Your views on gun laws in the UK

Fenris · 16 Apr 2012 at 12:09

I would be much more interested in the right to arm bears.

atpbx · 16 Apr 2012 at 12:22

elmarko1234 said:
Think of the kind of people who want guns in the UK, think long & hard - the kind of people with collections of samurai swords & gun magazines, masturbating over pictures of military hardware & wearing camouflage-gear to pubs - do you really want those kind of people to be armed?.

The kind of people who.....................post on here for instance?

Many of whom, own samurai swords, knives, camoflage gear, toy guns, knives etc etc.

Shocking statement.

Uther · 16 Apr 2012 at 12:26

The last thing any goverment wants is to arm the population...

I have to go through several hoops to have my gun, and thats as it should be.

Hagar · 16 Apr 2012 at 12:29

The american constitution allowed citizens the right to bear arms in a largely undeveloped and hostile country. Which also raised civilian militia instead of having a large standing army and used gun toting citizens to assist the sherriff posse and hunt down the unlawful.

These were originally single shot muzzle loading weapons and later six shot handguns, rifles and two barreled shot guns.

Now you have semi auto 13 shot capacity handguns, semi or full auto carbines and machine guns. These are weapons for war and not primarily self defense.

So thanks but no thanks. The brits do not want ease of availability of guns on the street even for the police. More guns must mean more shootings.

robj20 · 16 Apr 2012 at 12:36

I just think i should be allowed to do what i like as long as it doesnt impact on anyone else.

elmarko · 16 Apr 2012 at 12:56

atpbx said:
The kind of people who.....................post on here for instance?

Many of whom, own samurai swords, knives, camoflage gear, toy guns, knives etc etc.

Shocking statement.

I fail to see what's shocking.

The kind of person who wants a gun is exactly the kind of person I don't trust to have a gun.

robj20 said:
I just think i should be allowed to do what i like as long as it doesnt impact on anyone else.

That's all good & well, but having an armed population does impact on everybody else.

If somebody comes at me with a knife I have the chance to fight back to an extent, I can run, grab a chair if one is close (really good defence) - not sure what I'd be able to do against a handgun at close range.

dalin80 · 16 Apr 2012 at 13:03

robj20 said:
I just think i should be allowed to do what i like as long as it doesnt impact on anyone else.

So you want a gun solely to shoot yourself?

Raumarik · 16 Apr 2012 at 13:10

dalin80 said:
So you want a gun solely to shoot yourself?

Sometimes I wish VNBoards had a "like" option!

I'm against the general population having access to guns, let alone carrying them in the street.

robj20 · 16 Apr 2012 at 13:18

If you read my posts i already shoot at a club i would like a wider range of firearms to shoot.

DanTheMan · 16 Apr 2012 at 13:28

The mere fact that anybody would be allowed to have a gun would impact on everybody else. The military and armed police exist for a reason; yes there are cases where a gun would probably be handy but there are many more reasons not to own one.

RDM · 16 Apr 2012 at 13:30

DanTheMan said:
The mere fact that anybody would be allowed to have a gun would impact on everybody else.

I have some bad news for you. Plenty of people already own guns. How has this impacted your life?

elmarko · 16 Apr 2012 at 14:01

RDM said:
I have some bad news for you. Plenty of people already own guns. How has this impacted your life?

Define plenty (as a percentage of population).

Then I'll determine if "plenty" is actually the correct term to use.

I'll save you the time,

705,616 according to BBC data from the individual police forces on firearm ownership.

Out of a population of 62,262,000 (wiki latest), that's 1.13% of the population - with 3% being the average for some parts of Wales (farming areas) and 3% for the north & east of England - bringing it up from 0.39% of the population for the west midland's & 0.38% for London.

Yeah... plenty....

Compared to figures ranging from 45% to 55% in the USA.

RDM · 16 Apr 2012 at 14:08

elmarko1234 said:
Define plenty (as a percentage of population).

Then I'll determine if "plenty" is actually the correct term to use.

Couldn't tell you the number of people but the number of legally held guns in the UK is approximately 1.8m. I would say that is enough to count as "plenty" considering the non-specific nature of the word "plenty".

robj20 · 16 Apr 2012 at 14:14

It all comes down to acceptable risk, cars kill many more people a year percentage wise than guns do, yet we are all still allowed to own cars.

steve-h · 16 Apr 2012 at 14:19

dalin80 said:
So you want a gun solely to shoot yourself?

I'd like a gun for this reason... beats old age.

steve-h · 16 Apr 2012 at 14:19

robj20 said:
It all comes down to acceptable risk, cars kill many more people a year percentage wise than guns do, yet we are all still allowed to own cars.

Cars have a use other than sport and killing things.

elmarko · 16 Apr 2012 at 14:21

robj20 said:
It all comes down to acceptable risk, cars kill many more people a year percentage wise than guns do, yet we are all still allowed to own cars.

It's not just risk, you have to take into account gain/function.

Car's specific function isn't to kill, it's transportation.

Surgery carry's significant risks, but the potential gain is extension of life/reduction of pain.

A gun has a very limited function, self defence is a flawed reason (as by legalising guns the chances of being shot increases vastly - safety would only increase if JUST YOU were allowed a gun - but in reality, it wouldn't be the case).

robj20 · 16 Apr 2012 at 14:24

Thats just one take on it though, car for me is for fun i dont need it for transport and guns provide an income along with fun. So for me guns hold the high benifit.

atpbx · 16 Apr 2012 at 14:25

elmarko1234 said:
Define plenty (as a percentage of population).

Then I'll determine if "plenty" is actually the correct term to use.

There are 5.6 guns per 100 people in the UK.

There are 90 per 100 people in the US.

There are 0.5 mass killings per 10million people in the UK 1960-2010.

There are 0.8 mass killings per 10million people in the US since 1960-2010.

Tighter gun control since 1997 has done nothing to reduce gun crime, it had doubled by 2004/05.
We are supposed to of been ecstatic that it had been reduced to only 2/3rds more than 1997 levels when Labour were finally booted in 2010.

elmarko · 16 Apr 2012 at 14:39

atpbx said:
There are 5.6 guns per 100 people in the UK.

There are 90 per 100 people in the US.

There are 0.5 mass killings per 10million people in the UK 1960-2010.

There are 0.8 mass killings per 10million people in the US since 1960-2010.

Tighter gun control since 1997 has done nothing to reduce gun crime, it had doubled by 2004/05.
We are supposed to of been ecstatic that it had been reduced to only 2/3rds more than 1997 levels when Labour were finally booted in 2010.

Guns per head means nothing.

You need to look at firearm owners, not total guns.