US Gun laws- Will they never learn

[SCT]

Interesting figures, here are some more;

International Homicide rate.

UK 1.2 722

USA 4.2 12,996

Figures don't mean anything mate. In the UK every crime of violence is recorded by the Police, including common assault (ie simply grabbing hold of your arm roughly), even if the 'victim' doesn't want to report it as an assault!
But if I have the choice of being either beaten up or shot I know which I'd prefer, and at least if someone is going to assault me he will have to be big and tough or very sneaky but I won't get done over by some little geek with a big gun.

I think that you have missed the point completely.

Whether or not there is gun control, the criminal will still have a gun because the criminal doesn't give a shit about the law. All gun control does is prevent you, the law abiding citizen from defending yourself.

 

[Visioneer]

I like mechanical things that work nicely, good action, etc. If they happen to look good and make loud noises, so much the better. Aquiring the skill to use them correctly is an opportunity denied to the majority because of their misuse by a minority. If they applied the same logic to cars, bikes and cutlery, we'd all be walking and eating with our fingers.

 

[iangetty]

Gun crime in the UK is not really a major problem, certainly not events like those in Sandy Hook last week. Even in N.Ireland fatal shootings are a relatively rare occurrance. Guns are generally bought illegally which instantly puts those involved on the police radar. It is much easier to control armed criminals with illegal weapons than it is to anticipate lone psychopaths with nothing to flag them up as a danger. I know it's nice to think if the teachers had been armed Lanza would have been stopped but really it's just more untrained people putting more hot stuff through the air.

 

[SCT]

Gun crime in the UK is not really a major problem, certainly not events like those in Sandy Hook last week. Even in N.Ireland fatal shootings are a relatively rare occurrance. Guns are generally bought illegally which instantly puts those involved on the police radar. It is much easier to control armed criminals with illegal weapons than it is to anticipate lone psychopaths with nothing to flag them up as a danger. I know it's nice to think if the teachers had been armed Lanza would have been stopped but really it's just more untrained people putting more hot stuff through the air.

When you live in the US, understand the culture and know how things work - for example you comment about untrained people putting hot stuff through the air - then you will have a better understanding of how it works and may change your viewpoint. In order for someone to have a CCW they need to complete compulsory training, OK it may be a little lacking and coiuld be improved but that applies to most things.

Legislation will not work. You cannot legislate away 300 million guns.

 

[Oasis]

I think that you have missed the point completely.

Whether or not there is gun control, the criminal will still have a gun because the criminal doesn't give a shit about the law. All gun control does is prevent you, the law abiding citizen from defending yourself.

SC I haven't missed the point at all. If you have effective law and order agencies they do the shooting for you, while you can get on and enjoy guns for hunting and target shooting, however
after a full career in law enforcement myself, I am not so naive as to believe that they can achieve this over night but that's because you have created this situation where there are too many guns in circulation to control them.
I'm not suggesting that legally held guns are taken away, but perhaps tighten your laws, enforce them and give appropriate punishments to non compliers. In the UK guns are like cars, if you buy it, sell it, give it away, destroy it or adapt it you must notify the police and get permission to pass it to another gun owner. Is that too much to ask?
And if you are found in possession of an unlicensed or illegal firearm, the punishments are severe, thankfully.


Visioneer, same applies with your comments, cars and motorbikes are controlled by licensing and strict rules of the road. Unfortunately people break those rules and people get killed, but if the rules were strictly applied perhaps they wouldn't.
(incidentally the UK has one of the lowest fatal traffic collision figures in Europe)

It is interesting to note that if you get drunk and get in your car you will be arrested and your licence to drive will be taken away, if however you come home drunk you can still access your firearms, and possibly kill someone, either yourself, someone in your family or even someone passing in the street, whether it's legal to be drunk in charge of a firearm or not (its illegal in the UK).

What you are advocating is that almost everyone can carry a gun and then sort out violent disagreements and criminal behaviour at the point of a gun.
Didn't you try that once already? For some reason it was known as the 'Wild' west. I wonder why?
Then you could save yourself some money by dispensing with police and judges? In fact why not lynch people? That would cut the cost of running prisons.
Remember, tighter control is what I'm talking about, not removing your right to bear arms.
Contrary to what you seem to believe, everyone in the UK who isn't a criminal, and who can get a doctor to say they are sane enough, can have a firearms licence.
But they must keep firearms in a secure gun safe, and give a good reason for having it. Killing other people is not considered a good enough reason, even if they are criminals!

 

[Walks99]

The simple answer to the question posted ....'Will they ever learn?'.....is quite simply no!

The second amendment is ingrained into the US and it would be a pointless gesture to for the US government to try and change what is classed in the US as a freedom.

I once heard this guy from the US shouting - 'you take away my gun, you take away my freedom!'

For the majority of people in the US, this is their view point and I feel very sorry for the minority.

Without wanting to put a finer point on it - leave them to it and let them reap the consequences, they will never learn whilst this attitude is widely held.

I was gutted when I heard of the shootings and my thoughts are very much with the victims and families but unfortunately, I wasn't at all shocked or surprised.

Before anyone has a pop at this post - I am a SG certificate holder and enjoy the sport I choose to take part in but I also know that to hold a SG certificate, it is a privilege afforded to me and not an automatic right.

Stay safe all

Walks

 

[Oasis]

Like wise, I should point out that I have used firearms to do my job for most of my working life, and that I am not only holder of a Shotgun licence, and a Section 1 Firearms licence but also a registered firearms dealer.
So although an advocate of tight gun laws, actually I am not anti firearms and I know the law pretty well.
I don't sell firearms to private individuals and I certainly don't collect them for fun.

For some reason the expression about a 'turkey voting for Christmas' (or thanks giving more appropriately) is rolling around in my head.

 

[boropete]

I think that you have missed the point completely.

Whether or not there is gun control, the criminal will still have a gun because the criminal doesn't give a shit about the law. All gun control does is prevent you, the law abiding citizen from defending yourself.

i disagree completely with this,in the uk gun crime is few and very far between as its so hard to get hold of a firearm after 1996.

 

[SCT]

SC I haven't missed the point at all. If you have effective law and order agencies they do the shooting for you, while you can get on and enjoy guns for hunting and target shooting, however
after a full career in law enforcement myself, I am not so naive as to believe that they can achieve this over night but that's because you have created this situation where there are too many guns in circulation to control them.

The first thing you need to understand is that the vast majority of police officers in the United States are against gun control. The mindset is completely different.

I'm not suggesting that legally held guns are taken away, but perhaps tighten your laws, enforce them and give appropriate punishments to non compliers.

Penalties for non-compliance with existing firearms laws are already severe. A felon in possession of a firearm is going to jail for a lot longer than he would in the UK. There are much more severe penalties for a criminal comitting a crime if he was in possession of a gun at the time.

In the UK guns are like cars, if you buy it, sell it, give it away, destroy it or adapt it you must notify the police and get permission to pass it to another gun owner. Is that too much to ask?

Yes it is too much ask and here's why. It is illegal for BATF to keep records of who has which firearm. Gun registration is against US law. BATF were caught doing this by the back door and there was hell to pay.

Visioneer, same applies with your comments, cars and motorbikes are controlled by licensing and strict rules of the road. Unfortunately people break those rules and people get killed, but if the rules were strictly applied perhaps they wouldn't. (incidentally the UK has one of the lowest fatal traffic collision figures in Europe)

I really don't know where you are getting your information about US gun law from. There are regulations in place for the purchase, ownership and use of guns. Failure to comply is a crime. The rules ARE strictly applied and the penalties are imposed. It is by no means a free for all where you buy a gun at a candy store.

It is interesting to note that if you get drunk and get in your car you will be arrested and your licence to drive will be taken away, if however you come home drunk you can still access your firearms, and possibly kill someone, either yourself, someone in your family or even someone passing in the street, whether it's legal to be drunk in charge of a firearm or not (its illegal in the UK).

That really doesn't make sense at all. There is no difference between the two. If you get in your car drunk and drive it, you will only be arrested if stopped by police and as a former police officer you have acknowledge that drunk drivers arrested is a fraction of those who commit the crime. Same with the gun owner, he will only be arrested if he is stopped by police.

What you are advocating is that almost everyone can carry a gun and then sort out violent disagreements and criminal behaviour at the point of a gun.

You are correct, I am absolutely advocating that every law abiding citizen has the right to carry a gun for self defense, which is actually the already the case. It is an unalienable right under the 2nd amendment to the constitution that presidents and governments do not have the authority to change. [/QUOTE]

Didn't you try that once already? For some reason it was known as the 'Wild' west. I wonder why?
Then you could save yourself some money by dispensing with police and judges? In fact why not lynch people? That would cut the cost of running prisons.

That really is scraping the bottom of the barrel. There is no comparison. In the wild west there were no gun laws for anyone to obey. If there had been, they would have been enforced as they currently are.

Remember, tighter control is what I'm talking about, not removing your right to bear arms.

Removing the RIGHT to bear arms is EXACTLY what you are saying. A right means you do need permission as long as you meet the criteria. Tighter control means seeking permission from government which then turns the RIGHT into a PRIVILIGE.

Contrary to what you seem to believe, everyone in the UK who isn't a criminal, and who can get a doctor to say they are sane enough, can have a firearms licence.
But they must keep firearms in a secure gun safe, and give a good reason for having it. Killing other people is not considered a good enough reason, even if they are criminals!

Firstly, I am under no illusions about the UK. I am a Brit and have friends in the police. Everyone can have a firearms license if they give a good reason for having it.... there you go, a PRIVILIGE not a RIGHT.

 

[SCT]

i disagree completely with this,in the uk gun crime is few and very far between as its so hard to get hold of a firearm after 1996.

Bullcrap. The latest Home Office intelligence reports on the availabilityof guns to criminals show that handguns are purchased regularly on the street for under £500. Gun rental to criminal elements is rife. There are hundres of guns coming into the UK from eastern europe where they can be obtained easily. Please don't tell they won't get past customs. HMRC will admit that they prevent less than 10% of contraband coming into the country.

 

[SCT]

The simple answer to the question posted ....'Will they ever learn?'.....is quite simply no!

The second amendment is ingrained into the US and it would be a pointless gesture to for the US government to try and change what is classed in the US as a freedom.

I once heard this guy from the US shouting - 'you take away my gun, you take away my freedom!'

For the majority of people in the US, this is their view point and I feel very sorry for the minority.

Without wanting to put a finer point on it - leave them to it and let them reap the consequences, they will never learn whilst this attitude is widely held.

I was gutted when I heard of the shootings and my thoughts are very much with the victims and families but unfortunately, I wasn't at all shocked or surprised.

Before anyone has a pop at this post - I am a SG certificate holder and enjoy the sport I choose to take part in but I also know that to hold a SG certificate, it is a privilege afforded to me and not an automatic right.

Stay safe all

Walks

I won't waste my time repeating what has already been said.

However, it is interesting that you don't know UK firearms law and Statute. You are completely wrong. A firearms license in the UK is a privilege and you have to convince the police that you are safe to have it. A shotgun certificate, however, is NOT a privilege, it is still a right under law and the police have to have a damn good reason not to issue it.

 

[boropete]

nope,still disagree.i live in the uk and have visited and lived in and worked in a lot of shithole parts aswell.it only takes one look at the news to see the scarcity of guncrime in our country to realise our laws work.which i'm glad of.

 

[SCT]

nope,still disagree.i live in the uk and have visited and lived in and worked in a lot of shithole parts aswell.it only takes one look at the news to see the scarcity of guncrime in our country to realise our laws work.which i'm glad of.

Irrelevant whether you agree or disagree. Your own government's statistics. Laws work in the UK? You mean the ones used against the indigenous population when criticizing muslims, right? Of course, if it isn't in the daily rag it must not be true.

I am a Brit, I am 56 years old and England used to be a nice place.

 

[Oasis]

Space Coast
Whether people think this a 'Knee jerk reaction' or not is irrelevant, I am sorry that those poor children were killed and I do believe more could be done to stop 'nutters' like Lanza and his stupid 'armageddon fearing' mother from having access to firearms.
I have no problem with decent people having access to firearms, but it seems that being 'decent' isn't a requirement and it is a 'right' that apparently cannot be questioned, bizarre.
You however have put forward a reasoned argument logically and politely.
I don't agree with you but I understand that you have a different view point and attitude to me and I respect that.

I do believe more can be done, if you can manage to abolish slavery and put a man on the moon, after a bit of soul searching surely it's possible to give up some of your rights to save lives.

Whether you continue to have your 'inalienable' right to carry guns or not, as I have said earlier, will not be decided by me or anybody in the UK.
President Obama is in his final term and therefore may not care about losing votes from NRA supporters any more, so perhaps he will actually do something about those rights.
Clint Eastwood may have to pull off his 'empty chair routine' to help protect your rights, (good luck with that one).
Quite ironic when you think that it probably has a lot do with Clint Eastwood, that people in the US are so in love with firearms.
And he talks to empty chairs!
As a gun owner and shooter I'm sure you are sane responsible and a fit and proper person to have a firearm, and I know you deliver sound and safe firearms training, but from my side of the water I'd say you have some bad company.
As for the UK, one or two high profile shootings may recently have given rise to the impression that firearms use is rampant but as an ex National Firearms Tactics Advisor and member of the Tactical Firearms Unit I can honestly say that compared to the USA it is not.
Keep your powder dry and good luck.

 

[boropete]

couldnt have put it better oasis,from a fellow blue card holder

 

[Howardk]

So Nobabma may have to do something about our rights huh? Listen to yourself. You are still in the European mindset and can't escape it. You think it's fine that someone does "something" (ie=reduces/takes away) our rights. Before long we'll be just like the rest of the EU begging for some sliver of our former rights. If I wanted to live in a place where I have to beg for freedoms then I'd certainly leave here!

Another thing that bothers me is your general comments as a British police officers about this.....Do you really so naiively believe that you can be everywhere at the snap of a finger to "do the shooting for them?" As a long time cop I would think that you have it figured out but I guess not. You must have been the best bobby in the world if you think you can protect every citizen in your country in their exact time of need. That's a pipe dream, not reality. Any citizen who believes that just crawled out from under a rock.

I'm on a UK based K9 training forum. All I ever hear about is the rediculously slow police response times and failure to prevent crimes, or the woefully inadequate investigative skills or arrests. I hear about the rampant burglaries and assaults and the fact that the people barely have the freedom to protect themselves because the police are supposed to do it. That's why protection dogs, private security and billions of dollars in CCTV (yea, that'll save your ass) are obtained cause the cops do such a great job. In a country so small with so many cops and security officers your place should be a crime free Bali Hai.

 

[littlewoman]

I have to say, I don't feel oppressed by our government, I can't think of much that I'd like to do that I'm prohibited from doing other than deal out the odd slap to someone for being a complete idiot or anti-social. My main criticism of our governments of recent years would be being too soft on crime, that's nothing to do with humans rights legislation, the courts just don't hand down long enough sentences.

 

[Deleted member 33]

I always do whatever I want anyway



Rich H

 

[boropete]

So Nobabma may have to do something about our rights huh? Listen to yourself. You are still in the European mindset and can't escape it. You think it's fine that someone does "something" (ie=reduces/takes away) our rights. Before long we'll be just like the rest of the EU begging for some sliver of our former rights. If I wanted to live in a place where I have to beg for freedoms then I'd certainly leave here!

Another thing that bothers me is your general comments as a British police officers about this.....Do you really so naiively believe that you can be everywhere at the snap of a finger to "do the shooting for them?" As a long time cop I would think that you have it figured out but I guess not. You must have been the best bobby in the world if you think you can protect every citizen in your country in their exact time of need. That's a pipe dream, not reality. Any citizen who believes that just crawled out from under a rock.

I'm on a UK based K9 training forum. All I ever hear about is the rediculously slow police response times and failure to prevent crimes, or the woefully inadequate investigative skills or arrests. I hear about the rampant burglaries and assaults and the fact that the people barely have the freedom to protect themselves because the police are supposed to do it. That's why protection dogs, private security and billions of dollars in CCTV (yea, that'll save your ass) are obtained cause the cops do such a great job. In a country so small with so many cops and security officers your place should be a crime free Bali Hai.

why would we want to go around shooting people for them when the crime doesnt warrant it? as i said believe all you want from a forum but i feel safe in my country with our laws.The only drawback is the pitiful sentences handed out

 

[Deleted member 33]

Let us not mince our words here.

We Brits think you Yanks are daft.

End of.



(Generally speaking of course )



Rich H