It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

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

Thank you.


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


Less Shootings? o.o

page: 2
<< 1    3  4 >>

log in


posted on Jul, 28 2004 @ 06:08 PM
I'm pretty sure you can own one at any age, you just can't buy one till 18.

Silly law, you just get someone over 18 to get it for you. I suppose they intended it to be like that so the parent would know their kid had something like that but it doesn't work like that in practice. If a kid wants one and their parent says no, they can just get anyone else over 18 to get it for them.

posted on Jul, 28 2004 @ 07:44 PM
Damn who wants to have those strict laws here in the states all you need is money and you could have as many guns and rifles you want trust me to bad they are all semi auto. Plus you can go to the firing range and rent any guns they have there

posted on Jul, 28 2004 @ 08:49 PM
Geeze Shadow! Thats a lot of stuff I didn't know. Seriously. I had no idea that the crime rate involving guns is so. o.o

posted on Jul, 28 2004 @ 09:11 PM
Another interesting fact is when you review the areas in the U.S. with the most restrictive firearm laws, including such areas as Washington, D.C., Chicago, IL, New York, NY, and the state of California, shows that these areas have some of the highest crime (especially violent) crime rates in the U.S. The crime rates in all of these areas exceeds the national average and they all have enacted in-depth restrictions on firearm ownership

posted on Jul, 28 2004 @ 09:14 PM

Originally posted by WestPoint23
Damn who wants to have those strict laws here in the states all you need is money and you could have as many guns and rifles you want trust me to bad they are all semi auto. Plus you can go to the firing range and rent any guns they have there

hmm notice the diffrence in killings in firearm related incidents? mabye that answers ur question westpoint.

posted on Jul, 28 2004 @ 11:52 PM
I was close to a shooting but it was in another building near my complex. There were gunshots then the building went poof. They said that the bullet ignited some gas or something like that. Guns are pretty dangerous.

posted on Jul, 29 2004 @ 01:16 AM
The building went "poof" what re you talking about most gas lines are in the walls and even if you hit it the building wont go poof as you put it so can you be more specific.

posted on Jul, 29 2004 @ 06:43 AM

Originally posted by WestPoint23
The building went "poof" what re you talking about most gas lines are in the walls and even if you hit it the building wont go poof as you put it so can you be more specific.

it hit a gas thingy and it exsploded its happened before

posted on Jul, 29 2004 @ 07:43 AM
Nothing new here. My short take:

1) Guns are weapons as well as tools. They were originally designed to kill things, and that's what they do.

2) If no guns existed anywhere on earth, no one would be killed by guns.

3) If someone sends men with guns to take guns away from you, it's not for your protection.

4) The majority of people in power who support disarming the public own guns and/or employ security guards with guns.

5) Outside of war or genocide, which are disturbingly common events, here is no clear correlation between gun ownership and violent crime rates. They vary independently, regardless of what anyone tells you.

6) Without exception, every act of genocide in human history has been preceded by disarming the victims. Mass executions of armed people are impractical.

7) If you don't like guns don't own one. If you choose to own guns, own them responsibly.

8) When it comes down to it, an amazingly small number of people care whether you live or die. It is best to be among those people.

9) A government that is trusted cannot be trusted.

I have been following this issue for about 30 years. Just about everything in the "gun control debate" is utter nonsense, and the same old lies are repeated over and over again -- by both sides -- like a broken record, accomplishing nothing.

What I do know is that the "gun control" agenda doesn't have anything to with reducing crime. That's just a story for the useful idiots.

The money behind "gun control" is political, and is interested in political control. Crime is merely a commodity to be used for political gain to these people.

Disarming civilian populations is the first step toward controlling or destroying them. There are people who want to do either or both, they have a great deal of money and power, they have been working on this for a very long time, and they are making progress.

Attempts to point this out are invariably met with emotional opposition, and nothing changes.

Bottom line:

The only rights you have are the rights you can defend.

posted on Jul, 29 2004 @ 09:42 AM
::::::::::::Thread Jack::::::::::

What is hte little "o.o" for? I have looked at it and thought and thought,it doesn't look like anything..what does it mean?

::::::::::::End Thread Jack:::::::::: was driving me nuts.

posted on Jul, 29 2004 @ 10:01 AM
I think the "o.o" is intended to be two eyes and a little nose.

Alternatively, maybe it's a plea for 0.0 gun deaths per year.

posted on Jul, 29 2004 @ 10:45 AM
"Gun Control" is just a goverment thing to try and make the people feel safe, it may make them feel safe but they arnt safe, the wrong people to own guns, which is what the goverment is overall trying to stop, can get guns on the black market... or they can use a kitchen knife if they wanted to kill sombody - its not the weapon, its the mind behind the weapon

posted on Jul, 29 2004 @ 12:46 PM
The gun does not kill anyone its' the person who is in possession of the weapon that does. Values and moraes define an individual and those lacking in these virtues are the stoned dead killers in any society or Nation.
Nothing will change unless the mind set of these deviants are altered.

posted on Jul, 29 2004 @ 12:53 PM
Great post Majic I have been following the gun control debate for a long time and you made some really good points. I wish more people were as informed as you are on the subject. If they were there wouldnt be much of a debate though

posted on Aug, 2 2004 @ 05:28 PM
I was about to reply, until I read Majic's post. Very well said indeed!!!

As for you teens in Britain, I feel sorry for you. The NRA was founded in your country long before it existed here in the states. If I were you I would start lobbying NOW to reverse the backwards gun policies in your country.
It never hurts to keep the criminals questioning thier own safety while committing crimes

Unfortunately I have just had to start carrying a concealed firearm due to a new job in a rather nasty inner city neighborhood
. I had never wanted to carry a gun when I applied for my permit but now I'm rather glad that I went through the screening process. At least I don't have to "roll over" if some crack head thinks my car or other belongings would be better off in his posession.

posted on Aug, 2 2004 @ 07:09 PM
Blimey, as a serving police officer (UK) I have to say that the attitude to gun ownership in the US scares the living sh1te out of me!

Personally I don't believe that the US constitution actually meant for the kind of right to have weapons that currently exists in the US, but hey it isn't my country so I will happily bow to the yanks on here and accept your opinions on that front. It is your country after all!

And to clarify a point of UK law, pretty much all firearms are illegal unless you are able to put a case of neccesity to your local chief constable, or perhaps even magistrate. (It is a little more complicated than that but to all purposes that is the law).

Anyway from personal experience I would hate to police an area where firearms are legal! It is a rather obvious point that the easier you make it to take a life, the more lives will be taken. Firearms make the taking of a life so impersonal compared to every other means that they are bound to cause a higher rate of deaths. People that equate gun ownership with a kind of 'mutually assured destruction' have probably never been faced with the business end of a gun. (Seriously, before people jump on this point, in all honesty how many people have truly been looking down the barrel with somebody on the end who is looking like they will pull the trigger?) If you draw a weapon on me, the fact i am carrying is no help whatsoever, by the time i have drawn it i am lying in a pool of my own blood on the floor.

I am not dismissing the gun laws in the US and neither am I trying to sound like a high handed Brit, but I personally find the gun laws in the US a catch 22 situation. (If you are going to commit a burglary then why not carry a gun if the homeowner is bound to have one? If you know he doesn't have a gun then why carry one yourself? And vice versa) Ok it isn't the gun that kills it is the person but I am pretty sure that if you took the firearms out of the equation you would have a lot less deaths. I accept that in the US this is unenforceable due to the way society now is but it certainly isn't an argument for widening gun ownership in countries such as the UK that have tighter regulations.

The fact is that although gun crime is on the rise in the uk it is not, despite what many people believe, in any way a factor in 99.9% of offences that 'ordinary' people will encounter. The VAST majority of gun crime is commited in incidents between criminals in the UK. A UK citizen is at least 100 times more liekly to be confronted with violence at the end of a knife than a gun. If we were to make it legal for everyone to carry a knife does anyone seriously wish to argue that if carrying an offensive weapon (eg a knife) were legal we would not see a rise in the number of deaths due to stabbings? In that case what can possibly be the argument for wider availability of firearms?

To summarise, Although it seems a little mad to me, I can see the reason for US citizens to want and have a right to own fireams, however i honestly believe that such ownership causes as many problems (if not more) as it solves, and can't see any logical argument for making firearms more readily available in the UK or other countries with stringent controls. The more easily available weapns are then the more often they will be used. yes it is perfectly posiible to acquire a gun in the UK but in doing so you will be entering into a world that 99% of the population will not wish to mingle with. Regulation works in a country that is tightly controlled from the start. In the US, with so many weapons, I can understand the desire and passion in resisting gun control. You just can't transpose the US situaton on other countries.

(If anybody wants a full and proper summary of the UK firearms and weapons statutes I will be happy to oblige but please allow me a few days to respond. I am on a night shift pattern from tomorrow and will not be able to post as I will be busy looking after my kids during the day due to the school holidays).

[edit on 2-8-2004 by Badger]

posted on Aug, 2 2004 @ 07:23 PM
Guns or not, it's useless if you won't have order.

posted on Aug, 2 2004 @ 07:54 PM
Thank you, Badger!!!!

I truly value your input on this subject!
In my experiences with Law enforcement officers here in the states it has been different. The officers always had a renewed respect for those of us with CCPs (concealed carry permits). I would guess that it reassures them that we have been through the same FBI check as they have

Guns are not as easy to carry around as many european media outlets would lead you to believe. Even though I have a permit, I could be arrested if someone saw my gun when I reached up on a shelf for a loaf of bread. This is NOT the wild west. Carrying a sidearm is a very serious responsibility and those of us that do so legally take it as such.

posted on Aug, 2 2004 @ 08:37 PM
Thank you Fry, I am glad you didn't take my post the wrong way. I was a little worried that some US posters might have thought I was having a moan about US gun laws, and that certainly wasn't my intention.

Despite what you may think I don't think most Brits quite consider the US to be quite ike the 'Wild West' but I must admit the thought that pretty much any drunk driver I might pull over might just have a concealed weapon (legal or otherwise) would certainly make me uneasy! It certainly goes some way to explaining the somewhat 'heavy handed' approach that we see on various US cop documentaries when officers seem to draw their weapons whilst pulling over someone for a traffic violation. In the UK I would get a serious talking to for extending my truncheon whilst getting out of the car to talk to a suspected DUI! I have plenty of respect for officers that routinely face the possibility of an armed suspect!

I think it just goes to reinforce the differene in circumstances and how you can't apply US gun laws to other countries. What at first strikes me as an insanely over the top reaction seems quite legitimate when I think of it in context. I still hate the thought of people carrying concealed weapons though! I've no doubt that the restrictions and checks that you mentioned are thorough, but i would hate to pull you over after you had a night in the pub and found out your wife had been sleeping with your best friend! No offence intended!

As a matter of interest would you declare a concealed weapon when pulled by the police or wait for it to be found during the search?

[edit on 2-8-2004 by Badger]

posted on Aug, 2 2004 @ 08:53 PM
It varies from state to state. In my state its like this

29-35(b) The holder of a permit issued pursuant to section 29-28 shall carry such permit upon one's person while carrying such pistol or revolver. (Nothing in CT law states you have to tell an Officer you are carrying that I can find)

Badger is it true that some police in the UK dont even carry firearms or is it Japan Im thinking of?

new topics

top topics

<< 1    3  4 >>

log in