What do you brits think of this book and author?

[Curval]

Originally posted by lazs2
In the book the author seems to be saying that there were more homicides in england before guns than after and that if anything... guns in england don't increase the homicide rate...  guns do seem to decrease the crime rate which is about what we have found here.

The book does seem to be very scholorly and sensible with no preconcieved notions... she examins every statistic no matter how obvious it seems.

..and it just so happens to back up exactly what you think.

I suppose we can now take it that this book is the definative word on guns in England?

I must read it, then.

[NUKE]

Can anyone point to any statistics that demonstrate a reduced murder rate or gun death rate since the gun ban in the UK?

I thought there was not much gun crime to begin with before the ban.

Now what they seem to have is the same number of gun deaths, with the added bonus of rising crime rates. Like they say... "only the criminals have guns now".

Banning guns in the UK seems to have made burglars, home invaders and muggers a little more at ease though.

[Curval]

Originally posted by lazs2
IThe book does seem to be very scholorly and sensible with no preconcieved notions... she examins every statistic no matter how obvious it seems.

Rrrrrrrrrright lazs.

Her articles are distinctly "lazs-like though".

Why Britain Needs More Guns

She is the like British poster child for their version of the NRA.

[Defiance]

Nuke,
Dunno percentages but...........

The UK Firearms laws are dickish  lol

Airgun (rifle over 12pound strength) you need a fac Fire Arms Certificate

The actual pistol and smallbore ban was A partially B defianately to do with shootings @ dunblain (spl?)

Hugerford many many yrs ago a guy goes doo-lally with a semi m16 i think ? not sure, There's obviously a lot of anguish etc so getting a FAC is even harder just due to this 1 person, Along comes the scottish spree where a ******** massacres kids etc (terrible i know) so instantly the government panicks as usual and bans certain guns (no talking with gun societies etc either)

Government pats itself on the back thinking hey we can stop all gun crime, Bollocks i say, All's they did was make it harder for everyone to own a gun since 2 guys went tits-up

Gun crime here is on the rise i can tell ya that

I am now 24 miles from birmingham in the middle of england, Hardly a week goes by without another shooting (usual **** drug gangs etc etc) hitting the local/national news

As someone said over here dicks in government have a knee-jerk reaction that shrecks all 99.999999999999999999% of law abiding people

Gun crimes here are on the up, I don't think without gun laws they would drop, You have to remember a gun is not dangerous it's the dick with his finger on the trigger that's the danger

Guns are a TOOL to be used for good or bad, To tackle "gun crimes" you have to tackle the forces leading to them, In a nutshell sort the damn legalisation of drugs or shrecking start tougher sentenses/confiscation of assetts etc etc

Like pissing against the wind having a gun-ban and expecting certain criminals to abide by it

Sort the cause of gun crime and you solve the problem of gun usage

Smack-head dealers easy way shoot em/hang em whatever but get rid of em same with coke etc etc or legalise certain ones and let say the health service benefit from the influx of taxation etc

Banning certain gun types in the uk has done shreck all except stop a sport being enjoyed by law abiding people

After scotlands sad day of gun massacre do you think it will stop some dick that's pissed off from getting a gun n shooting people ?  of course not

I bet many a brit here knows or has heard how to get hold of an illegal firearm i for one know how to etc but i aint the type to fancy getting butt**cked in a jail thankyou very much while i am doing a few yrs for having a gun

You need like a medicine to cure the cause not the symptons

Guy last week gets a knife shoved into his skull slicing into his brain, Guy sentenced for it got 2 or 4 yr type of community work !  go figure, A farmer being raided by 2 thugs shoots at em killing one with a shot to his back he gets sent to prison, Shot in the back so what i say WTF were the 2 Tw@ts doing raiding his farm ? i somehow don't think they after road directions, If he hadn't of fired guess he would of been another uk victim of unsolved crime   go figure

Ban guns aint done diddly here except make it almost impossible for anyone to enjoy gun sport

You might wanna read up of this governments approach to illegal immigrants (and no i aint racist or predujiced i hate all people that annoy me or cross me the same, If they are ok with me they the same in return simple as that) anyways to stop illegals in the uk all people will be given a id card containing dna data and assorted gathered data from certain records and also when they can sort it a retana scanning on top, Now to me that's going a bit OTT, Why don't they use a fraction of this money and go find the illegals etc but no it aint the brit way, As long as can screw the populas out of a large tax slice they like to waste it on knee-jerk reaction/shemes instead of letting sanity take over and do a cheaper more effective thing

Ohh and another scheme is tax paid on cars will in the future be trackable from a installed ship i guess on a car and tracked from a sat

God knows how much this would cost  but wtf it's taxpayers money so lets waste it

(1/10th of uk road fund tax goes on anything remotely to do with roads etc !!!! this is the uk welcome to the mad-house)

Sheesh end of whine as i need another drink

Gotta add, Scottish parliament building estimate cost was 40 million pound, So far (not finished mind you) 400 million pound, Don't matter though as it's the sheepish err i mean british public picking up the tab

Kinda getting the pic how fubar our government is and always as such was from day 1

[SOB]

Originally posted by Curval
I don't disagree that many crimminals deserve to die.  ESPECIALLY if someone threatens my children.

But, I hear an awful lot on these boards about American's constitutional right to carry firearms.  Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't there a wee little thing in there (The Constitution) about the right to a fair trial?

Well, yeah, if you are a criminal and you manage to survive the act of being a potential threat to someone's life then you will get a fair trial by jury.  If you don't survive it because your intended victim was able to defend himself, then you're ****ed.

Do you think victims should not defend themselves so that the criminals can finish up what they plan on doing and then get their well deserved fair trial?

[beet1e]

Originally posted by Toad

• Curval, the point is that of those "gun deaths" every year, there are some that brought it upon themselves and "needed killing". She eventually got to a gun and shot him stone cold dead.
• IMO, that one needed killing anyway. I take Grim's view.

[/B]

People needed killing?

I always remember a scene from an old Western I saw on TV. There was a gun fight going on between two guys in the main street of a small township. Gunfire was blazing between the two men, while the gentrified classes went about their business - gentlemen in long tailed coats and high hats, ladies wearing elegant long dresses and carrying parasols... As the gunfight progressed, the camera passed by a funeral parlour, and zoomed in on their advertisement which read something like "We cater for victims of gunfights. Special rates for Saturday night killings!". It was the bit I've underlined that stuck in my mind!

Yes, I appreciate that there are rival drug dealers who shoot eachother, and while I don't care for those people, I don't want to see the bloodbath in Britain that we most certainly would have were guns to be freely available. It would be very un-British. To condone such killings sounds like you would like a return to the days of America's Wild West. Just remind me, do funeral parlours in the US offer special rates for drug dealers shot by rivals?

Lazs,  You know me now, and you've let me shoot off a few of your guns. While I was doing that, I was looking to see what sort of mistakes I made, as these might be the kind that many folks make who don't practise much - ie. most US gun owners. I was amazed that I was able to hit that target. I think I hit it more than I missed it...(?) As the book you have mentioned is about guns and their place in Britain, I will buy a copy and read it. I'll comment on it after I've done that. Might be a wall of text though!

[Curval]

Originally posted by SOB
Do you think victims should not defend themselves so that the criminals can finish up what they plan on doing and then get their well deserved fair trial?

Of course the victims should be able to defend themselves...what concerned me was the tone of what Toad was saying...that's all.  Sounded a tad bit on the vigilante side.

[qts]

I vaguely remember a member of the NRA being interviewed by the BBC who were taking a highly anti-gun POV (and not just adversarial) who pointed out that the US's burglary rate was many times lower than the UK's and attributing this to gun ownership - would you enter a house if there might be someone armed inside?

Another argument is the Dunblane one. Thomas Hamilton, the killer, was using a gun he was not licensed to have anyway, so gun controls were not relevant, but consider that had there been people with firearms about, they could have engaged him directly instead of waiting for the police and having more people die.

I'm not sure there are any right answers here, only least wrong ones.

[Toad]

Allow me to be perfectly clear.

I think the world would be a much better place if the people that needed killing were killed ASAP.

For example, take someone who rapes a child and then kills the child. This sick foxxer needs killing, the sooner the better.

Rapists of 80 year old women? Haven't those women earned a peaceful twilight of life? Cripes, surviving 80 years is tough enough without that.

Hitler? That sick foxxer needed killing long before he got his hands on the switch that killed millions.

There's loads of folks that need killing. They just never "get" this life thing.

The human gene pool is huge and diverse. It won't miss the sick foxxers that need killing and get what they deserve.

Sorry, I'm not going to shed a single tear over criminals that get their axxes shot off while committing horrible crimes. I don't care if some think they should be rehabilitated; I personally believe they should be recycled.

They lose their turn on this Buddhist wheel of life; let 'em start over as a lower organisim and work back up.

[Curval]

Okay Toad...clear...clear as an unmuddied lake.
As clear as an azure sky of deepest summer.

And I agree with you.

Lazs on the other hand I am not so clear about.  I honestly think he believes he has provided us with an unbias bit of literature.

[Toad]

Does any author ever write in a totally unbiased mode?

[NUKE]

I'd like to see someone use the facts and figures of crime, gun deaths and murders in the UK to make the point that banning guns improved ANYTHING.

At least this book seems to make a valid point based on facts.

[beet1e]

Originally posted by Curval
Okay Toad...clear...clear as an unmuddied lake.
As clear as an azure sky of deepest summer.

Hehe - it's *that* movie again! The bits I liked were "Shut your filthy hole you scum!" followed, almost immediately, by "Answer the Governor when he asks you a question!" and "Don't read it, sign it!". Did you see him in Battle of Britain? "Put that cigarette out! The mains have gone. Can't you smell gas?" - and then - "Don't you yell at me, Mr. Warwick!" ROFL...


____________________________
You are now in HM Prison Parkmore. And from this moment! you will address all prison officers as "Sir".

Are you aware of the white line painted on the floor directly behind you? Then your toes belong on the other side of it!!!

[NUKE]

Originally posted by SOB

Do you think victims should not defend themselves so that the criminals can finish up what they plan on doing and then get their well deserved fair trial?

That's a keeper SOB

[Curval]

Originally posted by Toad
Does any author ever write in a totally unbiased mode?

No, but according to lazs this one does.  I've already quoted twice where he stated she has no preconcieved notions.