The British Called. They Want Their Guns BaCK !
- Thread starter ccheese
- Start date
Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules
Matt308
Glock Perfection
Knives are next.
Clay_Allison
Staff Sergeant
- 1,154
- Dec 24, 2008
They ought to be careful they don't have rights like we do here, the stormtroopers will be at their door if they upset the government.
BombTaxi
Tech Sergeant
Speaking of stormtroopers, did everybody look at the guy's other vids? That interesting series of vids on Nazi rock and even a few words from Tom Metzger... 
Apart from the fact that the poster is obviously some kind of neo-Nazi nut, I think more people here in the UK want the smoking ban lifted than the handgun ban. Ownership of weapons simply isn't a big thing here in the UK - I have never met anyone who has complained because they do not have the right to posess a handgun or automatic weapon. It is true that the ban has had no effect on gun crime figures, but no-one expected it would. Like the automatic weapons ban of the 1980s, the handgun ban was not driven by a high rate of overall gun crime, but rather by one particularly dreadful incident which the media got hold of - in this case, the Dunblane shootings. The ban was intended to stop that kind of outrage, rather than prevent all criminals from having any kind of access to guns - because that just isn't possible.
And actually Clay, there are no stormtroopers to come to our doors. In the UK we enjoy a great degree of freedom to criticise the government and exercise that freedom long and loud every day
Maybe, seeing as you come from the country that passed the PATRIOT Act into law, you are the one who should be worried about the government policing your thoughts...
Apart from the fact that the poster is obviously some kind of neo-Nazi nut, I think more people here in the UK want the smoking ban lifted than the handgun ban. Ownership of weapons simply isn't a big thing here in the UK - I have never met anyone who has complained because they do not have the right to posess a handgun or automatic weapon. It is true that the ban has had no effect on gun crime figures, but no-one expected it would. Like the automatic weapons ban of the 1980s, the handgun ban was not driven by a high rate of overall gun crime, but rather by one particularly dreadful incident which the media got hold of - in this case, the Dunblane shootings. The ban was intended to stop that kind of outrage, rather than prevent all criminals from having any kind of access to guns - because that just isn't possible.
And actually Clay, there are no stormtroopers to come to our doors. In the UK we enjoy a great degree of freedom to criticise the government and exercise that freedom long and loud every day
Maybe, seeing as you come from the country that passed the PATRIOT Act into law, you are the one who should be worried about the government policing your thoughts...
Clay_Allison
Staff Sergeant
- 1,154
- Dec 24, 2008
If you think I'm not, you don't know how paranoid I am. Still, your "hate speech" laws pretty much mean that the government can stop you criticising anything if they so decide. God forbid anyone cirticise Islam in Britain.Speaking of stormtroopers, did everybody look at the guy's other vids? That interesting series of vids on Nazi rock and even a few words from Tom Metzger...
Apart from the fact that the poster is obviously some kind of neo-Nazi nut, I think more people here in the UK want the smoking ban lifted than the handgun ban. Ownership of weapons simply isn't a big thing here in the UK - I have never met anyone who has complained because they do not have the right to posess a handgun or automatic weapon. It is true that the ban has had no effect on gun crime figures, but no-one expected it would. Like the automatic weapons ban of the 1980s, the handgun ban was not driven by a high rate of overall gun crime, but rather by one particularly dreadful incident which the media got hold of - in this case, the Dunblane shootings. The ban was intended to stop that kind of outrage, rather than prevent all criminals from having any kind of access to guns - because that just isn't possible.
And actually Clay, there are no stormtroopers to come to our doors. In the UK we enjoy a great degree of freedom to criticise the government and exercise that freedom long and loud every day
BombTaxi
Tech Sergeant
Don't confuse the hunting ban (the rallies right at the start), with the handgun ban. The hunting ban was a complete load of crap and should never have happened. But it wasn't about guns, it was about hunting foxes with dogs.
GrauGeist
Generalfeldmarschall zur Luftschiff Abteilung
As far as private ownership of weapons are concerned, I think it's interesting to compare competant ownership of shoulder weapons and side-arms against criminal activity.
There should be no reason on this earth why a person cannot own anything as long as they do so in a rational, civil and safe manner. Last week we saw a distraught man shoot his family to death with a sidearm. And while this was a hideous tragedy, the bottom line is, he broke the law. Many laws. He chose to end the lives of his children and used the most available means to do it by. Once he made up his mind to step outside the law, no matter how many laws there are on the books forbidding it, he did it anyway. Now had there been no firearms available to him, do you suppose that would have changed his mind? Doubtfull...he would have used flammables, chemicals, knives, hammers...or perhaps tossed them off of a bridge. His mind was made up, just like that asshat that tossed his 6 year old girl off the bridge.
The mainstream fear of firearms is interesting, because to possess one is to empower that individual over another in a confrontation. If the holder of that weapon is a civil, rational person, there is no need to fear them unless they are being threatened. Which is most likely the reason why they would brandish it in the first place, usually as a last resort.
In neighboring Trinity County, there are about 13,500 citizens in that rural county. The ratio of concealed weapons permit holders in that county is about 1 in 3 making it one of the highest permit-to-carry ratios in the nation. The crime rate in that county is amazingly low. Robberies, Homicides and so on are almost non-existant. Want to take a guess as to why that is?
It's not because all the citizens there are holding hands and dreaming of a magic world of peace, co-existance, faireys and unicorns. It's because the bad people know that they run the risk of getting killed if they try and do something stupid to thier neighbor. It's not a fear, and people don't walk down the street watching for gun barrels to pop out of windows. There's the occasional brawls at the bars, idiotic fist-fights over stealing thier neighbor's firewood and so on, but firearms never make it into the situation. Call it a balance of power, if you will.
So gun control advocates need to give me a much better argument than telling me simply that "guns kill". I have seen far worse death in traffic accidents with a far higher frequency.
There should be no reason on this earth why a person cannot own anything as long as they do so in a rational, civil and safe manner. Last week we saw a distraught man shoot his family to death with a sidearm. And while this was a hideous tragedy, the bottom line is, he broke the law. Many laws. He chose to end the lives of his children and used the most available means to do it by. Once he made up his mind to step outside the law, no matter how many laws there are on the books forbidding it, he did it anyway. Now had there been no firearms available to him, do you suppose that would have changed his mind? Doubtfull...he would have used flammables, chemicals, knives, hammers...or perhaps tossed them off of a bridge. His mind was made up, just like that asshat that tossed his 6 year old girl off the bridge.
The mainstream fear of firearms is interesting, because to possess one is to empower that individual over another in a confrontation. If the holder of that weapon is a civil, rational person, there is no need to fear them unless they are being threatened. Which is most likely the reason why they would brandish it in the first place, usually as a last resort.
In neighboring Trinity County, there are about 13,500 citizens in that rural county. The ratio of concealed weapons permit holders in that county is about 1 in 3 making it one of the highest permit-to-carry ratios in the nation. The crime rate in that county is amazingly low. Robberies, Homicides and so on are almost non-existant. Want to take a guess as to why that is?
It's not because all the citizens there are holding hands and dreaming of a magic world of peace, co-existance, faireys and unicorns. It's because the bad people know that they run the risk of getting killed if they try and do something stupid to thier neighbor. It's not a fear, and people don't walk down the street watching for gun barrels to pop out of windows. There's the occasional brawls at the bars, idiotic fist-fights over stealing thier neighbor's firewood and so on, but firearms never make it into the situation. Call it a balance of power, if you will.
So gun control advocates need to give me a much better argument than telling me simply that "guns kill". I have seen far worse death in traffic accidents with a far higher frequency.
Matt308
Glock Perfection
Good Post Geist.
We never had the right to bear arms written into the Magna Carta. So bannng them was not viewed as an attack on are freedom. Apart from the hype in the press. I probably speak for most Brits that firearms dont have any part of are day to day living or are thoughts.
I am more concerned about the nanny society being created in order to increase are security.
I am more concerned about the nanny society being created in order to increase are security.
It is biased in that they've tried to imply the march was about guns, when in fact it was about the government's treatment of countryside issues in general, and foxhunting in particular.
It's not about the law abiding, it's about criminals.
If there are 200 million guns in circulation in the US, how do you keep them out of the hands of criminals? You can't.
Gun control in the rest of the world is about making guns hard for criminals to acquire, not about passing laws banning criminals owning guns. They're criminals, they break the law.
Guns are the easiest way.
We've had two terrorist suspects convicted of attempted mass murder in Britain in the last few months. One was a doctor, who, together with another doctor, planted 2 car bombs in London. Neither exploded. They then staged a suicide attack on Glasgow airport. One of them managed to set himself on fire and died. The only serious injury suffered by a member of the public, in all 3 attacks, was a broken leg.
The second case was a mentally retarded man who converted to Islam. Using instructions found on the net, he built a nail bomb. He planned to explode it in a restaurant. It went off prematurely in a toilet cubicle, causing him minor injuries.
At Columbine the perpetrators made numerous bombs (16, iirc). Not one caused any injuries, all the casualties were from shootings.
In the UK there have been 4 attempts in the last 20 years at school massacres. In one a man built a flamethrower and attacked pupils at his old school. Some were burned, no one was killed.
In another case a mentally ill man attacked a kindergarten class with a machete. The female teacher suffered fairly severe arm injuries fending him off, and some children suffered minor injuries.
The third incident saw a man enter a school armed with a knife. He stabbed one girl dead before being overpowered by a teacher.
The final case was in Dunblane. A man with 2 legally held handguns went in to a school and shot dead 16 children and a teacher.
It's possible to kill with almost any implement. Guns are by far the easiest.
Glider
Captain
HOPS posting is very accurate and as some of you know I do shoot and have done for a number of years.
Even when handguns were legal the security requirements were such that they might as well have been on the moon for all the good they are to you.
I have two gun safes, they are both coach bolted to the walls and floors of the house. One contains the guns the other the ammunition and firing mechanism. There are two locks on each safe, the keys of which are mixed and kept it two parts of the house and the house is checked when the license is renewed. The safe with the ammo and mechanism has two seperate lockable compartments. If someone was to break into the house there is no chance on earth that I would be able to access the guns to defend myself. If I were able to, then the Police would be asking how much warning I had and prove that I had the time to get the keys, unlock the safe's, assemble the gun, load the mag and then defend myself. Unlikely at best, in a break in situation.
Its also illegal for my wife to know where I keep the keys, if she does then I automatically lose the guns and will face criminal charges. When I was ill I wrote a letter and gave it to my soliciter so that she would be able to find the keys without my wife having to get the locksmiths in, if things had turned out differently.
There is one slightly ironic twist to all this, handguns are not illegal in of all places, Northern Ireland where the security requirements are a lot less, neither are they illegal in the Isle of Man.
Even when handguns were legal the security requirements were such that they might as well have been on the moon for all the good they are to you.
I have two gun safes, they are both coach bolted to the walls and floors of the house. One contains the guns the other the ammunition and firing mechanism. There are two locks on each safe, the keys of which are mixed and kept it two parts of the house and the house is checked when the license is renewed. The safe with the ammo and mechanism has two seperate lockable compartments. If someone was to break into the house there is no chance on earth that I would be able to access the guns to defend myself. If I were able to, then the Police would be asking how much warning I had and prove that I had the time to get the keys, unlock the safe's, assemble the gun, load the mag and then defend myself. Unlikely at best, in a break in situation.
Its also illegal for my wife to know where I keep the keys, if she does then I automatically lose the guns and will face criminal charges. When I was ill I wrote a letter and gave it to my soliciter so that she would be able to find the keys without my wife having to get the locksmiths in, if things had turned out differently.
There is one slightly ironic twist to all this, handguns are not illegal in of all places, Northern Ireland where the security requirements are a lot less, neither are they illegal in the Isle of Man.
Glider, what exactly are the gun laws in England? In Germany hunting rifles and shotguns are allowed and certain pistols for hunting purposes are allowed. Automatic weapons such as machine guns and so forth are illegal.
parsifal
Colonel
we have had this debate before.....with regard to gun ownership and crime rates, despite the populist myth, the higher the level of gun ownership, the higher the rate of gun related crime, whilst other crime statistics remain unnaffected.
There might be other reasons to argue for liberalised gun ownership, but reducing the crime rate is not one of them.
The guy that posted this video on U-Tube has an interesting background. I would not like to have him as a reference on any job application I would make
There might be other reasons to argue for liberalised gun ownership, but reducing the crime rate is not one of them.
The guy that posted this video on U-Tube has an interesting background. I would not like to have him as a reference on any job application I would make
