Skyrad

I agree and I doubt that many people disagree with this fact. The only reason that I get frustrated with some of the way the debate is held is that the UK ban is in place I don't see any reason to reverse it. If the clock was back 10 years and it was being proposed then I would see it as a waste of tax money. So I don't advocate banning guns, but I am certainly against reversing an existing policy. On what grounds? I wouldn't want to see freely available hundguns and people carrying them but what is the point of stopping law abiding subjects from owning handguns? Its possible to legally own a semi automatic rimfire rifle with a 30 round magazine on it if a legal firarm owner wanted to go nuts that would kill just as easily in a shopping centre or some other nightmare scenario location. So why stop sportsmen and women from owning handguns the way we own rifles, revolvers and shotguns? When an author is too meticulous about his style, you may presume that his mind is frivolous and his content flimsy. Lucius Annaeus Seneca

I think there are alot of didfferences between here and Gangs in the US. Over here in the UK most 'gangs' are just groups of mates who live in the same area. Bored youths with a fear of being a victim themselves that promote group cohesion. Most of these hoodies aren't even out of school so a job and better housing is hardly the problem. The majority of these kids are just emulating what they see on the TV in South Central LA and elsewhere. Not just working class kids but middle class kids with fuck all wrong with their lives other than boredom with their safe cushy lives so they go looking for a little danger to prove themselves. Bargin with them??? Beat the little shits if they step out of line put the fear of athority back into society. When an author is too meticulous about his style, you may presume that his mind is frivolous and his content flimsy. Lucius Annaeus Seneca

I belive you are right. In the UK the overwhelming culture is one of lack of respect and violence. Until the culture changes its important to restrict the access to firearms both legal and illegal. Sad but true. Nb, I'm not in favour of a ny form of gun ban but at this point feel that it is necessary to restrict their access. When an author is too meticulous about his style, you may presume that his mind is frivolous and his content flimsy. Lucius Annaeus Seneca

http://www.eyegas.com/sproutifarts/ When an author is too meticulous about his style, you may presume that his mind is frivolous and his content flimsy. Lucius Annaeus Seneca

Clearly in the Uk the supply of handguns and machine guns to the criminals is not stolen weapons from legal scorces as there is no legal semi auto handguns or machine guns in civillian ownership in the UK. Guns and drugs are easy to get into the country now and organised crime makes alot of money seeing that they arrive at the black market here ready to be sold on. Its towards organised crime that our hard earned cash should be aimed. Also at the same time trying to crush gang culture in the UK. Kid carry knifes because they are easier to get than guns and easier to hide. 2/3rds of the fatal killings of the 26 teenages in London were stabbings not shootings. Kids often carry knifes now because they are scared they are not afraid of they law because they know they can literally get away with murder. Not until they are more afraid of the consequences of carrying a weapon will they stop. Bring back the fear of the law, the police and authority. Respect is better than fear but in the absence of respect, fear is better than contempt. When an author is too meticulous about his style, you may presume that his mind is frivolous and his content flimsy. Lucius Annaeus Seneca

Yea, that was funny When an author is too meticulous about his style, you may presume that his mind is frivolous and his content flimsy. Lucius Annaeus Seneca

...You argue that criminals are the problem not the legal firearms (which I agree with) however, you also seem to use this as an argument to scrap gun controls. In which case you would make firarms even more widely available in a society which has a violent culture. So you'd be arming the criminals. Also you keep mentioning the period before the gun ban without realising that handguns still had to be locked away in gun cabnets and it was still illegal to carry the firearm for self protection. So let's see. The handguns that were owned before the ban, produced very little gun crime. Those handguns have now been confiscated, and three times more people are being shot in London. But you're claiming that if you gave those same people their same guns back, returning them to just as they were pre-1997, then gun crime would grow even more terrible than now? No, I don't think so. The pre-1997 gun owners weren't a problem then, and if you gave them their guns back, they still wouldn't be a problem. The problem is the criminals - that's what has grown in the meantime. All the criminals that want guns can still get them. Taking them away from the law-abiding has obviously had no effect upon that, as shown by the news story at the top of this thread. While we are in agreemnet about most of what you have posted here you make an assumption that 'All the criminals that want guns can still get them.' While I don't disagree that firearms are available on the streets of Britain I disagree that all criminals that want guns can get them. I also agree that the legal handgun owners were not large contributary factor in gun crime. However, you have repeatedly argued against ANY form of gun control. In that event any owner of a gun would be legal including the criminals that would like a gun but don't yet have one. In such an event you would most certainly see a rise in gun crime by 'legal' owners. When an author is too meticulous about his style, you may presume that his mind is frivolous and his content flimsy. Lucius Annaeus Seneca

Actually you'd be suprised just how many shooting clubs there are and not just Shotgun either. I belong to a rifle and pistol club and its only one of several in London alone. But compared to the states Brits generally don't grow up around firearms. When an author is too meticulous about his style, you may presume that his mind is frivolous and his content flimsy. Lucius Annaeus Seneca

Are stabbings big over there? When an author is too meticulous about his style, you may presume that his mind is frivolous and his content flimsy. Lucius Annaeus Seneca

Showing your age now old boy When an author is too meticulous about his style, you may presume that his mind is frivolous and his content flimsy. Lucius Annaeus Seneca

People with concealed carry licenses tend to go MUCH further to avoid/defuse possible conflict situations than people 'going bare', in my (admittedly limited) experience. The weapon is viewed as the absolute last resort, not the first. I am assuming that your experience is based in the States? You have to remember that in the UK generally people don't grow up with firearms and our culture is very different. What may work there might not work here. When an author is too meticulous about his style, you may presume that his mind is frivolous and his content flimsy. Lucius Annaeus Seneca

Um, more people were armed before 1997 - that's the year when the guns were confiscated. That's when the gun shootings were three times less than they are now. So quit shuddering and face reality: guns in the hands of law-abiding citizens bears no relationship to the amount of gun crime. you are correct but your argument is contrdictory. You argue that criminals are the problem not the legal firearms (which I agree with) however, you also seem to use this as an argument to scrap gun controls. In which case you would make firarms even more widely available in a society which has a violent culture. So you'd be arming the criminals. Also you keep mentioning the period before the gun ban without realising that handguns still had to be locked away in gun cabnets and it was still illegal to carry the firearm for self protection. When an author is too meticulous about his style, you may presume that his mind is frivolous and his content flimsy. Lucius Annaeus Seneca

Source: Sunday Mirror According to kallend, those Brits must not be storing their firearms responsibly, or otherwise these thugs wouldn't be getting their hands on guns. Um, no, wait, the citizens of England are not allowed to have handguns any more. So that would mean that, even though there aren't any unsafely stored firearms in citizen's homes, that the criminals are still finding ways to get guns anyway! And that, in turn, would mean that oppressive home gun storage requirements are going to be ineffective at stopping criminals from getting guns. Say it ain't so! Even on an island nation, with an almost total gun ban, gun crime victims still tripled over the last 10 years in their capital city. Hey, I've got an idea: Maybe it's not the presence of guns that causes gun crime. Maybe it's the presence of... criminals! Perhaps they should try locking the criminals up with long sentences, instead of confiscating guns from the law-abiding. That's just a crazy little idea of mine. I'm glad you posted this, its an interesting post on a day in the UK where everyone in London is hearing about how 26 youngsters have been killed this year by gun and just as importantly by knife. Your post is however incorrect in saying that there is an almost total gun ban which is simply not correct. I know dozens of people who own firearms, everything from .22 semi automatic longs to 7.62 Druganovs including .45 long barrel revolvers with fixed forearm rests. However, you are correct when you say that the problem is not the leagal firearms or their owners but the fact that there is a criminal culture of violence. If you take the guns away the criminal youth just stab you with a knife. I don't belive that long custodial sentaences alone is the answer seeing as even the DP doesn't deter criminals in the US. Stong border protection and investment into policing. Returning the Police to a force rather than a touchy feely 'Service' would be a move in the right direction. I know cops who tell me that the police don't go after these people because they are so violent that they would target the police who have no protection from these thugs in their and their families lives. The Police are scared and the government is without balls. The ineffective liberal PC tree hugging crowd have brought this country to the very brink of social collapse. When an author is too meticulous about his style, you may presume that his mind is frivolous and his content flimsy. Lucius Annaeus Seneca

Christians huh? When an author is too meticulous about his style, you may presume that his mind is frivolous and his content flimsy. Lucius Annaeus Seneca

Just remember when things get to deep to point out that Clinton got a blow job or GWB is a draft dodging alcoholic and you'll be fine. Also its common practice to bash John Rich's threads even if they make sense. Also common practice is to suspect Darius of being a terrorist loving woman suppressing Islamic type (Same goes for me) Whatever Kallend posts is usually attacked and common practice is to point out that he's a liberal with no answers. As for Kbordson she has a big gun and is a good shot so be niice to her. Welcome to the party! When an author is too meticulous about his style, you may presume that his mind is frivolous and his content flimsy. Lucius Annaeus Seneca

Carbon dioxide is a naturally occuring gas. When an author is too meticulous about his style, you may presume that his mind is frivolous and his content flimsy. Lucius Annaeus Seneca

I saw it at the weekend. I enjoyed it but I wish they had taken an extra hour rather than chop the story so much. Hopefully the next one will be a bit longer. When an author is too meticulous about his style, you may presume that his mind is frivolous and his content flimsy. Lucius Annaeus Seneca

LMAO Hatton? Fucking northern loudmouth. When an author is too meticulous about his style, you may presume that his mind is frivolous and his content flimsy. Lucius Annaeus Seneca

Is there any place for a white face in Southern Africa? I know South Africans who went to the US only to be told that they weren't African becasue they are white. The cheeky fuck who told him this was a black man who thought he was an African simply because he was black! 'African' Americans crack me up, the son of a bitch hadn't even been to Africa just like his father and grandfater and great grandfater before him but still he thought he was an African The Saffa like his father, grandfather, greatgrand father and greatgrand father all were born in Africa and he was a decendant of the vortrekkers. So what do you see happening in Zim? Can you ever see yourself going back? When an author is too meticulous about his style, you may presume that his mind is frivolous and his content flimsy. Lucius Annaeus Seneca

So while we the British and Americans tell the Israeli's and the Palastinians, the Kosovan Albanians and the Serbs that they must engage in dialouge we hold a double standard with the Zimbabweans and look to exclude them and punish them further with punitive sanctions that have been in place for years while we watch the MDC supporters die in droves as a result. I take it you were on the far side of the moon when we the BRITISH people welcomed the King of Suadi Arabia to London a couple of weeks ago stopped half of London for him and got HM the Queen to hold a banqet in his honour. I further speculate that you missed the photo of Prince William shaking hands with the Indonesian generals as they were over here on a defence spending trip (you can see the picture you missed in either The Economist or on the Indonisian Embassy web site.) Maybe because they are sick of the imperial shite double standards that get expoused. As for racisim why should we the British and the US have a monopoly on racism? Anyway are you seriously trying to claim that only the blacks in Souther Africa are racist??? So you must be very happy when we go to war to try and impose them on them then I guess. Why the fuck should other cultures adopt our principles just because they come from the west don't make them right or universal. Africa has vast riches in oil and mineral deposits where do those resources go to? Western nations. We give them loans and then hit them hard with interest which they will never be able to pay back, we buy their resources for bottom dollar and buy diamonds from people who commit the worst atrocities imaginable so we don't have to pay market price so your woman can have a nice shiney stone on her finger. We kill their democraticly elected leaders when they try and step out of line (Patrice Lumumba for example). Its us that does everything we can to keep them in debt and poverty by unfair trade and support for oppresive regimes in arms and training. Because he is feared and becuse he is tribal. We with our sanctions are not blameless either. We can see the effect that they have on the people of Zimbabwe and we still persue them to get rid of Mugabe at any cost to the people. Yea, Zim is in a shit state and Mugabe is a facist loon who in my opinion should not be running the country. But, we the west are not the solution, the solution must be found within Africa. If you are a Zimbabwean what are you doing to help YOUR country? Sitting in the UK and bitching about how bad things are in Zim isn't helping anyone. Are you involved with the MDC? Are you making a difference? Mugabe maybe a despotic dictator but when he felt there was a racist power there that he hated he was prepared to pick up a gun and put his life on the line not just sit about in a safe country and bitch about how bad things are at home. When an author is too meticulous about his style, you may presume that his mind is frivolous and his content flimsy. Lucius Annaeus Seneca

I'm not in denial. I just honestly don't think banning them will produce the results desired. And (quite honestly) I don't want to live in that "safe" but "taken care of" society. ("Ahhh.... susie, give me that dangerous gun. here... have a cookie. Don't you feel better") Susie???? Who the hell is Susie and why isn't she baking cookies rather than stuffing her face with them? When an author is too meticulous about his style, you may presume that his mind is frivolous and his content flimsy. Lucius Annaeus Seneca

While you're at it, might as well ban pens and pencils. And all other pointy sticks! When an author is too meticulous about his style, you may presume that his mind is frivolous and his content flimsy. Lucius Annaeus Seneca

There is a problem. But I don't believe the answer is banning the legal ownership of firearms. It might be the "easy" answer. ("Just make them all illegal" - right? Easy.) Wrong. 1. Who pays for the money invested into said firearms? Gov't kicks in $100 per gun? One of my scopes (just the glass) is worth 6k. Nope, a cute lil benjamin is NOT going to make me happy. And NO, I'm not going to surrender my property at such a devalued rate. 2. Such a program could encourage theft under a privateer type thought process - "break into this house and get his/her firearms, then turn them over to the gov't, collect my money and feel like I did a 'good thing' for society." 3. Do you REALLY think it's reasonable to try to collect ALL firearms in the US (even those illegally owned)?! confiscation of legally owned property will not fix this problem. reply] As John often points out the UK has proven that point. Our gun crime continues to rise while the only people affected by the ban on SLPs and Semi Automatic rifles (appart from rimfire) are the law abiding subjects of the UK. When an author is too meticulous about his style, you may presume that his mind is frivolous and his content flimsy. Lucius Annaeus Seneca

You have standards over there??? When an author is too meticulous about his style, you may presume that his mind is frivolous and his content flimsy. Lucius Annaeus Seneca

I'll go get a cowboy hat and boots. When an author is too meticulous about his style, you may presume that his mind is frivolous and his content flimsy. Lucius Annaeus Seneca