Gun Control in the UK: misconceptions, where do people get them?

reply to post by JohnPhoenix


I think that this really is a case of needing to examine the context very carefully. The UK is not the US - there are few if any cases of burglars being armed here, still less of homeowners being shot. And the most infamous incident of homeowners shooting back is the Tony Martin case. Which did not end well.

The other point to make is that we don't have any natural predators here - no wolves, no bears and no coyotes. We don't need to protect ourselves from invading wildlife. We don't feel the need to have guns.

Oh and one final point. Kids get everywhere. When I was six years old I somehow got into my parents medicine cabinet - which was five feet off the ground - in order to get a bottle of nice-tasting medicine, so that I could impress a friend of mine. My mother almost had a heart attack. How many times have we heard of tragedies where some kid got their hands on their parents gun and then accidently discharged it?

reply to post by JohnPhoenix


My commiserations that you live in a country whereby you feel that you have to take a gun to bed. I am rather assured that when I go to bed I'll wake up next morning.

We can all try and compare the UK, the US and any other country we like, but in the UK there is not a gun culture and the public are not armed "because it says so on our Constitution". Guns are not illegal, but it just is not "British" to want to wander around armed to the teeth.

It then follows that the police don't need to be armed because they are not fearful of being shot every-time they stop a car. Everyone is happy. Less people die and we are safer with a lower rate of violent crime. Surely, it is that simple.

Regards

CaticusMaximus

Of course the British have guns.

Just not of the caliber (pun intended) nor distributed quantity to make the British government think twice over overtly hostile actions against its serfs, if it chose to or needed to take them.

In a hostile rogue government attack on The People, you will get some use out of hunting rifles used as sniper rifles. You will get no use out of a shotgun against armored goons unless firing sabot rounds. Buckshot and slugs will be mostly useless.

Assault rifles, as broad as that term is, will be what would at least make the rogue government think twice about its actions. Handguns as well; Im thinking of 5-7 rounds that are highly armor piercing and have a very flat, smooth trajectory and a high velocity.

Pity you dont have them. I would prefer all people in all countries be able to adequately defend themselves against their totalitarian governments when inevitably those governments are taken over from the inside and begin targeting the people when they inevitably become bold enough to do so, confident in their own strength, and confident in the peoples weakness.

edit on 4/13/2014 by CaticusMaximus because: (no reason given)

I love this argument,

Its just so full of BS.

If the USA went into civil war I can grantee 95% of those running around the woods playing ramboo wannabe wont even live to fire off there first shoot!

Drones and remote platforms will be the game of the day. Plus most will die of exposure, malnutrition and disease. It happens in any war.

What will win a civil war is mundane things like food, medicine and spare cloths. Its worth stock piling them rather than Ammo as those are things that run out first.

In any civil war gun become the most common commodity!

Why?
1) Gun runners and the local organized crime groups will see a market and exploit it.
When they banned hand guns in the UK the local mob tried importing hundreds. Cause there was no market they ended up dumped in the local river. If they can get a few hundred hand guns and AK 47 through the UK border in peace when there is no market they will get thousands through in the turmoil of civil war.

2) Foreign powers like to get involved in Civil wars! From the french in the American war of independence to Syria some super power will always take the side of the rebels due to some grudge or opportunity to exploit the turmoil. If the UK or USA went intoi civil war China and Russia will flood the USA not just with guns but heavy weapons so fast you wont know what to do with them! In fact they will send advisers to help train you too!

mr-lizard

Hoosierdaddy71
Do you or your neighbor have a 9 mm glock?
How bout a colt 1911? That model is over a hundred years old now.
Brits can have guns, sort of I guess. You can't compare the constitutions of our countries. Apples to oranges. Have fun with your shotguns.

I'm sorry are you made of metal or something, or does your ego protect you from a shotgun blast?

For someone so cocksure about guns, I certainly wouldn't trust you with one, if that's your attitude. Grow up.

I have been a member of a gun club that shoots clay pigeons for over twenty years. Two nights a week during the warmer months. In all those years no injury has required more than a bandaid. I will put that safety record up against any other type of club out there. Maybe you should not judge people you know nothing about.
The whole point of my comment was that Brits can only have long guns. How you got anything else out of that is beyond me.

..reply to post by crazyewok


Why does everybody feel the need to defend their rights?
We have a bill of rights, 10 amendments.
1 protects our right to say what ever the hell we want and pray to whoever we want.
Another says we can have guns, doesn't say a thing about hunting.
There is even 1 that says the cops need a search warrant to come in my house.
These right protect us from our government, they also protect some bad people. So be it.
this whole thread was started by someone wondering why Americans didn't understand British laws. when it's painfully obvious he does not understand American laws.

reply to post by Hoosierdaddy71


It seems our fuzzy friend missed what happened in Nevada.


I believe that the government blinked first in that little showdown.

Swills
reply to post by Antigod

 

I'll be sure to pat every English on the back for a job well done.

Enjoy your shot guns, Big Bro surveillance, and corrupt gov't. I know we Americans do, and we enjoy our guns.

Statistics Prove: More Guns, Less Crime

Well, crime stats have been falling in the western world due to the ageing population. Nothing to do with guns, although your homicide rate is currently about four times ours. Also, our overall crime rate is about the same per capita, there's a great page on the internet that breaks down the numbers and it turns out you don't have a lower overall crime rate, we just report differently.

We don't have big brother surviellance. The vast majority of our surveillance cams are privately owned. More 'little brother' is watching you. Plus only a tiny percentage of it is ever viewed. As for corruption, I shouldn't think it's any different here than in the US.

As for having our emails etc checked... I see so many horror stories about Americans being spied of them (most from ATS) I'm stunned that you think you are in a posistion to criticise. Add to this the heinous abuses of eminent domain etc. You are in a worse state than we are.

It's a delusion to think your guns are getting you any kind of liberty. We do better without than you do with.

thesaneone
reply to post by Hoosierdaddy71

 

It seems our fuzzy friend missed what happened in Nevada.


I believe that the government blinked first in that little showdown.

READ VERY CAREFULLY: I know you like to read the first sentence or two and skip the rest.



If SHTF and the government wanted they could have used drones.

It was the guns that put them off in Nevada, just the thought of having to mow there own citizens down. If they really wanted too they would have sent tanks, armored vehicles or even a helicopter in. I bunch of Brits with shotguns and hunting rifles would have given the same issue.

IF all out war broke out then your stockpile of guns would not be a war winner. It would be those with stockpiles of food, medicine and clothing. The guns and much better ones in a civil war or revolution will find there way in. Plus if civil war now days are anything to go by most people wont even be using there guns, it will be IEDs, Car bombs, booby traps and over partisan tricks, gun deaths will account for very few of the causality's, the days of open battles are OVER.
Unless someone has F-22 stockpiled and Apache helicopters then a open battle wont ever happen and if it did it would be a complete and utter slaughter for the rebels.

If you want to prepare for resisting tyranny this are the priority's:
1) Organization and command structure
2) Food, food and even more food.
3) Medical supplies
4)Clothing for all weathers and conditions + Spares and boots, boots and more boots!
5) Bomb/IED and booby trap makeing
6) Evasion tactic.
7) Lastly Guns + Ammo, or even better know the people to go to to buy guns and ammo off the grid. In fact seeing as gun break ect its better to know where to get them for the future.

Now if SHTF in the UK and revolution broke out there are a number of people of "ill repute" in my area alone that will flood the UK with guns. As I stated before the local mafia imported hundred of AK-47 and hand guns very easily, they just ended up dumped in the local river as no one would buy them. If that happened then then Im sure thousands of hand guns and assault weapons will flood the UK if the market arose for such things. Thats how the world works, just ask Assad and Gadaffi or wait the people killed the latter one with imported guns from the west!.


Now I respect the USA 2nd Amendment in the fact if the USA loves it so much you can keep it, I wont try and get Piers Morgan about it as I dont live there and it dont effect me. But dont pretend its about protecting tyranny ect Its cause guns are cool, simple and obviously its useful for home protection and hunting.

And dont get all high and mighty over the UK either like we are lesser people or more prone to tyranny because we lack guns.

1) UK never has had a gun culture or obsession with guns. That's just us. Ok cool the USA does, good for you (?) but we dont. Its not good or bad , just a difference
2) We are quite capable to standing up against tyranny thank you. If the time for armed revolution came we would get what we needed the same way every other rebellious people have (see above, IE gun runners and interfering nations) plus you can have all the guns you you like but if the people are cowards or lazy then it dont matter. Us Britain's are known for our riotous unruly nature. Hell thats why the USA exists cause you took our unruly nature to the colonies!
3) UK is a Democracy, our government didn't forcefully ban guns, the UK people wanted it and got it, now I don't particularly agree with that decision but that's how the UK works.


Just remember the American Revolution nearly died a early death in Vally forge with the patriots freezing and starving to death, luckily the french came with supplies and bailed you guys out.

reply to post by crazyewok


Thank you for the unruly behavior. That is one of the things I respect most about you Brits.
You can keep the dark beer though.

Hoosierdaddy71

You can keep the dark beer though.

And you can keep your American piss water ( beer?) Sorry you Beer is a crime against humanity

JohnPhoenix
Those seconds trying to unlock a gun case could be the seconds it takes for the bad guy to blow your brains out.

And the chances of the bad guy being armed in the UK is almost non existent, hell at worst in 99% of cases he might have a flat headed screwdriver.

crazyewok
And you can keep your American piss water ( beer?)

Sorry you Beer is a crime against humanity

edit on 14-4-2014 by crazyewok because: (no reason given)

Actually, having been to Oregon I have to say that some of the microbreweries there (Full Sail Ale, etc) do a bloody good pint. Excellent beer. They need to export a lot of it to drown out the watery vileness that is Bud, etc.

I think i've worked it out..gun controls is inverse to the chance of your beer being like making love on a canoe (being f---ing close to water)...the better the beer the less need there is to shoot people so we in the UK get the beer and we'll leave you guys drinking Bud with your guns

AngryCymraeg

Bassago
US = Gun rights are natural rights not doled out by the government.

UK = Gun privilege where the government doles out the special privilege of ownership.

You have to ask if you can have a gun, we don't. It's your country and you're welcome to whatever restrictions by big brother you want. We have a different mindset here in the US.

Most of us are aware there are guns in the UK. Oz too.

Ahem - your Second Amendment was laid down by your Government. And it's not a natural right, its the right to bear arms as a means to arm the Militia and defend the country. There's a difference. And I believe that it even says a "well-regulated" militia. Who regulates it? It's supposed to be the government.

I do see the point of guns in the US. You guys have bears, coyotes and feral members of the NRA. We have the occasional demented seagull. We don't need 'em. (Guns that is, not seagulls.) Face facts - the NRA has politicised the whole thing on the way to making themselves an obscene amount of money.

Ruh roh. Big FAIL here.

None of The Amendments were "laid down" by our Government. They are, in fact, a list of limitations on Government power that serves as a defining measure of the powers delegated TO the Government BY THE people. Furthermore, nothing and I do mean nothing in the Second Amendment was intended to be regulated by "the government" as written at ratification nor have those individual rights been stripped out of existence for the purposes of establishing militias (at even the state level). You could argue for "reasonable" regulations at a state level but SCOTUS has made it very clear that the states and especially the Federal Govt. shall not infringe on the individual right of the people to keep and bear arms.

I always get a good chuckle when our friends from across the pond attempt to wade into Second Amendment issues. First, it starts with a example, an event, something to push the conversation into the inevitable line of reasoning:

"you should not have [insert firearm here]" or "we should examine 'reasonable' gun control solutions"

This is the same method that rabid anti-gunners use to chip away at those who support the Second Amendment and it's actually why those of us are so stubbornly against even hearing these arguments. Nothing, nothing you do will take guns away from those who choose to have them....legally or otherwise.

reply to post by AngryCymraeg

Ahem - your Second Amendment was laid down by your Government. And it's not a natural right, its the right to bear arms as a means to arm the Militia and defend the country. There's a difference. And I believe that it even says a "well-regulated" militia. Who regulates it? It's supposed to be the government.

No the 2nd amendment is a natural right that is simply acknowledged under the Bill of Rights of our constitution. As far as the citizens being armed must be militia, etc, etc that has already been put to rest by the Supreme Court in District of Columbia v. Heller.

Militia speaks to the State, People speaks to the people. Two separate parts to the amendment. Also all able bodied men between 18 and 45 are automatically part of the militia. Go figure.

Swills
reply to post by Antigod

 

I'll be sure to pat every English on the back for a job well done.

Enjoy your shot guns, Big Bro surveillance, and corrupt gov't. I know we Americans do, and we enjoy our guns.

Statistics Prove: More Guns, Less Crime

Correlation does not imply causation.

The stats might prove less crime but there's more at play that just more guns.

Hoosierdaddy71
Do you or your neighbor have a 9 mm glock?

Pretty sure my neighbours are not drug dealers, gang members or assassins. So why on Earth would they ever want a 9mm glock?

They are useless for shooting pheasants, rabbits or deer or anything else we may need/wish to shoot (although maybe they could take out the wood pigeons that plague my garden! )

And that is the difference between the British and Americans.

AndyMayhew

Hoosierdaddy71
Do you or your neighbor have a 9 mm glock?

Pretty sure my neighbours are not drug dealers, gang members or assassins. So why on Earth would they ever want a 9mm glock?

They are useless for shooting pheasants, rabbits or deer or anything else we may need/wish to shoot (although maybe they could take out the wood pigeons that plague my garden!

)

And that is the difference between the British and Americans.

edit on 14-4-2014 by AndyMayhew because: (no reason given)

Are you sure that your neighbors are not drug dealers?
Besides, I just like shooting them. And I'm well within my rights to do so. That's the difference between British and americans.

AngryCymraeg
reply to post by JohnPhoenix

 

I think that this really is a case of needing to examine the context very carefully. The UK is not the US - there are few if any cases of burglars being armed here, still less of homeowners being shot. And the most infamous incident of homeowners shooting back is the Tony Martin case. Which did not end well.

The other point to make is that we don't have any natural predators here - no wolves, no bears and no coyotes. We don't need to protect ourselves from invading wildlife. We don't feel the need to have guns.

Oh and one final point. Kids get everywhere. When I was six years old I somehow got into my parents medicine cabinet - which was five feet off the ground - in order to get a bottle of nice-tasting medicine, so that I could impress a friend of mine. My mother almost had a heart attack. How many times have we heard of tragedies where some kid got their hands on their parents gun and then accidently discharged it?

First off.. Nobody in the USA has a gun because the NEED to fend off bears, wolves etc.. Even the people who live in rural areas are not so remote from civilization that there are lots of wild dangerous animals - stop using this as part of your argument because it's just silly. There is no invading wildlife here except perhaps in very few isolated areas. (see you have misconceptions about the US.)

So in the cities, your normal law abiding citizens have been talked into being afraid of guns or they wont need them etc, but what about drug gangs? What about thugs being armed but with knives or other weapons? I'm sure it's not a greater sense of morality in the UK that keeps crime down, these elements are everywhere.

So perhaps your problem isn't as big as ours granted but if I lived there, I'd still keep my loaded unregistered gun in my drawer if I lived in the UK.

Also keep in mind your inner city black people are not like our inner city black people .. I say this because statistically blacks in this country blacks form inner city broken/poor homes commit way more violent crimes than whites do nationwide across the board. You guys didn't have a civil war that ( was not about but incorporated slavery) that pissed off all the blacks for generations to come. There's a lot more factors to that if you look at years of census data but generally blacks in other countries don't have the same mind set as blacks in the USA. I'm not blaming them because they are black so no racists remarks please, it's just how things turned out for what seems like the majority of them. Then there is the Civil Rights issues that are still new and fresh in the minds of the US citizens from the 60's.

We also have Mexicans who are here illegally by the hundreds of thousands and many of them are working with the Drug Lords of the Mexican Cartels right across the border - that our government refuses to do anything about - including protecting border towns.

So perhaps we Need guns more than folks in the UK.. what gets me is yahoos like Piers Morgan getting on tv and saying how bad the US is for allowing everyone to have guns and how wrong we are for wanting to defend ourselves.

I understand those folks with guns in the UK can only get them (legally anyway) if they claim and show they need them for hunting, then they can be granted a permit/license whatever. I read that someplace and that article said it was for rifles and shotguns, not handguns. Don't know how true this is.. do you think if I told them I wanted a handgun for protection against human predators they would grant me one?

reply to post by JohnPhoenix


You need 2 licenses, one for the shotgun which is your right to own, and the other is a firearms one which is for the rifles, which you have to prove why you would need one.

Handguns are outright banned, they are unnecessary and easily concealed. The only reason anyone would want a handgun is to kill another person, and were involved in some of the nastier atrocities in the UK... therefore they are a big no no.