What is it with the UK?
I gather there are no MV limits in the USA. In Japan, where I do most of my shooting and a whole bunch of skirmishing, no limits. Iceland, nada. Most of europe, couldn’t give a toss.
Heeere’s ENGLAND! Skirmishing, 325fps (barely enough to get the bloody ball spinning). Air-rifles, 12ft/lb. Adults treated like effing children. 👿
Sorry, just felt like getting that off my chest.
All Replies
We watch each other’s sixes, and probably always will, even if we don’t agree with how tidy the other keeps his house. There’s a lot about both places that could stand some improvement, but at the end of the day, we’re the best friends the other has.
[/quote]FACT: If you outlaw guns, only outlaws will have them. Doesn’t matter where they/you live.[quote]
quite correct and well proven in the UK
I’m no english pussy and I object to being called one 😡
banning firearms in the UK was about and still is about winning votes, it bears no correlation of crime whatsoever. we live in a nanny state no doubt about it and i for one hate it, if i could get out i would but that’s another story, however I don’t think the USA has got it right either,by being the totall opposite. I would like the oppotunity to feel safe within my own home and if the government can’t offer that promise then they should at least give me the chance to sort things out myself rather than tying my hands behind my back 🙄
as for the USA and the UK we are allies and tbh i like it that way even if gwb is as mad as a fish 😆
You know Tyke I’ve never been a bunny hugger. I like pets and all, but am far from a PETA type.
But you’ve got me concerned that somewhere in Yorkshire there’s a horse wondering around without a patoote…..
Doug Owen
I think the Sex Pistols said it best…
It’s nice to see a bunch of Yanks talking good hard common sense, while fellow Brits spout the usual pussie govt-line propaganda BS.
This is how it is in the UK…you get an intruder in your house, the police won’t respond and you’re not allowed to defend yourself. With anything, never mind a gun. If you do bash the perp you get done for assault. I shit you not.
Meanwhile all our politicians are living nice and safe on gated estates, with armed police posted around the corner.
Registered handgun and firearm crimes are very low…
Unregistered gun crimes are very high, taking firearms away from responsible citizens leaves only the criminals and the police with guns…
I believe that since all automatic weapons were restricted and uber registered there have been zero crimes with registered automatic weapons…
Yet 6 restaurant sieges were performed by about 8 automatic wielding gangsters, not a single one was registered… These weapons were BANNED from the state long ago… I’m in Oakland, CA.
So obviously only a retard would think banning weapons has any effect on the armament criminals…
IF one was a criminal what would you rather face, a family without any means of defense, or the possibility of two shotguns and a few handguns meeting you as your about to steal the family jewels…???
After living in Oakland for 2 years I now own two firearms and I’m far from finished collecting… Considering it takes 15 minutes for the police to show and the criminals have it so no one talks, there is only ONE way and one person to defend my home.
ANYONE who is against guns in the hands of responsible citizens is either a criminal, nazi, rich or a politician who wants to eliminate the Constitution and the possibility of revolt.
Live in a blighted area for at least a year, IF YOU CAN HANDLE IT, and then tell me your not interested in firearm protection… But remember rich antigun people, when things get really tough, guess who is going to get regular visits from serious criminal elements looking for some quick drug money without the possibility of facing a blackened barrel at the door…
This is already happening in the more affluent parts of Oakland, rich liberals have publicized themselves as unarmed, so who gets their houses invaded and who is constantly being mugged on the streets.
IF the goal is to minimize weapons we will need a real police force instead of this putzfest we have now. A fucking house gets broken into and they won’t even finger print!!! Justice?!?! Bunch of bullshit if you ask me.
Credit theft is to the point where it isn’t even prosecuted since the banks just get insurance money.
If the police don’t go after criminals what message does that send, and the politicians want to take away the most effective means of protection, sounds like criminals, the police and the politicians are in this together…
No guns would turn our so called peaceful country into a criminally run state (because they have the guns), which really it isn’t far from already…
FACT: If you outlaw guns, only outlaws will have them. Doesn’t matter where they/you live.
FACT: During 20th Century governments’ genocide have killed dozens and dozens of millions of people. Yet, not a single gun law proposed disarming government troops and arming their civilian victims.
Nope, not at all what I’m saying. I’m saying that teachers and other adults, duly licensed by their state, should soon be allowed to carry their handguns concealed while on school grounds. This is a no-no currently. One armed citizen on Virginia Tech’s campus on April 16, 2007, may have saved lives. As it were, the only armed individual there was the shooter.
Because official police reports document somewhat routinely the armed would-be victim inturupting the commission of a crime. All evidence of this is anecdotal, however, because even when it’s a documented fact that an armed citizen holds a perpetrator at gunpoint (without a shot being fired) no gun-related data is collected by the U.S. Department of Justice. (that’s the department that collects the stats that you use so loosely.) While the police reports validate my assertion that guns don’t have to be fired to be effective, the DOJ doesn’t compile that. But I suppose since I don’t have the DOJ stats to back up my assertion, my assertion is surely false.
That’s a statement I’d like to see backed up with some data. I can see where bad-guys killing the unarmed Bobbies being quite plausible, but to state that a crime being committed with the aid of a firearm will normally be met by a cop is somewhat odd. Are there cops in everyone’s flats, ready to confront an armed bandit? I don’t know about there, but here, if a crook attempts a car-jacking, he’s likely looked around to make sure there are no police to confront him, first.
One last point I’d make is that the police are there to document and investigate history. They show up to record history. It’s my duty to change history.
I don’t wish to appear be argumentative with you. I just wish for you to be clear on my position, whether you chose to accept it or not. [/i]
So what you are saying is to stop children been slaughtered in schools your gonna arm all the children, now don’t get me wrong but that sounds a rather nutty idea and I cant even see crazy George going along with that one, but then again.
“I’ll also point out that there are no hard stats kept here to indicate the number of times per year that a citizen with a gun deters a violent act just due to the presentation of a firearm, with no shots actually fired. How many people were saved in your country last year because the potential victim or a bystander brandished a gun? I don’t know how many were saved in my country, because we can’t adequately document that. But I do know it’s a much higher number than in the UK.”
Odd statement that, you don’t know the stats for America and you don’t know the stats for U.K. but you do know it’s a higher number in the U.K.; I will have to sleep on that one. I would say though if someone is committing a crime with the aid of a firearm in the U.K. they are normally confronted by un armed police officers and its not that common for a police officer to be shot, its normally the other way round when the mobile response team gets there.
Who is saying anything about arming children? Nobody. You think it would be easier for a retarded policeman to peacefully walk up to a criminal and ask him kindly to stop what he’s doing?
What the U.S. has done is make it easier for good-doing citizens to obtain firearms. Suppose a teacher had been armed, perhaps the tragedy could have been stopped by killing the little bastards. I think a strict no-gun policy would only RAISE crime – and by a lot too. No matter what, bad people will own guns. Whether it is illegal or not, they will find a way. It is the good law-abiding citizens that get forked when they can’t buy a gun in order to protect their themselves and others.
Pat
That’s pretty disingenuous response that does little more than restate your bias. That is clearly not what he said, and it doesn’t make your argument more persuasive to “respond” to something that he didn’t say.
Hey Chads
So what you are saying is to stop children been slaughtered in schools your gonna arm all the children, now don’t get me wrong but that sounds a rather nutty idea and I cant even see crazy George going along with that one, but then again.
“I’ll also point out that there are no hard stats kept here to indicate the number of times per year that a citizen with a gun deters a violent act just due to the presentation of a firearm, with no shots actually fired. How many people were saved in your country last year because the potential victim or a bystander brandished a gun? I don’t know how many were saved in my country, because we can’t adequately document that. But I do know it’s a much higher number than in the UK.”
Odd statement that, you don’t know the stats for America and you don’t know the stats for U.K. but you do know it’s a higher number in the U.K.; I will have to sleep on that one. I would say though if someone is committing a crime with the aid of a firearm in the U.K. they are normally confronted by un armed police officers and its not that common for a police officer to be shot, its normally the other way round when the mobile response team gets there.
While the school shootings are tragic and needless, our two countries deal with them in different ways. Where your country banned the tool, our country is moving to allow more of the tools in the hands of more of the good guys. Will it stop murder? Aside from a potential deterent effect, no, more guns will probably not stop murder, as a practice, from occuring. But will it let a would-be victim of violent crime have a chance of stopping a slaughter? You bet. It’s proven that more guns equals less crime. Fact, my friend. All those stats you toss around are largely based on murders committed in places where restrictive firearms laws have created victim-rich environments. Inner cities, where liberal lawmakers banned self-defense guns, creating an environment where criminals can opperate, free from the fear of meeting an armed victim. Schools and places of worship, where conceal carry of a firearm is illegal. All the places where I can’t carry are the same places where national tragedies have occurred. When was the last time you heard of a gun show in the United States being shot up? It’s full of guns. If guns were the problem, a gunshow would be rife with carnage. There must be some deterent effect, where criminals know better than to wage an assault on the place. Your little per capita statistic ignors the demographic and population data needed to see where the murders occur, and that more guns, in the hands of law-abiding people, saves lives.
I’ll also point out that there are no hard stats kept here to indicate the number of times per year that a citizen with a gun deters a violent act just due to the presentation of a firearm, with no shots actually fired. How many people were saved in your country last year because the potential victim or a bystander presented a gun? I don’t know how many were saved in my country, because we can’t adequately document that. But I do know it’s a much higher number than in the UK.
I wouldn’t expect you to understand our afinity for guns, having never had the absolute right to own one. All you once had was a priviledge, which was revoked. I have a right, not a priviledge, which can not be revoked, barring some ill act on my part. Nor would I expect you to understand how we pitty the good people in the UK and Australia, and elsewhere who’ve had the ability to protect themselves and their loved ones jerked out from under them. We wish you guys had a constitutional right to protect yourselves, we really do. While we can’t change that, we can push to further protect ourselves through more common sense and less emotion. Gun laws in our country, by and large, are emotionally written and passed. Thankfully, our Supreme Court, however narrowly, just affirmed and assured our right to not be like you.
Gotta run, I’ve got guns to clean.
Well said mate.
I’ve spent enough time in the UK to know that in general I feel safer in the US than in the UK, and I’m far less likely to have my car windows smashed and things stolen from my car in the US. But each country has it’s own flavors of social problems, including areas in big cities where it’s better just to stay away. In the US, apparently many more people belive that they would rather have the right to defend themselves, including with guns, than to rely on the governement to provide all of that secuirty.
I think that there is some real irony here in that US constitutional right to bear arms has a direct historical tie to the heavy handed approach of the british governement.
Total crime per capita:
#6 United Kingdom: 85.5517 per 1,000 people
#8 United States: 80.0645 per 1,000 people
Total crime victims:
#3 United Kingdom: 26.4%
#15 United States: 21.1%
Assaults per capita:
#6 United States: 7.56923 per 1,000 people
#8 United Kingdom: 7.45959 per 1,000 people
Burglaries per capita
#7 United Kingdom: 13.8321 per 1,000 people
#17 United States: 7.09996 per 1,000 people
Car theft per capita
#3 United Kingdom: 5.6054 per 1,000 people
#9 United States: 3.8795 per 1,000 people
I am not saying we are totally crime free, what I am saying is that in the land of the Free you are taking away the most cherished freedom that been the freedom to live a life, you are killing the population of a small country every year but hey that’s okay I’ve got a gun.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
There seems to be a belief that guns in the US are completely unregulated, probably because of the media hype surrounding the subject. The truth is that they are quite heavily regulated in most palces, but ownership and possession on private property are allowed. Most states in the US don’t allow open carry in public, and the ability to get a concealed carry permit varies quite widely. In general, it is usually not legal to be in possession of a gun in a public place (with some significant exceptions). And I think that it is fair to say that in most cases, the gun related crimes that you hear about involved illegal possession of the gun that was used.
Mad as a fish? Never heard that one before 🙂