2nd Amendment for the U.K. -- long overdue

You know, I don't think many Americans truly understand the difference in attitude towards guns here.

Suppose gun laws were abolished tomorrow in the UK. Many Americans seem to think that Brits would run out and buy guns for home defence, and the situation here would be much as it is there. In fact, this simply wouldn't happen. Most British people don't want guns, they don't LIKE guns. If guns were legal, most people wouldn't have them anyway.

For much of my early life the gun laws were a lot more lax than they are now. Nevertheless, I have never once met a person who owned a gun. If I were a career criminal who specialised in burglary back then, it would never even have occurred to me that a homeowner would have a gun, or that they'd threaten me with it if they did.

Similarly if we adopted US style gun laws tomorrow, I'd imagine very few of what we might term "law abiding citizens" would go out and get one for home defence. The idea simply wouldn't occur to most people.
 
Seismosaurus said:
You know, I don't think many Americans truly understand the difference in attitude towards guns here.

Suppose gun laws were abolished tomorrow in the UK. Many Americans seem to think that Brits would run out and buy guns for home defence, and the situation here would be much as it is there. In fact, this simply wouldn't happen. Most British people don't want guns, they don't LIKE guns. If guns were legal, most people wouldn't have them anyway.

For much of my early life the gun laws were a lot more lax than they are now. Nevertheless, I have never once met a person who owned a gun. If I were a career criminal who specialised in burglary back then, it would never even have occurred to me that a homeowner would have a gun, or that they'd threaten me with it if they did.

Similarly if we adopted US style gun laws tomorrow, I'd imagine very few of what we might term "law abiding citizens" would go out and get one for home defence. The idea simply wouldn't occur to most people.
Click to expand...

Same here. Only 5% of Australians own guns, mainly hunters, and I am certain that percentage wouldn't change regardless of the gun laws. The only thing which would happen is that existing gun owners would get more powerful weapons.

Thankfully we don't have a gun culture here.
 
Telaynay's G'son said:
The most dangerous places here are airports and schools as any bad guy knows these are virtual killing fields since law-abiding citizens are unarmed sheeple in those places.

It isn't surprising people from other places fail to grasp this concept as some are subjects (vs. citizens) of their governments while others derive their origins as a penal colony where lawless individuals were transported. We only had one of those (Georgia) here in the US.
Click to expand...

And yet, despite the lack of guns held by the general population, we have had only one person who went on a killing spree in a school; you seem to be suggesting that should be commonplace.
 
Seismosaurus said:
You know, I don't think many Americans truly understand the difference in attitude towards guns here.

Suppose gun laws were abolished tomorrow in the UK. Many Americans seem to think that Brits would run out and buy guns for home defence, and the situation here would be much as it is there. In fact, this simply wouldn't happen. Most British people don't want guns, they don't LIKE guns. If guns were legal, most people wouldn't have them anyway.

For much of my early life the gun laws were a lot more lax than they are now. Nevertheless, I have never once met a person who owned a gun. If I were a career criminal who specialised in burglary back then, it would never even have occurred to me that a homeowner would have a gun, or that they'd threaten me with it if they did.

Similarly if we adopted US style gun laws tomorrow, I'd imagine very few of what we might term "law abiding citizens" would go out and get one for home defence. The idea simply wouldn't occur to most people.
Click to expand...

Indeed. And that is why the conversation is pointless. The cultural divide is too wide and it cannot be bridged
 
Telaynay's G'son said:
I suspect many of those immigrating to north america did so to carve a better life based upon individual effort and not so much birthmark. In doing so they apparently developed a disdain for government doing all of their thinking for them. I believe it was settled during a little disagreement during ~1775-1883.
Click to expand...



I’m still not clear on what your theory is about why people emigrated from Wales to colonize the American Indians’ homeland?

Are your suspicions grounded in historical evidence or are you simply speculating?
 
Seismosaurus said:
You know, I don't think many Americans truly understand the difference in attitude towards guns here.

Suppose gun laws were abolished tomorrow in the UK. Many Americans seem to think that Brits would run out and buy guns for home defence, and the situation here would be much as it is there. In fact, this simply wouldn't happen. Most British people don't want guns, they don't LIKE guns. If guns were legal, most people wouldn't have them anyway.


...snip....
Click to expand...

When the legislation was last significantly changed, i.e. the banning of handguns it only affected somewhere in the region of 50,000 people (out of a population of over 60 million), so when they were legal very few folk exercised their right to own one.
 
There really is a gulf in understanding. Here in NZ I know a lot of people that have guns, rifles and shotguns mostly, due to knowing a number of hunters and farmers. I also know a few that own handguns, they are members of the local pistol club (the only legal way to own a handgun) but other then for hunting, farm work, or target shooting, people don't consider guns neccessary. Most people don't consider themselves to be in danger from criminals to the point they need one. Heck I have been home with a burglar broke in and a Cricket Bat worked fine, I wouldn't even consider having a gun in the house, and I certainly wouldn't consider carrying one (apart from it being illegal here.) Funny thing, like the UK (and unlike Aust) even our Cops aren't armed until and unless they need to be, so why should our civilians be?
 
Last edited:
zooterkin said:
Telaynay's G'son said:
The most dangerous places here are airports and schools as any bad guy knows these are virtual killing fields since law-abiding citizens are unarmed sheeple in those places.

It isn't surprising people from other places fail to grasp this concept as some are subjects (vs. citizens) of their governments while others derive their origins as a penal colony where lawless individuals were transported. We only had one of those (Georgia) here in the US.
Click to expand...

And yet, despite the lack of guns held by the general population, we have had only one person who went on a killing spree in a school; you seem to be suggesting that should be commonplace.
Click to expand...

And when there was an attempted suicide attack on Glasgow airport it didn't stop people (successfully) tackling the terrorists.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-525853/Its-proudest-moment-life-hero-baggage-handler-tackled-terrorist-honoured-Queen.html
 
I'm what passes for a gun-nut in the Netherlands.
I have a permit and own two firearms that I keep locked up separate from the ammo and I only shoot at the range.

I know a few people who own guns, most think of it as a hobby.

Recently I started shooting a .22 rifle and found it more fun then the insanely powerful handgun I own.
It made me think that maybe small caliber sports guns are the way to go for Europe. Not that easy to kill a human with that. But then, I don't hunt.
 
Eddie Dane said:
Recently I started shooting a .22 rifle and found it more fun then the insanely powerful handgun I own.
It made me think that maybe small caliber sports guns are the way to go for Europe. Not that easy to kill a human with that. But then, I don't hunt.
Click to expand...

A .22 can still kill pretty easily, but then we just have finished the trial of a man who shot and killed a undercover police officer with an air rifle, so.....
 
zooterkin said:
And yet, despite the lack of guns held by the general population, we have had only one person who went on a killing spree in a school; you seem to be suggesting that should be commonplace.
Click to expand...


I know of at least one other person who went on a killing spree in a school. I can't find it on Google because it isn't often referenced. The word "Dunblane" will take a long time to lose its connotations, but I can't remember where this other incident occurred.

The reason? He didn't succeed in killing anyone, although there were injuries and the teacher scooped an award for bravery. The thing is, he didn't have a gun. He went in with a machete. No deaths.

Rolfe.
 
Fiona said:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lisa_Potts

I think this is what you are referring to Rolfe
Click to expand...


Yes, that's the one. It's what always springs to mind when we're told there's no point in restricting guns because those intent on a killing spree will simply use something like a machete, and we all know it's just as easy to kill multiple people in a short time with a machete as with a firearm.

Of course, we're trying to restrict machetes too....

Rolfe.
 
JihadJane said:
I’m still not clear on what your theory is about why people emigrated from Wales to colonize the American Indians’ homeland?

Are your suspicions grounded in historical evidence or are you simply speculating?
Click to expand...

I was speaking about my people but they were apparently not in the minority. Rhode Island was established primarily based upon religious freedom but other states had different ideas as exemplified by the Baptists' prosecution in Virginia.

http://www.infoplease.com/ipa/A0108266.html

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Archibald_Cary
 
Rolfe said:
Yes. Your situation is your situation. The subject of this thread is how we ought to follow your example, because of only our third mass shooting spree in, like, ever.

Not enthusiastic, I have to say.

Rolfe.
Click to expand...

I do not keep up with your country's crime stats so whether they are starting to escalate is probably something you might wish to investigate.

Many the dam break started out as a small crack.

Also, with the recent terrorist attacks in the UK would a law-abiding subject consider the means for self-defense or simply embrace the wrath of a lunatic as another benefit of living in the realm?
 
Rolfe said:
Yes, that's the one. It's what always springs to mind when we're told there's no point in restricting guns because those intent on a killing spree will simply use something like a machete, and we all know it's just as easy to kill multiple people in a short time with a machete as with a firearm.

Of course, we're trying to restrict machetes too....

Rolfe.
Click to expand...

What about butter knives?
 
What part of "this is a pointless argument" do you not understand? It really does not matter what you say or what we say: no-one will change their minds. The kinds of things you are saying in that last post are completely irrelevant.

ETA: post before last :)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom