I'm an Englishman without a gun and here is my view...

page: 2
27
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join

posted on Dec, 29 2012 @ 06:03 AM
link   

Originally posted by circuitsports
If the US built a bridge to the UK and told the residents come on over there would be 6 people left in the UK, same as Russia, China and most other countries.

Freedom kicks ass, so does absurd levels of firepower, boob implants that are too large and fast cars.

I bet your queen has a machine gun in the house or thirty...sorry I forgot you are all peasants basking in the warm glow of a superior being who deserves access to whatever she sees fit - but not you.

Since when did you assume that the USA is still such a draw to the rest of the World that everybody wants to live there?
I dont know anybody that would want to live in America but i know loads that want to, will do and are living in Countries like New Zealand, Australia and Canada. You need a reality check fella, nobody loves the USA anymore, not even its allies.
Anyway, with respect, this is another pointless thread about gun control/violence "we are more violent than you" etc, etc.
Lets state the case here. The UK IS a violent place, especially at closing time when people are drunk and pouring out of the Pubs and clubs. Thats a fact that isnt in dispute. Its also a fact that crime in London has been massively fuelled by Black on Black gun crime/gangs. Its also had much to do with previous Government policy that opened our doors wide open and let anybody in. You want to see Somali gangs fighting "West Indian" gangs? Go live in London ( South of the River will be best) and be amazed.
We have a gun problem that is getting out of hand and thats due to the break up of the old Soviet Union, Yugoslavia and countries such as Albania, Bulgaria and Romania being welcomed into the bosom of the West with open arms. If you think the Mafia are the only families capable of extreme violence and organised crime you ain seen nothing yet!
The relevence to us? They all want to come here, be criminals here and bring guns and murder onto OUR streets.
That is some of the reasons why we are a "violent nation" infact we probably have always been violent, its why our tiny Island is so good at fighting in Wars and conflicts, we "Kick ass" as our American cousins say.
I dont think anybody outside of the USA gives a stuff if they all shoot each other till there is nobody else left to shoot, I certainly dont.
In the great scheme of things American Gun law is not overly important to the rest of Planet Earth, is it!!
Its time to let it all go, let the Yanks do what they gotta do and let the rest of us do what we gotta do.
There are more important things to be worried about, the UK really needs to be whiter than white before its citizens start offering views and opinions on other Countries woes and, to be fair, we are far from perfect!
I think we have all had a say elsewhere on here, do we REALLY need yet another thread on this subject?
OP, you are an articulate and intelligent poster, however, the title of your post tends to suggest the touch of sanctimonious about it. Its clear "Our views" from outside of the USA are NOT welcomed so should we really be continuing to post and discuss when we can post and discuss about the rubbish thats going on in the UK?
People that live in glass houses and all that............
edit on 29-12-2012 by LFN69 because: .




posted on Dec, 29 2012 @ 06:53 AM
link   
reply to post by SecretFace
 


Really good post! I agree with you, I think American culture creates violent attitudes.



posted on Dec, 29 2012 @ 08:57 AM
link   
OK, I've held off from this post until now, but I think I'll chuck my 2 cents in. I'm a Scotsman, living in Spain and I have guns (hand and rifles), however in order to keep guns I have to demonstrate a certain degree of responsibility in keeping them. In the case of the handgun, I have to agree to a psychological evaluation and need to keep the guns and their licences locked away. Forgetting hunting for the moment, the thing about guns is that they are the last line of defence in all circumstances. I'm not talking about turning the other cheek or giving in to violence or oppression or anything, but dealing with situations in a proportional manner(e.g get your fists out first). However in the USA which allows guns fairly freely (view this random walmart page), they appear to be the first choice when dealing with any situation (either material or perceived) and are also perceived as a consumer product and probably viewed as some sort of super sized fly spray. This consumerism of machines that kill will lead anyone who feels threatened or weak to grab the biggest "fly swat" he can find and use it rather than dealing with a situation in a more measured manner. It is also lazy in that it takes guts, strength and training to fight but almost no ability to keep squeezing a trigger and pointing a weapon in a general direction of people who are terrified. Yeah, that's really big.

Finally, the NRA needs shooting (no pun). In the face of 20 odd deaths, their solution is to put more guns out there and being cynical, they see the opportunity to sell even more guns. Shocking.



posted on Dec, 29 2012 @ 09:08 AM
link   

Originally posted by SecretFace
reply to post by LittleBlackEagle
 


I am totally for guns for defence, really I am. However, only for home defence. If someone obtains entry in to your property with ill intention, you should have every right to use all and every means necessary to neurtralise the intruder, including the discharge of firearms. I'm not for guns being carried by the general public in Britain, honestly, you Americans, even the youth seem far more respectful than the youth and certain section of adults here in Britain. You might have trailer trash and ghettos with drive by shootings and what not, but here, if we had guns in general circulation, half the population would be dead already, most probably at thier own hands. So guns being legal in that sense, here in Britain, no way, not until, again, attitudes change, but definately for home defence.


Incorrect! An armed society is a polite society! There isn't a lot of room to run around disrespecting people when everyone is armed.



posted on Dec, 29 2012 @ 09:14 AM
link   
reply to post by Evanzsayz
 


I think all countries nowadays create violent attitudes, not just the USA. I too believe that the mentally unstable shouln't be able to obtain firearms. However, when legally buying a gun, it's not like anyone acts insane while buying it. And there are people who go insane with no previous signs. It's just unrealistic to say mentally disturbed people shouldn't have guns, cause you may not know until they are insane until it's to late. I for one have firearms, and the proper unbringing, education, mindset, and safety practices, to continue to have them. The big one being upbringing. Guns have been a big part of my life, being in an area where hunting is common place. I was taught at a young age, that guns are not toys. Unfortunatly, not everyone who has a gun got that memo. So it all falls back on the gunowner, you are responsible for education, safety, and commonsense.



posted on Dec, 29 2012 @ 09:17 AM
link   
reply to post by SecretFace
 


First of all, great OP! S+F


You have echoed my thoughts and some points that I've made on ATS myself.

I live and work in Nottingham and you hit the nail right on the head when you said that crime stats are manipulated. Guncrimes happen all too often and you will not read about them in the newspapers because they are swept under the carpet.

Same with knife crime, you hear about it but only if it's 'high profile'... Just spend some time in the city suburbs and you will hear stories that will make your stomach turn.

I see so many Brits on here saying how wonderful and peaceful Britain is because we don't have guns. All I have to say is, maybe in your neighbourhood mate but try living round (insert rough council estate) here.

edit on 29-12-2012 by Wide-Eyes because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 29 2012 @ 09:21 AM
link   
reply to post by nomadros
 


By the way, the NRA doesn't sell guns. They are a platform for gun rights. Not supporting them, but atleast they are offering an idea. I don't see anyother organizations willing to dish out money for anything that will help. Say what you want about the NRA and putting armed guards/teachers in school. But remember Bill Clinton said the same thing after Columbine, and it was widely accepted. I see it as the NRA is trying to help, in a way that doesn't involve taking constitutional rights away.



posted on Dec, 29 2012 @ 09:51 AM
link   
reply to post by CJCrawley
 


I am sure you are right cj crawley but was nt the mad man in Cumbria a 'lamper' with a grudge ??? I mean he went on a gun tirade for no particular reason that anyone can tell ... anyway, I would still like to be able to have a firearm in my home.

You know what England is like these days GCHQ probably have my IP address and home address as we speak - because I said I would like a firearm.

England has been flooded by goods including guns and people from all over the world including the old soviet states - recently[ 10 years or so] which is why my opinion about wanting a gun has changed in this time.
edit on 29-12-2012 by HelenConway because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 29 2012 @ 11:33 AM
link   

Originally posted by votan

Originally posted by cripmeister
reply to post by SecretFace
 


No instances of people going nuts with firearms in Switzerland eh? What about the Zug massacre in 2001? Fourteen innocent people shot dead by a lunatic with an assault rifle.

en.wikipedia.org...


and that did not lead to gun control or bans from what I read. he took out 14 people with an actual assault rifle?? and what?? our home grown nuts took out how many?? 20+?? with guns that are not assault rifles.

So banning certain kinds of guns does not guarantee a low body count. A country dealt with this problem without gun bans/control.

Man those are good arguments to fight the gun control nutts with.



If you had bothered to read the wiki article you would have seen that the rifle was a civilian semi-auto version of the SIG SG 550.



posted on Dec, 29 2012 @ 12:10 PM
link   
reply to post by SecretFace
 

Dear Englishman,

We had a wholesome society until the gangster culture took over with their repulsive "music" and its message of rape, rob, pillage, kill, disrespect authority.

The gangster culture continues to poison and victimize society, and their drivel, unfortunately, has been exported to other countries and poisoned them as well.

Sincerely,
Etc.
edit on 12/29/2012 by PrplHrt because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 29 2012 @ 12:51 PM
link   
It is my hope that other nations comprehend why USA need guns.

1. For a small nation state, with a dense population of 20million living within a packed land area of 7000sq kilometres, guns are DEFINATELY danger to each other living in such close proximity, whereby just a spark of anger can cause human nature to flare up and whip out the gun, a tool that kills. So too a knife, or even a humble matchstick upon dry grass on a hot summer's day.

For a large nation state, with sparse population of 20 million inhabitants living within a wide open terrian of 700,000 sq kilometres, guns are DEFINATELY NECESSARY to protect one and one's loved ones, the heavier weapon the more effective, as help would be probable miles and hours away.

Smaller nations are more easily governed, as compared to larger nations, espacially where the diversity is more. And USA is a population of 300 million today with a large diverse landmass.


2. Throughout the course of human history, mankind had seen how effective WMDs of the then eras had been with a small group enslaving and tyranising the larger unarmed populaton, true even today such as Syria and hungry North Korea.

Should the largest army in the world - China CCP's - decides to wage a war upon USA with its 2 million strong army, it will NOT BE a 300,000 US military that China will face. It will be a staggering 200 MILLION armed citizens that the commies will face, whom may even conquer the China landmass as blowback if it wishes so.

Even Julius Caesar, the greatest general in the history of our progressive civilisations, will BAULK at such figures and turn back. He faced millions of gauls, but with superiour training and tech, his few thousand cohorts could hold the germans off. But will 200 million armed and equally intelligent americans? China knows when to stay silent and eat the humble pie.


3. USA, through its sacred Constitution, copied by many other nations around the world, is carrying mankind's manifest destiny. It is NOTHING to be proud of, for it comes wih a heavy, very heavy responsiblity to other fellow humankind often paid in blood by american sons and daughters, except for the honor of being held in the highest esteem by all, even if the all do not show it so as not to inflate the ego of americans.

How many times had the rest of world poked fun at americans, lampooned, insulted, burnt flags and even murdered americans, but when the chips are down, it was always USA that these same cretins turned to, such as the middle east, africa, and soon Asia?

And USA had never failed to answer the call for help, had shared wealth and even precious blood of american sons, daughters and families to help save others.

America stands strong because of the sacred Constitution, and the ever progressive, innovative and resiliant People, capable of change and adaptable to every circumstances thrown at them, whom knows what is discrimination, suffering and pain foremost being an immigrant society since the founding days, and had never wish or do ill upon any fellow innocent humankind less the criminals and the evil ones of humanity.

Destroying the 2nd amendment is akin to flushing down the sacred Constitution down into the drain pipe. Without the power of might through the barrel of guns by citizens, only enslavement, meekness, resignedness to circumstances will follow, as proven by history by ambitious men whom ruled by power and might, regardless if he was the king, or just a mafia or illicit drug crimeboss with huge organisational prowess.


4. Some claimed that murderers are sane man, for they could plan well ahead to conduct their gruesome activities. But fact is, which sane human would go out of his way to kill INNOCENT men, women and children?

Not all mentally ill will become mass murderers, but most certainly, NO ONE would call those who slaughter innocents are sane human beings.

Thus, mankind MUST acknowledge such facts and deal with the CRITICAL REALITY - MENTAL ILLNESS, rather than to toy with the idea that guns kill, when truth is that even a simple gas lighter struck upon intentionally leaked gas within an apartment block filled with innocent people WILL kill equally, if not far more.
edit on 29-12-2012 by SeekerofTruth101 because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 29 2012 @ 03:14 PM
link   

Originally posted by HelenConway
reply to post by CJCrawley
 


I am sure you are right cj crawley but was nt the mad man in Cumbria a 'lamper' with a grudge ??? I mean he went on a gun tirade for no particular reason that anyone can tell ... anyway, I would still like to be able to have a firearm in my home.

You know what England is like these days GCHQ probably have my IP address and home address as we speak - because I said I would like a firearm.

England has been flooded by goods including guns and people from all over the world including the old soviet states - recently[ 10 years or so] which is why my opinion about wanting a gun has changed in this time.
edit on 29-12-2012 by HelenConway because: (no reason given)

You've got a thing about lampers, haven't you?

I don't know if Derrick Bird was one, but it's not important.

It's not a sensible argument to want the public to have free access to guns because a few criminals have managed to obtain some on the black market...still less because some people who hunt in the woods near you might turn loopy and start firing at you.

You want to be safer, and yet you want to create a situation in which you will be less safe.
Think it through.



posted on Dec, 29 2012 @ 03:21 PM
link   
reply to post by PrplHrt
 


Sadly I kind of agree with you. I am actually a fan of hip-hop and in it's roots, it was just music like any other. Unfortunately it got mutated into gangsta rap and new rappers were sick of living in a sh*thole so they got vocal about it on their records.

Originally these guys were just venting their anger about the society they were living in. Little did they know that their angry and violent lyrics were going to appeal to so many people. Gangsta rap became the action film of music.

The record companies picked up on this of course and then promoted it. Next thing you know, hip hop in it's bastardised form is massive. White kids can't get enough of hearing about the ghetto culture.

That was during the nineties. Fast forward to 2012---> Most kids want to be a gangsta, they want to be tough, street wise, popular, admired and revered.

All of this worries me too but I want you to know that real hip-hop is the complete opposite of the crap these little thug wannabes are being fed. True hip-hop can spread love and respect.
edit on 29-12-2012 by Wide-Eyes because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 29 2012 @ 03:59 PM
link   
reply to post by LarryLove
 



The OP is good, but I am afraid you are entirely wrong about Britain being ’arguably the most violent country in Europe’ – utter tosh and using the Daily ’Fail’ as a source for post inspiration is akin to using Fox News. Entirely unreliable and full of sensationalism journalism.

this isn't about who's country is better (atleast you won't get that rhetoric from me, we're all human, so don't take the following as a personal attack) it's about the effects of banning guns on crime.

gun crime has increased dramatically, along with other forms of crime in the u.k. after guns were banned.

gun crime doubles in uk post ban
40% increase in gun crime right after 1997 ban
handgun crime up 40% 2 years after the ban

it is a logical fallacy to claim that information is wrong based only on it's source, and i'm afraid the dailymail is correct on this one. reliable sources for the statistics aren't hard to find, crime has only increased in the u.k. after guns were banned.



posted on Dec, 29 2012 @ 04:17 PM
link   
reply to post by LFN69
 




I dont know anybody that would want to live in America

Immigration numbers disagree with you. I think I'll support the numbers rather than your personal opinion.



posted on Dec, 29 2012 @ 06:35 PM
link   
reply to post by CJCrawley
 


I ve thought it through.. I want a firearm I want to own one legally and I think it is wrong that the government make it so hard for normal people top own guns for protection.

In my great grandfathers day - loads of English owned guns, I am sure after WW2 they did too, in my grandfathers day.

Our govt has brainwashed our society so badly, very few people think for themselves in England, they just trot out the same ' lines'.. particularly when it comes to guns.

I must admit I would prefer a non lethal gun, like a super taser or something, I am sure they have been or can be invented. You know one that hurts real bad without killing..

Anyway, we will agree to disagree and I wish you well



posted on Dec, 30 2012 @ 07:40 AM
link   
There are some die hard anti-gun lobbyists whom finally come round to the truth that the contributing factor to mass slaughters are due to mental health issues, BUT are quick to counter claim that it is impossible to target that one nutjob out of a population of millions, thus it would be better to ban guns so that quick acess is not possible to them.

Truth is, with or without guns, something will suffice for the insane to go on their killing sprees, and even NATURE alone provides more than enough fuel to add that fire to their mentally warped dreams.

Targetting the insane is NOT as impossible as the irresponsible anti-gun lobbyists made it out to be.

How does a military function?

It operates upon from a commander in chief down to many more self contained units through the chain of command and control from the top general, with the smallest unit being the infantry section lead by a corporal, that when the general issues a direction of move, EVERYONE within that establishments moves as one at the same time and in the right directions.

Excercises and Wars had proven such system works.

And it derives from how our once cavemen ancestors turned civilised work.

A democratic society operates upon from a Leader/Executive, down to many more self contained units through the chain of command and control through elected legistatives whom formulate laws, to the supreme court to interpretate those laws and dish out justice, to the smallest units which are the building blocks of ALL societies - the RESPONSIBLE family nucleas.

Without those responsible building blocks, no society can be formed.

A society's Leader will not be in a position to target or know who will turned loco the next minute, nor the various arms of govt and depts. Such situations occur right at the building block - family.

It is the responsibility of the family to identify, acknowledge and seek help for their own if one of them had turned violently mentally ill. Failing which, the next in line would be the relatives, neighbours and friends, and higher up the building block - the community - teachers/religious priests/bosses, etc.

In this manner, the problem of slaughters by the insane can be quickly stopped even before it happens - by early identification of people within the family building block.

This system failed in the Lanza case, due to the irresponsibililty of the mother, whom had allowed the son whom WOULD NOT be given license to carry guns at all by LAW, to get access to them, and to the irresponsibility of the father to acknowledge problems of his child even if divorced, and irresponsibility of SOCIETY itself, for neglecting the mentally ill, failure to provide better care and monitoring of them, and resulted in the slaughter of innocent children.

After Columbine and many other senseless mass slaughter, it is thought that mankind had learnt the true lessons, acknowledged them and find solutions to it to end such slaughter, BUT IT HAD NOT! Say thanks to the anti-gun lobbyists, whom stupidly believed banning guns were the solutions.

May we mankind, not just americans whom had suffered such pains, learn the true lessons and not let the innocent children's passing be in vain...........



posted on Dec, 30 2012 @ 07:51 AM
link   

Originally posted by Cosmic911
reply to post by LFN69
 




I dont know anybody that would want to live in America

Immigration numbers disagree with you. I think I'll support the numbers rather than your personal opinion.

Figures? Please do tell.
If the figures for the migration of UNITED KINGDOM citizens to the States exceeded UK immigration to Australia and New Zealand, for example, your view point will have been reinforced.
You are refering soley to UK migrants right? I think it was pretty clear that i was English and I was referring soley to the UK ....ok?
Please publish the statistics that has convinced you that I am wrong.
I am more than man enough to eat humble pie.



posted on Dec, 30 2012 @ 08:08 AM
link   
reply to post by SecretFace
 


Clear, concise and you hit nail after nail on the head. Excellent points made! You struck a chord with me especially with the "stats are manipulated" comment. That is all too true!

Thanks for an excellent post S&F!



posted on Dec, 30 2012 @ 06:59 PM
link   

Originally posted by LarryLove

Originally posted by auraelium
Great post, Many people in the anti-gun brigade are using Britain as an example of how gun control works,but gun control hasnt worked in Britain in fact its arguable that it has turned Britain into one of the most dangerous countrys in Europe.

www.dailymail.co.uk...
edit on 27-12-2012 by auraelium because: (no reason given)


The OP is good, but I am afraid you are entirely wrong about Britain being ’arguably the most violent country in Europe’ – utter tosh and using the Daily ’Fail’ as a source for post inspiration is akin to using Fox News. Entirely unreliable and full of sensationalism journalism.


If you bothered to read it properly you would find that the figures come from the EU comission in conjunction with the UN not the Daily Mail.





new topics
top topics
 
27
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join