Online Poll Shows 85% of Brits Want to Repeal the Ban on Hand Guns

Agenda 21 does not have section dealing with population reduction... Read the full document first, before commenting on the matter. Internet is full of people making claims that are not in the document...

reply to post by Cabin


I'm not sure what you are responding too, but I'll add a thought.
As far as Agenda 21 goes, if you read and understand it, you will see how many things are not possible with the world as it stands. So, one must consider how it would be possible, and that's how people come up with things like "population reduction", that and the fact that people like Bill Gates say population reduction is a good idea.


Now back on topic

Over 7 times more people are killed unintentionally with a firearm in US than total murders in UK...

Do you have stats for this? I find it hard to believe and would like to review your source please.

reply to post by crazyewok

Dear crazyewok,

Thanks for a substantive post, I appreciate it. I hope you don't mind if I start at the end of your post.

The deffination of Freedom ect will differ from country to country you just have to accept that. As long as major human rights abuses are not happening then its not really the bussness of westen countrys to judge each other,

I have some difficulties here, you might want to help me with. First, if the definitions vary from country to country, how can we decide when a country is committing "major" human rights abuses ("minor" abuses being, apparently, acceptable). Can't China or North Korea say it's not anybody's business to judge them? Or death by stoning for adultery. Is that something that can be judged?

Besides, judging other countries happens all the time with no outcry. Israel is a fine example. They're condemned by everybody daily. ATS will show you that the US is condemned on a daily basis as well.

Its not Tyranny (at least by UK deffinition) if the majority are ok with it. The UK is a democracy not a republic. If a large majority wanted to change the gun laws then a petition would be started and if it got 100,000 signatures (if the majority in the UK wanted a change this target would be very easy to hit in weeks) and it would go before parliment.

Doesn't that make you even a little uncomfortable? I can imagine the majority of Britons could be persuaded to vote for anything, just as the citizens of the US probably could. What happens when UKIP wins the majority, or perhaps, in thirty years an immigrant party wins a majority. It seems that there should be some lines drawn, but it also seems there aren't.

Forget those possibilities for a moment. What happens when the EU tells you to do something offensive. Have you any realistic recourse? And who in the UK is pleased with the growth of regulations? I keep hearing jokes about elf 'n' safety. How do you stop regulators? (Yes, it's a problem here too.)

Maybe a slight deduction on restrictions on hand guns but not very many want to see people carrying concealed weapons around or buy assault weapons. Not unless we can sort some of our own social issue out.

Fine, I see nothing wrong with that, and I suspect the OP would approve, as well. I am not meaning to interfere, but a little improvement in both areas would be even better. The US and UK both seem to be having a problem with immigration. It's widely believed that the result will not only be increased crime, but social conflict as the the groups don't seem to be assimilating well, and additional economic stress.

We both have a difficult road to walk. How do we encourage our leaders to take reasonable steps down that road?

With respect,
Charles1952

Originally posted by charles1952


Thanks for a substantive post, I appreciate it. I hope you don't mind if I start at the end of your post.

The deffination of Freedom ect will differ from country to country you just have to accept that. As long as major human rights abuses are not happening then its not really the bussness of westen countrys to judge each other,

I have some difficulties here, you might want to help me with. First, if the definitions vary from country to country, how can we decide when a country is committing "major" human rights abuses ("minor" abuses being, apparently, acceptable). Can't China or North Korea say it's not anybody's business to judge them? Or death by stoning for adultery. Is that something that can be judged?

Its a difficult one. You have to take into acount everyone and every culture has a diffrent view.

I thing there is room for a lot of leeway but lines should be drawn when they have a detrmental effect on standard of living or result in large scale killings, impirisonment and discrimination.

Originally posted by charles1952
Doesn't that make you even a little uncomfortable? I can imagine the majority of Britons could be persuaded to vote for anything, just as the citizens of the US probably could. What happens when UKIP wins the majority, or perhaps, in thirty years an immigrant party wins a majority. It seems that there should be some lines drawn, but it also seems there aren't.

Thing is it has worked for us for generations. And yeah maybe we will make a bad descion. But thats the risk of democracy really and if we vote in a crap govermnet we can vote them out (problem is like the USA we seem to switch between only crap ones). And whats wrong with UKIP? they are far from the NAZI party. The US republican party is worse.

Originally posted by charles1952
Forget those possibilities for a moment. What happens when the EU tells you to do something offensive. Have you any realistic recourse? And who in the UK is pleased with the growth of regulations? I keep hearing jokes about elf 'n' safety. How do you stop regulators? (Yes, it's a problem here too.)

No we are not happy with the EU.
Again our democracy seems to have spoken. We did the petition thing and raised the support it went through parliment and so it looks like we will get a in or out vote.

As for doing anything offensive? Well the EU is restricted by the European Court of human rights which is independat from the EU and in theroy is in place to stop any human rights abuses.....though some times its goes abit too far!

Online Poll Shows 85% of Brits Want to Repeal the Ban on Hand Guns

One thing history shows without fail is that government never surrenders power. It may have taken centuries for something like the Patriot Act to have been even considered, much less voted in as law... but the power it gives government will never be given back now that is in installed.

Guns in the UK?

The same goes for each shred torn away from the constitution and 300+ million Americans sitting back without doing more than grumping about the loss.

We're caught up in the latest McDonald's menu or how many worms are on the verge of extinction or how many miles per gallon we get in our cars. We cannot conceive of losing that which we have taken for granted since our first day in the day care center as a child.

In fact... we probably won't miss any of it until it is all gone.

reply to post by crazyewok

Dear crazyewok,

Before this goes any further, I have to say I have NOTHING against UKIP. I used them only because we hear that a goodly number of Britons see them as radical. Maybe I just swallowed the Main Strean Media line, sorry.

You have to take into acount everyone and every culture has a diffrent view.

But surely, the UK as a whole believes some cultures are better than others. If not, why bother to keep your culture, why bother to have any values if you can't say some are wrong?

I thing there is room for a lot of leeway but lines should be drawn when they have a detrmental effect on standard of living or result in large scale killings, impirisonment and discrimination.

I can agree with that, but is anybody actually drawing lines? Is any one saying to Country X, "What you're doing is beyond the bounds of common decency, we're going to get a bunch of our friends and we'll spank you until you stop?" The US did, once upon a time, but no longer.

As for doing anything offensive? Well the EU is restricted by the European Court of human rights which is independat from the EU and in theroy is in place to stop any human rights abuses.....though some times its goes abit too far!

This "court" is directed at governments who are members of the EU. I'm not trying to flatter you, but the European countries aren't the ones needing a court of human rights.

I may be falling for media nonsense, but don't they spend their time deciding whether someone who wears a small cross necklace, is allowed to serve the public? And why people with long criminal records have to be allowed into any European country because they're "refugees?"

With respect,
Charles1952

Huh. well that's some discouraging news, I wonder why they think that's such a good idea? Living in the US I can tell you....you better make sure you defend your right to bear arms with your arms, if need be.

Originally posted by GunzCoty

 

Just a few months ago over 300,000 guns were dumped on the streets of the UK. Criminals have guns and always will, however crazy people will use guns, knifes, bombs, poison...etc.

As far as shooting sprees go in the US, if memory serves me, most if not all happened in a "gun free zone". And Chicago has some of the strictest gun laws in America, as well as some of the most gun violence/deaths.

So, "strict" did/is not promoting less gun-related incidents, however less "strict" gun laws are promoting lower crime rates.

With all that said, although I believe everyone has a right to protect themselves, I'm glad you can't carry guns in the UK. You have been without them for far too long and I'm not sure most people would know how to handle it.

It would take a long time and a lot of money to reintroduce an "American style" carry concept.
But that's just my opinion

I am honest. I do not want to judge US laws. I´m already tired of the whole gun topic. Let US do what they want as long as they are happy with it. I am happy how things are at my country with strictly regulated gun laws.

Although I would argue with couple of misconceptions you have.

Everything depends on the local culture.

Implying "strict" did/is not promoting less gun-related incidents, however less "strict" gun laws are promoting lower crime rates in a misconception you have.

Every western/northern European country has lower crime rates than US, especially gun-related violence and one of the main reasons for it is the gun laws, although I do not believe the same would work in US.

Although in the current US system strict gun laws would not work. There are several reasons for it.

1) Non-uniformed laws. Making a gun-free zone is pointless, if there is no border control and easy access to guns in nearby areas.

I can bring an example from here. Here selling Snus (pillow-like tobacco, you put under your lips) is not legal, although owning/using it is not illegal. What people do (especially criminals), they go to Sweden, where selling it is legal, they stock up and come here and sell it. There is an oversupply of it, I can get it anywhere at a very low cost, as there is so much of it on the black market.

Although with guns it is harder, even for criminals to get access to these. It is not so easy to get an illegal weapon inside the country, which makes it very expensive on the black market + the laws are strict in owning an illegal weapon/selling it, which makes the risk even higher.It is easier and cheaper to make a gun licence and buy a legal gun, than buy one from the black market.

Uniformed laws make it harder to get access to guns and it is harder to smuggle them in, which sets access to them much harder. EU has uniformed laws, which makes it harder to get the guns inside the countries.

2) Another misconception is that criminals would still use guns. In US criminals own guns, in the country where I live at it is an extreme rarity of meeting a gang member or some lower-level criminal with a gun. Only higher-level criminals own guns (whom I´m very likely to never meet) , not some burglars or muggers. Making access to guns easier would make it easier for lower-level criminal to get access to guns.

In some ways, I believe even strict gun laws would never work in US, as the country is already past the point of no return. There are too many guns out there in private hands and in the hands of criminals. Access to a weapon is so easy, that whatever law was taken, it would not make access to guns harder to the general public. Maybe it truly would be easier to let everyone get a gun for protection.

Here criminals do not have that much guns, gun-related crimes are already very low and making guns laws less strict would only make access to guns easier for criminals.

3) Gun culture is very low in most European nations. It is not extremely hard to get a gun licence, although most people just do not see a point in getting it, unless one is a hunter or target shooter. Getting a gun for self-defense is rare in the country where I live at. Most people do not see a point in it as
1) Crime rates are low,
2) Criminals do not have guns
3) Gun costs a lot, getting a pepper spray, learning martial arts or just owning a bat, is enough for self-defense.
4) Guns are believed to be dangerous weapons and most people prefer staying away from these, especially people with kids do not want guns at their home (sometimes they do not even let their kids play at somebody´s home whose parents own a gun).

I just voted 5 times in that online poll.
I voted differently to average it out a little.
But it only took about 2 minutes to vote 5 times.
I could do it even faster with a certain plugin.
Then I could go make dinner, while voting 60 or 70 times.

That is the problem with online polls

reply to post by Cabin

Every western/northern European country has lower crime rates than US, especially gun-related violence and one of the main reasons for it is the gun laws, although I do not believe the same would work in US.

Again you're saying something without giving me a source, and frankly I believe it to be untrue.

In fact we can see how the crime rate jumped up after Australia ban guns. They never had home invasions until they ban guns and the crime rate never went down. crime rate source

And from what you are saying, I believe you have a misconception that anyone can just buy a gun in the US.

where I live at it is an extreme rarity of meeting a gang member or some lower-level criminal with a gun. Only higher-level criminals own guns (whom I´m very likely to never meet) , not some burglars or muggers

So, are you saying as long as a mugger, burglar, rapist, etc. does not have a gun you're safe?
What about the woman who has martial arts skill, a bat, a knife and pepper spray, but is still raped and beaten by 5 men?
I know of a woman that is a 6th degree black belt, but because she was not able to carry her gun in a "gun free zone" she was raped and beaten.

I'm glad you're very likely to never meet a higher-level criminal and I hope you don't meet a low-level criminal.
But the point you are missing is simple, criminals will use anything (not just guns) and not everyone is a bad a** martial arts master, a gun is a tool and it is used every day to save lives, everyone has a right to protect themselves.

reply to post by GunzCoty


I dont know about elsewere but night time home invasions in the UK seem to be a very rare thing. Not saying they dont happen but it is like a handfull a year. What we do get is day time home invasions when the croocks wait for everyone to leave for work and then break in. Thats very common. But a guns kinda uselss if your not around to use it and chances are if its a day time home invasion they will take your guns too

reply to post by seabag


Im a brit and id love to be able to own a hand gun to defend my property and family..

Originally posted by wlasikiewicz
reply to post by seabag

 

Im a brit and id love to be able to own a hand gun to defend my property and family..

I'm absolutely positive you're not alone.

Whether or not a majority share your view is unclear. Based on the current law I must assume the answer is NO but the poll (albiet unscientific and easily manipulated) should give you some hope!

I hope for your sake (and others who share your desire for self reliance) it is overturned in some fashion.

reply to post by seabag


Its making sure we dont get the guns into the hands of the idiots/criminals that would be the problem as at the minute its reasonably hard to get a gun and the penalties for owning one are strict so its a deterrent but it'd need a major culture change as well as otherwise every friday & saturday night would end up a bloodbath when the pubs and clubs kicked out the drunks

reply to post by seabag


Based on my experiences in the UK, he's not alone. Crime is on the rise in the UK. Brits, for the most part from my experience, are a practical people if anything else. I have a feeling that despite the poll being online and fraught with problems, it is probably actually quite representative, funny enough. As with anything, especially firearms, education (not indoctrination) is key for the reintroduction of firearms to be a success.

reply to post by Maxatoria

Its making sure we dont get the guns into the hands of the idiots/criminals that would be the problem as at the minute its reasonably hard to get a gun and the penalties for owning one are strict so its a deterrent but it'd need a major culture change as well as otherwise every friday & saturday night would end up a bloodbath when the pubs and clubs kicked out the drunks.

I’d imagine if they repealed the handgun ban they would do so with strict guidelines for ownership to prevent these weapons from getting into the wrong hands. I understand that the more guns in the country the more chance for bad people to acquire them (usually by theft from the legal owner). However, criminals will always have access to them even with your current laws. One need only look at criminal recidivism rates to see that punishments really aren’t much of a deterrent to real criminals.

As far as the drunken bar fights escalating to shoot outs, that’s really speculation driven by fear of guns (or gun owners). Incidences like that are very rare in America where gun ownership is obviously much higher. Murder is the least prevalent violent crime.

Maybe our cultures are just drastically different. Maybe UK citizens have a much greater propensity for violence than US citizens. Maybe your fears are completely justified and UK would become a warzone if the ban was lifted. If true, that says a lot about the culture and people there.

Originally posted by crazyewok
reply to post by GunzCoty

 

I dont know about elsewere but night time home invasions in the UK seem to be a very rare thing. Not saying they dont happen but it is like a handfull a year. What we do get is day time home invasions when the croocks wait for everyone to leave for work and then break in. Thats very common. But a guns kinda uselss if your not around to use it and chances are if its a day time home invasion they will take your guns too

Sounds like you've made a good case for concealed carry laws!

That would be interesting, huh?

Originally posted by Maxatoria
reply to post by seabag

 

Its making sure we dont get the guns into the hands of the idiots/criminals that would be the problem as at the minute its reasonably hard to get a gun and the penalties for owning one are strict so its a deterrent but it'd need a major culture change as well as otherwise every friday & saturday night would end up a bloodbath when the pubs and clubs kicked out the drunks

The whole shootout thing is a common reply I hear to firearm availability. Even during the western expansion of the US in the mid-late 1800s, shootouts and the like were actually far far far rarer than portrayed in TV, Movies, or even books romanticizing the era. They were actually quite rare, and the rule of law was usually followed and pursued as best as it could be. Some cities (smaller ones usually) in the US even require the ownership of a firearm to live in that city. Kennesaw Georgia (a suburb of Atlanta) has such a law that was enacted in the early 80s. Violent crime and crime in general seeping into the suburb from the city fell like a stone in the following years and is consistently ranked as the best town to raise a family in greater Atlanta metro area..

reply to post by Galvatron

Some cities (smaller ones usually) in the US even require the ownership of a firearm to live in that city. Kennesaw Georgia (a suburb of Atlanta) has such a law that was enacted in the early 80s. Violent crime and crime in general seeping into the suburb from the city fell like a stone in the following years and is consistently ranked as the best town to raise a family in greater Atlanta metro area.

While I don’t agree with making gun ownership mandatory, it is interesting to see the correlation between violent crime and gun ownership.

Check out the rise in firearms sales over the past few decades. It is now a 3.6 BILLION dollar market.

Now compare that to the decrease in violent crime over the past couple of decades.



While this formula may not work in other cultures, maybe not even in UK, there is no denying these numbers. There is no such thing as a coincidence.

reply to post by seabag


You seem to either completely ignore the British people who present reasoned arguements and explanations why the vast majority of us most definately DO NOT want to see any relaxation of our gun control laws or you resort to ridicule etc, whilst at the same time you delight in highlighting the small minority who do support such measures and try to portray them as some sort of enlightened free thinkers.
It's cherry picking of the highest order and most definately unrepresentative.

We are no more brow beaten and repressed than any other nation on earth, including the USA and your attempts to insinuate that we are can be at best described as highly inaccurate.

I'm absolutely positive you're not alone.

I'm absolutely certain he isn't either.
But I'm even more certain that he is one of a very, very small minority.

Whether or not a majority share your view is unclear.

No it's not unclear, it's absolutely crystal clear that it is very much a minority view.
You base your uncertaintly on a completely discredited opinion poll which has zero reliability and your pre-conceived ideas and opinions, I base mine on real life experiences and conversations with people from every walk of life during my approaching 48 years of living here.
Yet you arrogantly still assume you know better than me and other's who express exactly the same opinion as me.

.

...
but the poll (albiet unscientific and easily manipulated) should give you some hope!

The poll is complete and utter bollocks and has been proven so on numerous occassions.
Anyone who places any sort of hope or credence in this pathetic poll must be living in their own little world which bears no resemblance whatsoever to the real life the rest of us live in.

I hope for your sake (and others who share your desire for self reliance) it is overturned in some fashion.

I hope that you remain living in hope for a very long time, I suspect you will be.

reply to post by Galvatron

Based on my experiences in the UK, he's not alone.

And what would those experiences be?

Crime is on the rise in the UK.

Crime is on the rise everywhere unfortunately, the UK is by no means unique in this aspect.

Brits, for the most part from my experience,

Which is exactly why we don't want to relax our gun control laws.

.......I have a feeling that despite the poll being online and fraught with problems, it is probably actually quite representative, funny enough

Gunny enough, I think the last thing it could be called is 'quite representative'.

.As with anything, especially firearms, education (not indoctrination) is key for the reintroduction of firearms to be a success.

With all due respect we don't want your education, we do not want to become a replica of American society - it's not an insult or a criticism of the USA, just a recognition that we are different.

I really don't understand why people find it so hard to understand and respect that the UK is not the USA and what is right for one is not necessarily right for the other.

Why is this thread still ongoing when the sole premiss upon which it was based has been thoroughly and utterly debunked?

reply to post by Galvatron

And what would those experiences be?

Parents are Brits, Welsh actually. I have dual citizenship and right of abode in both countries. Even though I went to Penn for university, I spent a year at Cambridge. Almost every summer of my childhood was spent in the UK. I would consider it better experience than most Americans.

Crime is on the rise everywhere unfortunately, the UK is by no means unique in this aspect.

Its on the decline in the US.

Which is exactly why we don't want to relax our gun control laws.

Huh?

Gunny enough, I think the last thing it could be called is 'quite representative'.

Maybe in your circle of friends or in your "world".

With all due respect we don't want your education, we do not want to become a replica of American society - it's not an insult or a criticism of the USA, just a recognition that we are different.

Never said anything about US education. I think US education is very indoctrinating and it takes someone with critical thinking skill (which aren't taught in the US system) to be able to play the system well.

I really don't understand why people find it so hard to understand and respect that the UK is not the USA and what is right for one is not necessarily right for the other.

Why is this thread still ongoing when the sole premiss upon which it was based has been thoroughly and utterly debunked?

Did I ever show any disrespect? The UK has a long and triumphant history of revolt against centralized domestic tyranny. The peasant's revolt. The two barons' wars. The Glorious Revolution. I could go on. It's not a US vs UK issue, so don't make it one. It's fundamental societal issue about how giving people the fundamental power to project credible force gives them the power, collectively over their land and their lives. Look anywhere in the world. Good or bad, right or wrong, where people are armed, they, quite literally, have the power.