To all NON AMERICANS, would you feel safer if your country allowed its citizens to carry/own guns?

Originally posted by EvilSadamClone
That's what America is supposed to be about.

Did you notice the topic of this thread? "To all NON AMERICANS, would you feel safer if your country allowed its citizens to carry/own guns?"

Guns are engraved into American public as part of their life, taking that away from them is like taking a cell phone from a teenager, they would be lost without it.

reply to post by intrepid


Two things:

I'm dyslexic and often misread things.

And there were a few generalizations in this thread about Americans that bugged me, so I thought I'd respond to that.

reply to post by 4hero

Just so everyone knows, I am a citizen of the United States.

Criminals will always get guns, but they need to be taken away from most people.

Are you really suggesting that criminals should be the only ones that have guns?

See ya,
Milt

reply to post by Samuelis

In Australia, those three men are unarmed and will run if you come at them with a cricket bat. It's possible for a society to protect themselves without using deadly force.

How well do you reckon a cricket bat would work against someone with a shotgun? Aren't shotguns and rifles legal in Australia?

See ya,
Milt

Originally posted by RandalFlagg
The arguments for allowing an armed population in case of the need of having to fight the government and military during martial law dont stand in my view.

Take America for example if martial law was declared and the people were not happy with it and decided to fight the military the people would get destroyed. The American armed civilians would not stand a chance against the American military hardware the soldiers would be using.

Its a crap situation unfortunately but armed or not civilians are not going to be able to defeat there own military in western countries.

I don't think you'd see many american soldiers firing on american civilians in that event though.. you'd probably see a rush of soldiers helping the citizens if it came to that..lets not forget that at the end of the day, those soldiers have a family at home in most cases.. it's not quite as black and white as that.

reply to post by Trolloks

If they were legal many more people would have them, and the ammo, and with this, a huge increase in gang violence that result in death, robberies at gun point, shop hold ups, etc etc.

We have lots of firearms here in the United States, and considering your comment, I'd be interested in hearing why the United Kingdom has a higher rate of violent crime than the United States. Hell, it's even worse than South Africa according to this article. If you feel that article isn't accurate, please explain why.

See ya,
Milt

reply to post by BenReclused


It's the daily mail, i don't need to say much more.

reply to post by BenReclused


alot depends on how crimes are reported as in one country an act could be considered violent while in another country it would be classed as a misdemenour and don't forget the uk police is in a row with the governement over funding so the more crime reported = more need to have more police officers which means senior cops get more money for managing larger forces.

reply to post by Trolloks

And the reason the police in USA have guns in the first place, is because the public have guns.

That is NOT an accurate statement! The police here in the United States are armed with firearms because CRIMINALS have guns. That's also the primary reason our law abiding public feels there is a need to own handguns as well.

See ya,
Milt

Originally posted by BenReclused
That is NOT an accurate statement! The police here in the United States are armed with firearms because CRIMINALS have guns. That's also the primary reason our law abiding public feels there is a need to own handguns as well.

See ya,
Milt

Isn't that all a bit stupid though?

So everyone has guns because everyone else has guns?

Do you not see the flaw?

Originally posted by BenReclused
reply to post by Trolloks

 

And the reason the police in USA have guns in the first place, is because the public have guns.

That is NOT an accurate statement! The police here in the United States are armed with firearms because CRIMINALS have guns. That's also the primary reason our law abiding public feels there is a need to own handguns as well.

See ya,
Milt

Take a look at my previous post, where i clearly wrote out the point that the police have guns because they need to enforce the law against other people with guns. Paradox or stupidity, you make your choice.

If you're using th Daily Mail as a source, well the integrity of your post is lost. It's the British version of fox news, anyone without a British passport/low-wages/non-white/immegrant should be in jail according to them.

reply to post by BenReclused


Also, in the UK we have armed police, to tackle gun related crime. Not every police officer has a gun, only specialy trained police, and because of that, less people feel the need to carry a weapon.

If every police officer in the UK had a gun, well lets just say that the summer riots of last year would of been alot more bloody.

I haven't got round to reading other comments yet but I'll give my opinion first:

No I would not feel safer if guns were available to everybody. I have lived in 2 European countries and both of them have relatively strict rules about gun ownership and it the idea of needing to 'protect myself' by owning a gun has never occured to me.

I was mugged once in London walking home at knifepoint and I'm willing to bet that if guns were available on the mass market that the guy would have had a gun. To be frank the impression I get is that some of our US posters would like the opportunity to be in such a situation so they could kill somebody with a weapon and call it self defence - which gun ownership would allow.

I'm not interested in helping to create a more violent society and frankly killing somebody if they are robbing you is an over-reaction and has to be treated as such.

reply to post by BenReclused


I guess it could depend on what criteria are used to define 'violent crime', got to be the same everywhere for a realistic comparison.

And anyway, that's just more reason why NOT to loosen our gun control laws - how many of them 'violent crimes' would result in gun crime if they were armed?
My guess is quite a few.

What you got to realise is that the UK is quite different to the USA.
And we don't WANT or NEED easier access to guns.

Those that want or need guns can easily obtain and use them providing certain regulations are met.

Pretty straight forward really.

I don't really care what you do in the USA, that's your business - just don't rabbit on about it to us Non-Americans who are quite happy with the way things are thank you very much.

^ ^ ^ ^

What He said

reply to post by Freeborn




I swear to god mate.... how many times have we been in these threads about guns?

How many times have we had this argument? (UK/US)

:shk:

Australia doesn't need to have its gun laws changed, it makes me laugh when people start saying that Australians have had their guns taken away from them.

If your an Australian you can own guns, its easy just do a course in a basic safety test, get your licence and there you have it, go buy yourself a gun.

there are different types of guns though, i think the only ones you cant have are military style, full automatic, but you can get a rifles and pistols.

the course costs a few hundred dollars but if you can afford to buy a gun, you can afford the course.


Whateva

reply to post by blupblup


I know mate - they just don't seem to get the fact that we don't care about what they do over the pond, that's their business.

But it's different over here - different culture, different psyche - we don't need or want any relaxation of our gun laws.

The world doesn't want to be a replica of the USA.
The USA isn't the centre of the world.
Now get over it, carry on doing as you please in your country and we'll carry on doing things as we see fit over here.

What could be any easier or straight forward?

So straight forward I really don't get what the issue is.

reply to post by Freeborn




It know dude, seems pretty straight forward.



Then again, maybe we should adopt the practice...


Maybe we should all go around with with explosive belts/suicide vests strapped to us, ya know, just in case we chance across a terrorist who has one?


That's basically the logic used



:shk: