Britain Is Bleeding

Now if everyone in the U.S. that had a firearm was a mad dog killer, I would be a huge gun control fanatic, however, that is not the case.

Dying because some idiot decides I should die is not glamorous either.

A week ago, an unfourtunate boy was raped and no gun was used, the creep just used superior strength to subdue the poor 11 year old child.

The people committing the majority of crimes and Criminal activities are a very small minority, gangs and illegal drugs and prostitution and kill each other in turf wars.

To pretend that taking away or restricting law abiding citizens from owning firearms and concealed carry is foolish.

Many horrible acts are performed without guns by men of superior strength, unseemly acts, and sometimes a small revolver held in reserve in a pocket is enough to discourage an attacker.

Finally, Millions of law abiding citizens have firearms and concealed carry, and use their firearms not to harm anyone, but to save lives and prevent rape and other crimes.

This is further reinforced by States that are shall issue of concealed carry permits to all law abiding citizens of good record.

I prefer not to be a victim.

 

Sadly your insane gun laws make it some 5 times more likely that you will be. But hey if you are good with that knock yourself out ?

 

How come Russia's strict gun laws don't make them safer than the US?

 

I am a Retired Police Officer, so am exempt from most of the laws you criticize.
The people doing the attacking are prohibited from possessing firearms of any type.

I have successfully defended myself many times from violent convicted felons, these were not your ordinary nice everyday folks out for tea.

What you call "Insane gun laws" are nothing of the kind.
As long as a firearm is not used, you are fine with violent acts.

Another example of a young fellow that was raped multiple times and after, they snapped both his elbows like carrots.

Insane gun laws are the laws that restrict law abiding citizens from defending themselves and turns them into ready victims.

 

Because the bulk of Russia isnt really a first world country (take this from someone whos been) and I'm sure comparing yourselves with many corrupt banana republics will make you feel good too. It doesn't really exonerate your lethal firearms psyche in the first world now does it ?

 

The relative numbers tell a different story

 

You really can't tell the difference between criminals and the law abiding majority ?

 

Yeah they looked really cunning when one guy with a machete stabbed at least one cop to death and almost made it into parliament before he was stopped....by a guy with a gun.

They looked especially cunning during the London riots when the police basically ran away and waited for it to be over.

Then the cunning really revealed itself when 3 jihadis with knives took on thousands of Brits who all ran away until they were stopped.....by guys with guns.

Ever notice how your politicians in the UK are surrounded by a wall of guns? Strange that.

 

You forgot grenades.

 

what causes a European to obsess over our firearms laws and our freedoms? WE don't spend hours on a British board complaining about your stupid gun laws or your hysterical reactions to one mass shooter

 

Cease with the semantics and answer the question as it is presented. Would it be preferred if the rate of killing remains unchanged, but the methodology of the killing is something other than a firearm? The same number of deaths will occur regardless, the only difference will be the tool that was used. Why exactly does the utilized implement matter more than the fact that people are being murdered without regard?

Would a difference be made in the matter if they were achieving their annual homicide rate through beating one another to death with crowbars and framing hammers? If such were the case, what would the ultimate, meaningful difference be in the matter?

 

Look at who is doing the killings.
Dedicated criminals and not your law abiding citizens with concealed carry permits.

 

Check out the homicide rate. Check out yours. Check out your spree killing rates. Then check out ours. You might notice something...

 

Which boils down to one simple thing, you're on tiny islands with 65 million people crammed into it, and you don't share a border with the most violent drug dealing countries in the world.

If it wasn't for our drug cartel and minority violence our murder rate would be the same as yours used to be.

Here's the facts about the UK:

After the gun laws in 1968 your murder rate went up and continued to go up.

After the gun laws in 1997 your murder rate went up and continued to go up, until it finally did go back to 1997 levels recently.

Here's the other thing, you simply cannot compare the US murder rate and the UK murder rate. In the US, a dead body that isn't a suicide or an accident is categorized as a homicide. Not true in the UK. In the UK, it's not a homicide until there is a CONVICTION.

All of Harold Shipman's murders, for example, were all counted in one year (2003), not the years in which they occurred.

It also has to do with how your coroners issue "narrative" verdicts.

https://www.gov.uk/government/uploa...t_data/file/217475/coroners-bulletin-2011.pdf

In 2011, for example, there were over 4000 "narrative" verdicts. How many of those are murders is unclear.

Fact is, we cannot compare your murder rate to ours.

At a minimum, it is not as low as what England claims if they were to use the same reporting the US does. At worse, it's higher than ours.

 

We have high violent crime rates, inflamed arguably by consequences of high inequalities (and lack of social mobility). What we don't have is high homicide rates. What we don't have is any evidence that gun culture has inflamed such problems. Look closer to home!

Please refer to one respected source that argues that gun control in the UK increased murder rates. Try to find one! (Hint: There isn't one, but I have to go through the charade that you care about the evidence)

That merely makes time series analysis difficult (which arguably isn't going to be very interesting either, given the low homicide rate). You really need to up your game!

Utter drivel!

 

What you have is a system where there is no homicide until there is a conviction. Period. That's not the same and you can't compare your system of counting homicides with ours.

I can certainly argue that your gun laws did not reduce homicide, because the homicide rate did not go down after implementation.

I can argue that the people the government in the UK considers important, i.e politicians, have access to plenty of firearms.

I can argue that 3 jihadis with knives made thousands of brits cower under tables until men with guns got there.

Just wait until your next Dunkirk. History has a way of repeating itself.

 

Can the article be cited?

 

It was the Borough market and (another) London bridge attack.

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2017-06-...ge-and-borough-market-attack-unfolded/8588014

Three guys with knives basically rampaged around taking out unarmed cops and citizens. It would have been much worse if men with guns weren't on high alert from the Manchester concert bombing.

 

Any brits reading this: Don't worry y'all. When it happens again, and it will, we'll send you some of our personal arms like we did back in the day. This time though, you ****ers are signing contracts: Toss the guns into the sea and go to jail for theft of property then be sued in tort for conversion.

 

I have a better idea for our cousins across the pond, they have been warned, and if it indeed happens again, it is their own look out and let them deal with it or not.

Reference the Fairy Story;
The Ant and the Grasshopper.

 

I figure if they need it again it'll be because their ants are finally fending off their grasshoppers.
Don't see a problem with Ants helping Ants, as long as the latter does not go back to status quo with their grasshoppers

 

The parallel really only works within the setting of a fairy tale intended to tell a moral. In real life, a colony of ants will tear a grasshopper completely apart. Even a land crab will be picked clean in a conflict with a nest of ants.

 

The parable is about grasshoppers not preparing for winter and not having food. The movie "a bugs life" and certain popular fiction novels (perhaps mirroring a local version of the parable?) alter the meaning to producers vs leechers by force.
In that way it is about a superior force (ants) who either don't know their own strength or cannot muster the will to use it and so go along to get along, living life being exploited by the inferior force with no qualms (grasshoppers).

 

I saw the short sighted approach of the grasshopper
( British ) in not preparing for Winter as did the Ant
( U.S. ) and when Winter ( War ) came, the grasshopper ( British ) had no food ( guns )..

History will have repeated itself and our cousins seemed to have learned very little from it.

 

Did you know that Americans are some 200 times more likely to be killed in domestic firearms violence than Europeans are by terrorism ?