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

i live in scotland used guns on the farm as a little kid . the slightest offence sees your gun licence revoked but you can get a gun in minutes if you know the right people or make one with a bit of wood . stun guns are my favourite easy to get in europe work well i would recommend them to any female .if the goverment allowed guns in the uk the deaths would be in the tens of thousands per year . we are the nut jobs of europe with drink & drugs & fried mars bars .america would seem sane if we were allowed semi automatics a friday night in glasgow or nottingham would be like world of warcraft with us heed the balls .its bad enough at chucking out time on the weekend with alcohol add guns & it would liven things up no end the police cannot cope as it is phone them and wait hours sometimes . i keep a well oiled revolver & shotgun hidden for when things do got wrong .but then again if you declare yourself a freeman on the land you dont need a gun licence

It depends on where we live. If it is a blissful country, where there is 0% of chance of getting killed for nothing, i don't see the reason why having a gun. If its a country like the entire North America, should Definitely have a gun. Besides, if everyone know that the gun they have is only for self-defense against criminals, there should be no problem about everyone being armed. Espiecally that now you are not allowed to wear a Kevlar or similar bullet/knife proof clothing. How are we supposed to be protected against criminals, and with no true police anywhere?

reply to post by BenReclused

Whoa! I did not know Britain had a higher crime rate than South Africa..Imo in South Africa, it is most certainly safer for law-abiding citizens to own a gun.Many criminals have them,and to believe the useless cops are gonna pitch up in time to help out in the event of a home invasion,is same as believing in the Tooth Fairy- how quaint.I would definitely rather have one and never have to use it,than not have one when a machete-wielding intruder,or one armed with a gun of his own,shows up.
At the end of the day,here, normal civilians going about their daily lives are most likely to be robbed/raped at knifepoint,not shot.So a type of martial arts training would come in handy,too.Private small businesses are more likely to be robbed by criminals with guns,and drivers are of course hijacked by those with guns.

reply to post by Trolloks

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

That is certainly among the laziest arguments I have seen.

The Daily Mail's "League of Shame" is based on stats from the "Conservatives", the "EU Commission", and the "UN", so I'm not sure how the stats are combined. That said, statistics from Eurostat, while not an exact match, do tend to confirm the numbers regarding members of the European Union.

Do you consider Eurostat to be bogus too?

See ya,
Milt

I grew up in the worst part of my town. They used to call it "Little Chicago" or "Valley of the flying knives". I had to run away sometimes, yes. Usually standing straight made the "enemy" stop. But never anybody would have had the idea, that a gun would make life better.

You would have lost your face, if you would have used a gun. It was simply unthinkable. Even in this environment.

(That is Germany here, as I said before.)

reply to post by Maxatoria

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.

I won't disagree with any of that. I did however come across an article earlier today regarding burglars, and others that committed various "lower level" crimes, that were caught in the act and given warnings instead of being arrested. Supposedly, that was because the UK police were too busy with other crimes. If I can find it again, I'll send you the link.

Considering our media's overwhelming interest in sensationalism, many around the World don't get a true idea about conditions here in the United States. Many feel that we have an obsession with firearms, but that is far from being true.

See ya,
Milt

American here, this entire thread for the most part is a prime example of why I won't ever subscribe to any social government. Morons making decisions based on their own "opinions" that directly and indirectly effect my life, my families life and my ability to protect myself and my family and survive OTHER types of morons.

This thread is why I hate when people of any ilk speak on my behalf...EVER. This thread is why I for the most part believe in isolationism and independence over all any and all other forms of "livelihood"

I don't think any self righteous holier than thou, fix the world, ignorant, arrogant, utopian brainwashed fool(s) should be able to have ANY say at ALL about how I am allowed to live on this earth so long as I AM NOT exploiting or interfering with other's ability to do the same...and owning a gun is not interfering with anyone's else livelihood.
Using it however might, but you just have to trust that I won't...if you don't trust me, that's fine, I don't trust you either...and that's why I own a gun.

The notion that removing guns will decrease crime is a fallacy as once guns are removed as a "prime weapon" something else will replace it...knives etc...once knives are outlawed, it will be clubs, once clubs are outlawed it will be rocks, once rocks are outlawed it will be fists and feet, and once were all left unarmed and unlegged by those above self righteous holier than thou, fix the world, ignorant, arrogant, Utopian brainwashed fools we won't be able to feed ourselves and will be left without a leg to stand on...

as other posters have said, if you want to take away my guns you better be willing to kill me with one to do so...and at that point you are nothing but a hypocrite

reply to post by blupblup

Isn't that all a bit stupid though?

Not at all. Contrary to popular opinion here on ATS, our police normally confront only those suspected of committing a crime, or those that actually did.

Why do you think a cop would need a gun as protection from a law abiding citizen? That thought truly is stupid!

So everyone has guns because everyone else has guns?

Not everyone here owns, or wants to own, a gun. Most criminals, however, do own guns, regardless of legalities.

Do you not see the flaw?

I absolutely do! Your logic is based on myth!

See ya,
Milt

reply to post by IkNOwSTuff


I am from Kurdistan,

Before my marriage 3 years ago i always had a 9mm glock with me every where i went. and i didn't work for nobody, but the fact that i knew some one in the security force, this managed to get me a license to carry firearm.
for someone thats in his early twenties looked cool to carry a gun with an ID to back you at every checkpoint.
But then i started to see the ugly side of every one carry weapons backed Tribal leaders. Tribe....you don't mess with tribes!

Now regarding the license. i would love to see the country stricken their firearm to citizens.

/KurdMan

If they already allow crooks to have guns, then yes. if there is not already a significant level of gun crime, then no.

I'm from Macedonia and I'd say not.Too many hotheads ,and there are already very violent inter ethnic incidents, imagine those idiots with guns.Americans always had them and have culture built around them,you can't change something like that overnight.

reply to post by Trolloks

Regarding:

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

and:

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.

I was not responding to your previous post, only that comment. Nor does that post make make your comment any more valid. That comment was not a paradox, so I reckon it was only stupid.

If you're using th Daily Mail as a source, well the integrity of your post is lost.

Attacking a source, without disputing a claim, only shows a complete lack of integrity on your part, not mine. As far as my integrity is concerned, here is another source.

See ya,
Milt

reply to post by Trolloks

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.

Though our police officers are armed, we normally don't fear them unless we are breaking the law.

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.

That may very well be true.

Even though many rioters here are armed, our police officers tend to show a great deal of restraint when it comes using firearms on them.

Out of curiosity, was it one of your "specialy trained police" that shot Mark Duggan? Wasn't that supposedly the cause of your "summer riots"?

See ya,
Milt

Originally posted by Sly1one
American here, this entire thread for the most part is a prime example of why I won't ever subscribe to any social government. Morons making decisions based on their own "opinions" that directly and indirectly effect my life, my families life and my ability to protect myself and my family and survive OTHER types of morons.

This thread is why I hate when people of any ilk speak on my behalf...EVER. This thread is why I for the most part believe in isolationism and independence over all any and all other forms of "livelihood"

I don't think any self righteous holier than thou, fix the world, ignorant, arrogant, utopian brainwashed fool(s) should be able to have ANY say at ALL about how I am allowed to live on this earth so long as I AM NOT exploiting or interfering with other's ability to do the same...and owning a gun is not interfering with anyone's else livelihood.
Using it however might, but you just have to trust that I won't...if you don't trust me, that's fine, I don't trust you either...and that's why I own a gun.

The notion that removing guns will decrease crime is a fallacy as once guns are removed as a "prime weapon" something else will replace it...knives etc...once knives are outlawed, it will be clubs, once clubs are outlawed it will be rocks, once rocks are outlawed it will be fists and feet, and once were all left unarmed and unlegged by those above self righteous holier than thou, fix the world, ignorant, arrogant, Utopian brainwashed fools we won't be able to feed ourselves and will be left without a leg to stand on...

as other posters have said, if you want to take away my guns you better be willing to kill me with one to do so...and at that point you are nothing but a hypocrite

You somehow mistakenly assume that only socialist governments hate guns, that only those on the left hate guns, that if you have any concern what so ever with guns you must be a leftist commie wanting nothing but socialism and all the evil and poison and lack of freedoms that go with it.

You post shows how much you don not understand, and likely have no wish to even try and understand people and governments with a social conscience. Sadly, your post is not terribly surprising, and no doubt someone can tell by your words where you stand on so many other "issues".

I am a left leaning centrist with many right leaning beliefs to, but just because I tend to lean left, (some would say I AM left) by no means I am a moron, nor brainwashed, ignorant, arrogant, utopian, foolish, or many of the other epithets you are tossing around about people who do not believe exactly as you do. Your post seems very partisan, and frankly, shows ignorance about what happens, or has happened in other countries. Many countries have never had prolific firearm possession, such as Canada, so this is not an issue of the "taking away of guns" either.

Reading your post brings to mind the old adage,

The Quill is mightier than the sword

Edward Bulwer-Lytton in 1839

Some people escalate situations immediately to the highest level, pulling a gun because you are in my yard, not even knowing if you are a threat, these are they type of people that scare me, they do not know how to deal with much without (or anything sometimes) escalating any situation to the highest levels, and sadly, some places (and people) condone this, showing a complete disregard for the sanctity of life. These are the types of people that scare me, and in my humble opinion, should not own guns, they lack the ability to escalate things in a reasonable manner, rather than turning what might be simple situation, in to a threat of life situation.

I have sat at a traffic light before, and had someone "jump in" my car, it was not a car jacking, it was a friend out in the freezing winter, if I had the mentality some here share, he would be dead, I would have pointless blood on my hands, all because I was scared of my own shadow, and felt the need to escalate the situation to extremes before I even knew the whole situation, or threat level.

It does take some thought though, and reasoning to wield the "quill" in an effective manner. Ranting and tossing epithets around is not an effective use of the "quill" in even the wildest of imaginations.

reply to post by freethinker123

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.

Your impression, unfortunately, would be correct. I have met a few individuals that feel that way.

The "and call it self defence - which gun ownership would allow" part of your statement isn't true though. If the police don't feel that deadly force was justified, it's off to jail that individual goes. The charge could range anywhere from manslaughter to 1st degree (premeditated) murder. It depends entirely on the circumstances. Possession of a Conceal and Carry Permit carries a great deal of responsibility with it, and it is NOT a "get out of jail free card".

See ya,
Milt

reply to post by RyanFromCan


When I say social government I don't mean socialism...I mean any gdm form of governance that allows other to directly or indirectly dictate what I can and cannot do based of THEIR FEARS...

I don't even like or agree with my own damn government anymore...I just want to be left the hell alone? Are you ok with that? Or must you and your arrogance tell me and force me to abide by your silly social experiments?

I didn't call anyone a communist and addressed no partisan issues, I don't believe in the splitting of the brain and labeling your thoughts left or right, blue or red, democracy or communist...that is for people who believe in those things, I DONT.

Basically my post was there to tell you and the lot like you that think you have "the social" world figured out enough to tell ME how I should and shouldn't live...if you admit you don't then take your rhetoric to someone who cares.

The asinine implications you tried to make and tie me in with people who would shoot their own friend jumping in their car because they are as you put it "afraid of their own shadow" is very weak and has no ground to stand on.

I could just as easily fire back and say its people like you afraid of your own shadow wanting to pass laws to limit my ability to protect myself based off your WAY OFF perception that I will kill my friend if he jumps into my car...you are no less afraid then you are accusing me and other gun owners of being. We could do that silly dance all day back and forth and get no where if you wish.

Bottom line is, who the hell are you or anyone else or any NUMBER of other people to tell ME how I CAN and CANNOT protect myself? WHO are YOU to drape your world view over the top of mine? The ONLY people who believe they have the right to do so are those that I labeled in my previous post...self righteous, holier than thou, arrogant, ignorant, Utopian fools...

I explained why I am isolationist and independence oriented in my views because I don't think I have the right to tell you to NOT OWN A GUN...by all mean don't own a gun, that is your very right to make that choice for yourself and your family but that my friend is where it ends, you and no army has the right to intervene in my life, without just cause and I'm sorry but being AFRAID of what I might do with a gun isn't just cause...that is a preemptive judgement call that implies you can read the damn future...and last I checked we don't believe in that do we? Once we start passing preemptive laws we end with preemptive incarcerations based on the likelihoods and possibilities of what we MIGHT do based on fear and paranoia fueled by horrible statistics. In that world you might end up locked up before I do...

reply to post by IkNOwSTuff


I definitely would. If everyone owned a decent firearm then the people could rise up against the government if needed

Weapons will all ways be NO MATTER WHAT!! If you take away a weapon from group and let another one use that weapon then the other group could easily over throw the other group. Keep in mind WEAPONS WILL ALL WAYS BE!! No matter laws. The fairest approach is to TEACH people how to use them the right way, when to use them ect... Imagine if you wear tough how to use and respect a weapon in school.

The good people in this world out way the bad. So to speak, their will be more people defending then attacking. YOU CANT GET RID OF WEAPONS!!! So why leave your self vulnerable?

Originally posted by juleol

Originally posted by tetriswoooo
reply to post by IkNOwSTuff

 

i would feel safer if everyone had guns because the people who want guns for malicious activities WILL get their hands on them i would rather have it and not need it than need it and not have it (im australian and i dont have one unfortunatley)

Yet Norway is a perfect example that this theory is not exactly true. The only real shootings we had here was that incident with Brevik. Otherwise gun deaths are extremely low and most murders are actually done using different measures like people being stabbed to death, which is nowhere as lethal and has a very low range.

I do understand how Americans want to keep their gun rights though and doubt criminals would hand in their guns if they were banned.
Also I think an armed population could be a good thing once # really hits the fan so that the people can fight back against governments that is not in the best interest of the people.

But that gun laws here has saved life there is no question about. When you have hardly any guns circulating around it is even hard for criminals to get hold of them.
I personally have not even seen a real gun here in Norway as not even police are allowed to wear arms unless there is a special situation.

edit on 9-4-2012 by juleol because: (no reason given)

Yours is also a perfect example of a way of doing things not being true. Switzerland, for example, is awash with guns, yet they have almost no gun crime. Link

They have not had a massacre like happened in Norway either. Not trying to rub salt in a wound but you did bring it up.

The fact of the matter is criminals are the people who cause gun crime. Another fact is that most of the criminals are poor. So, one could hypothesize that poor + gun = crime. It is hard to scare the poor away from committing crimes because they have so little to lose. If we can solve poverty, then we solve most all gun crime. Unfortunately, no one in the US political establishment is interested in solving poverty. On the contrary, they seem to want more of it.

reply to post by Freeborn

I realise fully well that the UK, as are all other countries, is different than the United States in many, many, ways. This is why I have not told, nor will I ever tell, citizens of another country what is best for them. What made you feel that I was telling anyone what they should, or shouldn't do?

My ONLY purpose in this topic is to question statements that I feel are not true. In fact, this is ALL I have done. Do you have a problem with that too?

See ya,
Milt