Welcome to the UK, Where Anti-Gun Laws Make Us Safe

Search

New member
Joined
Sep 21, 2004
Messages
5,398
Tokens
The police have failed us - so we've hired a 6ft 6in security guard

When Harriet Sergeant and her neighbours discovered a shared sense of powerlessness at the level of crime in their street, they set about organising the policing of it themselves. But why should they have to? And why, when some US police forces have regained the trust of communities, can their example not be followed in Britain?


(London Telegraph)

In the still hours of the early morning, my neighbour could sometimes hear a man rattling the door handles of the shops opposite, checking if they were locked. The phantom rattler was the local bobby, who passed her house four times every 24 hours on his beat.

guard01.jpg

On the beat: Yauheni, a private secuirty guard hired by Westminster residents

That was 40 years ago. Today, no one in the five streets of my Westminster neighbourhood can remember the last time they saw a policeman on the beat.

The Home Office says that crime is "low" and that the "real" problem is not crime itself but the public's irrational fear of crime. But when I asked 20 households in my immediate neighbourhood what crime they had experienced in the last three years, the tally suggested otherwise: 17 muggings and assaults, three houses burgled, two cars stolen and numerous incidents of petty theft and criminal damage.

Just a couple of weeks ago, a two-minute walk away from where I live, two men armed with handguns and knives broke into a house where the family were sitting down to supper.

My neighbours and I have concluded that the "real" problem is not fear, but crime itself - and the absence of police to deal with it. People are angry, and they are now taking matters into their own hands.

Story continued here.


Phaedrus
 

hangin' about
Joined
Aug 21, 2003
Messages
13,875
Tokens
Funny how the title to this thread leads one to believe we'll be reviewing a link about how the UK's anti-gun legislation is leading to an increase in crime. Funny, too, that the article is about a serious deficit in policing.
 

New member
Joined
Sep 21, 2004
Messages
5,398
Tokens
Lawful British citizens are forbidden to own guns, and generally forbidden to defend themselves from criminals. In some parts of America a situation similar to the above might play out, but it would be a rare case, because in a large number of cases one home invader would be found adding an art deco splash pattern to the dining room wallpaper and that would pretty likely be the last such activity in that neighbourhood for a long time.

But, OK, point conceded: Brits owning guns might not help the above crime problem. However, Brits being denied the right not only to own a gun but in many cases to self-defence at all is a doubly apalling situation in light of the above.


Phaedrus
 

hangin' about
Joined
Aug 21, 2003
Messages
13,875
Tokens
I should think that the notion of increased demand for privatised law enforcement would give you goosebumps ...
 

New member
Joined
Sep 21, 2004
Messages
5,398
Tokens
Not like that. Under the current legal regime the Belrusian gentleman will either be killed or severely injured, or arrested and possibly imprisoned or deported the first time he encounters any seriously dangerous criminals, depending on how the situation goes down.

The citizens are paying taxes, and getting nothing. So they pay even more, and get slightly more than nothing. Doesn't make me tingle in the slightest, except when I ponder the lovely fact that I don't live in the UK and day after tomorrow I'll never have occassion to visit there again (my one family member who means something to me is coming to live out her days in the States finally; London is simply too dangerous and she can't legally do anything to defend herself since a) guns are banned and b) she isn't oneof the *exempt* political/royalty class who are allowed to be surrounded at all times by machine gun-toting guards.)


Phaedrus
 

New member
Joined
Sep 21, 2004
Messages
2,228
Tokens
P. is a gun nut.
He'll use any excuse to arm the general public.

We have some of the toughest anti-gun laws in the world, and it makes the streets much safer.

Especially on a Saturday night when the idiots and loonies suddenly appear in droves and have a few beers.
Its not just minor fights, theres running battles, some guys even attack brick walls with thier fists and boots while others headbutt lamposts.

And he wants to make guns freely available...omg

London is a craphole anyway, about 8 million people living like rats in a box.
If you have the money to be a westminster resident then you have the collateral to get the hell out of that place.

I found out a while back, I've got more chance of being a UK lottery winner, than a UK gun victim.
Gun laws work.

Everyone had guns in the wild west, but I don't recall that period being a haven of civilised tranquility.
I believe that Afghanistan and Iraq have lots of guns too.

[This message was edited by eek on April 06, 2004 at 05:32 PM.]
 

New member
Joined
Sep 21, 2004
Messages
5,398
Tokens
Your intellectual dishonesty is breathtaking eek.

I shan't bother with an overly detailed rebuttal, since every time I make one you just run from the thread and wait for the next one, but to touch on a couple of things briefly:

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>
P. is a gun nut.
He'll use any excuse to arm the general public.
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Both of these assertions are simply untrue.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>
We have some of the toughest anti-gun laws in the world, and it makes the streets much safer.

Especially on a Saturday night when the idiots and loonies suddenly appear in droves and have a few beers.
Its not just minor fights, theres running battles, some guys even attack brick walls with thier fists and boots while others headbutt lamposts.
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Your streets are much safer, and therefore on Saturday nights you have idiots and loonies engaging in running battles? Are you so daft that you cannot see the contradiction?

I refer you to this post from one of our many pointless debates about gun control, which you true to form just disregard once you realise you're fúcked if you continue the line of conversation.

Or if you'd just prefer the juicy bits:

Britain, Australia Top U.S. in Violent Crime

Gun Control’s Twisted Outcome: Restricting firearms has helped make England more crime-ridden than the U.S.

Part Two of Benedict De LaRosa's "Can Gun Control Reduce Crime?"

Results of the Seventh United Nations Survey of Crime Trends and Operations of Criminal Justice Systems (PDF file)

Yes, truth be told, since the ban on guns, you are less likely to be killed with a gun. Who would have thought that a reduction in the physical number of guns in the UK would have led to a reduction in gun-related death? Astounding!

(the point, eek, is not that we should have guns so that we can all go have shoot-em-up parties in Swindon. Perhaps at some point in the future you will at last grasp this.)


Phaedrus
 

New member
Joined
Sep 21, 2004
Messages
2,228
Tokens
icon_smile.gif


And we agree to differ on this. I know, I know.

So we arm the individual, and the Police need to be armed to counter this, and the criminal needs to arm to counter them, and the individual needs to get better arms to counter them and so on.

Introducing guns into ANY relatively violent society is escalation.
So we have decided not to escalate, things are quite bad enough thankyou very much.

The thing is, if people really wanted guns here, there would be a thriving black market, like with drugs, or kiddie porn, or any 'illegal' commodity.
Prohibition doesn't change demand, it just drives it underground.

There's no thriving black market because we don't want guns here.

On the other hand the level of drug use is so huge that we are now considering 'coffee shops'.
(see other thread.)
 

Honey Badger Don't Give A Shit
Joined
Sep 21, 2004
Messages
46,540
Tokens
Actually your levels of 'drug use' are much lower than in the U.S.

And the proposed coffeeshops would be for cannabis only, which is where the heavy demand is, just like in the U.S.

Of course, public safety would be increased if all drugs were legalized, but cannabis is the logical place to start.

As for GUNS (he added after reviewing the Topic Subject), I've never seen a reason to own one, but don't mind if others have them, provided they don't use them in a commission of a crime.
 

New member
Joined
Sep 21, 2004
Messages
5,398
Tokens
posted by eek:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>
So we arm the individual, and the Police need to be armed to counter this, and the criminal needs to arm to counter them, and the individual needs to get better arms to counter them and so on.
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

This has never played out in practice, despite the nearly ubiquitous availability of heavy assault weapons in the US. I understand the logic, and I even personally think that it makes sense, but even the most horrific gun crimes are generally carried out with pretty mundane hardware -- just more reinforcement of the fact that it is not the guns themselves committing the crime, but the idiot criminals.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>
Introducing guns into ANY relatively violent society is escalation.

So we have decided not to escalate, things are quite bad enough thankyou very much.
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I understand.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>
The thing is, if people really wanted guns here, there would be a thriving black market, like with drugs, or kiddie porn, or any 'illegal' commodity. Prohibition doesn't change demand, it just drives it underground.
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I agree wholeheartedly.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>
There's no thriving black market because we don't want guns here.
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Perhaps we have different definitions of the word "thriving" but I know of two illegal gun dealers in the UK and one in Ireland, and I've hardly even looked (never even been to Ireland actually.) The existence of guns is not neccesarily evidenced by blood pouring in the streets apparently.


Phaedrus
 

hangin' about
Joined
Aug 21, 2003
Messages
13,875
Tokens
Illegal guns were, at some point, legal. How many (and I did tried to find this stat) illegal guns on the streets of the US are estimated to have been the fruits of robbing a lawful household?

For those nations whose governments are a real and penetrating threat to its people, gun control may be harmful. But to supposedly peace-loving nations, I see them as hypocritical and counter-productive. Just my opinion, though.
 

New member
Joined
Sep 21, 2004
Messages
5,398
Tokens
posted by xpanda:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>
Illegal guns were, at some point, legal. How many (and I did tried to find this stat) illegal guns on the streets of the US are estimated to have been the fruits of robbing a lawful household?
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Not sure, but some reliable statistics should be out there. I'll look around some.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>
For those nations whose governments are a real and penetrating threat to its people, gun control may be harmful. But to supposedly peace-loving nations, I see them as hypocritical and counter-productive. Just my opinion, though.
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

All governments are a real threat to the governed. You may have noticed that it is seldom the citizenry of a nation which makes war.


Phaedrus
 

hangin' about
Joined
Aug 21, 2003
Messages
13,875
Tokens
Yes, Mr. Sarcasm, but we aren't discussing tyrannical nations, we are discussing democracies with strong international alliances. Further, if the US government made a serious run at terrorising its citizens, I'm guessing that widespread gun ownership may be a little, well, too little.

At any rate, I am glad we have restrictions on firearms here, as Eek is. Enjoy target practice.
 

New member
Joined
Sep 21, 2004
Messages
5,398
Tokens
posted by xpanda:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>
Yes, Mr. Sarcasm, but we aren't discussing tyrannical nations, we are discussing democracies with strong international alliances.
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I am not being sarcastic. All governments are a threat to their citizens. As President Washington said, "Government is not reason, It is not eloquence, It is Force: like fire it is a dangerous servant and a fearful master."

"Democracies with strong international alliances" are even worse, because they are a threat not only to their own people but to people well outside of the sphere of those governments' official influence -- many of said people who wish neither the governments nor the citizrny they represent the least bit of harm, and are largely preoccupied with getting on with their lives when they are rather suddenly seperated from same by a stray missile.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>
Further, if the US government made a serious run at terrorising its citizens, I'm guessing that widespread gun ownership may be a little, well, too little.
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

You are very wrong. Ownership of guns is not what makes Americans tyranny-resistant; it is the fact that large portions of the American populace would quickly and brutally murder such a ruler as Saddam Hussein. There are certainly state-worshipping sheep here in America of course, but their effectiveness in helping to shape a true totalitarian state is highly dubious, especially compared to the likely force and speed of resistance to such a potentiality by the rest of us.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>
At any rate, I am glad we have restrictions on firearms here, as Eek is. Enjoy target practice.
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I don't do enough target practice, but then as I said above I am not a "gun nut" as eek characterises me. I hardly ever think about guns except when I get into a gun control debate online, and I live in an environment where they are indeed very common.

I also am not speaking about restrictions on guns in general, but rather the ban on them as is practiced in the UK and as attempted here from time to time. As I have stated in other threads on the issue, gun crime laws make far more sense and are proven to be more effective in controlling violent cirme than gun control laws.


Phaedrus
 

New member
Joined
Sep 20, 2004
Messages
5,412
Tokens
Phaedrus,

I really don't get something here. If you are in an environment in which gun control is not an issue, then why do you care about such laws in other environments? If you needed a gun to protect yourself you most surely are intelligent enough to get one and prevent it from getting discovered (unless you need it of course) even if it's against the law, so why do you care about how such laws affect other people in Britain?
icon_rolleyes.gif
 

New member
Joined
Sep 21, 2004
Messages
5,398
Tokens
It is possible to be troubled by something which does not effect a person: the war in Iraq troubles me despite the extremely limited effect it has on me; the Holocaust bothers me despite the fact that I am not Jewish and that it occured nearly three decades before I was born. Jessica Simpson bothers me despite the fact that I can simply choose to not purchase or otherwise consume her music, television show, etc.

Do note however that I am not calling for President Bush to liberate the British or any such thing.


Phaedrus
 

New member
Joined
Sep 20, 2004
Messages
5,412
Tokens
In the case of anything related to Iraq or the Holocaust I see a close connection in that your country's policies and culture are greatly affected by these and that affects your environment directly. In the case of a media star who is popular in your country, I see direct effects to the extent that your fellow citizens' attitudes and behavior are influenced, although I admit this is less significant than matters of war. In most cases I see the links when the effects are only indirect but in this UK arms case I still fail to see any meaningful link. Does it have to do with them being the key ally in the war and making an effort to bridge a gap in the two cultures? Or is there another angle which better illustrates the connection?
 

New member
Joined
Sep 21, 2004
Messages
5,398
Tokens
I'm not sure where you're going with the line of questioning, counselor.

Seriously, there's no connection; no agenda. Just bugs me.

I am pretty sure that the Iraq war and the Holocaust would bother me just as much if I were not American. Jessica Simpson maybe not.

In an aside, I would think it almost impossible to find an issue, especially a political one, most especially a political one which resulted in war, that could not be "linked" to an American in the manner in which you seem to be "linking" the Iraq war and the Holocaust to me.


Phaedrus
 

New member
Joined
Sep 20, 2004
Messages
5,412
Tokens
Phaedrus,

My reasons for asking are simply to try to understand where you're coming from. When a war topic is discussed I feel a sense of involvement because I see the links to me (or to you or to anyone in the western world) and so it becomes relevant and interesting. In this case I just want to understand why it's important to you in case there might be some reason why it should be important to me. If there isn't any, well, no big deal, but I consider you a highly intelligent and rational being so I want to try to understand your angles better. If I thought you (or anyone else) had some sort of ulterior motives or agenda I'd come out and say it.
 

New member
Joined
Sep 21, 2004
Messages
5,398
Tokens
You have a pretty interesting point here (and thanks for the compliment.) The more I think about it the more I begin to suspect I keep it up solely to bust eek's balls.

I will point out that while the majority of politically- and socially-motivated threads that I post here tend to center around the US (for obvious reasons) I am interested in global politics and society because I travel a great deal, and do a great deal of business outside of the States, so to an extent some of the policies and trends which I celebrate or (more frequently) bemoan do have an effect on me.


Phaedrus
 

Forum statistics

Threads
1,119,215
Messages
13,565,523
Members
100,768
Latest member
cluon4073
The RX is the sports betting industry's leading information portal for bonuses, picks, and sportsbook reviews. Find the best deals offered by a sportsbook in your state and browse our free picks section.FacebookTwitterInstagramContact Usforum@therx.com