Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 48

Thread: Firearms in the UK ... POLL

  1. #1
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    North Newbald, , United Kingdom
    Posts
    69

    Post imported post

    Been experimenting with polling software and have a simple pollto whichyou might care to respond.



    http://bogbeagle.wordpress.com/shoul...n-their-homes/



    If you like it, pass it along.

  2. #2
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Swansea which is in Wales not England, , United Kingdom
    Posts
    64

    Post imported post

    Hi Dave, Voted in your poll. I'm a boring old fellow and voted pro gun

    I'm plain old fashioned common sense I'm afraid.

    best wishes to you Marcus, wales.

  3. #3
    Regular Member t33j's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    King George, VA
    Posts
    1,384

    Post imported post

    Voted yes, but wanted to vote no.

    Who decides the definition of, "good character"? That qualifier is completely unnecessary. If that sort of language were law, you may as well have banned guns entirely.
    Sic Semper Tyrannis

  4. #4
    Regular Member t33j's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    King George, VA
    Posts
    1,384

    Post imported post

    Somewhat related example:
    The politicians are Sneaky and take advantage of any opportunity to snatch my rights.

    Section 13 of the Constitution of Virginia says, "That a well regulated militia, composed of the body of the people, trained to arms, is the proper, natural, and safe defense of a free state, therefore, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed; that standing armies, in time of peace, should be avoided as dangerous to liberty; and that in all cases the military should be under strict subordination to, and governed by, the civil power." That was the model for the 2nd amendment to the US Constitution BTW.

    In Virginia, you must possess a permit to carry a handgun concealed... a concealed handgun permit. To obtain one you must submit fingerprints, pass a background check, and have no objections from your local chief LEO.

    Section 13 does not say, "the right of the people to keep and bear arms openly shall not be infringed. It says, "the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed" period, done, end of story, that's all she wrote.

    Both my national and state governments infringe on that right anyway.

    Don't give them an inch.
    Sic Semper Tyrannis

  5. #5
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Swansea which is in Wales not England, , United Kingdom
    Posts
    64

    Post imported post

    Ideally t33j is right. But we have to start somewhere.

  6. #6
    Moderator / Administrator Grapeshot's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    North Chesterfield, Va.
    Posts
    34,622

    Post imported post

    t33j wrote:
    snip...

    and have no objections from your local chief LEO.
    Local LE has NO personal, valid input. This is NOT part of the equation in Va.

    Either you are qualified or disallowed by statute - past events are what count, not objections/opinions.

    http://leg1.state.va.us/cgi-bin/legp...0+cod+18.2-308

    The above cite might work well as a planning model for you - you could do worse.
    Only thing better IMO would be Alaska or Vermont style.

    Yata hey
    You will not rise to the occasion; you will fall back on your level of training. Archilochus, 650 BC

    Old and treacherous will beat young and skilled every time. Yata hey.

  7. #7
    Regular Member CrossFire's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Irving, Texas, USA
    Posts
    408

    Post imported post

    I voted yes. I go to the UK alot and would like to take my little friend with me.

  8. #8
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Swansea which is in Wales not England, , United Kingdom
    Posts
    64

    Post imported post

    I wish you could bring your little friend with you and wear it on your hip!

  9. #9
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    10

    Post imported post

    “No … people do not have the right to effective defence of themselves and their families.”

    How about ‘Yes’ … An increase in the number of suicides,domestic murders, ‘postal’ massacres and accidental deaths of children playing with guns is a small price to pay for our liberty to follow the lead of the USA’?

    Or might that be a loaded question too?

  10. #10
    Moderator / Administrator Grapeshot's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    North Chesterfield, Va.
    Posts
    34,622

    Post imported post

    UKexcop wrote:
    “No … people do not have the right to effective defence of themselves and their families.”

    How about ‘Yes’ … An increase in the number of suicides,domestic murders, ‘postal’ massacres and accidental deaths of children playing with guns is a small price to pay for our liberty to follow the lead of the USA’?

    Or might that be a loaded question too?
    Defense of one's life is not and shall not be vetoed or subjugated by man or ruler. That is apparently a difficult concept for one of the rule enforcers to understand.

    The gun is NOT the problem. The person is - end of argument. Punish the criminal, not the good citizen and stop making criminals of those truly good people.

    Yata hey
    You will not rise to the occasion; you will fall back on your level of training. Archilochus, 650 BC

    Old and treacherous will beat young and skilled every time. Yata hey.

  11. #11
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Swansea which is in Wales not England, , United Kingdom
    Posts
    64

    Post imported post

    Someone who leaves a potentialy dangerous objectin reach of a young child is neglectful and should recieve the attention of the law. The other events will occur regardless, with other tools in all probability. I accept a firearm is a very immediate and effective tool.

  12. #12
    Campaign Veteran
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Lobelville, Tennessee, USA
    Posts
    2,615

    Post imported post

    UKexcop wrote:
    “No … people do not have the right to effective defence of themselves and their families.”

    How about ‘Yes’ … An increase in the number of suicides,domestic murders, ‘postal’ massacres and accidental deaths of children playing with guns is a small price to pay for our liberty to follow the lead of the USA’?

    Or might that be a loaded question too?
    Be very careful with laoded questions. You may get an answer you didn't want. :what:



  13. #13
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Swansea which is in Wales not England, , United Kingdom
    Posts
    64

    Post imported post

    In response -

    "Those who sacrifice a little freedom for some security deserve niether" - One of the founding fathers.

  14. #14
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    10

    Post imported post

    Irony not a strong point of you americans is it.



    Also, saying 'end of argument' after putting your point does not actually mean that it can't be rebutted, just that you're not prepared to listen.



    As for sacrificing freedom for security, perhaps next time I come to the USA I should defend my freedom as an Englishman to drive on the left!



    As to the 'other tools' argument, how many massacres in the USA or the UK have been carried out with, say, cricket bats or vegetable peelers. Since the gun was invented it is the best wayI know of killing lots of people. Ask the parents of Dunblane, whose children were massacred by a previously law-abiding and fully licensed firearms holder 'of good character'.


  15. #15
    Moderator / Administrator Grapeshot's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    North Chesterfield, Va.
    Posts
    34,622

    Post imported post

    UKexcop wrote:
    Ask the parents of Dunblane, whose children were massacred by a previously law-abiding and fully licensed firearms holder 'of good character'.
    Let's not forget that he was a scout leader - so be sure to paint all scout leaders with that broad brush while you are at it.

    BTW - everybody is law abiding until they break the law - duh. So your point is a bit light on substance.

    But you are right - penalize a nation for what the criminals do - don't need any freedoms - the state will decide for you - we'd rather you die than defend yourself. Hows that for irony?

    Yata hey
    You will not rise to the occasion; you will fall back on your level of training. Archilochus, 650 BC

    Old and treacherous will beat young and skilled every time. Yata hey.

  16. #16
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Swansea which is in Wales not England, , United Kingdom
    Posts
    64

    Post imported post

    I'll keep my own counsel.

    I have a higher regard for the words of one of America's "Founding Fathers" than just about any other creature with the ability to speak or type!

    Many were in fact Welsh, so they must have got the Constitutionright

  17. #17
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    , California, USA
    Posts
    560

    Post imported post

    It seems to me that the answers were all preloaded with some sort of bias. How about a "Yes (other reason)" and "No (other reason)" option? At least give folks a shot at weighing in with yes or no without attaching other things they don't agree with to it.

  18. #18
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Swansea which is in Wales not England, , United Kingdom
    Posts
    64

    Post imported post

    Some ofmy countymanscomments are plainly "incendendiary".

    I wonder if he feels that if the RKBA in the UK were ever re-established, us potential citizens maywish to reconsider the rathergenerous pay-scale offered to hisformer (alleged) collegues?

    Have to go, my wife tells me I have to execute somepotatoes with my trusty potato peelerbefore the likes of him call for their prohibition:?




  19. #19
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    10

    Post imported post

    BTW - everybody is law abiding until they break the law - duh. So your point is a bit light on substance.

    Actually, that is my point! The fact that people are scout masters, priests, teachers or other people 'of good character' or 'law-abiding' is no guarantee that they will not suddenly stop being both without warning! Were all the massacres in the USA committed by obvious crazed lunatics? If so, why were they allowed guns in the first place? Or were they just people who didn't show up on the radar until they started shooting?

    As I said elsewhere on this forum, if I lived in the USA Imight want to carry a gun. American society is so awash with firearms and with a murder rate 3 times that of 'violent' Britain, perhaps I'd feel safer. Of course I'd always be worried about someone not of good character trying to take my gun from me. Check out how many armed US police officers are shot with their own weapons.

    In 30 years as a British police officer I nevercarried a weapon on routine patrol. There is violence in our society too, but I did not feel the need then or now to protect myself from my fellow citizens with a gun. They're not, generally, that bad!Remember, you're overwhelmingly more likely, in the UK at least,to be murdered by a member of your family than a stranger.

    'penalize a nation for what the criminals do' The nation is not being penalised. Hardly any British people owned firearms before the latest gun controls.It is only the tiny minority of firearms enthusiasts who were inconvenienced. And, I repeat, the worst incidents of firearms murders were not committed by hardened criminals, drug dealers or persistent burglars. They were ostensibly non-criminal, until they started murdering!

    Not being allowed to carry lethal weapons is not the same as having no freedoms. My freedom to get blind drunk and drive my car as fast as I can along the public highway is severely curbed by the law, but, on the whole, society is probably a better place as a result. I'll take the freedom to go about my life without being shot by some disturbed citizen over his freedom to carry a gun, whatever his motives,any day.







  20. #20
    Moderator / Administrator Grapeshot's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    North Chesterfield, Va.
    Posts
    34,622

    Post imported post

    UKexcop wrote:
    BTW - everybody is law abiding until they break the law - duh. So your point is a bit light on substance.

    Actually, that is my point! The fact that people are 'of good character' or 'law-abiding' is no guarantee that they will not suddenly stop being both without warning! Were all the massacres in the USA committed by obvious crazed lunatics? If so, why were they allowed guns in the first place? Or were they just people who didn't show up on the radar until they started shooting?

    As I said elsewhere on this forum, if I lived in the USA Imight want to carry a gun. American society is so awash with firearms and with a murder rate 3 times that of 'violent' Britain, perhaps I'd feel safer. Of course I'd always be worried about someone not of good character trying to take my gun from me. Check out how many armed US police officers are shot with their own weapons.

    In 30 years as a British police officer I nevercarried a weapon on routine patrol. There is violence in our society too, but I did not feel the need then or now to protect myself from my fellow citizens with a gun. They're not, generally, that bad!Remember, you're overwhelmingly more likely, in the UK at least,to be murdered by a member of your family than a stranger.

    I'll take the freedom to go about my life without being shot by some disturbed citizen over his freedom to carry a gun any day.
    So because there is no "guarantee" that someone won't step over the line, you "guarantee" that there will be plenty of defenseless victims waiting for them.

    The number of policemen shot with their own weapons, is another reason to disarm the populous? Regardless of whom you're attacked by/murdered by, you would have them as defenseless victims. See a pattern here?

    The right of self-defense does NOT originate from any government. You indeed are part of the problem.

    You cannot ever have freedom from disturbed individuals - what is next thought police. The next time someone hijacks an airliner, maybe you'll be there to tell the victims that you have the answers - that should be very consoling to them.

    Yata hey
    You will not rise to the occasion; you will fall back on your level of training. Archilochus, 650 BC

    Old and treacherous will beat young and skilled every time. Yata hey.

  21. #21
    Moderator / Administrator Grapeshot's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    North Chesterfield, Va.
    Posts
    34,622

    Post imported post

    Guns in America - read and apply as needed.

    New report/article from MSNBC.

    Few small errors, but over all balanced report.

    http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/34714389/ns/us_news-life/


    And this one:
    http://www.examiner.com/x-4525-Seatt...examiner-email

    Yata hey

    Edited to add new link.
    You will not rise to the occasion; you will fall back on your level of training. Archilochus, 650 BC

    Old and treacherous will beat young and skilled every time. Yata hey.

  22. #22
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    10

    Post imported post



    I'm not talking about disarming the populace. I'm talking about not introducing firearms into Britain, the subject of this thread, where the population is largely unarmed, at least with any form of firearm (!) and never has been, despite any myths about the past you might have picked up from reading Sherlock Holmes. Some Victorian and Edwardian 'gentlemen' may have carried pistols, but they were a tiny minority.

    My biggest fear is not being defenceless in the face of the attackers and murderers you seem to think we constantly face. Actually, in 30 years in the policeI had to defend myself on more occasions thanI can remember and was always successful. Never needed a gun to do it though, they're not the only way of defending yourself. I'm more frightened of the evil or simply disturbed getting their hands on guns. Even if very strict controls are exercised over legal ownership, what about theft? That seems to be committed by criminals, the ones you don't want armed. Each year in the USA over a third of a million guns are reported stolen. That's a lot of guns in the hands of criminals.I don't want to give British criminals the same source of supply, as well as risking the legitimate holders blowing a fuse and going on the rampage.

    My point is that, in the USA, already a violent and gun-carrying society, your cure for violence might work. In generally unarmed and relatively peaceful Britain (I reiterate, our murder rate is only one third of yours) it would just make you more likely to be on the receiving end of lethal violence. The cure would be worse than the disease.


  23. #23
    Moderator / Administrator Grapeshot's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    North Chesterfield, Va.
    Posts
    34,622

    Post imported post

    UKexcop wrote:

    I'm not talking about disarming the populace. I'm talking about not introducing firearms into Britain, the subject of this thread, where the population is largely unarmed, at least with any form of firearm (!) and never has been, despite any myths about the past you might have picked up from reading Sherlock Holmes. Some Victorian and Edwardian 'gentlemen' may have carried pistols, but they were a tiny minority.

    My biggest fear is not being defenceless in the face of the attackers and murderers you seem to think we constantly face. Actually, in 30 years in the policeI had to defend myself on more occasions thanI can remember and was always successful. Never needed a gun to do it though, they're not the only way of defending yourself. I'm more frightened of the evil or simply disturbed getting their hands on guns. Even if very strict controls are exercised over legal ownership, what about theft? That seems to be committed by criminals, the ones you don't want armed. Each year in the USA over a third of a million guns are reported stolen. That's a lot of guns in the hands of criminals.I don't want to give British criminals the same source of supply, as well as risking the legitimate holders blowing a fuse and going on the rampage.

    My point is that, in the USA, already a violent and gun-carrying society, your cure for violence might work. In generally unarmed and relatively peaceful Britain (I reiterate, our murder rate is only one third of yours) it would just make you more likely to be on the receiving end of lethal violence. The cure would be worse than the disease.
    You ARE talking about KEEPING the populace disarmed.

    I am not a fan of your mythical detective - sorry. I am aware that the working class Brits were disarmed as a result of the landed gentry wishing to control poaching and ultimately because they feared armed rebellion. Yet they, the aristocrats - the titled, have always enjoyed the protection of life and property. Leave it to the few, your minority, to rule the many.

    I do not believe that you "constantly" have anything life threatening, but it only takes once unless you have the lives of a tabby. Never said that a gun was the "only" way to defend oneself and admittedly it should be the last resort. Unfortunately, I have seen how you treat some victims who were forced to protect themselves by whatever means available - I find the punishment of the victim reprehensible.

    "Evil and disturbed" persons will always find a way to wreck havoc. You cannot legislate morality. You should, however, be allowed your God given right to protect yourself from them. You leave people with a cell phone and a prayer then arrive with chalk and camera to solve the crime - how nice.

    Your yearly figure on guns stolen in the USA is wholly inaccurate. The latest figures available indicate 138,035 guns were stolen (approximately 1/2% or less) and declining each year as is the murder rate.
    http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/...uns-usat_x.htm

    You then insult the honest British citizen, or should I say subject, by demonstrating your lack of trust and faith in them - you fear their 'blowing a fuse and going on the rampage." Really little Johny, it just doesn't happen - we've heard all of the fear mongering before. In fact the direct opposite happens - good people are responsible people and will continue to be law abiding.

    To give the devil his due, yes we have more murder in my country. The problem is primarily a social/economic one with no single answer. The solution does not direct itself to disarmament, but perhaps to shutting the revolving doors to our system and through education. We are doing something right as the numbers indicate.
    http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/20203888/

    The cure is not to lie down and accept that the innocent be punished for the acts of the criminals/guilty. Recognize the bad people are the problem, not guns, vehicles, bath tubs or dare I say it - knives.

    Your service of 30 years is appreciated. Had you been a officer in my state, you might have been one of my students - I am a retired Academy instructor. You, sir, would be in need of some in-service training.

    Your assignment is to read and grasp the material in Gun Facts.
    There are a few cites/links included there for your benefit.
    http://www.gunfacts.info/

    There will be a pop quiz and I do not grade on the curve.

    Class dismissed.

    Yata hey

    PS - Sorry you "feel" that way but I deal in facts.
    You will not rise to the occasion; you will fall back on your level of training. Archilochus, 650 BC

    Old and treacherous will beat young and skilled every time. Yata hey.

  24. #24
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    396

    Post imported post

    There are two kinds of British cop: The steady, helpful, gentlemanly Bobby of films and TV who is much admired in naive America.

    And there is the real article: The one who confiscated an elderly man's cane because it could be an offensive weapon. Or the ones in this story I read two or three years ago.

    It seems this drug dealer became upset with his girlfriend and decided to discipline her by tossing her out a second-floor window. After a long period unattended police and ambulance finally showed up and took her to the hospital where a police guard was posted.

    Now the good part. The criminal decided to visit the patient and called the hospital to inform them. The police guard immediately bailed leaving the young woman unprotected. A real cop would have stayed around and given the thug an ASB caution.

    And don't forget the hero who ordered a man to remove the St. George flag from his car lest some put-upon minority be offended or the ones who insist they can't remove trespassers who are taking over private homes and effectively destroying lives.

    I could go on but I'll simply reiterate that your police system is out of control and thoroughly useless.

  25. #25
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Swansea which is in Wales not England, , United Kingdom
    Posts
    64

    Post imported post

    I don't blame the police, they are just puppets (or should that be muppets) for our pathetic political rulers, I won't call them government, they overstepped that mark long ago.

    Ourrulers (parliament), took away an agreement between the people and the Monarch thatparliament were not party to. They had no right or authority toremove OUR RKBA. At the time this RKBA was removed, Britain was a very safe country, not the shambles UKexcopthinks we would become.

    As has been mentioned, the US is becoming safer by the day, and they don't record crimes to suit the polititian of the moment.


Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •