Changing attitudes about firearms

[Klenchblaize]

Guess we'll disagree then... I quite like going to Tesco knowing the people aren't wandering around with loaded guns on their belts.

"If guns are outlawed... only outlaws will accidently shoot themeslves in the foot"

Just my opinions, not claiming I'm right by any means.

I simply wanted to make the point that the retention of firearms ownership here in the UK, care of rigorous licensing of the person, still requires those who wish to continue with their passion for the grooved bore to have a suitably pro-active and passionate body representing them. Sadly, at my reading at least, the jury is still very much out on weather that body is the Bisley-based NRA.

May I also suggest that the comfort you take from not having a someone behind you in Tesco with a handgun only proves things are somewhat different in Warwickshire to that of certain parts of South East London I have reason to visit more often than I would wish! The only comfort I may take being the certainty that should a handgun be drawn it is all but certain to be possessed illegally.

K

 

[Armleywhite]

One of the exemptions to the Firearms (Amendment) Act 1997 (1) allowed for the grant of a firearms certificate (FAC) to the holder of a 'small firearm' that was a genuine trophy of war brought back before 1945. In the granting of such a certificate the usual fee was waived and a condition placed on the certificate that no ammunition for the firearm was to be held. The grant of such a certificate was of course subject to he usual background, medical and household security requirements. Another exemption to the same Act allows the keeping of 'small firearms' on a firearm certificate if they are of genuine historical, aesthetic and/or technical interest. If they are in an 'obsolete' calibre they can be kept at home in your gun safe, else they must be held at an approved facility and cannot be moved without permission of the police. Only the one who holds the firearm certificate may shoot the gun.

Yeah, cos burglars would take so much notice of the certificate wouldn't they? Old or not, if someone pushes a gun in yer face and demands cash etc you gonna question if it has ammo in it?

 

[xylaria]

The thing is the types of military grade weaponry that can be available in britain if you know the wrong type of people is quite staggering. I have met 15 years that have used and got sentenced for having SA80s and AKs on british streets. Canada has nearly blanket gun possession in some areas and with exception of the odd weirdo pig farmer has very low murder rates. It is too easy for governments and media to get flustered about gun crime rather than deal with the real issues of a youth that grow up with violence, and no values for life. Canada obviously gets something right, it has problems with poverty, ethnic tension and the other issues that get blamed for having a violent society, yet its crime rates are low. If we can work out why then the answer maybe closer at hand.

Oblio: I hope your freind makes a full recovery, personally I don't see having an accident with firearm any different to having an accident with a chisel or a knife. It is a tool that appears to as central to american culture as patchwork quilts and cattle driving to an outsider such as me. It does make me wonder what knowledge the people at work have of your settler ancestors and what tools they needed to survive in your country without prepacked food and McDonald's.

 

[Armleywhite]

If I may also add. For what purpose (in the UK) is there for carrying a handgun. Shotguns / rifles I understand, but handguns??

 

[Oblio13]

... For what purpose (in the UK) is there for carrying a handgun...??

To avoid being a victim? A quick Google search turns up some shockingly violent crimes in the UK.

 

[Armleywhite]

To avoid being a victim? A quick Google search turns up some shockingly violent crimes in the UK.

No excuse!!

 

[BigShot]

How is it no excuse?
It's not a legal excuse as things stand now - but the undeniable difference a handgun makes between being a victim and not says otherwise.

The simple fact that areas with widespread civilian owned and carried handguns have FAR lower violent crime rates than those areas where only determined criminals have them should say all that needs saying.

 

[Tadpole]

To avoid being a victim? A quick Google search turns up some shockingly violent crimes in the UK.

If you take out the leading cause of death of people In the USA between the ages of 15 and 34 (toad traffic accidents), the second most common way to die is by homicide (of which 81.3% is with a firearm) and the third most common way which is suicide, (of which 48.3% is with a firearm)
(Figures the USA for 1999 and 2005)
I will have to say that in the USA your risk of being a “victim” is much greater than it is in the UK

 

[Armleywhite]

How is it no excuse?
It's not a legal excuse as things stand now - but the undeniable difference a handgun makes between being a victim and not says otherwise.

The simple fact that areas with widespread civilian owned and carried handguns have FAR lower violent crime rates than those areas where only determined criminals have them should say all that needs saying.

I cannot believe that your being serious. The handgun in the UK has not been a legal item for many years now. Why should it. This is Britian, not the wild west!!! I fully understand the need in the US, but not in the UK. All that will do is legitimise the carrying by the idiot criminals even more. I'm pretty sure the parents of the murdered child in Liverpool recently are wishing the gun toting idiots had had more control over them preceding their little sons murder!

 

[BigShot]

Tadpole - care to use some more relevant and honest statistics?
The point Oblio made is not addressed by the stats you present.

Quite apart from the incredibly misleading nature of comparing the pure stats between the two countries...
Those figures make no distinction between the murder rates in legally armed areas and in areas under effective or actual prohibition, those stats fail to account for how many violent crimes were PREVENTED by the presence of a legally owned firearm (around 1.5 million per year if the US government stats are to be believed - and those stats were gathered in an effort to outlaw guns, not encourage more).
The vast vast vast vast majority of murders in the USA happen in urban areas where there is NO or virtually* no legal carry of handguns. Those areas with legally owned and carried handguns enjoy a significantly lower rate of all violent crimes including homicide, rape, armed robbery and so on than equivalent areas without arms.

The stats you present also make no representation in the change in the rates of all violent crimes (including homicide) in areas where the concealed carry of handguns was placed under "shall issue" laws compared to the change in areas that are disarmed.
Trends say far more than raw numbers to represent an entire country which are skewed significantly by those urban areas under prohibition.


* virtually = in New York City the law allows for the carrying of handguns for self defence, but since the law is a "may issue" one as opposed to "shall issue" the NYPD refuse to issue carry permits to anyone who isn't a celebrity (and even that's rare) police officer (including retired) or politician.
It is effective prohibition enforced by the police as opposed to prohibition by law.

 

[xylaria]

In Uk we have an hysterical media that covers every shooting with front page headlines, this gives the populous a distorted image of a "broken Britain". Every stabbing in london creates even more headlines. It is not the knives, or the guns, it is the media led fear of getting stabbed that creates part of the problem. Children get scared into carrying knives for protection, rather than talking to a level headed adult. One kid carries a knife so the next has to carry a gun. It is the same media that puts Otis Ferry (spoilt brat offspring of a pop star) on the pages rather than a reasoned debate on hunting. This adds to the perception that hunting is for rich people with no respect when the complete opposite is much closer to the truth.

 

[BigShot]

I cannot believe that your being serious. The handgun in the UK has not been a legal item for many years now. Why should it. This is Britian, not the wild west!!! I fully understand the need in the US, but not in the UK. All that will do is legitimise the carrying by the idiot criminals even more. I'm pretty sure the parents of the murdered child in Liverpool recently are wishing the gun toting idiots had had more control over them preceding their little sons murder!

Handguns are illegal here and have been for ages...
...yet Rhys Jones was STILL shot in the neck and killed.
Why?
Because the ONLY thing prohibition does is disarm those who have no criminal intent for their guns.

If there's one thing we've learned in the UK, it is that banning handguns has been ineffective at disarming criminals (read again - criminals - that's an important word - since when did criminals obey the law?)
If there's another thing that we've learned - it is that the rates of murder with handguns has INCREASED since the ban. A dramatic increase at that.

A friend of my family was attacked in his bed a few nights ago.
He didn't know his attacker - burglars broke into his house and one of them hit him in the face with an axe while he slept. Not used like a hammer - used like an axe. He lived and is currently in ICU awaiting massive surgery to put his face back together.

He would have been far less likely for that to happen in most of the USA, or here if firearms were legal to own for self defence - why?
Because in the USA people have GUNS. Because people have guns home invasions at night are almost unheard of. Burglars wait to make sure the house is empty before breaking in.
Having a handgun wouldn't have helped him directly as he was asleep when the attack took place - but if anyone who met the criteria could own a handgun for self defence - the burglars probably wouldn't have been there in the first place meaning he wouldn't be in a critical state right now.

The simple fact of the matter is that in the UK violent crime is a reality. Women are raped, people are attacked - the thing they all have in common? They are weaker than their attacker.
A firearm is a great equaliser - one which allows a lone, petite woman to fight off a gang intent on raping her in a way no other tool or law is capable of doing.

Read up on Orlando, Florida to see the effect that concealed carry firearms have on rape statistics and then ask yourself if the same could apply in the UK.

 

[Mike Ameling]

Gun laws, or any laws, only restrict the ... law abiding public, not criminals who routinely ignore or violate them. The "law abiding public" does not need to be controlled, just that criminal element. But the standard solution is to dump more "laws" on everybody - knowing full well that the criminals will just ignore them.

Any gun is just a tool - just like a knife, axe, saw, baseball bat, screwdriver, etc. The USE OF that tool is what shifts it into a WEAPON.

Most "tools" have a primary purpose. But they also have many other purposes/uses.

The current push to "demon-ize" knives is a classic example. They are being portrayed as only good for stabbing or cutting people. But they have far more "uses" than that. And those other uses far outweigh those "assault" claims. Most people will use a knife as a TOOL and not as a WEAPON.

A vehicle (car/truck) can be a very deadly WEAPON if so used. And vehicles kill and injure far more people every year than all the guns/knives out there in the Western World - either intentionally or accidentally. They are restricted/licensed/taxed, but still sow their carnage every year. Should they be treated as WEAPONS and banned accordingly?

How about Doctors? In the US, it is estimated that 100,000 people a year die from doctor/medical errors. Yes DOCTOR ERRORS! Should doctors be viewed as WEAPONS, and banned accordingly?

The problem is CRIMINAL use of an object/tool/thing. And they do not obey laws anyway.

Once you strip away all the political hype/spin/propaganda, the whole issue becomes much more clear. But the solution to that criminal element is something that has been around for many centuries. So the "feel good" solution is often used and laws are written that only ... law abiding ... people will ever comply with - instead of the criminals who need to be controlled.

And people's ... emotions ... then complicate the whole issue immensely. Especially when "emotion" supercedes logic and facts.

A WEAPON is all in the ... intent ... to use a tool in a specific way. So simple a concept. Yet so many people cannot understand that simple principle.

Just my humble thoughts to share - from across the pond.

Mikey - that grumpy ol' German blacksmith out in the Hinterlands

 

[Armleywhite]

A very good friend of mine lives and works in Myaka FL, and carries two guns with him. He is an officer of the court. Due to his job, his life is threatened on a daily basis, hence his need for sidearms. US is massivley different than the UK, where normal gun carrying has never been the norm, whereas the vast maj of US residents are aware of the gun culture from a very early age. The sad thing about the UK is the lack of LAW that takes drastic action over gun crime. IF the UK law took massive steps to outlaw it properly then the abusers fothe gun would pay very dearly!!!!!

Also, can you imagine a "petite" woman actualy pulling a gun and killing someone over here? You think it's easy to take anothers life? Majority fo those killed in gun crime in the US are those self same "petite" people, or blokes like your mate who decides to use the gun, gets taken from them and bang end of mission. It will be a very ver ysad day in this country if the gun was ever made the norm!!

 

[Tadpole]

Tadpole - care to use some more relevant and honest statistics?
The point Oblio made is not addressed by the stats you present.

Ok
USA 6.8 violent deaths per 100,000. 81.3% involved the use of a firearm
England and Wales .06 violent deaths deaths per 100,000 (It may be a low as .04 per 100,000 depending on which stats you trust) 0.015% involved the use of a firearm

You may not feel as much of a "victim" with a gun in your pants, but the chance of actually being one is greater in the USA then it is in the UK.

A 1997 study in the New England Journal of Medicine that found that a gun kept at home is 22 times more likely to be used to kill a friend or family member than to stop an intruder. A study by the Harvard School of Public Health found that children in states with the highest rates of gun ownership were 16 times as likely to die from an accidental gunshot wound, nearly seven times as likely to commit suicide with a gun, and more than three times as likely to be murdered with a firearm.”

 

[BigShot]

Please back up your claim that the majority of those killed in gun crime are petite women.
I flatly don't believe that for a second.

Also please back up the claim that gun owners have their guns taken from them in any even vaguely significant numbers.


So how could UK law be any different?
Handguns are completely and utterly illegal. Our own olympic shooting team have to train abroad they are so illegal.


If you really want to see - I can send you links to personal accounts where lone women have been attacked by a rapist or robber and, upon pulling the gun have either seen their attacker flee, or continue to attack and have shot them in defence.
I can send you a link to a woman crying down the phone to the 911 operator to get the police there as fast as possible "he's coming up the stairs!"
After begging the guy to leave her alone while he choked her - she unloaded a shotgun on him and killed him.
She was distraught but alive.

Until you back up your claims that guns = unsafe society I'm not taking a single thing you say seriously.

If you really want I'll unload a mountain of statistics that back me up - but that'd make it a fair bit harder for you to argue your case - so I'll only do that if you actually ask me to.
Your call.

 

[BigShot]

Tadpole - again - comparing one country directly with another is sketchy as it ignores a whole rack of factors that must be considered.
I'll ask you again to provide some statistics that are not skewed by the massively higher rates of violent crime in areas of the USA that are under firearm prohibition.

I'll also ask again for stats that show the TRENDS in violent crime.

As I said to Armleywhite - I can bring a mountain of stats to bear on this discussion but it will make your argument much harder to maintain so will only do it if you want - your call.

 

[Matt.S]

I cannot believe that your being serious. The handgun in the UK has not been a legal item for many years now.

Largely, since 1997. People weren't being shot with pistols left, right and centre. Many more people have licenses for carrying a gun for defense purposes than you might think. MPs have an automatic eligibility. Several types are permitted to be held on a firearms certificate still; muzzle-loaders for instance.

Why should it.

For defense, for target shooting, for humane destruction/slaughtering of animals, for hunting/pest control situations unsuitable for a rifle or a shotgun, for collection/historical research purposes, for scientific/ballistics research.

This is Britian, not the wild west!!!

The 'Wild' West was in many ways more civilised than the UK these days; no rape, no burglaries, no robberies beyond stagecoaches and banks,murders were gang-related or a result of 'fair' fights between consenting men -- because most people carried a gun, and if they didn't the third party who walks past did.

 

[Wallenstein]

Just a few final observations from me before this thread disappears

- if a criminal pulls a gun on me one-on-one, there's no benefit to me being armed. If I try to go for my gun I get shot. But if the criminal suspects I might be armed, he is much more likely to use deadly force as a first resort rather than if he thinks you're unarmed.

- a total of 70 police officers have been killed in the line of duty in the UK over the last 30 years; in the first six months of 2007 more than 40 policemen were killed in the USA. It's a totally different playing field so there's little point comparing UK vs USA. This is a UK-based forum, so those are the stats that are relevant.

- this New Year's Eve we had dinner with a CID inspector who is a friend of ours, his view is that gun crime is simply not an issue for his force (Warwickshire). Where guns are used in crimes they are rarely discharged (robberies etc), and they tend to be shotguns. Handgun deaths are either limited to personal arguments or criminals shooting other criminals. A good example is the recent M42 shooting of the hells angel chappie... an internal feud which wouldn't have been helped by other drives being tooled up.

- would Rhys Jones still be alive if the UK public were armed? I can't see that being the case.

There's never going to be agreement on gun ownership, especially from a UK vs USA perspective... guns are a way of life in the USA and that's just the way it is; the same is not true in the UK and that's the way it is. Mutally incomprehensible perhaps, but that's life.

 

[Armleywhite]

Nah, I don't have stats to back it all up, im not that anal!! What I do know is that there are many many gun battles on the streets of LA and other major cities in the US. Still, it's legal to carry a firearm isn't it..

The use of petite was a reply to your use of it. You don't have to take me sriously, i'll not lose sleep over that! Show me. Keep your stats, I'm pretty sure you can provide stats to back up the existence of the yetti as well!