English Gun Ban Works
01.05.07At least thats what any anti-gun liberal will tell you when arguing the case that banning guns doesn’t stop gun crime. Take this interesting case, for example. A cute wee little limey girl by the tender age of 14 has been convicted of dealing machine guns such as Mac 10’s (Spray and Pray, baby!) to London gangsters.
A girl of 14 has been charged with conspiring to supply machineguns to London crime gangs.
The girl, who cannot be named because of her age, was one of four people arrested by detectives from Operation Trident which specializes in black on black gun crime.
She is being held in juvenile custody today.
The arrests came after a weekend of gun violence across London in which two men were shot dead and four others were injured.
One man was shot in the face at close range in Harlesden and another died after a shoot-out at an illegal gambling club frequented by Albanians in Park Royal.
A third man, described as an innocent passer-by, is critically ill after another nightclub shooting.
The 14-year-old, from Colindale, was charged along with two youths and a 31-year-old woman.
She is accused of conspiring to supply two revolvers and two machineguns - including a Mach 10 known as “spray and pray” which is a favorite weapon of Yardiestyle gangsters.
The girl is also accused of three charges of possession of prohibited weapons and three counts of possessing ammunition.
So I would like to hear more from our leftist anti-gun friends on how the crime rate is so much lower in England, because only the bad guys have guns?
http://www.guncite.com/gun_control_gcgvintl.html
http://www.guncite.com/gun_control_gcgvinco.html
England comes out better no matter how you crunch the numbers. Why? Because illegal guns are also far more difficult to obtain in England than here. I didn’t say that there aren’t gun homicides in england, and this is certainly an interesting story because of the involvement of a young child.
I also conceded that gun control is probably no longer effective in the US because illegal weapons are so easy to find. A critical part of gun control is stopping the flow of “black guns”, and we have much bigger borders than England.
But that doesn’t mean we should start passing out guns to anyone who seems “responsible” enough… If someone wants a gun, and is “responsible”, then sure, they should be able to get one. But I think if you started offering teachers guns (as you suggested) most of them would refuse, and take the risk.
What’s your take on background checks?
# January 5th, 2007 at 1:12 pmEven if youre asking Chad, Im still going to answer this one. I support background checks, they make sense. Of course someone who has a record for armed robbery should not be able to buy a shotgun, or any type of firearm for that matter. However, I have heard of instances in which people who had many speeding tickets were denied firearms. I fail to follow the logic of that one but Im sure its only rare instances. Background checks are a logical way to keep as many firearms as possible out of the hands of those who shouldnt have them while still allowing those who want them and are responsible enough to handle them to bear arms.
# January 5th, 2007 at 2:08 pmNow, correct me if I’m wrong…
but lookin at the guncite “stats” for England.
I would say, that England has some pretty high Homicide rates for not having any firearms, and such a smaller population than the US. Does that mean…*gasp* people are using knives??? or baseball bats, or little foreign cars, or kung fu, or sticks with sharpened rocks tied to them??
point being, that killers will kill. wether or not they have a gun. if someone wants you dead, but can’t get a gun… I’m pretty sure they won’t drop the whole thing over it.
I’m not very good at math… but I would say that chart shows England to have a higher homicide rate percentage wise. AND it’s a couple years older than the US stats.
# January 5th, 2007 at 8:08 pmHey! About time I showed up, good time too.
In the UK you are now 4 times more likely to be involved in a violent crime against the person than in the US! Over 38% of home invasions/burglarys in the UK are done with the homeowner present as opposed to under 10% in the US… hmmm, I wonder why?
Well, it goes even deeper than the fact that the law-abiding UK population has been disarmed. The 1997 firearms ban opened a hugh doorway to crime, that coupled with a duty to retreat even in your own home and burglary being regarded by the UK criminal justice system as a minor misdemeanor that oft goes unpunished has created a pro criminal culture.
Let’s not even mentioned the unchecked illegal immigration and don’t ask social services network they’re afforded… hmmm, starting to sound familiar.
# January 7th, 2007 at 1:09 amOh, I almost forgot, the Police don’t seem that inclined to answer burglary calls anymore… unless of course you’ve been shot whilst trying to commit one, then they’ll be after the homeowner like white on rice.
# January 7th, 2007 at 1:12 amwe will see this kind of evil here if bill and hill get back in office and may God Help you all.
buy Guns Buy Lots of Guns.
# January 7th, 2007 at 5:32 pmThose rates are per 100,000 people, so lower number = less crime. Absolute statistics would be kinda useless, because as you point out, america has more people, and hence logically more murders. but the murder rate per X people won’t necessarily increase just cause your population is 300 mil instead of 60 mil.
“Does that mean…*gasp* people are using knives??? or baseball bats, or little foreign cars, or kung fu, or sticks with sharpened rocks tied to them??
point being, that killers will kill. wether or not they have a gun. if someone wants you dead, but can’t get a gun… I’m pretty sure they won’t drop the whole thing over it.”
I’m actually very glad you brought this up. I think this point is the source of much of the disagreement between the anti/pro gun people. I think the feeling that a lot of people have about guns, and it’s a feeling i can understand, is that the ease with which one can kill/harm others with a gun versus a knife, baseball, etc. makes a vital difference. guns kill easily at a distance, with limited physical exertion - point and pull the trigger. you don’t have to be big and strong or agile to use one.
you might say, “great, that allows people who wouldn’t otherwise be able to defend themselves against stronger people to do so, it evens the playing field.” but it also allows people who wouldn’t otherwise do so to commit crimes and violence.
you cannot ignore the psychological effect of guns- as i mentioned before, for many people they represent power and freedom. but which kind of power and freedom? power to enforce the law, and defend themselves, and freedom to live independently without fear? or power over others and the freedom to do whatever takes one’s fancy?
depends on the owner.
# January 8th, 2007 at 6:30 amGun control works like flies cause garbage…
# January 24th, 2007 at 5:43 pmahooooooooooooooo werewolves of london ahooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo
# January 28th, 2007 at 7:29 pm