We share a lot more in common with Europe then people wish to believe.


- I don't disagree with this, but I think to deny the cultural effects we have 'imported' from the USA is wishful thinking.


Or I can start using Africa or Asia or the Middle East to display how a gun ban doesn't work? Enough innocent people been killed through their lack of ability to own a firearm.


- This is simply to exaggerate and distort the truth.

Everybody in the UK stands the tinniest chance of being a victim of gun crime. That is the proof of how the ban works.


Look at Europe and the only nation which used a similar gun ban to ours and then had to remove it.


- Thankfully you are dreaming if you think anyone wants widespread gun ownership in the UK or anything like it.
It isn't going to happen.



posted on Jul, 24 2005 @ 04:06 PM
link   

Everybody in the UK stands the tinniest chance of being a victim of gun crime. That is the proof of how the ban works.


Yet, you even admit that those chances are constantly increasing! How would allowing law abiding adults access to firearms for defensive use be a detriment to your society? If anything, I think it would give the potential violent criminal one more reason NOT to commit the crime in the first place.
I'm not saying that everyone in Britain should carry a gun all the time. Heck, only a small percentage of us "crazy Americans" actually carry on a daily basis. The best part is that the bad guys don't know which ones "we" are. This serves to protect the community as a whole. Statistics will show you that in states that recently enacted "shall issue"* laws, violent crime has gone down substantially and consistently.

* Shall Issue is in reference to laws which say that the State SHALL ISSUE a permit to carry concealed (or in some places, not) firearms to a lawful citizen as long as they are not disqualified to own or carry such.



posted on Jul, 24 2005 @ 06:01 PM
link   

Originally posted by Fry2
Yet, you even admit that those chances are constantly increasing!


- Yes, it has increased from one tiny number of incidents to another higher number of incidents but which is still a tiny number of incidents.

It remains the truth that it is only a tiny fraction of our population that ever become 'involved' in this kind of crime.

[qoute]How would allowing law abiding adults access to firearms for defensive use be a detriment to your society?

- Simply because I think we are far more likely to replicate the US experience where more guns around = more gun crime.

(not forgetting more accidental maiming and death etc etc)


If anything, I think it would give the potential violent criminal one more reason NOT to commit the crime in the first place.


- Hmmm, as always this seems to me to be the rationalisation law-abiding people use, because it is how the majority of 'us' think; sadly it is not necessarily how the criminal thinks which is why IMO so much of the 'deterrent' arguement is redundant.

In Northern Ireland (a crazy situation that distorts the UK figures and where adding more guns into the already well stocked mix would be IMO insane) the paramilitaries shoot 'anti social' youths through the kneecaps for things like stealing cars, burglary, assault etc etc.

If that doesn't stop them and they persist they shoot them through the kneecaps, elbows and ankles.

......and we still get repeat offenders.

During the height of the 'troubles' 'we' had repeat offenders even to the point where the ultimate penalty some was to go to appointments to see the 'nutting squads'.
ie be shot in the back of the head, dead. (cos if they didn't their familes got it). ......and yes, people did go and get murdered this way.

So you'll excuse my reluctance to believe that an ever harder line is the answer.

Anyhoo, so no comment on the UK's total of 850 gun deaths comparison with the US's top 10 largest cities then?



posted on Oct, 15 2005 @ 07:59 PM
link   
Funny how the British are constantly trying to figure out if the gun ban has worked.

Firstly, there were never that many centre fire and rimfire pistols in the first place, but there are LOTS of shotguns.

Legally owned pistols were practically never linked to armed crime, the big exception was of course when Thomas Hamilton went on his killing spree and that was the end of that.

No one with an ounce of understanding ever seriously believed that armed crime with handguns would be reduced by the handgun ban, it was pure hoplophobia at work. Guns are bad, therefore banning guns is good.

An unarmed Britain is probably a good thing however, with the decreasing standards of social behaviour there. Britain just doesn't have the social standards of somewhere like Switzerland where firearms ownership is practically uniform.



posted on Dec, 14 2007 @ 09:14 AM
link   
This discussion is pretty insane. Unless you can view a seperate dimension where the UK didn't enact strict firearm legislation, and that was the only difference, and you could compare the two, all of this is ass-delving speculation on the highest order. What we can do, however, is logically look at the situation as it is at present. Guns in legal private ownership can very easily become illegal guns by that house being robbed. Having a gun doesn't instantly mean you will never be robbed, and most illegal guns in the US have to, at one point, been legal, unless there is mass-importing of illegal weapons into an already weapon-saturated country. Being able to buy a gun at your local sporting goods store will only serve to increase the number of firearms in the streets, which means when someone has an emotional breakdown, they're more likely to be armed. It's not sane people who wander around shooting people, it's disturbed folks. Even our most righteous gun owners (including those in this thread) can become unhinged, and I'd rather them to not have a gun, and training, when they do.

If the argument is safety, then fix the problems, don't just treat the symptoms, as the underlying problems will just get worse. Gun control is great for that, as it's a two-pronged attack. The government can have "don't use guns" education and not be hypocritical, at the same time stopping them being imported into the country, and having them destroyed when found. That means the number of guns in the country will decrease, even if there are more and more people found with guns (as remember - all these statistics of gun charges result in guns being removed from circulation).

Gun ownership is a genie we should NEVER let out of the bottle. Their uses are obsolete, and only serve to do more harm than good. Want to protect yourself? Get a rape alarm. Those bastards are perfectly legal and will deafen anyone you want, allowing you to get out of dodge before anything happens to you.

When people in the UK say things like "gun crime is getting out of control", it's not the same thing as if the same thing was said in, for example, the US, as our idea of "out of control" is the same as "a quiet wednesday night in the Alaskan wilderness" - as in hardly any.

I've rambled on enough. I hope I didn't offend our American cousins.



posted on Dec, 15 2007 @ 06:36 AM
link   

Originally posted by edsinger

Originally posted by djohnsto77
Well if you're all unarmed sheep being led to the NWO slaughterhouse, I'd say it's working...


Spot on......


Wow, can you give me directions to this NWO slaughterhouse? It sounds like jolly fun.



posted on Dec, 15 2007 @ 06:55 AM
link   

Originally posted by Winchester Ranger T
An unarmed Britain is probably a good thing however, with the decreasing standards of social behaviour there. Britain just doesn't have the social standards of somewhere like Switzerland where firearms ownership is practically uniform.


Wow. Just wow. We lack social standards perhaps, but you lack manners.
Different cultures have different results. The Swiss don't have a stupid attitude towards guns like we do, because they aren't as easily led by gung ho action flicks, or rap music videos I'd imagine.



new topics

top topics



 
0
<< 1  2  3   >>

log in

join