posted on Aug, 6 2009 @ 07:21 PM
Originally posted by CRB86
Sorry, but that is patently untrue. It doesn't constantly happen at all, infact here are a list of cases where quite the opposite
Forgive me, CRB86, but I don't often hear about people who DON'T get arrested for things; generally, the only things that make the news around here
are the people who are arrested, and I understand that this view may be biased. However, I believe that any arrest, for any form of self-defense,
within reason, is oppressive.
And the self-defense arrests I have heard about have been for gun ownership, and if it is so difficult for a Brit to own a gun (as axehappy has been
describing) then I don't blame them for owning one somewhat illegally.
But is it true that you actually have to give a reason for gun ownership? I used to be a competitive shooter; if I gave that as my reason, gun club
aside, would I be allowed to own a gun? On what legal basis may they refuse any citizen a gun, even in a built-up suburb?
And what makes you think that someone in a housing estate doesn't need a gun? I don't want to make a huge fight out of this; just your opinion, and
a reasonable debate.