It's not always about the volume, as the severity can greatly outweigh the frequency.
Proportion is dependent on context. Is the risk of something so severe really worth not having a little more annoyances for those who use guns?
Poll: UK Gun Laws
- Thread starter NVP
- Start date
Proportion is dependent on context. Is the risk of something so severe really worth not having a little more annoyances for those who use guns?
IMO in this country we mostly have the balance right - gun violence is rare, outside of criminal activity/gang stuff even more rare. If we were seeing even small numbers of mass shooting events it might be another story but domestic dispute related homicide/suicide situations where the firearm is ultimately a relatively small component of that IMO aren't grounds for changing gun laws in any fundamental way.
Soldato
- Joined
- 23 May 2006
- Posts
- 7,894
even as someone who has no interest in guns, i think you are under estimating exactly how many people in this country use them.
of course it is possible that given my back ground it is me who is over estimating them i suppose
The only part about guns I don't really like is that it makes it too easy to do evil things. That's it.
Otherwise, I am a gun fan. I don't own any at present however (even having moved to the US).
Legitimate reasons would be livestock protection, personal protection of a client, vermin removal etc, sport shooting and hunting. I wouldn't be against sport shooting users having there firearms locked up at the facility they use/belong to though.
Typically in the UK we don't really need guns for defence, and personally wouldn't want to see it.
Otherwise, I am a gun fan. I don't own any at present however (even having moved to the US).
Legitimate reasons would be livestock protection, personal protection of a client, vermin removal etc, sport shooting and hunting. I wouldn't be against sport shooting users having there firearms locked up at the facility they use/belong to though.
Typically in the UK we don't really need guns for defence, and personally wouldn't want to see it.
Associate
- Joined
- 6 Dec 2013
- Posts
- 2,070
- Location
- Nottingham
wonder if those who are pro gun would change there mind if they had a gun in there face being waved around. one to think about.
The guy appears to have shot his 7-year old daughter..
Just take the L and accept that a person that far gone isn't going to be deterred from their homicidal path because they don't have access to a firearm.
So is rat posion (more specifically to kill), as the person you were replying to mentioned
Do you have to make an effort to spread so much nonsence and disinformation or does it come naturally?
"We are aware of speculation regarding a firing range on the site. We can confirm this range does not form part of our scene or our inquiries. Any reporting to suggest otherwise is inaccurate."
Last edited:
Soldato
- Joined
- 23 May 2006
- Posts
- 7,894
i think that is a pointless argument..... if my child was run over (god forbid) by a drunk driver, it could well change my views on stricter controls on alcohol, i may even want a full prohibition on it, after all cant have a drunk driver if they cant get drunk............... it wouldnt make me correct however. There is a reason why people on a jury are not meant to have had life experiences which give them a huge bias from the get go.
Last edited:
Personally I don't come to an opinion lightly, though might be changed by events, but I'd have thought about stuff like that before making an opinion and stuff like how I'd feel if my family was on the receiving end and so on. I've had people wave a gun in my face before and doesn't change my stance on firearms, albeit only one of those instances was in the UK (one of my school friends wound a neighbour up to the point he lost it and threatened us with a shotgun - was lucky we didn't tell anyone at the time).
EDIT: Albeit I've not as an adult been in a situation facing a madman intent on killing me with a gun with no ability to defend myself.
Last edited:
Where do you draw the line though? is a gun purely designed and built from the ground up for sports shooting any different from a baseball bat which if you reduce it down is just a club for killing things?
(Slightly referring towards your wider post there personally not a fan of hunting either).
Associate
- Joined
- 9 May 2022
- Posts
- 1,899
- Location
- London
How you gonna lecture others on nonsense and disinformation after your demented old man rant about Greta Thunberg the other week lol.
Last edited:
But that’s the point, if he didn’t have a gun he may not have done it. Or the victims may have been able to escape, raise the alarm, not die from their injuries. A shotgun means he doesn’t have to get up close to them in the way he would with a knife or something like that. The victim could have ran, hidden and barricades themself away. The gun removes a lot of defence for the victim.
I’ve got no idea what you’re on about with the school having a firing range. Why does that mean someone living on school grounds should have a shotgun?
Soldato
- Joined
- 20 Oct 2002
- Posts
- 11,740
- Location
- Derby
Surely that's a poor argument. The likelihood that happens is extremely small (unless you run in criminal circles and a knife in some places is probably at least 10 times higher), if it did happen the likelihood that it was a criminal using an illegal firearm is extremely high so what legislation/law that would be put in place that differs from the current gun ownership do to stop that? They are already in possession and brandishing an illegal firearm that they shouldn't be able to get hold of but they have.
You seem to have had a brain failure that leads you to be unable to differentiate between facts and opinions you don't like.
And Greta's stated means of obtaining her desired ends (a neccesarilly totalitarian centrally planned state has always ended in disaster.)
Now do you have anything meaningful to say about the topic of this thread or are you looking to get yourself banned for trolling?
It appears that the man went to the effort and planning of taking his gun from his house to the college (see the previous link about any firearm facilities at the college not being connected to the shooting).
Sally Challen, on learning that her husband was cheating on her again, bidded her time, made him and meal and waited for him to sit down to eat it before she bludgeoned his skull in with a hammer.
This wasn't a spur of the moment thing and if he didn't have access to a firearm there are many other ways he could have easily seen the wife and child of with.
Last edited:
There's more chance of someone waving a knife in your face, would you want those banned?
What are you talking about? He shot them in their home. What college are you talking about? You are just incoherently ranting here.
Last edited:
I'd be fine with gun laws being tightened.
I don't think it's a massive issue but I certainly wouldn't want them eased.
Guns do make it easier to kill things. And therefore people. When you can kill from range it is just easier.
Stabbing/beating someone to death is a whole different mindset.
I don't really see the need for guns outside of professional environments like shooting ranges.
I don't think it's a massive issue but I certainly wouldn't want them eased.
Guns do make it easier to kill things. And therefore people. When you can kill from range it is just easier.
Stabbing/beating someone to death is a whole different mindset.
I don't really see the need for guns outside of professional environments like shooting ranges.
I'm confused about what point you're trying to make. The ultimate "severity" is death. I think the point @plasmahal is making is that your likelihood of being killed with a gun in the UK is minuscule. The best stats I can find (for year ending March 2021) are that 7% of homicides were committed with a gun (35 people) - (https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopula...homicideinenglandandwales/yearendingmarch2021). Your likelihood of being murdered in the UK is pretty low anyway, <1,000 per year.
If the stats are anything like the US I'd imagine that the majority of gun deaths will be suicide so I can imagine there might be ~100+ gun deaths per year (total) at the moment in the UK.
The idea of any more laws or regulations to control gun deaths in the UK is the proverbial sledgehammer to crack a nut. Even if there were any more laws criminals would still get hold of them anyway so there still could be gun deaths (like the Christmas Eve shooting in Liverpool in 2022).
You'll notice that the most common method of murder in the UK is via knife / sharp implement (40% of all murders). I assume you also want to introduce more controls on knives, such as allowing them only in a professional environment, like a restaurant?
For further context there are about 1,500 vehicle related deaths in the UK each year, just to put the odds into perspective versus being shot (https://www.gov.uk/government/stati...d-casualties-great-britain-annual-report-2021).
Last edited:
Unlike you I will take my L's and admit them when they crop up...
The reporting on the incident talked about the bodies being found on the grounds of Epsom College. Just that these particular grounds contained the house they had moved into which is rather unusual.
"Colleagues have paid tribute to the headteacher Emma Pattison, who was found dead with her seven-year-old daughter and husband at Epsom College in Surrey, as reports emerged that emergency services were alerted after gunshots were heard."
Tributes paid to Surrey headteacher found dead with husband and daughter
Colleagues describe Emma Pattison as ‘inspiring’, as reports say shots were heard before bodies found in grounds of Epsom College
www.theguardian.com
Last edited:
Unlike you I will take my L's and admit them when they crop up...
The reporting on the incident talked about the bodies being found on the grounds of Epsom College. Just that these particular grounds contained the house they had moved into which is rather unusual.
"Colleagues have paid tribute to the headteacher Emma Pattison, who was found dead with her seven-year-old daughter and husband at Epsom College in Surrey, as reports emerged that emergency services were alerted after gunshots were heard."
Tributes paid to Surrey headteacher found dead with husband and daughter
Colleagues describe Emma Pattison as ‘inspiring’, as reports say shots were heard before bodies found in grounds of Epsom College
What are these L’s you keep talking about? I’ve no idea what this saying means.
They were found dead in their home. That’s been widely reported. He didn’t take his gun from his house to some college. He lived in a schoolhouse on school property. This property was where he shot and killed his wife and daughter. What aren’t you getting about this?
You seem to be suggesting the gun wasn’t relevant and he would have used any weapon as this wasn’t a spur of the moment thing as he travelled some distance with his gun. That’s not true.
I’m making the claim if he didn’t have a gun, these people may have still been alive. The fact he had access to a gun made it certain they died. I think gun ownership needs changed and the reasons to have a gun made stricter. Certainly I don’t think there’s a need for a headmistresses husband to have a shotgun and ammo in a school house.
Epsom College deaths being treated as homicide investigation, say police
Detectives recover firearm and are said to suspect husband killed headteacher Emma Pattison and their daughter
www.theguardian.com
Last edited: