Author Topic: UK gun laws a failure (Read 1170 times)

ra · « **on:** January 03, 2003, 01:14:27 PM »

according to this article, anyway.
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,2-530727,00.html

john9001 · « **Reply #1 on:** January 03, 2003, 01:24:27 PM »

""Police fear a descent into American-style violence ""

i'm a little slow , what is "American-style violence" and how is it different from other "styles" of violence?

44MAG

Curval · « **Reply #2 on:** January 03, 2003, 01:26:05 PM »

It involves loud "bangs" with small lead projectiles flying all about.

beet1e · « **Reply #3 on:** January 03, 2003, 01:29:58 PM »

ra - I've been away for 24 hours, and was expecting a thread to have been created about the two girls killed, but none was there! I had to wait for this.

I don't agree with your logic that "UK gun laws a failure". That's like saying that "Speed limits are a failure" because people still get pulled over for speeding despite the speed limits.

This editorial in today's Telegraph was quite interesting. I never knew that Vermont was the state with the most relaxed gun laws. But whereas Lazs might say that's the reason why it has some of the lowest levels of crime, I would disagree, and point out that Vermont does not have any large cities, and is virtually devoid of race related issues and relatively free of drug problems and other ghetto related issues.

miko2d · « **Reply #4 on:** January 03, 2003, 01:41:01 PM »

beet1e: I would disagree, and point out that Vermont does not have any large cities, and is virtually devoid of race related issues and relatively free of drug problems and other ghetto related issues.

So it's not a large number of guns in the hands of law-abiding citizens that is the problem but the presence of criminals that causes gun violence.

So the gun laws restricting legal gun ownership are a failure becasue they do not adress the real problem but distract law-enforcement and infringe on liberties.

It's not differences in gun ownership that caused historically lower crime rates in GB but different ethnical/cultural landscape. As GB is converging with US in some respects, it will experience the same problems.

miko

ra · « **Reply #5 on:** January 03, 2003, 01:41:48 PM »

Quote

I've been away for 24 hours, and was expecting a thread to have been created about the two girls killed, but none was there! I had to wait for this.

beetle, I created one, you missed it.

"I don't agree with your logic that "UK gun laws a failure". That's like saying that "Speed limits are a failure" because people still get pulled over for speeding despite the speed limits. "

Speed limits are a failure if they don't reduce traffic accidents as advertised.

"But whereas Lazs might say that's the reason why it has some of the lowest levels of crime, I would disagree, and point out that Vermont does not have any large cities, and is virtually devoid of race related issues and relatively free of drug problems and other ghetto related issues."

Yes, murder is a social problem that gun laws cannot prevent, whether in NYC, DC, or London.

ra

lazs2 · « **Reply #6 on:** January 03, 2003, 02:12:23 PM »

Hmmm... beetle making my arguement for me... Not only does he agree that gun problems in the U.S. are not any worse than in limeyland (if you factor out race) but... he seems to feel that more guns in the hands of law abiding citizens makes crime drop. Rural has nothing to do with crime as some of the rural areas of the states have very high crime rates. It would appear that U.S. citizens are not only capable of being responsible gun owners but.. that they are an asset.

Too bad that limey's can't be trusted with firearms... gonna be a squeak to live there when the immigaration and drugs catch up to here. Like I said... they are allways ten or twenty years behind us.
lazs

lazs2 · « **Reply #7 on:** January 03, 2003, 02:18:24 PM »

"The ban on handweapons above .22 calibre, which was introduced in 1997 after the Dunblane primary school shootings, forced many legitimate owners to surrender their guns but did nothing to stop underworld supplies. "

Let's see here.... we can either arm more law abiding citizens while at the same time increasing the penalties for gun crime or.... we can do like england and take all the guns away from the law abiding making sure that only criminals have guns...

The article also said that the cops were urging "stricter" gunm control laws? How much stricter do you get than an outright ban?
lazs

miko2d · « **Reply #8 on:** January 03, 2003, 02:35:56 PM »

lazs2: The article also said that the cops were urging "stricter" gunm control laws? How much stricter do you get than an outright ban?

Ban toy guns like they are trying to do in many US cities?
Suspend schoolchildren making a gun with their fingers?
Suspend school children drawing a gun on a piece of paper?
Confiscating guns from 12-inch tall toy soldiers?
Suggesting counseling for a student extressing interest to enroll in military?
Outlawing the gun-shaped tools?
Outlawing the word "gun"?

There is quite a lot of activity politicians can legislate or outlaw that GB has not tried yet. Since it's all directed towards law-abiding citizens and greatly inconveniences them, they notice it and believe "something is being done".

If you really go after criminals and, say, reduce crime rate by half, how many people would notice that? You get the same number of articles in newspapers dedicated to crime, opposing politicians would still claim not enough is being done, etc.

miko

Kieran · « **Reply #9 on:** January 03, 2003, 03:33:13 PM »

Quote

But whereas Lazs might say that's the reason why it has some of the lowest levels of crime, I would disagree, and point out that Vermont does not have any large cities, and is virtually devoid of race related issues and relatively free of drug problems and other ghetto related issues.

Yup, that sounds pretty much like Lazs's point to me.

beet1e · « **Reply #10 on:** January 03, 2003, 04:05:22 PM »

Quote

we can either arm more law abiding citizens

Lazs - wouldn't have made any difference here. It was a feud between two rival drug gangs.

Nashwan · « **Reply #11 on:** January 03, 2003, 04:12:40 PM »

Quote

Hmmm... beetle making my arguement for me... Not only does he agree that gun problems in the U.S. are not any worse than in limeyland (if you factor out race) but

According to the FBI, approx 5200 murders were committed by whites, which equates to a rate of 2.3 per 100,000, well above Britain's.

However, around a third of US murders are carried out by unkown criminals, so a proportion of them will also be white. White's committ approx half of known murders, so to be generous assume only one third of unkowns are whites. That gives around 7000 whites murders per year, a rate of 3 and bit per 100,000, which is two and half times Britain's.

The British murder rate is overstated because it includes negligent homicide, which the US doesn't.

Overall, just the whites in the US still have around 3 times the murder rate of everyone in Britain. If you were to take out the urban poor from the British figures, which is what you are doing with the US figures by excluding blacks, the difference would be even larger.

Quote

Too bad that limey's can't be trusted with firearms... gonna be a squeak to live there when the immigaration and drugs catch up to here.

According to the Home Office, there are approx 600,000 regular users of cocaine, crack and heroin in the UK. According to the White House, there are approx 3,000,000 regular users of crack, cocaine and heroin in the US.

That puts the percentage as similar between the 2 countries.

As to immigration, it is a major problem in Britain. In fact, the 2001 murder stats went up by about 8% because one group of 58 illegal immigrants suffocated to death in the back of a lorry as they were smuggled through customs.

ra · « **Reply #12 on:** January 03, 2003, 05:38:23 PM »

Quote

wouldn't have made any difference here. It was a feud between two rival drug gangs.

The point is that tight gun laws made no difference here.

beet1e · « **Reply #13 on:** January 03, 2003, 06:06:05 PM »

ra

Quote

The point is that tight gun laws made no difference here.

That isn't a point at all. To reuse the motoring analogy, that's like pulling a guy over for running a red light, and then saying that because speed was not a factor in that particular incident, that the speed limit along that stretch of road is ineffective and should be abolished.

john9001 · « **Reply #14 on:** January 03, 2003, 07:24:23 PM »

analogys are always wrong, if you gona talk guns, talk guns , you wanna talk cars , talk cars