Dear me, people just read stuff and don't think about it...
Originally posted by merkaba93
Here we have another piece of proof that gun control does not work.
Please learn the difference between "evidence" and the various meanings of the word "proof". This is not proof of anything.
The poor British who were once able to defend themselves in the face of violent crime
Evidence for this? It's a ludicrous statement.
The British people should organize and reinstate their right to keep and bare arms so that they might better protect themselves. If criminals
knew their prey would likely fight back with lethal force I am sure crime rates would drop dramatically.
Mmmm. Canada has similar gun laws to the US, yet violent crime and death by shooting, per head of population, is way way lower. Care to explain
that?
I feel fortunate that I live in the US where my basic right of self defense is recognized and I am able to carry a gun with me every
day.
I feel fortunate to live in the UK where there are only two kinds of thugs carrying guns: criminals and the police. So far I've had
more contact with armed police than with armed crims.
Gun control is evil.
I just love unsupported generalisations like that.
What say you all? Opinions for or against in the face of this hard data?
The
Mail is an appalling rag that's fit only for wrapping chips. They harp on about Laura Norder all the time. And... did no-one reading the
article
look carefully enough to notice this statement?
There are also degrees of violence. While the UK ranks above South Africa for all violent crime, South Africans suffer more than 20,000 murders
each year - compared with Britain's 921 in 2007.
Am I the only person here who can see that this statement
directly contradicts the premise of the thread? South Africa has more than 20,000
murders annually (well over 20 times the number in the UK) and yet Britain is more violent?
Quick population check: for this to be true, South Africa would have to have a population of around 140m. Its actual population is roughly 44m.
So it's a gun freak who wants to get all available evidence to show why guns are good.
As it happens, the only place I think should have guns freely available is the US, partly for solid Darwinist reasons - it's an effective cull on the
stupid - and partly because I do think the US government is evil and its people will need to defend themselves against it pretty soon.
As far as the UK is concerned, the fewer guns on the streets, the better.
And as far as the article is concerned... it's just more
Mail frothing, and they can't even get their analysis straight.