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.


Dunblane School Massacre....ended handgun rights in UK

page: 14
<< 11  12  13    15  16  17 >>

log in


posted on Dec, 18 2012 @ 08:12 AM

Originally posted by Honor93
reply to post by Heresy

and this is how and where you lose credibility ...

The issues are

A: that you have handguns, easily concealable for crime.
B: you have automatic weapons.
C: you have very little legislation to check on whether gunownes are sane responsible adults
D: you appear to think it's okay to allow children access to automatic weapons and have no discernable consistent legislation insisting that guns are kept securely locked away.

If Lanza didn't have access to those guns, all those kids would be opening their presents this year
IF you realized that Lanza killed the gun owner to illegally gain access to the guns, you might have a point.

IF we knew for sure that's what actually happened, you'd have no point whatsoever.
IF he owned them legally, what was stopping him from doing the same thing ? Nothing.
IF B or D were true, things could be a whole lot worse than they are today.

and on the flip side, IF one of the adults had been armed, perhaps all of those kids would be alive, today. (whether they had presents or not)

no, handguns are age restricted. however, long guns/rifles are not and yes, they can and they do, without a license of any kind. they cannot march around town with it, they cannot patrol the playground or anything outrageous like that but they can possess, discharge, maintain, compete and utilize it at their leisure.

Im confused so kids can own rifles , but you then state that if B or D were true then things would be different , so kids can own rifles which can kill people if they so decide !

I think I see the problem here, why are kids being allowed to carry guns , kids arent allowed to drive , or drink alcohol , or do a whole load of other things that society deems are soley the responsibility of adults ! Yet we allow them to own and use rifles at any age ?

thats quite scary actually

EDIT: Sorry I see you were stirctly referring to Automatic weapons , but still a kid with a rifle is a scary thought, kids are mean little buggers and dont often have that consequences thing going through their heads !

edit on 18-12-2012 by sapien82 because: (no reason given)

posted on Dec, 18 2012 @ 08:16 AM
reply to post by Vulcha

Hi Vulcha,

yeh I think that the Dunblane massacre still weighs heavily on the hearts and minds of the Scottish government. There have been a number of "airsoft" related injuries and deaths as well so they are trying to ban them outright unless being used in sport and under license!

posted on Dec, 18 2012 @ 08:30 AM

wow you don't know much about history do ya? you must understand why the United States Constitution gives explicit rights to own firearms... you must read the Deceleration if Independence sometime.

UK and the British Church State of course wanted peoples right to defend themselves against a tyrannical government taken away from the people. The British are renown worldwide for their colonialism and I believe hated above any other nation on this planet.

Handguns are dangerous though imo...

Your totally missing the point. It took till Dunblane for the major gun laws. I'm saying these laws took hundreds of years to evolve, longer then USA has been a country, "america's changes are not going to happen over night" especially considering the cultural differences. end of.

that's pretty funny coming from a tiny island nation in which the sun used to never set on their empire... Americans mentality with gun ownership is directly related to freedom and a militia which stands in defense of states rights. In fact militias have been on the largest increase this nation has ever experienced in just the last 4 years.

yes the sun is setting on the remaining 45 million inhabitants of some tiny island who think they are the world... even UK's own government can not stop what lays in your future. There are nearly 360 million inhabitants of all nationalities which call themselves Americans, Brits only count their nationals in their head count, even if they don't live on the island haha.

I hope you'all like speaking Urdu that's all I have to say...

the British have a very liberal way of turning the blind eye... Brits are the type of people to see a rape or a mugging taking place in an alley and instead of help they run and call the police.

their cowardice is unsurpassed.

You talk some utter rubbish, I realise you must be young, but come on.

edit on 18-12-2012 by tdk84 because: (no reason given)

edit on 18-12-2012 by tdk84 because: (no reason given)

posted on Dec, 18 2012 @ 08:40 AM
reply to post by sapien82

No kids dont own rifles like they just save their money and walk down to the gun shop and buy a heater.
edit on 18-12-2012 by Logarock because: n

posted on Dec, 18 2012 @ 09:34 AM
reply to post by Logos23

hmmm, government stats vs Wiki ... yeah, i did.
you accused me of relying on msm info/distortions, i didn't.

i gave both ... before gun laws in 1997 and after all the way up to 2008 i think.

uh, last i checked, that is part of the topic of this thread.
how things changed after the laws were enacted.
can't know how they changed unless we know how they were beforehand, can we ?

so, i took your advice? and googled it ... guess what came up before anything else ?
[color=amber]US Violent Crime Rate: 475 per 100,000 citizens
(Year: 2003 )

UK Violent Crime Rate: 4,100 per 100,000 citizens
(Year: 2003 )

do we really need to do this nonsense ?
how 'bout if you believe it's different than what's been posted, then you show the rest of us, ok ?

because I had already sourced the information it gave on there
where? i sure haven't seen any such 'source' link.
considering you have yet to provide any link to support your assertion, it would be appropriate if you did.

hardly ... lumping the entire period together is a smoke screen, that's all.

so, separating the time periods and showing a remarkable difference is wrong in your opinion but lumping it all together is not ??
no wonder this conversation isn't very productive.

we aren't discussing guns in the US, we are discussing banned guns in the UK ... they are not the same topic no matter how much others would like it to be.

i don't believe we have a 'gun problem' in the US.
unless you are referring to existing restrictions, like gun-free zones.

just because others imagine one (gun problem) doesn't mean there is one.

hmmmm, aren't you cute ...

be sensible about the time period you cover and make sure it's relevant
do tell, what is the difference between the two time periods being discussed, covering 1981-2008 ?

yeah, the bigger picture is ... violent crime (and crime in general) in the UK is on the rise and has been ever since the gun bans of 1997.

posted on Dec, 18 2012 @ 09:53 AM
reply to post by sapien82

ok, let's see if i help you become less confused.
first, let's forget B & D are listed simply because they are both FALSE. ok?

automatic weapons are severely restricted but not banned.
semi-automatic weapons come in both handgun & rifle platforms.

what this shooter supposedly used would be a semi-auto rifle.
[yet to be verified]

kids under age 21 can own, use long-guns and rifles, yes.
kids who do own/use such weapons are supposed to ALWAYS have adult supervision present (although we all know how well that works)

B is absolutely false with relation to kids unless a parent who owns one is supervising access/use of it or they (gun owner) is lawfully responsible.

why are kids being allowed to carry guns
kids don't legally carry guns, period.
that is what you aren't understanding.
kids hunt, they compete, the plink, they learn, they do not "carry".

kids do drive, at 15 they can be permitted.
not so for a gun.

kids are not permitted to consume alcohol until age 21 (in most places) even though they are considered 'adults' at 18 ... but that doesn't mean it doesn't happen anyway.

the introduction and use of weaponry is a parental decision as it should be.
nothing wrong with that.

kids learn how to use their fists without much supervision or training at all ...
should we bind them until adulthood ?

honestly, it's only scary because you view it that way.
the kids who are roaming with guns, are NOT and i repeat ARE NOT doing so legally.

doesn't mean it doesn't happen ... however, no law is gonna change that either.

posted on Dec, 18 2012 @ 10:08 AM
Gun laws of Japan.

* The only types of firearms which a Japanese citizen may acquire are rifles or shotguns.
* Sportsmen are permitted to possess rifles or shotguns for hunting and for skeet and trap shooting, but only after submitting to a lengthy licensing procedure.
* Without a license, a Japanese citizen may not even hold a gun in his or her hands.
* Shotguns and rifles for hunting or sports may be possessed upon completion of a licensing procedure that requires a police background check, successful completion of a safety course, passing of shooting, written, and psychological tests, and police verification of secure storage, prior to approval being granted by the police to purchase a firearm.
* Fully automatic weapons are restricted to military and police. Gun owners must take a class once a year and pass a written test.

Read more:

posted on Dec, 18 2012 @ 10:11 AM

Originally posted by Honor93
reply to post by Mark Harris

if you believe there was a point in there, perhaps you should be more specific cause all i saw was a bunch of whine and cheese.

swaying opinions is the goal of a 'debate'.
if you are not attempting to sway mine nor i yours, why debate at all ??

is it your position to simply tell as many ppl as you can that they are wrong and that is that ?
if so, what will that accomplish

I was genuinely starting to wonder if you weren't just playing stupid to discredit a particular side but perhaps you just genuinely don't have a clue. Ok, lets try one last time. You saw what you did because you are coming from a perspective of utter ignorance, perhaps that's why you appeared to have a such mental block over this. This is exemplified by your words above, debate doesn't have to be about winning.

Here: Define: Debate

Innocent ignorance is nothing to be ashamed of, far from it we all come from there and it needs gentle and honest handling, stubborn stupidity is your own fault - not the responsibility of others. Come back and read the initial post again after exorcising your painfully limited understanding then U2U me if you want to discuss it further. I've tried and tried to get the point across despite it being pretty damned apparent to begin with. Being slightly worried that you may not be able (or inclined?) to click a link and read I'll give you an extra hand here - the point of debate can also be to inform, discuss.

Debate (between grown-ups) doesn't have to be about swaying an opinion. It's not about your damned 'side' winning at all costs, ATS isn't some giant point scoring exercise to satiate your ego.

Now, you can consider that and all that has passed so far, you can click the link and go educate yourself a little or you can wallow in your own ignorance. Don't try and excuse it through others though, it's your issue now. I've tried once again to demonstrate the initial point (even this back and forth between us relates to it directly - can you not even see that yet?) and if you still fail to get it then it's obviously either simply beyond your presently capability or you are purposefully trolling trying to discredit the 'side' you seemingly stand for and those who thought you stood next to them should be furious at your fake ignorance. And so, U2U's notwithstanding then, we are done here. (That even means you can have the last word if you wish. Is that enough for a win for you?)


posted on Dec, 18 2012 @ 11:51 AM
reply to post by tdk84

firearms of the magnitude we are are discussing here didn't arrive on the scene until the early 1900's it wasn't until the 1800's when Colt I believe invented the repeating revolver and Winchester the repeating rifle.

America was very much a Nation at this time and thru the birth pangs of our Revolutionary and Civil Wars.


and the assault rifle took two world wars before it came on the scene, with the second one ending halfway thru the 20th century.

England never had a "historical" gun problem or a modern one imo at that.

edit on 18-12-2012 by SisyphusRide because: (no reason given)


posted on Dec, 18 2012 @ 11:55 AM
By all means continue with the comparison of statistics if you deem it relevant but the "All citizens of ABC are insane/cowardly/purple/insertpettyjibehere rubbish has to end. is NOT the place for parroting the ignorant hate speech spewed on TV and talk radio.

"Broad Brush Bashing" is the epitome of IGNORANCE.

Originally posted by Springer
I am with you 100%, is NOT the place for parroting the ignorant hate speech spewed on TV and talk radio.

The dynamics involved, cultural, political, propaganda, agendas as diverse and opposed as any in Human history are WAY TOO COMPLEX to cast in the typically simplistic perspective (required for the mental abilities of the intended audience) of ludicrous hate speech or religious/cultural group bashing.

"Broad Brush Bashing" is the epitome of IGNORANCE. I don't care which brand you buy into, it's simply stupid beyond belief. To state "(enter name of group you hate) is totally to blame and EVERYONE who is part of this group is a dastardly dog" simply illustrates the utter blind ignorance of those who scream it.

Any "All you Yanks/Brits are.." comments are not welcome here and will be removed.

posted on Dec, 18 2012 @ 12:14 PM
there is a huge misconception in this thread about America being an immature nation directly pertaining to our gun laws. What most people who are not American in this topic do not understand is America is a Nation of immigrants, it is how this country was founded... by the people for the people. History has taught the forefathers of this nation a great deal in the philosophy of Live Free or Die.

The main difference between Americans and the British and the socialist Canadians is... we don't like or ever trust our government, no matter which party is in office, we keep them in check because history dating back before antiquity has taught us that... America became the greatest nation in such a short time because it is directly related to our philosophy of freedom.

it's the Wild Wild West baby...

edit on 18-12-2012 by SisyphusRide because: (no reason given)

posted on Dec, 18 2012 @ 12:20 PM
reply to post by SisyphusRide

America became the greatest nation is such a short time because it is directly related to our philosophy of freedom.

“Your” philosophy of freedom comes from a British dude

When you look at history this “Greatest country” or “world super-power” stuff runs in a cycle, it used to be the Mongolians, the Romans, the British, the French and now it is the Americans, tomorrow it will be the Chinese. Actually some might argue that it already is the Chinese because they really are starting to catch some up with America so really history may look back at America’s time as “world super-power” and realise that it done a rather crappy job, only held the status for 70 years, didn’t do much conquering and left its self in huge debt to the rest of the world.

posted on Dec, 18 2012 @ 12:26 PM
reply to post by OtherSideOfTheCoin

I am sorry sir... it comes from the French. We do know a little about history mind you.

posted on Dec, 18 2012 @ 12:36 PM
reply to post by Mark Harris

i would guess your inability or unwillingness to discuss the topic at hand, coupled with a penchant for childish name-calling could be symptomatic of a terminal condition that seems to have infected a majority of what could be considered a beneficial and/or constructive conversation.

now that you've clarified that you do understand what a debate is, the question was, why are you debating me, personally ?

this topic isn't about a 'debate' of any kind.
i have shown that violent crime in the UK is steadily increasing since the gun ban went into effect.

you, on the other hand, can't/won't even address the topic.
and, although intentional derailment is something you should avoid, it appears that is the whole of your personal arsenal.

should you dispute my assertion, fine, please provide something more than ...

I'm not attacking any 'side'
what 'side' ?
violent crime has either increased, decreased or shown no remarkable change.
there are no other 'sides'.

until then, enjoy your delusion.

posted on Dec, 18 2012 @ 12:36 PM
reply to post by SisyphusRide

John Locke, a British man, is the father of modern liberalism, your constitution is based largely on the works of Locke as it is a liberal document and the French man whose man you are trying to recall or Google is Jean-Jacques Rousseau who was also massively influence by John Locke but had very little to do with the statue of Liberty although his writings did also influence the constitution.

Either way it is not “your” philosophy

posted on Dec, 18 2012 @ 12:49 PM
reply to post by OtherSideOfTheCoin

there is already a thread on just this subject and as was proven there, Locke most likely got his liberalist influence from the Dutch, during his time in Holland.

posted on Dec, 18 2012 @ 12:52 PM
reply to post by Honor93

Regardless of what inspired him John Locke is recognise historically as being the father of liberalism. And I have been involved in that thread so no need for the link.

posted on Dec, 18 2012 @ 12:56 PM
reply to post by OtherSideOfTheCoin

America is not a liberal nation... England is though.

people like Ben Franklin who were Americans which had British roots learned what we know from the French in his many visits. I believe Ben visited old England once? haha!

Our ideas are originally and wholly American, as I have stated America is a Nation of immigrants. I suppose this is the concept the motherland still can't grasp... we weren't some subordinates throwing a temper tantrum as your history books may elude to... we were dead serious. George Washington, the Father of our Nation... who is a little more important to me than your father of liberalism was born in America... hence an American. The British still can't grasp that concept, they even tally their expatriates in places like Australia when they do their census.

America is a Republic.

edit on 18-12-2012 by SisyphusRide because: (no reason given)

posted on Dec, 18 2012 @ 01:02 PM
reply to post by SisyphusRide

The American constitution is accredited as being the first “liberal constitution” it is a liber document it is based on the natural rights of man and freedoms this is all liberal and it’s origins can be found in the works of John Locke. Your forefathers basically stole a whole bunch of European ideas, to give them some credit they did take the best bits and kind of smash them all together to try to make a better way of live but there is nothing “original” or “American” them.

Democracy, Capitalism, Liberalism and the idea of the republic all European philosophies.

posted on Dec, 18 2012 @ 01:14 PM
reply to post by OtherSideOfTheCoin

sucks you guys didn't think of it then eh? think what you will... I am an American I'm not the thought police like most Europeans are in this modern age... where we happen to be living and residing in presently. We have freedom of speech -- and that goes for thought too over here so...

I was born in America, I have Hungarian grandparents... my mom was brought here when she was 9 years old and married a Russian... out pops me in the great state of Virginia... am I a Russian? how about a Hungarian? nope you guessed wrong, I am an American, I possess both traits, a complex fusion if you will. We are not some Hitlitarian Eugenicist over here bro, even the british born founders and helpers we had over here at the time of the revolution considered themselves American.

you mine as well start another topic and direct me to it.... we're getting ot.
edit on 18-12-2012 by SisyphusRide because: (no reason given)

new topics

top topics

<< 11  12  13    15  16  17 >>

log in