Machete , knives acid attacks ,cars , trucks ,bombs , gang beatings ..........seems to be an epidemic of crime rise in London lately , particularly those associated with the pro or anti-gun debate ? Kind of proves what the pro-gun people have been saying all along . If a criminal doesn't have access to guns he'll use whatever is handy ?
We were right all along , A little difficult for the anti's to swallow ?
And can you imagine how much worse it would be if those gangs (mostly teens, by the way) had easy access to firearms? It doesn't bear thinking about. In any case, they are mostly killing each other.
Besides, London is not the whole of the UK.
Your point does not prove anything.
What ,only 1500 knife attacks in London last year ? I doesn't bare thinking about because of your ideological denial . Your problem is , it's not a school shooting so it's not an important point of debate , until it happens in your party "history of the moment" again?
So how would giving these kids guns help anyone? These aren't citizens defending their families and property. These are nasty little uneducated teens stabbing each other. Happy for them to take each other out of the gene pool.
What's 'my party'? Not sure what you mean by that.
I don't have a problem, sorry to disappoint. The UK is never going to approve firearms for citizens. Thank goodness.
Edit: We have had a school shooting, by the way. Back in the 80s. Guy with a shotgun. Never had one since.
Great , Just proves the world wide issue that taking guns from a society cures all the violence in the world ,you know ? Pacifies all of the violent ones and turns societies into cute little villes of peaceful playgrounds where the criminals and the lions lay down with the sheeples !
The "intentional" homicide rate is 5X higher in the United States than in the United Kingdom.
They must be doing something right.
Hmm, I've been resisting the temptation to comment on your posts recently 'horse as there's no point - as far as guns are concerned you're never going to convince me that insanely ludicrous US gun laws are a good thing, and I'm never going to convince you otherwise.
But as a Brit, when you bring up the UK I guess I've got more reason to react. Your definition of 'proof' leaves an awful lot to be desired. Yes, there has been an inordinately large number of murders (by our standards) in the past two months in London, mostly using knives. The reference to cars, trucks and bombs is largely irrelevent as that applies to terrorists - in the absence of guns, I guess it's true they do use the next most effective killing device they can get their hands on. I'm quite sure though they'd prefer to have easy access to guns so they could kill far more people.
But let's look at the facts. You presumably have selectively picked on the rise in the past two months as 'proof' that London criminals have finally discovered - 20 years after gun ownership was severely curtailed - that they can use other weapons when guns are not available. The criminals must be slow learners indeed!! Prior to that disturbing two month total, London had a homicide rate of 1.45 per 100,000 people in the year between Sept 2016 and Sept 2017 (Sky News). The 30th (!) worst US city in the year 2015 was Waco, Texas with a rate of 16.74 homicides per 100,000. The worst of all was St Louis at 59.29 per 100,000 - hugely greater than London (The Bismarck Tribune).
Even in those extremely bad (again - by our standards) two months of February and March, London's murder total was only comparable to New York's - one of the better big cities of America. In any other time period you care to mention, London has been safer than New York, and is certainly much safer than scores of other US cities. What's more, this hopefully temporary rise in deaths in London has led to huge media attention and will probably lead to new powers for the police and local authorities, and more stop and search operations by police for knives - very sensible.
When, I wonder, will the far more extraordinary levels of gun crime in the USA lead to stop and search for guns???? (A rhetorical question - because of course your 'right' to carry lethal mass killing weapons means that it won't happen in the foreseeable future.)
Last first , you're right , it won't happen.
Next ,February and March in London says enough doesn't it = NYC ?
Next , per 100,000 rate is about the only usable figure when used for all deaths , that put's gun deaths somewhere around twentieth here after ladder falls or something .
Then , "......an inordinately large number of deaths in london "or england , what without firearms you mean ? Could it be related to immigration issues or is it something in the water ?
No we're not going to agree on the reasons or the gun debate are we , so let's go to causation , Why do you think the spikes in London are happening ?
To answer the questions you pose 'horse, I'm not sure exactly what the breakdown in the demographics of recent victims is, though I strongly suspect there is some relationship to immigration - or at least to the communities of minorities which develop in inner cities. I'm also sure that there is - as in the US - a strong link in some cases to gang violence. Most cases occur at night, involve young people, and usually in less affluent areas. It doesn't follow of course that the victims are all gang members, and it would be unfair to them to suggest that they are. Some may be hotheaded or drunk youngsters caught up in a fight where another individual produces a knife. But others are entirely inoffensive party goers or ordinary pedestrians etc mugged on their way home.
Unfortunately, as with gun ownership, knife carrying breeds more knife carrying - even some youngsters not intending to commit crime today may carry a knife in order to protect themselves. It doesn't work however, and it must be discouraged. it is illegal. I suspect that the authorities' response to the recent rise including a crack down on knife carrying will ensure that this is a temporary blip. Because overall, violent crime in the UK (as I believe is also the case in the US) has declined in recent decades.
Crime overall is dropping here , As it is in most of the free world at least , Yet one has to ask oneself this important question . How does keeping a gun or a knife from the law abiding citizen in any way going to make the CRIMINAL turn over his gun or knife to prevent the next crime from happening ? That alone is the question .
This week a knife wielding man in China killed 10 kids and injured another 12 and this is a growing crime in China and elsewhere ? Insanity itself at whatever level seems to be the culprit that should be the focus of your" banning ".
The longer "intelligent "civilized people focus on the wrong "solutions " , the closer well all get to this same insanity
How does keeping a gun or a knife from the law abiding citizen in any way going to make the CRIMINAL turn over his gun or knife to prevent the next crime from happening ?
Simply because the evidence is that that is exactly what does happen. That is exactly why guns are in such short supply in the UK that criminals have had to resort to other, much less effective methods of killing or intimidating - such as knives. Guns have largely been taken off the street. Periodically in the UK there is a 'knife amnesty' too, where literally thousands of knives, swords, axes etc have been handed in (the amnesty of course only applies to weapons and owners for which there is no known criminal activity other than illegal possession).
Even if hardened criminals do not hand in their weapons, family members, innocent collectors etc do, so there are less lying around in houses waiting to be stolen or sold on the black market or used irresponsibly. All sales without licenses are banned in the case of guns and certain other categories of weapon. Eventually obtaining such weapons becomes harder and harder to achieve. Other measures can also be taken to deter the carrying of weapons. Criminals carrying weapons in the conduct of a felony will receive much harsher sentences even if the weapon has not been used.
Nobody pretends it happens overnight. Nobody pretends every terrorist, serial killer or gang member dutifully hands in the guns etc the morning after legislation is passed. But it DOES happen that over time the weapons are removed. The evidence from the UK, Australia, Japan and many other countries proves it.
So if it's all simply a war of attrition ? Then take all the cargo vans too ? What about transfer trucks ? Folding ladders ? What do you do for a living Greensleaves, I'm sure something there is killing people .? Let's ban kiddy swimming pools, they kill as much as Ladders ? What about cell phones and baby strollers ? Computers owned by people committing sex assault crimes ? Better ban Footballs , Hockey sticks , OMG what about fatty hamburger ,the worse killer known to man ? Anti- gun people simply do not make any sense at all and they never have . If you would honestly admit it , It is simply because YOU have no use for a gun and don't care about other people lives and cultures . And That is the most selfish reasoning in the world .
The greatest crime areas , using guns or not in America especially or for that matter in world politics , are where the ownership of firearms have had severe restrictions , Chicago , Baltimore , let's face it London . Boston mass., NYC , Minneapolis Min. . In fact since the Clinton assault weapons ban --repeal , crime in many areas has dropped and so your " crime overall is dropping claim ". Shall we get into this gun thing once again as it's so outdated ,but hey "I'm loaded for bear "
Oh 'horse, that first paragraph is one of the oldest arguments in the gun lobbyist's handbook and the answer to it has been repeated a million times - all those other things you mention have other primary functions as essential tools in society or highly desirable conveniences. They are not designed or built to kill, and if they were removed then our lives would be poorer.
The primary function of guns IS to kill, and if they were removed our lives would be better - as indeed they are in those countries like the UK where we don't have to worry about them.
Of the list of cities you mention, London I repeat has a far lower murder rate than most big US cities despite the recent escalation. Chicago of course is the usual example cited in these arguments, but the evidence demonstrates that citing Chicago is a red herring. I will find the articles which demonstrate that if you wish - I read several a few months ago. Besides, in a country where people can easily carry guns from one city to another or from one state to another, clearly localised gun control laws are not going to be as effective as national restrictions.
Finally, I like to keep things as friendly as possible 'horse, but I do take strong exception to your comment 'If you would honestly admit it ,YOU have no use for a gun and don't care about other people lives and cultures . And That is the most selfish reasoning in the world.'
That is offensive. Given that guns pose no threat to me, why do you think I comment on the issue? - precisely because I DO CARE about the tens of thousands of lives pointlessly lost in America every year. You seem to care less about all those lives, and more about a peculiar 'freedom' to carry guns, a freedom which few people in the rest of the world think is either necessary or desirable.
What is offensive to me is that I live the very life you ignore and disrespect by this gun debate , as millions of Americans do in the many hobbies of gun ownership , hunting sports , shooting and target sports , classic gun ownership , the extensive [and my personal ] hobby of reclaiming ,, repairing , rebuilding , shooting and owning old guns .
"the function of guns is to kill "........Do you realize another leading cause of death is medical misdiagnosis and operating room mistakes ?
You and many others really need to put into perspective ALL deaths , accidental or otherwise , having to do with ALL reasons for a death. I know you're intelligent enough to google the top twenty or thirty reasons for deaths , in America or the UK., If I'm not mistaken more people die from eating animal fat than most all other reasons .Again , put all deaths into perspective .
"... precisely because I do care .......Maybe you should care equally as much about the incredible recidivism rates of criminals in America or the UK . given that somewhere around eighty + percent of gun deaths are by repeat criminals ! Fact . Fix that incredibly broken an acutely dangerous situation and get back to me about being offended perhaps ?
You decide when we will stop debating , I could go on and on about guns crime and the ills of humanity AND the defending of a my constitutional rights , you should however learn to refocus your reasons for being offended for phony reasons . You may be wasting your time .
If you are saying that anyone who simply disagrees with your point of view on guns and debates the subject is 'disrespecting you and offending you' then THAT is a phoney reason for being offended. And in those circumstances, there is no hope for debate because you'll take offence at any criticism of the pro-gun lobby.
Yes, guns can be used for all the purposes you mention - and are in the UK too - under proper licensing and strict control. No problem with that. But the comments about other causes of death which kill more than guns is simply a further extension of the old, continuously repeated argument which I criticised in the previous post. Effectively what you are saying is that because we cannot ban ladders, computers, footballs, eating animal fat etc and indeed 'medical diagnosis' without diminishing quality of life, then we also shouldn't ban guns. That's just illogical.
What's more when it comes to homicide rates it's not an 'either/or' situation. It is possible to have gun control AND improved recidivism rates, as part of a package to reduce violent, lethal crime. You don't have to have one or the other. By the way, what evidence do you have for assuming I DON'T care about recidivism rates?
Returning to the issue of offence, I have to repeat what you said to me in the previous post. You said: 'If you would honestly admit it ,YOU have no use for a gun and don't care about other people lives and cultures . And That is the most selfish reasoning in the world.'
THAT statement is NOT a phoney reason for me being offended. It is a genuine reason.
I understand why you are offended , it's called political correctness . But more than many other shades of the anti-gun , anti second amendment , it is an extremely phony "offended ".
Are you offended as criminals celebrate a plea-ing down of firearms offenses more often than not , including in the U.K. ?
Are you offended when written scales of criminal punishment are ignored by activist judges ?
Are you offended by the fact that creating every Gun Free Zone in America and probably around the world instantly means higher crime rates in those areas ?
Are you offended by the fact that 90 % of gun crimes are committed by repeat offenders ?
Are you offended by a media that is so biased as to totally ignore ,FBI facts , statistics and directives of it's studies ?
Are you offended by the fact that most firearms crimes are committed by handguns and the media focus is all about "assault rifles "?
I could go on and on with fact because I am fact informed and I am not so easily emotionally offended . When bias of media holds such agenda as to ignore literal fact and promote phony "offended ",perhaps we should ALL be offended .
I was offended when you said I don't care about other peoples' lives - That is a morality issue.
You apparently get offended simply because someone disagrees with your position on gun ownership, because you feel that 'disrespects' you and the life you live - That is a freedom to express a point of view issue.
If you think yours is a better reason than mine for being offended, then you have very distorted values. I have always tried to debate purely on the merits or demerits of gun ownership in saving life. You and other gun lobbyists all too frequently debate on the basis of your perception that your opponents are immoral.
You clearly know nothing whatsoever about me after all this time - otherwise you would never accuse me of political correctness. That's laughable - I hate political correctness.
And most of what you talk about subsequently are not issues of 'offence' as I would interpret the term. They are issues of 'concern'. That is different, and yes, I am concerned about some of those just as I am concerned (rather than offended) by the ludicrous number of people killed by guns in America. Offence cannot be applied to facts - only to things like personal abuse and attacks on integrity and morality. (Though I would point out that some of the things you list are inaccurate anyway or maybe demonstrate your own bias - such as the argument about Gun Free Zones).
As for news media, I obviously cannot comment much on news media coverage bias in America, though when I have had the opportunity to watch both CNN and Fox News, it was Fox News which was most obviously biased. Even in my limited experience I was astonished by the number of times conservative interviewees were allowed to make very questionable statements which the interviewer not only let pass, but positively agreed with! I don't know if Fox News is the service which most 'informs' you? - I hope you watch a balance, but I do know from these forums that many others who think like you seem to get most of their news, not even from Fox, but from far more right-wing biased media, frequently peddling fake news (as has happened in the other debate we've been having about baby Alfie).
"I have always tried to debate purely on the merits or demerits of gun ownership in saving life."
That's a really interesting statement, and something I have searched hard for. What can you provide that shows gun ownership costs lives, or that limiting gun ownership saves lives (same thing in reverse)?
Hi wilderness; I can provide lots of statistical evidence and research evidence, though I am well aware that it's the kind of subject where both sides can either find evidence which they claim is convincing, or alternatively find reasons why they think the evidence can be dismissed as irrelevant.
For example one report which pooled results from 15 separate investigations indicates that people with easy access to guns are three times as likely to commit suicide or die through accidental discharge, and twice as likely to be the victim of a homicide as are people who do not have access to a gun. That strongly suggests that guns increase the risk of death - either self-inflicted or malicious. I do look at things analytically and therefore recognise that gun lobbyists may argue that people are more likely to own guns if they live in dangerous localities, and so inevitably there may be more deaths among gun owners than non-gun owners. Or they may have other explanations for the results of that study. The point is one cannot prove pro or anti gun - there is only the balance of probabilities. I think those probabilities strongly favour gun control.
That's just one example. The most glaring example of course is simply the very high homicide rate in America which has extremely lax gun laws, compared with most other democratic Western nations which have much more stringent laws. Again, I know all the contrary arguements gun lobbyists will counter with.
Anyway, that's already quite a long answer and it would extend to a book length reply to give all the evidence, and I'm not sure this is the place to do it given that this forum was meant to be about knife crime in London. But as soon as I've got time, and if 'horse doesn't mind, I will check out some of the best stats I can find and post links here.
While I can accept that more people will die by suicide or accident when guns are available, I reject the notion that I can't own one because of that. It's like saying I can't own a chainsaw, or a car, because someone else might hurt themselves with their own chainsaw or have an accident with their car. Not something I think we should be doing.
As far as people owning guns are more likely to be murdered, well, I would have to see that study. Does it happen because gun owners live in high crime areas? Because they put themselves in harm's way? Because a family member might use the gun against them? All of these indicate that the cause of the murder is not the gun, and that any correlation is coincidental only.
But mostly I would have to reply that a careful examination of the relationship between gun ownership and homicide rates, over many countries, very plainly shows that there is no correlation at all between the two. The same thing applies here: the US has a very high homicide rate, and a very high gun ownership rate, but that relationship, using a single country, does NOT indicate causality. Which in turn means that guns aren't causing the deaths; that there is something else doing it. The probabilities do not suggest anything at all, not when a larger data set is used.
Greensleeves , contrary to you thoughts , I don't get offended by hardly anything with the exception possibly total misinformation , as our media is so full of that and never likely at this point to change , I'm sure I will get over that too. First ,and secondly ,
Most of all I don't get offended by anti-gun or anti -second amendment opinions because I simply know that nothing there is going to change anytime soon , at least for decades to come and in fact it could actually change in the direction of MY beliefs . There are too many of us who are constitutionally motivated to defend our basic DNA human rights and liberties , for one the right to defend ourselves from whoever ,whenever .
It would be interesting to note how less guns in America will save lives though , barring lies , since the repeal of the 1996 Clinton inspired "assault weapon ban "- the amounts of crime has dropped substantially and the amount of said "assault weapons". has grown twenty fold , Most importantly you need to help us all explain that phenomenon please ?
Fox news ? against all others I grant you that they are as biased in presentation even if they are at the same time more truthful and trustworthy- period . I however get my numbers statistics and facts mostly from FBI studies , lets see you refute that ?
As to being informed , I have explained before here that my sources of media come from at least a dozen sources , Why , because compared to most I'm very capable of and practice always independent analysis .
Fact - With the ever increased amount of firearms [assault weapons especially ] in America since around 1996 , major crimes have dropped dramatically . With one major and irrefutable exception , where unconstitutional gun RESTRICTIONS have been installed and enforced crimes against property and humans has generally increased , Look hard at places like Baltimore Md. , Chicago Ill. , San Francisco Cal. , Minneapolis Minn.,
No , I don't worry whatsoever about a gun ban in America , I as many ,many others here know without one iota of doubt that that situation would bring this country right to the immediate doorstep of an armed revolution , so why should or would I become offended by yours or anyones rather shallow understanding of the very DNA of America's constitutional law .The need for the second amendment to defend all of the other constitutional rights thereof ?
Please by all means break away from tradition disinformation of liberal thought and leftist media presentation and very simply google up the facts about gun controls in America ,especially regional and stop believing the barrages of the liberal ideologies media disinformation agenda . I guarantee you'll feel like a newly informed man .
As to Baby Alfie , we're continuing that in the proper forum . If you can't do the above then I have to believe that yes You too are as biased as the rest of the anti -gun crowds .
'Most of all I don't get offended by anti-gun or anti -second amendment opinions.' Sorry, I must have misunderstood when you said in a previous post : 'What is offensive to me is that I live the very life you ignore and disrespect by this gun debate'
'how will less guns save lives?' That is the crux of the issue, and I can tell you if you wish (I have already done so many times in the past). I can post some links as I suggested to wilderness, though I do know exactly what your response will be because I've heard all the counter arguments many times before.
'why should or would I become offended by yours or anyones rather shallow understanding of the very DNA of America's constitutional law' Oh dear, I guess as I'm a Brit, you must be right and my understanding must be shallow. Oh well, at least I'm in good company - four out of nine Supreme Court judges in the 'District of Columbia v. Heller' case also presumably had shallow understanding, as did four out of nine in 'McDonald v. City of Chicago'. I guess 'shallow' or 'deep' understanding depends on whether you are right wing or moderate. It seems that most Americans are moderate, as a recent poll (2018) suggests that two thirds are in favour of stricter gun control.
'Please by all means break away from tradition disinformation of liberal thought and leftist media presentation and very simply google up the facts about gun controls in America.' Hmm - a bit condescending 'horse. I just checked through my Internet bookmarks and counted. So far I've bookmarked 127 of the articles I've researched on the subject of gun control. How many more would you like me to google?
Even if every knife crime would otherwise be a gun crime, more people escape or survive being stabbed than being shot.
Like the recent one in China where 10 Kids were killed , 12 injured by a man and a knife at a school , yea I'm sure those victims cared ? You're now using the odds of statistical importance between a knife and a gun to defend a crime by a criminal who cares about neither statistic ?
Just proves only the law abiding care what choice of weapon's used I guess ?
First a warning imprinted into the very iron barrel of every gun .
Second a sticker warning with every gun and a laser sight .
I offer you this , why don't you require these labels on the foreheads of every once convicted firearm criminal ? Perhaps a subsequent label stamped or attached to the first for every recidivist firearm criminal convicted of a second crime , on and on until it's more than obvious who the 90% recidivism rate of firearm criminals is so obviously and permanently marked as to make it impossible to commit another crime?
Whats going on in society that people are so irritated with each other?
Kathryn; I should explain, what irritates is when people give very misleading information about knife crime in London in order to suit their agenda for gun ownership in the USA. And when people question my morality by telling me: 'YOU ... don't care about other people lives and cultures . And That is the most selfish reasoning in the world.'
AS I told 'horse it is precisely because I do care, that I counter these arguments. If I didn't care I'd just ignore the 30,000 plus who die every year in the US as a result of guns, as it doesn't affect me directly. Recent knife crime figures in London have been a bit of a concern, but the dabate here is mostly about more powers to stop and search suspects, and the transformation of inner city communities. Nobody debates that we should all be allowed guns to protect ourselves - that would just be silly.
But I can assure you, I am the most mild-mannered of people. Sorry if I get irritated by those things - it only happens in online forums!
Kathryn , Do you mean the U.K , maybe it's the biscuits and tea ? If you mean in the U.S. it's all the fault of Alinsky's 13 rules ?
… well, yes I was speaking of British society. Biscuits and tea! Actually it may be because they (the English) have been invaded. We will be pretty grumpy too if we don't listen to Trump and close the borders. And I know what I'm talking about.
As to gun violence in the U.S. a recent number discussed in media is something like a minimum of 800, 000 incidents a year that involve firearm prevented crimes from occurring ; consider if you will the NRA released number being closer to two million firearm prevented crimes from happening . Even IF you consider the lower number at 800,000 that would mean around 17,000,000 million crimes that were prevented from being committed in 22 years by firearms owners .
Check my math ?
Go ahead and tell me this number is insignificant .
If it is true, then it is not insignificant. But as someone who talks a lot about 'fake news', maybe you will understand that simply brandishing stats like that without explanation gives a very one-sided and probably misleading point of view. It is not necessarily true.
According to the Violence Policy Center, the five-year period 2007 through 2011, saw 338,700 incidents of self-protective behaviour involving guns - an average of 67,740 per year - still high but rather less than your figures. Hugely less in fact.
What's more, they report that there were 259 justifiable homicides in 2012 (FBI figures). But there were 232,000 thefts of guns, most of them burglaries! So for each gun used in a justifiable homicide to prevent a crime, another 896 were put in the hands of criminals enabling them to carry out violent crime. Check my math.
Now let me say that I do not know where the truth lies - nor I am sure do you. Authorities argue about it either from an objective or subjective standpoint. There are multiple ways of distorting statistics and analysing them to suit one's prejudices, as I indicated in a previous post. I recognise that, but I think you do not. You seem to just pluck some figure out of the ether and if it suits your cause, you run with it without questioning it.
First , All of the "........misleading , misdirecting information ......." IS in fact that there is a war that has been going on against the second amendment , firearms and law abiding mass majority of gun owners in America for almost 50 years in America . But why not right , first to socialize America you have to disarms it . There is not one "misinformed "fact about that . Today EVEN the anti's are clearly admitting it . The absolute collective ignorance , for lack of a better word , of any governing body ,people or group who think that the US will alter it's very constitutional DNA peacefully is blatantly obvious ?
Second , you and so many in the US and UK .for that matter, completely and blindly ignore ALL massively important and directly subjective fact affecting crime in our major cities and beyond , Number one being recidivism . The absolute failure of systematic crime prevention by the same percentage of revolving door criminals .over 90 % of killers have extensive criminal records and it is this same % of people returning again and again to the courts .
Do you fish ? Imagine that you are hungry , your parents and children are starving so you send your best village people to go fly fishing for Salmon in the local river , when you get to the river to bring home dinner , you are surprised to watch as everyone who has a fly rod and fishing net is throwing all of the fish back into the river after they catch them ! THAT is exactly why you there in the UK. and we here in the US. cannot , will not , will ever end the killing . Catch and release criminal justice !
Greensleeves , it's pure insanity , you are whining your way through an acting social , cultural epidemic . It is killing yours and my children and all we can do is talk about it ? All we can do is stand back and watch as the systematic destruction of our justice system from within , from apathy , from the top , stands back and symbolically holds the door open for the killers walking in and out of the courthouses .
Good luck with all of the same happening in the UK, especially the recent media reporting of the major increases of knife , machete , baseball bat , automobile and truck attacks going on in the UK , with the collective finger pointing activism and criminal justice system apathy , you're very well going to need it . You SHOULD soon be waking up to the fact that the restricting of law abiding people does absolutely NOTHING to end the act of the criminal !
'A war going on against the second amendment'
'to socialise America, first you have to disarm it'
'the absolute collective ignorance of any(body) who thinks that the US will alter its very constitutional DNA is blatantly obvious'
'(gun control advocates) completely and blindly ignore all massively important and directly subjective fact affecting crime'
'it's pure insanity , you are whining your way through an acting social , cultural epidemic . It is killing yours and my children and all we can do is talk about it ? All we can do is stand back and watch as the systematic destruction of our justice system from within , from apathy , from the top , stands back and symbolically holds the door open for the killers walking in and out of the courthouses .' ... 'the collective finger pointing activism and criminal justice system apathy'
All of this 'horse really is pretty much what I suspect is true of most of the most ardent gun enthusiasts.
The majority of gun owners in America I'm sure have guns - not because they really want them - but purely because they feel they need them for reasons of self-defence, and would happily accept a balanced approach which includes controls with other measures. But the hard core of pro-gun lobbyists have a very different agenda.
The refusal to accept that there is any problem with guns (it's all the fault of the Justice department, the police, the blacks, the Hispanics, drug culture, gang culture, and most of all 'Liberals') together with very selective, blind acceptance of seemingly pro-gun statistics and complete ignoring of statistics which don't fit the progun theme, plus the fervent desire to seek out any evidence, however flimsy, to support the cause (such as evidence of knife crime in London) - it's all typical of the strategy which is to attack everything else which could conceiveably have a role in violent crime, whilst the issue of easy access to guns is sacrosanct, and not to be touched. (Before you object, I am speaking generally when I refer to those alternative societal problems - the reference to blacks, hispanics etc is not accusing you personally of racism or anything like that, but those are the many sorts of arguments which I've seen routinely thrown up by gun lobbyists to divert all attention away from gun control).
It's not really about self-defence is it? It's about - as you have said in several posts - your culture which you treasure, a belief in some kind of fundamental human right or even a God-given right to bear arms, a paranoia about State control, and a fear that everyone is trying to impose socialism / communism / liberalism (choose a favoured buzz word) surrepticiously, through lies and control of the media.
I feel a bit sad. As I said to 'wilderness', and will say again, the facts don't really seem to matter. It's about an inner belief that your lifestyle is under threat. All I can say 'horse is that we just don't see this in most of the rest of the free world. We are free to get on with our lives, we don't feel overly controlled by the government, we don't feel fear of armed burglars. Of course there are problems because Society isn't utopian. We have raging debates going on over issues such as the nature of Brexit, levels of immigration, social rights, foreign interventions in Syria etc. And of course there are extremists on both sides who are full of hatred - but they are very much a small minority vocal on the Internet, whilst the minority who believe that society and freedoms are on the brink of collapse due to state control or rising crime, is even smaller.
I know I'm not going to convince you 'horse, whatever I say. All I would ask is that you try not to use fake news about 'epidemics of crime rise in London' 'proving' the need for gun ownership, as evidence for your cause.
"So for each gun used in a justifiable homicide to prevent a crime, another 896 were put in the hands of criminals enabling them to carry out violent crime."
It is statements like this that make it so difficult to reasonably discuss gun controls, for implicit in it is the idea that without a gun criminals will not become violent. All the evidence points to the opposite; that while a gun is the preferred tool the crime occurs with or without it, but when that false assumption is accepted as true reason is left out of the equation.
Well lets face it disinformation has become the greatest campaigning tool known to modern elections for the democrats since at least the inception of Pravda ,the great Russian propaganda agency of the past .The likes of CNN has actually " gone back to school " the academy of sensation , bias , misinformation and propagandizing .
I just have had trouble figuring how the left actually purchased the media .
I think we purchased the media. By demanding stories that fit our preconceptions, delusions and beliefs, refusing to watch (and pay the bills) if we don't get them.
In a way that's very true. There's a common phrase that 'we get the politicians we deserve', and the same may be true of the media. Certainly I would suggest that right wing media operate because they say exactly what their audience wants to hear. I'm happy to accept the same may be true of left wing media.
It isn't true in the UK at least as far as national television is concerned. The BBC - and also ITV (independent Television) Channel 4, Channel 5 and Sky News all I think receive roughly equal complaints of bias from both sides of the political spectrum which exists in the UK. That's the best possible indication of fairness! They have obligations to give as equal coverage as is possible to the major parties, and to vigorously cross-examine statements made by both sides.
The BBC has a charter for public funding which expressly requires that kind of neutrality. Presumably the others which are funded through advertising, have something similar. I don't know whether that would work in the USA, but it certainly works pretty well in the UK.
In a way wilderness, you are just proving the validity of what I said - that advocates for or against guns will always find an argument against the other side's statistics, whilst unquestioningly accepting the statistics which seem to work in their favour. That's what makes the discussion a bit pointless.
Perhaps you accepted 'horse's statistics of 800,000 to 2,000,000 crimes prevented by firearms without questioning it at all? But you try to pick small holes in the statistic I presented, or in this case the way in which it was expressed. Effectively you seem to be saying that instead of 'enabling them to commit violent crime', I should have said 'enabling them to commit more efficiently violent crime using the very weapons which gun owners had bought in order to protect themselves'.
OK, I'm happy to change the phraseology to that, though the basic point I'm making remains unchanged.
As I say, the truth is obscured in all these statistics which are bandied about (mostly it seems by the pro-gun lobby on these forums), but whereas I accept that, pro-gun hubbers do not. They just believe what they've read or heard on guns from a right wing source, or if it's from a neutral source then they read into it the most favourable pro-gun explanation they possibly can.
You mean THESE RULES?
The Rules: (for successfully running a movement for change)
1. "Power is not only what you have but what the enemy thinks you have."
2. "Never go outside the expertise of your people."
3. "Whenever possible go outside the expertise of the enemy."
4. "Make the enemy live up to its own book of rules."
5. "Ridicule is man's most potent weapon."
6. "A good tactic is one your people enjoy."
7. "A tactic that drags on too long becomes a drag."
8. "Keep the pressure on."
9. "The threat is usually more terrifying than the thing itself."
10. "The major premise for tactics is the development of operations that will maintain a constant pressure upon the opposition."
11. "If you push a negative hard and deep enough it will break through into its counterside"
12. "The price of a successful attack is a constructive alternative."
13. "Pick the target, freeze it, personalize it, and polarize it."
From: the last book that Alinsky wrote, published in 1972. It was a a guide for future community organizers to unite low-income communities, or "Have-Nots", so they could obtain social, political, legal, and economic power.
Where do I begin , America today is not only approaching but is close to the arrival of the same political position it was in when the second amendment and the very constitution was actually written , The tyranny of over taxation , the plague of social and cultural treats evident in an array of crimes against our basic liberties , from within and without , drugs , property crimes , a systematic breakdown of control of the apathy and elitist mentality in the distant and powerful government .
However , you obviously don't live in America you live in the UK , the fact that as a nation and a people you've willingly surrendered more of your basic human ,social , public liberties than Americans have is not only your choice but your own cross to bare . Your country,your people and thus the surrendering of liberties is not only suffering many of the same ills but actually more than America is , the immigration problem for only one of these .
The surrendering of liberties is your choice then ? Or rather it is and was your governments choice ? In America the sacrifice of liberty to government is the people's choice , Guess what , we choose not to surrender the very tool that keeps our society free of not only outside political influences BUT internal political ideologies and controls . We chose not to surrender ourselves to the socially inspired fear of out of control crime , drug trafficking , property crimes or immigration crimes ; home invasions , gangs , human trafficking , etc....And the most basic of God given rights is the right to defend yourself and family from anything .
The UK is quickly beginning to reflect the influences and chaos in your society of the mixing of "normal " first world problems AND third world sub-cultural problems , where third or even fourth world crimes are being perpetrated on the streets of London , I believe that what you need is a return of the people's ability to defend yourselves from those threats , And What ? you chose to rely on the "Bobby " and his nightstick where even the police cannot effectively defend you ?
The single largest problem today in America IS it's crime rates and that of the misrepresentation of facts , truth and statistics by its news media. In other words neither you nor your understanding of America is truthful , realistic or statistical
You are only reflecting the agenda of the left in America , Like all mass crimes against a people Socialism is not going to transform America as long as it's citizenry is armed , nor is a third world cultural criminal take over of our streets like is happening in the UK. .
To be continued ...........
Your most recent post 'horse demonstrates all the paranoia about state control and all the extreme and heavily biased overstatement of the threats which I described in my previous reply to you.
As far as America is concerned, you talk about: tyranny of over taxation, plague of social and cultural threats, crimes against basic liberty, systematic breakdown of control, elitist mentality in the distant government.'
It seems you have a much lower opinion of America than I do! But then you go on to suggest we are even worse ...
As far as the UK is concerned you think we have: willingly surrended basic liberties, internal political ideologies and controls, chaos in our society, third world cultural criminals, and police who cannot effectively defend us.
I wonder if there is a typographical error there. Did you press 'U' and 'K' by mistake? Because it is clearly not a country that we recognise in this part of the world. It is some absurd fantasy land that you have created.
Would you like me to present a list of some of things (basic liberties) we are free to do in the UK which you are less free to do in America? I can do so if it would help inform you? But almost the only major freedoms you have that we don't, are (1) the freedom of media - notably the extreme right wing media - to basically lie without fear of prosecution, and (2) the freedom to own lethal weapons almost without restriction. Personally I and everyone else in the UK will gladly 'sacrifice' those 'freedoms' for all the rights and freedoms we have, and which you don't.
One statement stands out as the ultimate in clearly wrong statements. You said: 'We chose not to surrender ourselves to the socially inspired fear of out of control crime , drug trafficking , property crimes or immigration crimes ; home invasions , gangs , human trafficking , etc'
Hmm, I think any objective person reading these exchanges might reasonably draw the conclusion that you 'horse are just a tad more fearful of those things than we in the UK are!!!
You criticise me by saying I am 'only reflecting the agenda of the left in America.' I have merely countered and corrected your bias with alternatives. But let me take your point and turn it around; do you think you are representing the agenda of both sides in America???
You also still seem to persist in thinking that I am a socialist. Only by the bizarre definitions of the extreme right in America could I be described as a Socialist!!
Anyway, at the end of the day 'horse you seem to think that America is a nightmare on the brink of civil war, and the UK is even worse. I and my fellow Brits criticise many things about our country, but we don't think we're on the brink of catastrophe and we are happy with all our many civil liberties. You should try living here - maybe you'd be less stressed.
Obviously you not only don't get my points but are way off on your observations of America life so distant and different from your own , so please do tell me what freedoms and liberties that you perceive that we do NOT have here , I would love to counter those observations with the real truths as that is what seems to be the problems of our debating in this forum , perceptions or rather misperceptions of the one truth .
You are routinely dismissive of my understanding of American life and gun control issues simply because I'm a Brit. Earlier you described my understanding as 'shallow'. But I won't take offence at that - after all, in your opinion anybody who disagrees with you about guns has a shallow understanding of the issue - even several Supreme Court judges.
But the hypocrisy is outstanding. You criticise me for my foreign views on America, but you seem to have forgotten - YOU started this by deciding to express your foreign views on the UK, not once but twice in recent forum posts, based on selective stats plucked from whatever news media you follow, and I am sure without any effort on your part to check out the truth. If I have a 'shallow understanding', you believe you have a deep understanding of UK life? I did tell you how many gun control articles I've researched - 127 saved to date. I wonder how many articles on the UK you've read? You are delusional 'horse.
I wouldn't pretend to be an expert on all things that happen in other countries 'horse, but all I have been doing is countering your blinkered assertions about life in the UK - a country, as you put it : 'so different and distant from your own'.
Just a few randomly chosen charts for Crimes in the UK, and so while you defend the reduction in police roles , the disarming of the police , ignore the fact that your populace is becoming more violent , while ignoring of the inevitable legal or illegal immigration related hate crimes , while you divert attention away from UK's decline in quality of living associated with crimes by pointing at the US and our firearms . YOUR quality of life declines . Maybe you need to rearm your law enforcement , instead of the token few ?
OK, I'll present a few alternative charts shortly, just to set the record straight, but first: 'horse, I can't let you keep getting away with this kind of deceit and total distortion of my point of view. You say: 'so while you defend the reduction in police roles.' PLEASE - show me where I have defended reduction in police roles. Go on, show me! You also say that I ignore: the inevitable legal or illegal immigration related hate crimes.' Where have I said there are no immigration related hate crimes? Go on, show me!
You just make these things up as you go along don't you? You don't check facts - you just make assumptions based on a blinkered black and white view of the world. In your world there are only two types of people. Your way of thinking goes like this: 'I'm a conservative, therefore I believe this, this and this --- you're a 'Liberal, therefore you believe this, this and this.'
As far as quality of life declining in the UK, let me give you the 'World Happiness Index' which is published by the United Nations and based on data from 156 countries across the world. The data covers many quality of life issues including economics, healthy life expectancy, social factors, technological advancement, education, the environment, law and order and general feelings of well being. Now I'll be fair - in the most recent March 2018 report the UK ranked 19th and the USA ranked 18th (under Trump) - congratulations!!! Your quality of life is one place better than ours in the entire world! You must be so delighted. But wait ... last year we were 19th and the USA were 14th. In the years 2013-5, we were 23rd and the USA was 13th (under Obama). Seems like we're on the way up despite all the upheavals associated with Brexit, plus a spate of terrorist attacks, whilst America's quality of living is declining. Can't wait for next year's stats! The US did marginally better on issues like the economy and life choices and the UK did better on issues like healthy life expectancy, social support, and generosity. (Incidentally the best quality of living by this Index is in Australia, New Zealand and Canada, and most of all - many north European countries, all of which are far more 'socialist' (by your definition) than the USA.
Now I'll turn my attention to those charts you produced. 'Random charts'. Really? You mean you just plucked any old charts out of the air and they just happened to seem favourable to your cause? Your charts are, of course, highly selective in terms of the dates chosen and the parameters chosen, and all done without any explanation of underlying factors. So here's a few more 'random charts'. Unlike you I don't claim that my charts should be accepted uncritically, because unlike you, I look at things objectively. I just produce them for the sake of balance.
Taking a longer term look at crime figures in the UK, it doesn't seem that crime has increased. The chart above gives a very different picture to the one your chart gives.
Well, what d'you know? It seems from the chart above that violent crime is also on a general downward trend since a peak in 1995 (coincidentally (?) just before the UK introduced stringent gun control laws.)
Crown Prosecution Service (CPS figures)
Your charts were big on an apparent rise in hate crime (this is in part due to the change in the definition of hate crime and to the way in which such crimes are reported). But look at this chart. Not so much of a rise as your graph seems to show. Seems like graphs can be made to say whatever you want them to say.
Your second chart is interesting, but just when were those "stringent gun controls" instituted and what were they?
Were there other factors for the '95 peak? The US had an even larger peak in the 20's for homicide rates...right when prohibition went into, and back out of, effect.
But I'm not comfortable with it in general. It shows 4 million violent crimes; 1 out of 16 people suffered a violent crime according to the graph (1995) and 1.25 million (1 out of about 50) in 2017. By comparison the US had 1.2 million violent crimes in 2014, or 1 out of 300 people were victims. Something doesn't seem right here. https://www.fbi.gov/news/stories/latest … s-released
Of course, the definition of "violent crime" may be very different in the two countries.
Hi wilderness. OK I'll give the best information I can. It's quite lengthy but I don't really want to reignite the debate so I'll try to keep it as uncontroversially neutral as possible!
As far as the gun control laws are concerned, I believe semi-automatics etc had already been banned before 1995, and most guns in criminal possession were handguns. Then in March 1995 at a school in Dunblane Scotland 16 children and a teacher were murdered by a lone shooter with four legally owned handguns. Prior to that, gun ownership had been rising, mainly for sport, but I'm not sure what the cause of the peak in 1995 was. Anyway, there never had been a significant gun culture in the UK unlike the US, and this school shooting led to increased public pressure and successive governments taking action. In 1997 the Conservatives banned high calibre handguns. Later that year the Labour party came to power and the ban was extended to include all handguns. A facility to hand in now-illegal guns was initiated - those who did were compensated financially. By 1999, 165,353 licensed handguns and 700 tonnes of ammunition had been handed in.
Now I will say that recorded gun crime did actually rise quite a lot across the UK for several years despite these new strict laws being passed, due to crimes involving stolen weapons or smuggled guns, but also air rifles and imitation fake guns (later on, imitation guns were removed from the statistics). On the other hand in Scotland where the attrocity had occured, handgun crime dropped by 80%, and shotgun offences by even more (statistics can always be found to argue the case for or against! ) But gradually the authorities built up their understanding of how illegal guns were being smuggled or traded, and then gun crimes began to fall very significantly. There's a constant battle of course to try to maintain that trend, as criminals are always finding new ways to get hold of guns (even apparently now using 3D printers to make them!). However, the National Ballistics Intelligence Service which is the authority on these things estimated just 332 guns known to be in criminal hands in Great Britain in 2016-7. Some guns are still owned legally including some categories of shotguns and sporting rifles, but only under strict licencing controls and controls on how they are kept (under lock and key).
Regarding the point about violent crime, you are absolutely right in your suspicions - the definitions ARE very different in the two countries. As I understand it 'violent crime' in the States includes four specific crimes: murder and non-negligent manslaughter, forcible rape, robbery, and aggravated assault. In the UK a lot of other crimes are classified as 'violent' including minor assaults which do not result in injury, and all sexual assaults. Apparently less than half of 'violent' physical assaults against the person in the UK involve any injury and would not be classified as such in the USA, and less than a quarter of sexual assaults would be classified as violent in the States because they don't involve rape. Violent crime rates (by the US definition) are still too high in the UK, but are much more comparable to the US than the stats suggest.
In another post you query the 'more guns = more homicides' association. Again I don't want to push my point of view too much. I would say 'yes' it does if only for the commonsense reason that it's easier to kill with a gun than a knife or other weapon, but I recognise that the pro-gun lobby will argue that the evidence doesn't prove it. They may argue that there are many 'third world' countries with less guns but higher homicide rates. On the other side of the coin, the case is also made about Switzerland which has very high gun ownership but a very low homicide rate. There are big differences however between Switzerland and the US in terms of the attitude to guns. Gun ownership in Switzerland as I understand it derives mainly from mandatory militia service with expert training for all men, plus background psychological tests etc on the owner's fitness to keep a gun after leaving the service. So there are differences, but then again there are differences between all nations which is one reason why both sides can point to examples to back up their arguments.
Hope that helps with some of the chart explanations
Wilderness convinces us that the proliferation of firearms is just incidental and not the cause of America's horrendous homicides rates. Do you think that Americans have a natural predisposition toward violence?
I know that I visited London a long time ago and things may have changed but I am still astonished that bank guards were armed only with truncheons or batons. There is a civility that you have that is lacking here, generally, availability of weapons not withstanding.
Thank you Credence. I don't see any reason why Americans should have a natural predisposition toward violence - after all, most I guess have ancestry dating back to these shores - so there shouldn't be anything different in the DNA! I suppose there is the cultural aspect. I wouldn't like to say where that comes from although the obvious inclination is to link it to the frontier lifestyle when pioneer settlers really did have to arm themselves and look after their own defence because the law, such as it was, was in no position to help. Then of course the desire to be 'free' from Britain and the Declaration of Independence, which I suppose instills a sense of pride in self-determination and freedom of expression. I guess the whole concept of individual rights as oppposed to societal rights is very strong with many Americans. But beyond that I don't know. You and others on both sides of the US political divide will have better ideas on that than I can offer.
Re-Britain, things haven't changed really. Civility is still here though as in any country there are inner city areas to steer clear of. Certainly I've never seen bank guards armed with guns, and the great majority of police aren't either. In most towns and villages you could easily go through your entire life and never see a gun, though in prime terrorist target areas such as airports and outside Parliament etc, there are unfortunately more than there used to be.
Yes, itis not nature, but nurture?
Just speaking with you has opened up of any number of explanations.
Americans, particularly conservatives, here have an inherent distrust of Government. They feel that if they are all armed they can act in defense of tyranny in case it rises its head, but many of them don't understand that they themselves are the most likely source if it comes.
So, what is with this license to carry that more than a couple of US states promote? Do people really want to pack a fire arm to go to the grocers, church to defend against possible criminal assault? There is a more likely chance that the weapon will be used in tragic circumstances beyond the expectations of the carrier. Only Clint Eastwood could prepare himself instantly to be quick on the draw to defend himself or others. That exists only on celluloid. It is a macho thing to say that "you carry". I had that sense of power when I got my pellet gun, the spitting image of a 357 magnum. But, I was 14 years old and had it confiscated by my Mom because I was putting too many holes in things. As the scriptures say, when one ceases being a child one puts away childish things ( or concepts). We have imbeciles here that talk about allowing students on college campuses to carry. We already have a potent combination of variables for the inexperience to traverse. That being gasoline and alcohol, I guess now we can add gunpowder to the mix.
To get you up to date, the idea of arming teachers in public schools several Florida counties in the vicinity of where I live is sinking like a stone. The idea that the only way to stop a bad guy with a gun is there being a good guy with a gun is just another right wing fallacy, that never holds water upon close examination.
The problem with the idea of individual rights is that all of us cannot simply do what we want without regards to the individual rights of our neighbor. Is that what they mean by despising government and civilization? I will have to ask the rightwing people about that.
I want to reiterate how much your interesting perspective from outside the local fray is observed and appreciated
oh gawddd... another damn lovefest.
Cred, go hug your wife while the moment is still tender.
Thanks Credence. The opening comment about distrust of Government is one which I think is a significant difference. Here in the UK there is just as much venom - even hatred - directed at leading politicians, and yet nobody worries about tyrannical oppression of freedoms. Nobody thinks they have to arm themselves to defend their liberty. They just wait for the next General Election and a chance to vote out the Government.
I can only agree absolutely with all you say about the right to carry. Evidence has shown that real people (as opposed to film characters) usually freeze or panic when shooting suddenly starts, or don't shoot straight, or don't know who are 'the good guys' and who are 'the bad guys'. Mr Trump's latest address to the NRA in which he talked about the Bataclan Theatre terrorist attack, was utterly imbecilic in that regard.
'The problem with the idea of individual rights is that all of us cannot simply do what we want without regards to the individual rights of our neighbor.' Agreed. we are not a collection of individuals who can do whatever we like - we are a society.
Nowadays I usually resist the temptation to take part in these forums Credence, because they take up far too much of my time checking facts for accuracy, reach very few people, and in the case of the most extreme gun lobbyists, nothing is ever going to change their beliefs. I only did so here because the opening post attacked the UK's 'rise in violent crime'. But some pro-gun hubbers are willing at least to enter into constructive debate and are fair in that regard, whilst it's always a pleasure to hear from those like yourself who restore my faith in American sanity
'horse, as you decided to publish charts which at first glance appeared to show rises in crime in the UK, I thought I should reply in kind. So here's a few gun crime charts for the USA, which counter a few of the pro-gun myths.
So states in which more people own guns tend to have more gun deaths as shown in the graph above. Odd. I thought good guys with guns stopped bad guys with guns?
No need to comment on this sad graph, but I do worry - given the nature of copycat offences - that the figure will continue to rise steeply in future years.
A popular theme of the gun lobby is that guns level the playing field for women. They empower women to defend themselves. But they also lead to far more deaths. Can you see the figure for the UK? It's rather small. Seems like women are safer in the UK than in the US.
Note 'horse that this graph above shows all homicides - not just guns - so is it really the case that if people can't get hold of guns they will just use other weapons to kill the same number of people?
Now 'horse, I'm sure you'll want to criticise these graphs, just as I have criticised yours. But do we really want to go on trading these statistics, claims or memes, and counter-arguments, some more true than others? Or can we find a way to end this in a conciliatory way?
"so is it really the case that if people can't get hold of guns they will just use other weapons to kill the same number of people?"
Unable to ascertain from the graph, which I'm sure you recognize. Post the number of guns in each country and then compare them, pair by pair. You'll find out if more guns = more homicides.
".......Or can we end this in a conciliatory way .........."Sure , if that's what you wish , as long as we both admit that the reliable sources of statistics is as twisted as is the heart of the uncaring media . We can continue ignoring the title just as much as you wish as that seems to be the way of the political leaders of all major cities , while we debate over a gun , a knife , a chain or a ball bat , our major cities cave in around our heads . Alcohol , drugs, a youth losing it's morality , the immigration of fourth world cultures ...........
If we keep ignoring those it will all just go away .
The UK , its Kings , it's lords it's sheople can do what they will with their increased violence , all your "media" generated crime statistics mean very little , I am only interested , although less reliable these days , in FBI statistics , charts and graphs . In America ,our God gave the people the right to arm themselves and to defend themselves and the people gave government the job of enforcing our rights and laws and law enforcment .
That is the problem with gun crime n America not the law abiding owners but the criminal elements who disregard all laws and rights .
So for the increases in violent crimes in the U.K. I offer you all of the absolute brilliance of the education system has come up with here in America , all that they can offer for the ending of school violence .
So much for being concilliatory. I thought we were ending this 'ahorse, and I was just about to post a reply to wilderness's questions when you insisted on writing nonsense like that. So 'your God' gave you the right to arm yourself with guns did he? Oh well, at least I now know where you're coming from and I guess in those circumstances you're never going to listen to a mere mortal like me are you? As far as 'increased violence in the UK' is concerned, I knew you wouldn't take any notice of any evidence I presented which didn't support your beliefs, so I'll address that to wilderness's comment instead.
More and more I'm beginning to see why some people relish the actual mentality of victimhood , crime , high crime and higher crime only serves apparently to drive some people collectively deeper and deeper into their caves . It must be the mentality of sticking your finger into the hole in the dike to stop the flow of water . What else can one do but to wring ones hands and flitter about worrying about drowning or dying .
In the 1600's in America a people rose up against victimhood , against government tyranny , military policing , where soldiers representing royalty actually posted their troops in our very homes , where the tyranny of a local governors and military officers raped ,burned and pillaged at free will . Imagine a third world leader thug like a mexican drug cartel leader riding through the neighborhood daily choosing which daughter to rape , which home to invade etc....
That environment of chaos and tyranny is as close as ever to happening again as even in the beginning . Today however its crime , not exactly a rogue governing power but a wayward segment of society either dominated by illegal drugs and moral depravity or an out of control justice system , now more than ever is the time in America at least to learn how to to defend oneself and ones family . This is exactly why the silent migration of people from the inner cities is happening in America for one . No, not the millennial migration towards the cities but the moving away from them by a people sick of uncontrolled crime .
Gun are not going away in America , the second amendment either , the liberties and moral right to defend oneself or family either . If a people in London or Paris , NYC Baltimore or L.A. willingly give up these rights so be it . That is the UK's or Frances or the inner cities problem , you then will suffer your related social ills because of that decision . We are finally however seeing the real truth of the lefts attack against truth in these gun debates . No longer do we have to read the back room created "facts " about gun deaths crimes or the home defence statistics for that matter .
We know the real [only] truth . Gun ownership reduces mass crime .
by M. T. Dremer 9 years ago
Why are guns so violently defended?I know why gun manufacturers defend guns (it's their business) but why do gun owners defend it more vehemently than any other topic? People that are completely silent on other hot button issues suddenly pull out their megaphone to defend guns after another...
by strengthcourageme 7 years ago
I was just wondering everyone's thoughts on gun control, are you for or against?
by thomasczech 8 years ago
Gun Grab North America .In your opinion, are the anti gun groups going too far, or not far enough?The governments of both, United States and Canada, along with the anti gun groups are pushing for tighter restrictions of firearms and an all out ban on certain guns. However, those who have firearms...
by Earl S. Wynn 11 years ago
Does gun control prevent crimes?
by nightwork4 9 years ago
Why do you think that gun laws don't help with crime?The U.S. has some of the least strict gun laws but an extremely high rate of murder compared to other countries, why is that ?
by zzron 11 years ago
As a legal citizen of America, how do you feel about guns?
Copyright © 2022 Maven Media Brands, LLC and respective content providers on this website. HubPages® is a registered trademark of Maven Coalition, Inc. Other product and company names shown may be trademarks of their respective owners. Maven Media Brands, LLC and respective content providers to this website may receive compensation for some links to products and services on this website.
|HubPages Device ID||This is used to identify particular browsers or devices when the access the service, and is used for security reasons.|
|Login||This is necessary to sign in to the HubPages Service.|
|HubPages Traffic Pixel||This is used to collect data on traffic to articles and other pages on our site. Unless you are signed in to a HubPages account, all personally identifiable information is anonymized.|
|Remarketing Pixels||We may use remarketing pixels from advertising networks such as Google AdWords, Bing Ads, and Facebook in order to advertise the HubPages Service to people that have visited our sites.|
|Conversion Tracking Pixels||We may use conversion tracking pixels from advertising networks such as Google AdWords, Bing Ads, and Facebook in order to identify when an advertisement has successfully resulted in the desired action, such as signing up for the HubPages Service or publishing an article on the HubPages Service.|