BBC: Why Britain needs more guns

[GabonX]

Granted, Europe has it's own problems. Human trafficing and sexual slavory appear to be a bigger problem in Europe, but in terms of the violent mindset of criminals there is no comparison.

[Royal Panda]

There is no comparison between the criminal threats that the United States faces and the problems any nation in Europe faces, particularly an island nation like the UK. This is in fact the primary reason that the murder rate is higher here, not the availability of fire arms to law abiding citizens. Fire arms are in fact the solution to these problems.

You're effectively arguing against the initial link you posted here. Yes, the UK is an island nation - that makes it particularly difficult for criminals to get hold of guns, unlike in the USA. Britain will, as a result, never have the same sort of crime that the US faces; there is no comparison as you rightly said.

For that reason also, Britain would be worse off putting guns in the hands of citizens. It simply wouldn't work and will NEVER happen.

[GabonX]

There is no comparison between the criminal threats that the United States faces and the problems any nation in Europe faces, particularly an island nation like the UK. This is in fact the primary reason that the murder rate is higher here, not the availability of fire arms to law abiding citizens. Fire arms are in fact the solution to these problems.

You're effectively arguing against the initial link you posted here. Yes, the UK is an island nation - that makes it particularly difficult for criminals to get hold of guns, unlike in the USA. Britain will, as a result, never have the same sort of crime that the US faces; there is no comparison as you rightly said.

For that reason also, Britain would be worse off putting guns in the hands of citizens. It simply wouldn't work and will NEVER happen.

You're ignoring the fact that gun crime has risen since the gun ban. You're also ignoring the different kind of violent crime we have here which is unrelated to the presence of law abiding citizens with fire arms.

Anyhow, if you're going to claim that I'm contradicting myself it falls upon you to explain how.

[TheProwler]

I don't think people are understanding that there is a different culture in USA.

Oh I perfectly understand, but what does it matter? Who cares that Americans are appereantly a bunch of murderous bastards who love shooting and killing eachother?

Also, yeah, too bad about those schoolyard massacres. But a lot of the people in America being killed (okay, "murdered") had to coming to them.

In England basically everyone who is murdered had it coming to them if you mean "got into a dangerous situation like organized crime". There are very few people who get shot for no reason at all.

So....it follows that just looking at murder rate statistics is not enough to come to any conclusion about whether gun control raises or lowers crime rate.

I'm glad we can agree on this.

[GabonX]

Also worth noting is that this:

In England basically everyone who is murdered had it coming to them if you mean "got into a dangerous situation like organized crime". There are very few people who get shot for no reason at all.

is not supported by any empirical evidence.

[Royal Panda]

There is no comparison between the criminal threats that the United States faces and the problems any nation in Europe faces, particularly an island nation like the UK. This is in fact the primary reason that the murder rate is higher here, not the availability of fire arms to law abiding citizens. Fire arms are in fact the solution to these problems.

You're effectively arguing against the initial link you posted here. Yes, the UK is an island nation - that makes it particularly difficult for criminals to get hold of guns, unlike in the USA. Britain will, as a result, never have the same sort of crime that the US faces; there is no comparison as you rightly said.

For that reason also, Britain would be worse off putting guns in the hands of citizens. It simply wouldn't work and will NEVER happen.

You're ignoring the fact that gun crime has risen since the gun ban. You're also ignoring the different kind of violent crime we have here which is unrelated to the presence of law abiding citizens with fire arms.

Anyhow, if you're going to claim that I'm contradicting myself it falls upon you to explain how.

OK then.
Gun crime has risen due to the influx of foreigners in London, with contacts back in Eastern Europe and Russia that can get them access to the guns. There is virtually no gun crime elsewhere in the country (plenty of knife crime though).

Making guns available to the rest of the populous will only increase the amount of crime - especially in the short term - because it will give access to these weapons to the mental cases such as those who perpetrate the school shootings. It will also give access to the nationalist white Brits/South Asian populations in places like Leeds and Bradford who are constantly at each others' necks as it is - few deaths though due to the lack of guns.

There is a lot of race tension in Britain and accessibility to guns will increase shootings that are currently confined mainly within the gang wars of London - most of whom have it coming to them. The answer is not gun legality, but I will concede that allowing a protective weapon such as a knife to be carried by the general populous may help to deter some murders (as it's not exactly as if these aren't available to those who want to commit a crime).

As for you contradicting the article from the BBC, you mentioned why America needs guns in the hands of ordinary people - and I agree with that - is because of the gang crime and general culture of the country. Britain a) is an island nation and b) does not have this sort of crime. Therefore, guns would only extend a confined problem.

[Snorri1234]

Also worth noting is that this:

In England basically everyone who is murdered had it coming to them if you mean "got into a dangerous situation like organized crime". There are very few people who get shot for no reason at all.

is not supported by any empirical evidence.

It's true. Murders are typically between criminals and occasionally between loved ones within a social atmosphere. There is virtually no one who gets shot just because some nutcase shoots up his school.

[GabonX]

There is no comparison between the criminal threats that the United States faces and the problems any nation in Europe faces, particularly an island nation like the UK. This is in fact the primary reason that the murder rate is higher here, not the availability of fire arms to law abiding citizens. Fire arms are in fact the solution to these problems.

You're effectively arguing against the initial link you posted here. Yes, the UK is an island nation - that makes it particularly difficult for criminals to get hold of guns, unlike in the USA. Britain will, as a result, never have the same sort of crime that the US faces; there is no comparison as you rightly said.

For that reason also, Britain would be worse off putting guns in the hands of citizens. It simply wouldn't work and will NEVER happen.

You're ignoring the fact that gun crime has risen since the gun ban. You're also ignoring the different kind of violent crime we have here which is unrelated to the presence of law abiding citizens with fire arms.

Anyhow, if you're going to claim that I'm contradicting myself it falls upon you to explain how.

OK then.
Gun crime has risen due to the influx of foreigners in London, with contacts back in Eastern Europe and Russia that can get them access to the guns. There is virtually no gun crime elsewhere in the country (plenty of knife crime though).

Making guns available to the rest of the populous will only increase the amount of crime - especially in the short term - because it will give access to these weapons to the mental cases such as those who perpetrate the school shootings. It will also give access to the nationalist white Brits/South Asian populations in places like Leeds and Bradford who are constantly at each others' necks as it is - few deaths though due to the lack of guns.

There is a lot of race tension in Britain and accessibility to guns will increase shootings that are currently confined mainly within the gang wars of London - most of whom have it coming to them. The answer is not gun legality, but I will concede that allowing a protective weapon such as a knife to be carried by the general populous may help to deter some murders (as it's not exactly as if these aren't available to those who want to commit a crime).

As for you contradicting the article from the BBC, you mentioned why America needs guns in the hands of ordinary people - and I agree with that - is because of the gang crime and general culture of the country. Britain a) is an island nation and b) does not have this sort of crime. Therefore, guns would only extend a confined problem.

Few deaths due to lack of guns? I could fix that. Let me know if you can find a good offer for my services

I disagree with your position and I think the numbers back me on this but frankly I don't care. The UK can do what the UK wants to do. I sympathize with the law abiding citizens who had to turn over guns which had been in their families for generations but frankly it's not my battle.

If they want to come over here, the US would be glad to have 'em

[Snorri1234]

So....it follows that just looking at murder rate statistics is not enough to come to any conclusion about whether gun control raises or lowers crime rate.

I'm glad we can agree on this.

Well yeah. But the article claimed differently.

[Royal Panda]

Few deaths due to lack of guns? I could fix that. Let me know if you can find a good offer for my services

I disagree with your position and I think the numbers back me on this but frankly I don't care. The UK can do what the UK wants to do. I sympathize with the law abiding citizens who had to turn over guns which had been in their families for generations but frankly it's not my battle.

If they want to come over here, the US would be glad to have 'em

And they're welcome to leave I'd be glad to lose any lunatic gun nuts from this country - you're also missing the point that not many people had guns before the ban. Not many at all.

[TheProwler]

So....it follows that just looking at murder rate statistics is not enough to come to any conclusion about whether gun control raises or lowers crime rate.

I'm glad we can agree on this.

Well yeah. But the article claimed differently.

Argg...I am simply saying something very clear and concise with a narrow scope...please try not to expand it into the a total agreement or disagreement of the article.

I will bold the important part..."So....it follows that just looking at murder rate statistics is not enough to come to any conclusion about whether gun control raises or lowers crime rate."

That's all. The article did not claim "By looking solely at murder rate statistics, we can conclude whether gun control raises or lowers crime rate." If it did, it would have been a much shorter article.

[Snorri1234]

So....it follows that just looking at murder rate statistics is not enough to come to any conclusion about whether gun control raises or lowers crime rate.

I'm glad we can agree on this.

Well yeah. But the article claimed differently.

Argg...I am simply saying something very clear and concise with a narrow scope...please try not to expand it into the a total agreement or disagreement of the article.

But why would you state it? It's so blatantly obvious anyway that it's like saying "The sky is blue" to show how smart you are.

[TheProwler]

So....it follows that just looking at murder rate statistics is not enough to come to any conclusion about whether gun control raises or lowers crime rate.

I'm glad we can agree on this.

Well yeah. But the article claimed differently.

Argg...I am simply saying something very clear and concise with a narrow scope...please try not to expand it into the a total agreement or disagreement of the article.

But why would you state it? It's so blatantly obvious anyway that it's like saying "The sky is blue" to show how smart you are.

You said "Well yeah. But the article claimed differently."

Which it didn't. Period.

Don't presume to understand my motivation.

[Snorri1234]

So....it follows that just looking at murder rate statistics is not enough to come to any conclusion about whether gun control raises or lowers crime rate.

I'm glad we can agree on this.

Well yeah. But the article claimed differently.

Argg...I am simply saying something very clear and concise with a narrow scope...please try not to expand it into the a total agreement or disagreement of the article.

But why would you state it? It's so blatantly obvious anyway that it's like saying "The sky is blue" to show how smart you are.

You said "Well yeah. But the article claimed differently."

Which it didn't. Period.

Don't presume to understand my motivation.

Oh yeah, my bad. It actually says murder-rates are unimportant in determining whether gun control works or not.

[TheProwler]

Oh yeah, my bad.

No probs. I know you often have a hard time with the specific nature of some words in the English language.

[InkL0sed]

Oh yeah, my bad.

No probs. I know you often have a hard time with the specific nature of some words in the English language.

Awesome. Nice way to encourage someone to admit to a mistake.

Next time, I'm sure Snorri will be very enthusiastic to admit he's wrong, knowing that douchebags like you don't know the meaning of the word "graciousness."

Oh wait, sorry, that must be a problem with your English. Carry on.

[TheProwler]

Oh yeah, my bad.

No probs. I know you often have a hard time with the specific nature of some words in the English language.

Awesome. Nice way to encourage someone to admit to a mistake.

Next time, I'm sure Snorri will be very enthusiastic to admit he's wrong, knowing that douchebags like you don't know the meaning of the word "graciousness."

Oh wait, sorry, that must be a problem with your English. Carry on.

He's being a sarcastic smartass.

Sorry you couldn't figure that out on your own.

[InkL0sed]

And you are being candid and humble. I think those are the correct English words for it, anyway.

[TheProwler]

And you are being candid and humble. I think those are the correct English words for it, anyway.

Look, you didn't pick up on his sarcasm. That isn't such a big deal. But now that I enlightened you, possibly an apology will be forthcoming?

I'll be right here, holding my breath.

[Snorri1234]

He's being a sarcastic smartass.

Prowler. When I'm beign sarcastic you and everyone within 200 miles will notice it.

[TheProwler]

He's being a sarcastic smartass.

Prowler. When I'm beign sarcastic you and everyone within 200 miles will notice it.

I just never expected you to ever, in a million years, be anything but a dick to me.

Please accept my apologies.

[Snorri1234]

[Dancing Mustard]

...and he's right too.

If the UK had more guns, then its criminals would be much less cool and would turn into lazy mollycoddled gun-toting imbeciles. QED.

[TheProwler]

A gun can certainly make a guy who can't fight hand-to-hand into a force to be reckoned with...

I think Englishmen like to get into more fist fights than Americans because Englishmen can't punch hard. It is true. Something to do with small penises not allowing for good power generated by twisting the hips. So their fist fights are equivalent to the average domestic dispute in America. The ones not involving guns.

(Don't use Lennox Lewis as an example...everyone knows he did his "growing" in Canada")

[jonesthecurl]

A gun can certainly make a guy who can't fight hand-to-hand into a force to be reckoned with...

I think Englishmen like to get into more fist fights than Americans because Englishmen can't punch hard. It is true. Something to do with small penises not allowing for good power generated by twisting the hips. So their fist fights are equivalent to the average domestic dispute in America. The ones not involving guns.

(Don't use Lennox Lewis as an example...everyone knows he did his "growing" in Canada")

This thread has reaffirmed my belief that the people in the forum are stubborn and immature and argumentative.