Jump to content

Knife Control?


Guest
 Share

Recommended Posts

quote:

Gun crime in the UK is on the rise - guns are banned there. Your correlation is loose.

Gun crime is not generally on the increase except amongst criminal gangs who choose to use the weapons to kill each other.

The real issue I feel is not perhaps the right to bear a gun, but how responsible are the people who bare those guns. In Australia Guns are banned and the crime rate increases. In the UK guns are banned and gun related crime goes down. In Switz a lot of people may have a gun in the house but the ammo is generally in sealed boxs. Also I would suggest their national character is not one to use guns, similar to the UK.

Guns are a part of America whether people like it or not. That means that guns are available whether you like it or not. The issue is not the weapon but the person. However dealing with people is a lot harder than dealing with the weapons. That is why I believe gun control is necessary and why I am glad the UK banned them.

TO be honest I am glad I am not American or living there so that it is not an issue I need to live with.

Jez.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 122
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Interesting piece on the news last night, violent crime in the US is down 15% from last year.... Yes, yes, I'm looking up a link for that now, just wanted to post that while I hunt.

Addtion:

Now I want to know where they got their figures. The preliminary FBI figures for last year actually show a .01% increase for violent crime and an actual incress in crime rates of 0.0%. The most significant portion of the report was the two year trend tables. Those tables show dramtic decreases in all crime types since 1997.

I find it interesting that while the "civilized" gun banning nations are seeing a marked increases in crime, the "uncivilized" gun bearing US has been experiencing a dramatic decrease with a one year lull when crime rates didn't fluctuate much (other than vehicle theft).

[ 06-14-2001: Message edited by: Tyrn ]

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guys I tend to disagree... The people here in the UK has lost the rights to defend themselves. Tony Martin for example....so he shot a burglar whopeee woo. I know he had an illiegal weapon but who was there to protect him? The pigs? Come on that aint never gonna happen. All the cops care nowadays about are speeding tickets cause they get to keep the money. Now Tony Martin is in jail for life for protecting himself from some idiots in his own home. By prosecuting Tony the goverment has basically given the O.K. for burglars. Now if everyone has the rights to protect themselves with a gun in thier own property then do u think anyone wants to nick stuff from your home? I dont know...maybe Im just angry from my past experience or what. But before we judge other countries look deeply at our selves. Besides a gun could be used as a deterence, like my black belt hanging out of my window. Oh its also a double whammy for me....If I get caught 'defending' myself in my own home I go straight to jail as I stupidly registered myself in martial arts. The law sez 'u can only restrain someone' and 'if they hit u once u can only hit back once'sorta thing. What if u r only 8 stones and your intruder is 16 stones?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

quote:


In Australia Guns are banned and the crime rate increases. In the UK guns are banned and gun related crime goes down.

It is interesting to note, however, that violent crime is UP.

So, let me see - ban guns, and gun crime drops. But crime overall climbs. Hmmm. Yeah, guns are the problem.

One must wonder if guns are a deterrent to violent crime. I think so.

Fendi: well made point.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Fendi,

I think you might have missed the point I was trying to make. I agree Tony Martin may have got a rough deal in defending himself. On the other hand the burglers were not armed and would probably run a mile if they new Mr Martin was about.

This issue is NOT GUNS, it is PEOPLE! To able to own and have guns in the house puts a massive resonsibility on the person owning the gun. I personally do not feel that the UK population is capable of handling that responsibility.

You just need to see what is happening with the race riots in Oldham at the moment. How much worse do you think it would be if the racist nutters on both side of the equation (Asian and Caucasian) had guns available. Do you think it would stop at a few thrown rocks and pertrol bombs.

Shootings would escalated...we see that in Northern Ireland and I have no desire to see it on the streets of my country.

Beyond that there is the sanctity of life. Whilst I despise burgulers and other lowlife criminals they are nevertheless human beings no matter how far they have sunk. I don't believe that 16 year old kid deserved to have his life taken from him, because he made a bad decision to enter the house uninvited of an armed man. My stereo system is just not worth his life.

If Jesus thought he was worth dying on a cross for then he's worth trying to rehabilitate him and you can't do that when if he is dead.

Nope Guns are better left out of society.

Jez.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

quote:

if the US constitution contained a paragragh which stated that every US citizen should have free and unfettered access to narcotic drugs, what would be the situation now?

This would be such an obviously stupid thing to do, that any delegate at the Constitutional Convention in 1789 who suggested it would have been tossed out immediately.

This is a false argument.

[ 06-14-2001: Message edited by: Steve Schacher ]

Link to comment
Share on other sites

And to Tyrrian,

Sorry, couldn't disagree more, most people are not capable of owning a gun, they can't handle the responsibility? scuse please while I throw up!!

Most people, if given the opportunity are more then responsible enough to own a firearm, with you they are guilty until proven innocent, here it is the opposite.

We have more rights here, and therefore more responsibility. The above statement is a intellectual elitist one if I ever heard it.

And last but not least, anyone that breaks into my house to rob me of my possessions, gives up ALL rights to Life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. If they wanted to live to tell the tale, they wouldn't have been stupid enough to break into my house. In my house, I HAVE all the advantages, know the layout, will know where the noise is coming from, and no warning, no what the hell are you doing in my house, it's one shot, and call the coroner for the body.

Without repercussions, criminals will take advantage, with repercussions, getting shot while in a house they have broken into, they're gonna think twice.

Yes, they are people too, but to defend my property and family, I will shoot with no qualms about it!! and no questions asked, in this country, if I shoot and kill an intruder, the police will take my gun as evidence, once it is proven to be self defense, my weapon will be returned to me, and I will continue on with life, besides a little mess in my living room or wherever to clean up.

I am not a bleeding heart, never have been, never will be, but he's poor, yeah, so get a job, he can't get a job, yeah so get some help, can't get help, go to his family, no family, well shoot, don't know what to do for ya, but it doesn't give him the right to break into my house and steal MY property!! and does give me the right to shoot him down if he decides he does!!

Oh, and never carry a firearm into a riot, it's STUPID!!! Never go into a riot, that's STUPID too!!! Never get involved in a riot, it just shows that you are a sheeple that is too stupid to think for himself, and if that is the case then you most definitely should NOT own a firearm!!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

quote:

Originally posted by Steve Schacher:

This would be such an obviously stupid thing to do, that any delegate at the Constitutional Convention in 1789 would have been tossed out immediately.

This is a false argument.

It was purely hypothetical. In some cultures (round Turkistan, Uzbekistan)they still chew on opium leaves for stimulation. Were the founding fathers aware at the time of the dangers of addictive drugs? Tobacco was very popular 200 years ago. What if there was a clause about tobacco? Now people are aware of the dangers, would the government be able ban or restrict tobacco if everyone was entitled to it as laid down in the constitution? They may seem like rather odd analogies, but I'm just trying to make a distinction between what is relevant now and what was relevant then.

Another point about the Tony Martin trial, as Jez stated, the burglars were unarmed and, iirc, fleeing from him (the kid was shot in the back). I wasn't aware that his shotgun was illegally owned, but it doesn't take much to get one. My Father, being a vicar, used to sign shotgun applications left, right and centre for the local guys, who were generally farmers using the guns for pest control.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

quote:


Beyond that there is the sanctity of life. Whilst I despise burgulers and other lowlife criminals they are nevertheless human beings no matter how far they have sunk. I don't believe that 16 year old kid deserved to have his life taken from him, because he made a bad decision to enter the house uninvited of an armed man. My stereo system is just not worth his life.

Of course your stereo system isn't worth his life. But, is the safety of you and your family worth it?

Yep.

What, should we all wait to discover the criminal's intentions before we take action? I don't think so.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

quote:

It was purely hypothetical. In some cultures (round Turkistan, Uzbekistan)they still chew on opium leaves for stimulation. Were the founding fathers aware at the time of the dangers of addictive drugs? Tobacco was very popular 200 years ago. What if there was a clause about tobacco?

The reason that I say it is a stupid argument is, whether they were aware of it or not, they were concerned with the structure of a citizen-led government, with all the approriate checks and balances. The issues of drugs or tobacco (or even abortion and education) would, to them, have been considered non-essential to the formation and operation of a government of the people and would therefore have been relegated to the states and the people to handle via the ninth and tenth amendments.

I will say that my use of the word "stupid" was probably inappropriately harsh.

[ 06-14-2001: Message edited by: Steve Schacher ]

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Shingen

quote:

originally posted by Tyrrian:

This issue is NOT GUNS, it is PEOPLE!

The issue IS guns, or weapons in general. The PROBLEM is people. People are NOT ALWAYS going to be CIVIL, nor are they ALWAYS going to have any sort of CIVIL DUTY or RESPONSIBLITY.

However, governments, laws, and bans CANNOT instill these values. They are either intrinsic to the person or they are not. That's why I don't really believe that prohibition really works. It seems to me that the liberals are trying to regulate morality, (or there VERSION of it), and that's as impossible as trying to take all of the risks and dangers out of life.

The U.S. already has laws against murder and rape, theft and the like, and writing NEW laws is pointless, and banning guns, knives, and assualt weapons pointless. (unless you look at the REASON they want to ban these weapons, which I believe is to disarm Americans and make them UNABLE to defend themselves against a tyranical government.)

Just because you ban something, or make it illegal, doesn't make the problem or the item go away, and it doesn't make it any harder for those outside the law to aquire it, only those living within the law. (I think someone already made that point.)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If you want to know about even more stuff the govt. tries to control you really should read my post entitled Surgeon General's Warning?!?!?!

The irony of the govt. is amazing. The constitution is supposed to support our freedom the US is known as "The Land of th Free" yet they try to conrol everything we do

Link to comment
Share on other sites

quote:

And last but not least, anyone that breaks into my house to rob me of my possessions, gives up ALL rights to Life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. If they wanted to live to tell the tale, they wouldn't have been stupid enough to break into my house. In my house, I HAVE all the advantages, know the layout, will know where the noise is coming from, and no warning, no what the hell are you doing in my house, it's one shot, and call the coroner for the body

Jaguar, Your desire to take life is one of the reasons I have no desire to live in the States no matter what your so called freedoms are. To me your desire to own guns amounts to little more than a desire to kill people and you are just looking for an excuse to do so. The way you write suggests that the only life you value is your own and the rest can go to 'hell'. Your casual disregard for human life makes me glad you were well trained in the army. I understand, and correct me if I am wrong, that even your armed police are required to shout a warning and at least have some evidence that the person is armed before they willing(unwilling) shoot the person.

Just walking up to your house to ask directions seems an invitation to be shot. It saddens me that someone of your evident capabilities is all to willing to kill people, I might suggest the way your write gives evidence you would enjoy the chance to kill someone.

Its a surprise you don't advocate the death penalty to all who break the law. The person that speeds, the person that shoplifts, the hooligan who writes graffiti across the school wall, those who get into bar room brawls and injure some inocent. Hey they have all broken the law, they have lost all right to the consitution, just line up against the wall and let have at em with an M60.

No sorry, such arguements don't wash with me.

Jez.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Tyrrian,

I have been following the news of Tony Martin a lot. It seems that he was REPEATEDLY broken into and antagonized by those yobs. You may say that a life is a life and must be valued...true I agree. But when it all comes down to it I would place the life of me, my wife and my baby first. Besides the police did not wanted to help him when it happened. Take it from me he is not the only one. I had problems like this too except that the victim was more like my wife who was pregnant at that time and the burglar tried to hit her? As I said in my old post if anything happened to my kid...I will not let him serve a jail sentence. I would rather kill him and flee to Mexico or other non extradite country. The point is had my wife been armed then he would not have made our lives a living hell after that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Oh yeah...what if I were to break into 10 Downing Street (Prime Minister's Residence for non-UK people) or Buckingham Palace with a knife or other form of weapon? I'm sure I'll get shot by some guards. Therefore do you think that our lives are less precious than those people?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Shingen

quote:

Jaguar, Your desire to take life is one of the reasons I have no desire to live in the States no matter what your so called freedoms are. To me your desire to own guns amounts to little more than a desire to kill people and you are just looking for an excuse to do so.

Oh, cry me a freakin' river! Haven't you ever heard the saying: "The only thing needed for evil to triumph is for good men to do nothing." ..or how about:, "The price of Liberty is eternal vigilence."

Are you really saying that you would VALUE the life of someone who broke into your house to do you and your's harm, over the protection of your own life and family?? What if they raped and murdered a close family member? A wife or daughter? Would you still spout out that crap about how we should 'value every human life'?

I NOT sorry to say that I believe FIRMLY is the QUALITY of life NOT the QUANTITY!

Some people, by their actions and by their demented mental processes, FORFIET their right to life when they feel that they can violate and exterminate the LIFE OF OTHERS!

Is it BETTER to keep these demented psycopaths locked up for life and PAY FOR THEIR FREAKIN' WELFARE INSTEAD?! Why should I have to pay to keep someone alive who HABITUALLY murders, rapes, commited other vile acts against society?!

Give me a freakin' break! Jez!

..and YES I SUPPORT THE DEATH PENALTY!!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

quote:

Jaguar, Your desire to take life is one of the reasons I have no desire to live in the

States no matter what your so called freedoms are. To me your desire to own guns

amounts to little more than a desire to kill people and you are just looking for an

excuse to do so. The way you write suggests that the only life you value is your

own and the rest can go to 'hell'. Your casual disregard for human life makes me

glad you were well trained in the army. I understand, and correct me if I am wrong,

that even your armed police are required to shout a warning and at least have some

evidence that the person is armed before they willing(unwilling) shoot the person.

Just walking up to your house to ask directions seems an invitation to be shot. It

saddens me that someone of your evident capabilities is all to willing to kill people, I

might suggest the way your write gives evidence you would enjoy the chance to kill

someone.

Its a surprise you don't advocate the death penalty to all who break the law. The

person that speeds, the person that shoplifts, the hooligan who writes graffiti

across the school wall, those who get into bar room brawls and injure some inocent.

Hey they have all broken the law, they have lost all right to the consitution, just

line up against the wall and let have at em with an M60.

No sorry, such arguements don't wash with me.

OK, let's take this one piece at a time, shall we?

1: My desire to take life? Pardon me, I have NO desire to take anyones life. I am not some kind of bloodthirsty monster, no matter how you pervert my meaning.

2: If a person has broken into my home, armed or not, I will shoot first and ask questions later, the lives of my family are far more important then his, and I will take no chances with the lives of my family, whereas it sounds like you would.

3:Ask me for directions, that's fine, come to my front door, knock, and ask how do I get here? you think that I am going to shoot someone that does that? You're a SICK puppy!!

4:the death penalty for all crimes? come on, how far can you pervert my words? you are getting desperate and I'm not sure why.. I advocate the death penalty in cases of rape, murder, terrorist activities, or if they break into my house. and for the last, I am the judge, Jury, and executioner, and only because I am protecting my family.

You had better try again, because your arguments get more desperate as we go along, if you have no facts, then don't go and pervert someones words to make them fit into your arguments, it's a liberal tactic and may work with many, but it DOES NOT wash here!! See the above posts for that.

I am offended and a bit angry at your tactics, use my words in context and the way I meant them, fine, but to pervert them for your own silly argument, NOT FINE!!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

quote:

Some people, by their actions and by their demented mental processes, FORFIET their right to life when they feel that they can violate and exterminate the LIFE OF OTHERS!

Is it BETTER to keep these demented psycopaths locked up for life and PAY FOR THEIR FREAKIN' WELFARE INSTEAD?! Why should I have to pay to keep someone alive who HABITUALLY murders, rapes, commited other vile acts against society?!


I have no problem with the death penalty provided due process has been carried out. What you are suggesting is the gun owner who feels threatened in some way should be judge, jury and executioner.

I too have no patience for rapists, murderers, wife beaters, burglers etc, but do not see the arming of the average citizen as the panecea to end all such social ills. I accept the need to defend one family from harm, but I'm not convinced that every criminal who breaks into your property is there to personally injure you or your family. More than likely he just wants to take your possesions. And I reinterate, my possesions are not worth someones life, no matter who they are.

If you note South Africa where gun ownership is perfecly accepted and where they have a definite need to defend themselves, has the ownership of guns prevented such violent crime? No it has increased.

The same arguement is made over and over again. I must be able to defend my family from that crazed killer and I can only do that with a gun. Interesting isn't it? In the UK we do not have guns and I can't remember the last time some crazed killer broke into my house to murder me, rape my wife and abuse my kids...have I missed something? I must be the lucky one, but oh no I seem to remember something about such crimes being very low in the UK. Indeed since I have been the victim of crime 7 times in the UK, mostly burgalry and theft, I never once met the perpertrators, indeed they only seemed interested in my belongings. Interesting too, they never hung around to abuse or attack any of my family. But of course me owning a gun would have been very helpful. They would have stolen that too and sold it on to some criminal gang.

Fortunately crazed killers are rare in the UK, from the description of the need for guns, they must be quite common in the USA.

Jez.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

quote:

Indeed since I have been the victim of crime 7

times in the UK, mostly burgalry and theft, I never once met the perpertrators,

indeed they only seemed interested in my belongings. Interesting too, they never

hung around to abuse or attack any of my family. But of course me owning a gun

would have been very helpful. They would have stolen that too and sold it on to

some criminal gang.

7 TIMES?, damn, I have lived in Downtown Seattle, Downtown Portland, Downtown Louisville, and Downtown Atlanta, and I have been robbed exactly...... NEVER!! I have never had my house burglarized, I have never been stolen from, I have never had my person or property violated in any way, unless a middle finger in my direction or a little vandalism of my lawn counts.

How do you survive? 7 times? god, that is unreal, you are either A: putting a sign on your door, saying "ROB ME!!" or B: your crime rate is WAY higher then ours. You need to move buddy, your insurance must be unreal!!

And that last little shot about guns, I have a built in gunsafe in my attic, all my guns, except my 2 handguns are locked up in that safe at all times. My 2 handguns are either A: holstered to my hip, or B: in my fannypack on my waist. I wish any Burglar good luck at getting to them, double locked, the attic door is locked as well, and then bolted to the main frame of the house. Lots of luck to them, and they had better hope to god I don't walk in on them.

And again, I will say this ONE LAST TIME, hoping you get it, if I am in the street, and someone threatens me, and I shoot them, I will be arrested and tried, if found in self defense, I will be released and no problems, but if I did wrong, I will be thrown in jail for either A: Murder, or B: Manslaughter. Having a gun does not give one the right to shoot someone down in the street.

BUT, if a person has broken into my house and is in my house, armed or not, it IS my right to shoot that person and kill them to protect my life and the lives of my family. You'll notice again the above, I have NEVER been broken into, could my guns actually be deterring crime, (nah, no chance!! according to you) Yeah right!! That's exactly what it is, by having the right to own guns, we deter the exact type of crime you have been the vicitm of. And that is a fact!!

But dude, take my advice, you NEED to move!!!

[ 06-15-2001: Message edited by: Jaguar ]

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Me personally three times in Glasgow and twice in Oxford. The last one I persued till I caught up with the guy. The last time it happened the guy attacked my pregnant wife. And its also the last time he will ever touch my family again.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Shingen

hmmm... i find it funny that all you Europeans with all your gun laws and such, are vitims of such frequent crime.

I've been on the streets of Los Angeles, Portland, OR., Seattle, San Fransico, Miami, and Chicago, (no I haven't lived in all those place, but I used to hitchhike alot when I was younger ), anyway, I can only think of one instance when I was physically assualted or otherwise accosted. (It happened in a bar when I was rather intoxicated). I've NEVER been broken into at home (knock on wood), and I can't think of anyone close that's been a victim of home invasion either.

Seems strange to me..

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...

Yo Hi Jaguar,

Sorry its been a while, but I have been away for 2 weeks. You're damn right I moved house! The last time I had any sort of criminal trouble was about 5 years ago, after I turned the house that I was being robbed in, into a lookalike Fort Knox!!

I guess we come from different cultures with different takes on things, we will just have to beg to differ on the issue of Gun control.

cheers

Jez.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now
 Share


×
×
  • Create New...