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

reply to post by Freeborn

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.

Why the need for the continued name calling? I don’t assume I know more about UK culture than people who live there. I said “Whether or not a majority share your view is unclear. Based on the current law I must assume the answer is NO”.

I’ve learned this: If the attitudes and temperament of some of the UK responders in this thread is indicative of the “average” UK citizen then you’re right, you definitely don’t need guns! Gun ownership isn’t for everyone!

reply to post by Galvatron


Your opinion does indeed seem to be based on more experience than most Americans and also appears a bit more reasoned and considered than many.

I can, and in fact do, respect different opinions, just sometimes I get a bit sick of the same old same old and the apparent desire to ridicule and belittle - and that's not aimed at anyone specific.

If I come across a bit abrupt in my last post I apologise - a long afternoon in the sun at my allotment, and I'm sure with your experience of our climate you'll understand how rare they are, and a morning catching up on Open University studies has been quite draining.

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

I am reasonably well travelled in the UK and across Europe and have a very large circle of friends from all parts of the UK.
I try my best to keep up to date with current events, even those outside of the UK and Europe, as much as possible and try to keep an open mind as much as possible.
Apart from some shooting enthusiasts who for sporting purposes would like to see a relaxation of the stringent prohibition on hand guns I genuinely don't know anyone who would like to see a general relaxation of our gun control laws.

I recognise that a small minority of criminals do use guns, but it is mostly gang and drug related instances - the use of guns in any other criminal activity is very, very rare indeed.

We have enough problems here in the UK without adding to it by making guns more available.

Of course it is very, very different in the USA.
Not that it's any of my business whatsoever but I feel it would be a massive mistake to implement UK like laws in the USA.
If there is a need for a tightening of US gun control laws in relation to semi-automatics etc is a discussion the US probably needs if for nothing else other than clarity and improved understanding and awareness - but ultimately it is a choice for America and America alone.

And by the same token I honestly believe it would be a massive mistake to introduce something like The Second Amendment here in the UK - and all my experiences and interactions lead me to believe that the vast majority of UK citizens agree with that.

Never said anything about US education.

I was commenting on your reference to 'education not indoctrination' and not your education system per se.

Perhaps when we've addressed some of the more pressing issues that face this nation we will be ready to have a public debate on gun control.

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.

Indoctrination of various sorts is endemic within the UK education system and is rightly so regarded as one of the poorest in Europe - unless of course your family is wealthy and connected enough for you to attend private school.
An interesting topic for debate in another thread I think.

Did I ever show any disrespect?

No you did not, other's have but not you.

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.

As I said, you show a far deeper understanding of UK history and culture than most....but there are fundamental differences in our attitudes, society and culture.
We have removed tyrants before and if the need be will do so again, in our way.

I didn't make this a US v UK issue, the OP did with his misinformed OP.
And then came a number of posters who wanted to do nothing but ridicule and brow beat just to pursue their obvious anti-UK bigotry.

And I and other's have asked numerous reasonable questions which have been consistently ignored or replied to with the usual sound bites and pro-gun lobby rhetoric -- which may be relevant in the US but not here.

reply to post by Freeborn


Fair enough. I should have taken into account the rest of the thread when looking at your reply to mine. You're right, you didn't make it a US vs UK issue. Looking at your reply to my post, I felt that way, but the overally character of the thread was that way and you were just defending your position taking into account the rest of the thread.

And I and other's have asked numerous reasonable questions which have been consistently ignored or replied to with the usual sound bites and pro-gun lobby rhetoric -- which may be relevant in the US but not here.

I can't tell you how much I hate that, too. It seems as though that's the same problem I have. I get no replies to the points I make in comments on a large fraction of threads that I participate in.

reply to post by seabag


I've never entered into any name calling at all, if you've taken anything I have said that way then I apologise.
I just don't understand how you can continuously fail to accept that for whatever reasons the vast majority of people here in the UK don't want US style gun control laws.

We are not a brow beaten or submissive nation by any stretch of imagination.

We do things our way, just as you do things your way.

Can we learn from each other?
Yes, of course we can.

But we can also begin to accept that in some things we are just so different and what is right for one is not necessarily right for the other.

I put this puppy to bed on page one. Then 2,3,4 and 5 as the arguments came out about this "flawed" poll. I can't understand what makes this issue so absorbing that a flawed poll is taken as evidence when the people that the poll focuses on say the exact opposite.

I'm not reading 16 pages, so I will just give my view.

18,000 (or whatever) people do not count for 60 million, and that is assuming the 18,000 are even from Britain.

Those that voted could be 90% of the entire people who want hand guns back, definitely an agenda there.

I noticed a poster pointed out the UK has a high violent crime rate compared to other countries.... I am sick to the back teeth of this argument. In the UK shouting bumder cleppet at someone over the street is recorded as a violent crime in the UK, a married couple who have a verbal argument is recorded as a violent crime (both these assuming somehow the police get involved, and with all the nosey neighbours here, often.)

I remember reading somewhere (CPS guidelines) burglary and car theft is also recorded as violent crimes for whatever reason.



There are lots of examples of what is recorded as a violent crime that doesn't actually involve physical violence, so please, do not take the official stats as that of real violence, it is incorrect and even slightly embarrassing.

Originally posted by GunzCoty

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.

Homicides with firearms per 100 000 people:

US - 3.8, In comparison even unintentional is 7 times higher than in US
Switzerland - 0.52
Italy 0.36
Finland 0.26
France 0.22
Germany 0.2
UK - 0.04
Norway 0.04

en.wikipedia.org...


Intentional homicides (including guns and other)

US - 4.8
UK - 1.2
France 1.1
Netherlands 1.1

en.wikipedia.org...


Rape statistics per 100k:
US - 29.0
UK - 27.5
Norway 20.6
France 16.2
Finland 12.4
Germany 8.9

en.wikipedia.org...

I could not count in Sweden ( Murder rate 0.19, Rapes 63,8) The rape statistics seems very high, although there is a reason for it, they take every claim as a crime. For example there were 232 homicides, while actually only 92 were actual homicides, others were claims of homicide, but the person survived. In other countries mostly homicide in statistics requires a death. There were 5940 reporter rape claims. Only 253 involved anything rape-related, while 114 were convicted. Over 95% lower actual rate (253 - 5940). There is a problem with lying and fake claims there. I was in a bar with a friend couple of years ago in Stockholm, he was making out with some girl, ended exchanging numbers. Next morning police came by as the girl had claimed my friend had "raped" her... I had been with my friend whole night... He got away thanks to me testifying. There is a problem with that, especially due to racism and very loose legal definition of rape.

Other crimes as extremely hard, if not impossible to compare. The legal definitions differ too much. In US violent crime is murder and non-negligent manslaughter, forcible rape, robbery, and aggravated assault. In UK all "violence" against a person is considered violent crime : Spitting, if family is having an argument which involves yelling at each other it is considered violent crime, vandalism (violence against somebody´s property) etc etc. It is like comparing traffic deaths to speeding tickets... There are far more speeding tickets, which means country who counts such small things in has times higher rate than country without these counted in.

Although claim guns save lives is not justified in European situation. There are less guns AND less homicides. Americans have 14 times more weapons than UK citizens, but there is still 4 times more murder than in UK and similar/slightly higher rape statistics.

If gun laws were made looser round here, it would only end up more people being shot, whether minor criminals or innocent victims. In US making laws stricter, might even result with more gun deaths, but here it is the opposite due to different culture.

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.

I have never implied guns should be banned. I have nothing against a person having a gun for self-defense. Most EU countries allow it, getting a licence is not hard (background checks are good though) , although people on average do not like guns round here. Most people prefer staying away from these. They could get them, but they do not want to. Guns are not seen as tools here, but as weapons that can kill. It is about culture. The crime rates are very low and even the odds of somebody innocent being endangered are extremely slim. For example, over 15 years, not a single person has died after robbery or burglary here. I have a right for self-defense, although I do not consider myself having the right, even if law allows it, to kill somebody in self-defense. That is the reason why I personally and all of my friends I´ve talked with, do not see a point in getting a gun.

I respect how things are at US, you do it as you want to (I´ve learned to respect your culture in ATS). Here things are different and when you look at statistics, it can be said that such tactics work round here, so please respect the opinion of Europeans, who think otherwise.

reply to post by Cabin


Please explain Switzerland, if having guns brings up the crime rate.
Please explain Australia, if banning guns works so well.

The funny thing is the UK never had a gun culture and that's why only the hunters cared when they banned guns (too the extent they did, I know it's possible to own a gun in the UK)

And your source says

Firearm-related death rate per 100,000 population

so, yeah that sounds right. Now lets factor in the people who die by cops, would be victims, suicides, negligence, accidents etc.

The number of gun murders in the US are much lower than the number of firearm-related deaths.

And I'm sorry, but using Wikipedia as a source is not what I would call reliable, just my opinion.

Now we wont even talk about places like Mexico and Africa so, moving on.


As far as the UK murder rate goes, lets face it you don't have the inner city gangs, or many of the other things we have here. Is there a ghetto in the UK, a real one?

respect the opinion of Europeans

I do, and I know some are afraid of guns, as well as some would like the option to protect them selves.
As I have said before

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

Originally posted by GunzCoty
Is there a ghetto in the UK, a real one?

I suggest visting Brixton, Hackney and Depford.


Parts of Manchester, Bolton, Nottingham and Luton are pretty dire aswell.

reply to post by seabag


Politics works best when it respects the will of We The People. This poll info shows the blatant disregard for the will of We The People over there in England. NOT to point any finger exclusively at them. Here, in America, all polls, such as Gallup and Zogby, always show 75% to 80% of Americans want a two term limit on all elected office holders. We already got that on the President. How can it be that such an overwhelming percent want Term Limits, yet our elected representatives fail to give it to US? Good question. The obvious fact in this: our representatives FAIL to represent!

You may quote me, Everything that is good begins and ends with respect [credit larrymuse.com, thank you]. The very first respect we expect from representatives is they respect the will of those whom they represent. I'm working out a way to make this happen: LTA (Legislation Transparency Amendment). The gist of LTA: post all proposed laws on the Internet for 14 days before elected officials may vote on it. How can we get them to Read The Bill? By example. LTA allows everyone who cares to Read The Bill BEFORE they vote to make us PAY for it! We debate about waiting time for firearms. But laws can hurt you more. We The People propose a waiting period for laws. Time to hear some common sense from common people. The measure allows registered voters in that jurisdiction to post their yes or no advise and to comment up to 1000 words. All my download the law and comments but only registered voters in that jurisdiction may advise and comment.

We The People Rx for good law:
1)Read The Bill! 2) Gather common sense input from voters in that jurisdiction. 3)Keep it simple.

LTA: Get common sense, get simplicity, shut down the Special Interest Café, and create Real-Time transparency!

If legislators ignore obvious public opinion showing in LTA advise and comments, then they face opponents next time around with specific accusations that they do not deserve to represent that jurisdiction because they already FAILED to represent. Thus campaigns begin answering to real issues. Real-time transparency? Yep.

See more LTA at larrymuse.com. I did not lift a finger to promote this Website yet because I'm not quite finished crafting the language. I invite input from anyone here. Help me get it bullet proof before it goes public.

Bottom line: good government partakes the common sense will of We The People. LTA can help with that but many other measures can help. Biggest thing, we got to educate folks to seek this key to common sense government: will of We The People. With this key, Brits would carry guns and Americans would get Term Limits, then many other good stuff would follow improving life in a million ways. Its control freak politicians who frustrate the will of We The People. Odd, since we elect them for the express purpose to represent our druthers into the government.

American lawmakers now give US 40,000+ new laws every year. If this ain't control freak, then what is? Can you spell micromanage? That is 520,000 new laws just since 2000. If you read just the title page of each for 3 minutes 5 days per week like a regular job, you cannot review them all in 13 years! It takes attorneys, with their doctor degree in jurisprudence, many months to study just ONE law. How much legalese can YOU digest in just 3 minutes. And can you really spend full time just reading title pages for 13 years? If you did, you would then face another new batch to start all over again! Our lawmakers are TOTALLY OUT OF CONTROL! So I'm starting one more political movement, the 500K rebellion. We require them to repeal 10 laws for every new one they create. 10 at a time will make a slow dent in the over a million laws (since beginning) that already weigh US down. Did you know EACH new law includes half a dozen (minimum) new punishment enforced requirements? We are talking millions and millions and millions of requirements. How can this make ANY sense to anyone? We gotta shelter from this avalanche. We need to find lawmakers who actually walk the walk of freedom and respect instead of merely lip service to Constitution and to the Declaration of Independence. Are there ANY honest representatives out there not hell-bent on crushing us with dictator micromanagement of every detail in our lives and in our businesses? I did not add the 500K rebellion to my Website yet but I'll get to it within a week or so. I already created the core flier/essay. If anyone here wants to help me with these two ideas based upon will of We The People, email me, [email protected]. I don't know what is legal here on this site so I cannot tell if my Website or email got through. I am larrymuse on the Web but, as I said, this is embryonic right now so not one inch of advertising nor promotion yet. But you can find me.

Your brother,
Larry Woods

One news items that gave me food for thought was that in the first full year of the Australian gun ban, armed crime went up 40%, there has never been that many guns in private hands in the UK, so cannot compare like for like.

reply to post by pikestaff


That is interesting….but not surprising. When you take away the most powerful deterrent to crime you can expect an immediate increase in crime, no?

Your post got me thinking; has there ever been a country with a ban like UK that reversed course? If so, what was the outcome with regard to crime rate?

Originally posted by seabag
reply to post by pikestaff

 

That is interesting….but not surprising. When you take away the most powerful deterrent to crime you can expect an immediate increase in crime, no?

I dont think guns ever were a detterrent really over here.

Plus here you dont really get night time home invasions. Most home invasions happen when the home owners are out at work.

reply to post by crazyewok


This is a very interesting video, crazyewok, if you have a few minutes. This video speaks to the point many, including myself have made about population density impacting violent crime.



Urban areas in US have significantly more violent crime than rural areas, as I stated earlier.



Within those large metropolitan areas where the majority of violent crime takes place there are many factors that contribute to the violence, such as higher poverty levels, a greater lack of jobs, a greater lack of education, etc. I believe it was mentioned that UK has a higher population density than US but US actually has 6 times as many large metropolitan areas as UK.

This isn’t saying that what works in US will work in UK but it does demonstrate that it’s not gun ownership that leads to increased violent crime; it has to do with social and economic conditions. In fact, violent crime in US has decreased 50% over the past 20 years while gun ownership has increased. Though UK has a lower murder rate than US, gun crime in UK has risen 89% in 10 years (your gun ban has been in place for 15 years)and UK has 3.5 times as many violent crimes as US.

So what does this mean? To me it says less guns does not equal less violent crime - Prosperity (low poverty levels, high employment rates and good education) equals less violent crime. Therefore, reintroducing hand guns to law abiding citizens should not increase violent crime as hand guns are not the determining factor.

reply to post by seabag


We need to knock the violent crime stats on its head. It been pointed out that Crime reporting in the UK is markedly diffrent and down right dishonnest sometimes. I dont think anyone really can be certain of the violent crime rates in the UK. It is certainly not 3x higher than the USA.

As for population density I agree I think its that that mainly is the cause of our crime. That and our drinking problem.
But I think it is mainly due to our high density low income areas as that were most of the crime is located.
Outside of these areas and its about as safe as it can be.

Now I think the issue is that guns will fuel and increase the crime in these high density areas. Or thats the fear anyway.

In my opinion relaxing guns laws wont increase of decrease crime in most of the country but it would increase it in the high density areas.

Also at the moment we do have the drinking problem. If guns were allowed to be concealed carry we would have drunks having shot outs rather than fight fights on a Friday/Saturday night

Joke thread it has to be lol.
Look can you USAers try to understand that we do not want handguns and we want guns to be monitored to make sure people can not get one.

I could get a gun easy, a Gunsmiths not 5 mins away and I go in to buy my camping stuff, I like to look and have banter with the Gunsmith that this is the first stop when Zombies come but I do not feel the need to have one, Iam not scared of anyone in my area and never had much trouble.

We banned handguns because the general public wanted to ban them, not the government but us the people.
So please respect our way of life, our culture and do not try to change it into your own.
Oh the poll is BS btw, and another thing crime stats are recorded differently in the UK and they look worse than they are.

reply to post by crazyewok



I don't think they understand the way us Brits drink lol.
Iam a bit old for the fighting bit but with 12 pints down my neck I get courage and shamefully last weekend I had to knock out a little scally who was beating up his GF.
My rage when that drunk with a hidden gun? I would be in nick now...so no thanks we do not want em.

reply to post by seabag


Hand guns have never been freely available in the UK.
Introducing them now would be a time bomb.

Of course the same is true about taking guns away from a society where they are more freely available and have entered into that society's culture.

I honestly think that repealing The Second Amendment would be as disastrous for the US as would introducing an equivallent in the UK.

Originally posted by GunzCoty

Please explain Switzerland, if having guns brings up the crime rate.
Please explain Australia, if banning guns works so well.

The funny thing is the UK never had a gun culture and that's why only the hunters cared when they banned guns (too the extent they did, I know it's possible to own a gun in the UK)

Switzerland is very different country, not even comparable to US. (Although fire-arm related murders are among the highest in Europe). There might be lots of guns, but it is because of the system. Every man has to go to military and own a gun till the age of 31. The ammo must be sealed, there are regular controls over it. Every military member is strongly psychologically evaluated, the ones with more troubles are not even allowed to keep their guns at home.

After becoming 31, one has an option to keep the gun with automatic options removed at the factory, although he needs to get a gun licence. To get a gun licence one has very strong backgound checks, trainings, psychological evaluation, specific locker is required etc etc. Many prefer to keep the gun, although that gun can not be used for self-defense, only national emergency situations and ammo must stay sealed. Many people are not even allowed to keep their gun at home due to safety, but must keep at local armoury.

It is very small country in the middle of the big ones. It needs to be alert all the time. The country is also very rich, there is not much poverty, some of the highest living standards in Europe, the immigration laws are quite strong and that is also one of the main reasons behind the very low crime rates. Overally Switzerland has among the strictest gun laws in Europe, if we take into account the process of getting a gun licence. Hunting is also popular in that area, which bring more firearms.

I can not tell about Australia. As I said before the local culture matters a lot. Less guns=less crime in most, if not all European nations, but it might not be the same in Australia and US.

And your source says

Firearm-related death rate per 100,000 population

so, yeah that sounds right. Now lets factor in the people who die by cops, would be victims, suicides, negligence, accidents etc.

The number of gun murders in the US are much lower than the number of firearm-related deaths.

And I'm sorry, but using Wikipedia as a source is not what I would call reliable, just my opinion.

If you take a look at the statistics there, you see I only used homicide statistics, not total firearm-related deaths. I left out the unintentional, unknown motive and suicide rates. Police murders are counted under unintentional homicides.

Wikipedia is often quite trustworthy, especially in statistics. These statistics have all been taken from quoted sources from a trustworthy site. You can check the used sources from the bottom and double check if you want to...

Now we wont even talk about places like Mexico and Africa so, moving on.

Yes, we won´t talk. These are uncomparable to other countries. The life standards of countries have to be taken into account to compare, as poor life standards lead to weaker education, more poverty, more crime. Even some post-Soviet Eastern Europe countries are hard to be compared due to higher poverty rates. The salaries are much lower than in other EU countries. Most of the OECD countries (except poorer ones) can only be taken to account when comparing to US,

Originally posted by seabag
reply to post by pikestaff

 

That is interesting….but not surprising. When you take away the most powerful deterrent to crime you can expect an immediate increase in crime, no?

Your post got me thinking; has there ever been a country with a ban like UK that reversed course? If so, what was the outcome with regard to crime rate?

"After establishment of Czechoslovakia in 1918 the country took over the preceding Austrian gun law from 1852. The law was very liberal, allowing to own and carry guns without any formalities, only with restriction regarding their number. This was restricted during the German occupation of Czechoslovakia: Nazis forbid private gun ownership (except for hunting) and imposed very harsh punishments. The liberal situation was returned following the defeat of Germany in May 1945.

The situation changed again after the communist coup d'état of 1948. Although the law allowed for some restricted gun ownership, in reality the authorities were instructed, which groups of people could be allowed to own a gun. In 1962 a secret directive was adopted, which was listing the nomenclature of persons deemed loyal enough to be allowed to own a gun. Enactment of 1983 was more liberal, but gun ownership still remained rather restricted. Access to sport guns was easier (sport shooting was encouraged and supported by the state via Svazarm) and the rules for hunting shotgun ownership were relatively permissive.

The new enactment of 1995, after the Velvet Revolution, meant return to liberal times of the First Czechoslovak Republic. "


Gun politics in the Czech Republic


From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia





Their laws are very much like the US with AR-15's allowed and full auto restricted. Concealed carry is permitted with license jsut like in most of the US but there is a two handgun limit to the number of guns you can carry concealed at one time (makes sense, you only go two hands).

Number of murders with a firearm in 2010: 2