Beet1e, you got some 'splaining to do (lucy)

[beet1e]

Originally posted by Godzilla
Tell us why guns, which have never been responsible for more than a hundred or so deaths in the UK, are banned ( after 1 guy killed 16 people ) yet you don't feel the same need to ban cars or alcohol, which combine to kill many thousands a year?

You might say that guns have no redeeming values or legitimate use. Same would apply to alcohol. Then you may argue that alcohol itself cant kill someone.... the same applies to guns and cars.

OK, I will.

I've already explained about guns.

On cars - we used to have about 5000 deaths a year until the wearing of seatbelts became mandatory on 1st January, 1983. At that time, the numbers dropped to about 3000. Still bad, and still more than the number of people killed by guns, but that's because we have gun control laws that work - even if they don't work perfectly.

But cars have a legitimate use. We could not survive without private transport in the modern world, wherease we can (and do) survive without guns. That is why cars are not banned. On guns, we take the view that a gun has only one purpose - to kill. Anyone who wants to do recreational shooting can, but we're never going to have a guns free-for-all.

Alcohol, in limited quantities, is actually good for you. Wine is even served in hospitals!  Last time I was in, I had a glass of Chardonnay with my dinner. Hehe - it sure as hell wasn't an NHS hospital - lol. And red wine is served (two glasses a day) at one particular hospital treating heart patients, where the value of red wine is recognised. We saw the folly of banning alcohol when America tried it during the Prohibition - biggest fillip that organised crime ever had. Sometimes America tackles problems the wrong way.

So far, we have folks in this thread representing England, Wales, Ireland, France, Spain, Bermuda, Canada and Hong Kong - all happy with their (relatively) gun free environments.

And a US tard who has created an ID just for the purpose of spouting in this thread.

[Angus]

Tsk tsk tsk...what a thread.
Although there have been some recent shootouts in the UK, some resulting in death, the British have a long way to go to match the Americans in that sector.
Conclusion: Gun law works, - but nothing works perfectly.

[Godzilla]

Originally posted by beet1e

So far, we have folks in this thread representing England, Wales, Ireland, France, Spain, Bermuda, Canada and Hong Kong - all happy with their (relatively) gun free environments.

And a US tard who has created an ID just for the purpose of spouting in this thread.

So this thread was started last month? I didn't notice it.

You are saying that the people from those countries are happy with their gun laws, yet I am a "tard from the US" for being happy with our gun laws?

All I was pointing out was that in the UK, you have NEVER had more than a hundred deaths a year, according to you. So then after the hanguns were banned in the knee-jerk reaction to one person killing 16 others (1996?), has the annual death rate gone down?

Contrary, the death rate has not gone down and gun related crime has gone up. So I asked what you believed the gun ban has accomplished .

[lazs2]

Ya know... I know a few limey's that live here now (my grandfather was born in Scotland) and they all own firearms.

they seem to like em.
lazs

[beet1e]

Took me all of 5 posts to figure it out, but I recognise the phraseology, and his persistent manner in which he repeatedly asks me personally why the UK banned handguns. I've already given answers. But he keeps coming back. And that leads me to believe that Godzilla = NUKE. Reason for the new ID? Well he knows he's a life member of my ignore list as NUKE... but there's always room for one more.

Thanks, Angus. So now the list of unarmed countries with folks happy about it extends to England, Wales, France, Spain, Iceland, Bermuda, Ireland, Canada and Hong Kong.

[miko2d]

Replicant: What on earth has that got to do with owning guns?

 You said that if the people try to defend themselves, they will be in more danger than if they don't. So I am just asking why not-defending from criminals is good while not defending from foreign invaders is bad?

I cannot understand that some people in the US cannot understand that guns are not part of the UK culture and no matter what people say we're not suddenly going to say 'we all want guns' because it's never going to happen.

 You are blatantly ly.. er.. misrepresenting the state of affairs. You pesonally may have a "no guns culture" but other people do not have guns not because of their culture but because they are prevented by restrictive law.
 You could say that you as a country have a prevailing "no guns culture" if the ownership of guns was not restrictied and people were still not buying guns. The issue is not that all people in UK would not say 'we all want guns' - minority of gun-crazy amricans owns guns either. The issue is that those who say 'we personally want guns' may not get them in UK.
 As it is, you do not have a "no guns culture". You have an oppressed serf culture. Any other culture is what you are allowed to have by your overlords. (Not that US is that much different, but at least we have more people not deluded as to our real serf status.)

 It used to be we had a "slave culture" in US. Guess what happened when the slavery was repealed - very few former slaves chose to continue serving their masters - despite previous assurances that it was their choice and beneficial for them and society.

Whereas in the US people have grown up with guns, if guns were suddenly made legal in the UK it would be catastrophic and like I said earlier I simply wouldn't trust anyone with one!

 yeah, right. We freed slaves and look what happened...

 miko

[Nashwan]

You said that if the people try to defend themselves, they will be in more danger than if they don't. So I am just asking why not-defending from criminals is good while not defending from foreign invaders is bad?

Criminals tend to take things and leave, and there is then an option for police to try to recover the goods and punish the criminals.

Invading armies tend to stick around, and nobody is likely to track them down, punish them and force restitution.

Of course, in some situations, the reverse is true, for example Kuwait.

[beet1e]

Miko2D -

You pesonally may have a "no guns culture" but other people do not have guns not because of their culture but because they are prevented by restrictive law.

[/b]  If you're talking about the UK, that's bollocks. And looking at the remarks made by cyrano, straffo and curval, it would be bollocks if you were talking about Spain, France or Bermuda.

[Curval]

I can confirm that it is indeed bollocks from my perspective.

[straffo]

Bollocks was the word I learned first when going the London the 1st time

And I confirm what Beetle and Curval said : the less gund there is in my vicinty the more I feel secure.

I was myself a shooting addict before having kids and I obeyed my father rule : no gun at home .

[lazs2]

so if all the people in all the countries mentioned have no use or want for firearms....

then why ban em?   I mean if nobody wants em why bother to ban em?   Or could it be that the people who are responding to this thread from other countries are just girly men frieghtened of an inatimate object?  


"Some men get turned on by women, some men get turned on by cars, some men get turned on by guns! "

and some by all three.... at the same time or seperate.   Still... nothing beter than a hot car full of guns and hot women.   Unless of course..... you are a girly man...
lazs

[-dead-]

Here's an interesting set of figures for the "you're safer with a gun" crowd:

UK (where the cops are - I believe - mostly unarmed)
No police officers were seriously injured on duty by firearms during 2001/02. Ten officers had slight injuries.
There have been no fatal injuries to police officers by a firearm since 1995.
Source

US
Law enforcement officers feloniously killed in 2001 with a firearm: 61
(3 with their own weapon)
Law enforcement officers accidentally killed in 2001 with a firearm: 5
Law enforcement officers Injured by firearms in 2001: 213
Law enforcement officers feloniously killed with a firearm since 1995: 332
(25 with their own weapon)
Source

[Mini D]

Hehehe... I notice nobody really wants to answer these questions about life in G.B. :

1) Have there been no schoolroom massacres since the gun ban?

2) Have there been fewer deaths per year every year since the gun ban?

3) Were the bobbies allowed to carry firearms before the gun ban?

4) Can bobbies carry firearms now?

MiniD

[Toad]

I think it's even simpler and (to me) a view of the future of the US.

England has a gun culture; they've plenty of folks that hunt and target shoot and "talk guns" and enjoy them. I've met some of them. I've shot with some. I've hunted with some of them. At the noon break, they asked me how different it was from my US hunting.

My comment then and now, is that I could take anyone of them to the Kansas pheasant opener and they'd fit right in. They hold the same views about life (really), they talk about gundogs in the same way, they talk hunting the same way, they joke the same way. The only real difference that would make them stand out is the different accent.

However, England also as a far more developed and powerful "urban" political base. The Urbans clearly control the governmental machinery in England. That's why they have these laws.

It's what I see coming for us in the US as well. You have only to look at the Bush/Gore "vote by counties" map to see the delineation. Rural areas... gun areas.. clearly went for Bush. Urban areas.. no-gun areas.. clearly went for Gore.

And which population is growing at the fastest rate? Urban, by far and away. In fact, rural populations are shrinking in a lot of states.

So, when the Urbans finally have the clear majority here, we'll follow England's path, I'm fairly certain.

That's what happens when folks that think chickens grow up boneless and skinless on a plastic-wrapped styrofoam plate get their hands on the controls of the nation.

I doubt there'd be that many drive by shootings if the Urbans had the up front and personal experiences with death that are a natural part of rural life. Farm kids KNOW you can't call a bullet back and that it WILL land somewhere. They know what happens when that bullet hits flesh, too. The Urban kids KNOW that it works just like they show it in a Hollywood movie. Big difference.

Just my .02. But I think we're headed for the same Urbanization of thought that brought about the present situation in England and other places.

Thankfully, I've studied on it and I'll either be dead or have long since quit going afield by the time I figure this will happen.

[straffo]

Originally posted by lazs2
and some by all three.... at the same time or seperate.   Still... nothing beter than a hot car full of guns and hot women.   Unless of course..... you are a girly man...
lazs

I've my own phallus and I don't feel the need to have a phallic symbol/substitutes near me to feel confortable in such circumstance.