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

Just out of interest, can anybody cite some instances where a gunman on a killing spree was stopped by the actions of an armed member of the public? I'd be interested to know whether the proposition that arming the public prevents armed serial killings has a reasonable existence theorem.

Dave
 
[sweeping generalisation]
Brits aren't paranoid about the man stealing all our rights hence there's no need to have every citizen armed to the teeth.
[/sweeping generalisation]
 
I still see nobody has attempted to counter this point on page one.

How do you explain the lack of multiple murders by firearms in Australia since restrictions on firearm ownership was introduced?

Restricting firearm ownership improves the safety of a society IMO.
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
What Lionking said.

Also, the question both Dave Rogers and I asked. Is there any recorded example of an armed passer-by (not a police officer) stopping a killing spree?

Rolfe.
 
Rolfe said:
Also, the question both Dave Rogers and I asked. Is there any recorded example of an armed passer-by (not a police officer) stopping a killing spree?

Rolfe.
Click to expand...
I don’t think this is a fair question.

If someone who has been on a killing spree is killed by an armed civilian then it is clear that arming civilians didn’t stop it.

You are therefore looking for an example where someone was shot before they went on a killing spree. In those cases the ‘before they went on a killing spree’ can only be a subjective opinion. I don’t think it is safe to make assumptions on what the victim would have done.

I think the only question you can really ask is whether killing sprees actually occurred and whether arming civilians prevents it from happening. I think we all know the answer.
 
Rolfe said:
If there's one thing the Whitehaven incident might suggest, it's that police should be armed. A cop or cops got very close to Bird very early in the proceedings, but without a gun, they had to take cover and he got away. The nearest armed officers were ten miles away.

But there's no public call for any such thing. This is one incident. I

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

I was just looking for murder rate by guns in my area and I found this article:

http://www.thisisnottingham.co.uk/n...-gun-crime/article-851330-detail/article.html

..snip...

THE number of Notts police firearms officers is to be cut – due to the the force's success at tackling gun crime.

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

Even the police look to reduce the number of armed officers when they can!

Some background about armed police in the UK: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/10260298.stm

...snip...

The Police Federation, which represents rank-and-file officers, called for a 5% increase in the number authorised to use guns.

However, when it surveyed 47,328 members, 82% said they did not want officers to be routinely armed on duty. This was despite almost half stating they felt their lives had been "in serious jeopardy" in the previous three years.
...snip...
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
Lothian said:
I don’t think this is a fair question.

If someone who has been on a killing spree is killed by an armed civilian then it is clear that arming civilians didn’t stop it.

You are therefore looking for an example where someone was shot before they went on a killing spree. In those cases the ‘before they went on a killing spree’ can only be a subjective opinion. I don’t think it is safe to make assumptions on what the victim would have done.
Click to expand...

I think you could interrupt them mid spree and qualify. They have had a bit of a spree, and you stopped them from continuing.

Obviously if everyone in Britain had a firearm then nobody would ever get started on a spree because as soon as they pulled out their weapon they'd be gunned down by dozens of bystanders.

It would be a polite and safe society, well, safe so long as you remembered not to pull your new gun out to show a friend.
 
I was thinking of someone starting on one of these shooting sprees, and being stopped in the early stages. I'm not even sure I've heard of someone being stopped by an armed civilian in the late stages. Mostly they seem to end when the perpetrator turns the gun on himself (it's been said with perfect truth that these incidents are really very very spectacular and complicated suicides), or the police manage to take the guy down.

Rolfe.
 
richardm said:
I think you could interrupt them mid spree and qualify. They have had a bit of a spree, and you stopped them from continuing.

Obviously if everyone in Britain had a firearm then nobody would ever get started on a spree because as soon as they pulled out their weapon they'd be gunned down by dozens of bystanders.

It would be a polite and safe society, well, safe so long as you remembered not to pull your new gun out to show a friend.
Click to expand...

I think that was Robert Heinlein's argument, though I forget in which book.

When I've seen this question asked before (have armed civilians ever stopped a spree), the answer always seems to be, "No, because gun laws are too strict, and civilians are prevented from being armed in sufficient numbers or in the specific location" (e.g. in the various school shootings, guns are not allowed on campus).
 
I've actually had a bit of a google round and while I've found lots of links assuring me that armed civilians stop shooting sprees on a regular basis I'm having a hard time actually finding any instances of it actually happening. Like Zooterkin I've found plenty of stories where a shooting spree would have been stopped if only other people had been armed.

I'm sure someone with better google-fu than mine can find some though.
 
Pick any book of Heinlein's, and you've a fair chance of the argument being made in it. I read his stuff as a teenager, and thought this was just part of the SF/future fantasy society he was creating. I didn't realise until much later that he was making a political statement intended to be relevant to the USA in the 20th century.

Yes, you see the spree killers always plan well and head for a location where they know firearms are restricted. So the poor bystanders are helpless to intervene. Which is a reasonable argument in logical terms and may have some force, except that this certainly isn't the case in every example.

Rolfe.
 
I think it's a reasonable argument that if the Cumbria police had been routinely armed, Bird would have been stopped sooner. The question really is, do we want to go down that road, with all its disadvantages, and the current answer seems to be no.

I strongly suspect that if there had been a number of ordinary people with guns present in Whitehaven that morning, the death toll might have been even higher, as people "had-a-go" without fully understanding the situation, and one gunman shot at another with nobody quite clear which one was the murderer.

Rolfe.
 
When talking about a "gun culture", we in the UK would naturally tend to think of the most vocal proponents of such a culture, and the NRA does a pretty good job of often sounding barking to me, in the puerile manner that Rolfe mentioned.

What's wrong with flintlocks? If every citizen had to carry a loaded flintlock pistol, then surely anyone could stop shooting sprees. Swimming might be a bit annoying though.

Single-shot weapons must be enough for most deterrence, whilst being difficult to shoot large numbers of people in a short time.
 
UNLoVedRebel said:
See, threads like this disheartens me. In the U.K., is the prevailing attitude "never fight back?" If so, not all is well in Brittania. Home-invasion robberies seems like a piece of cake. I expect to see more gun-related deaths in U.K.
Click to expand...


A lot of the participants on that thread are Americans. They also seem to be saying something similar too.
 
Last edited:
Dave Rogers said:
Just out of interest, can anybody cite some instances where a gunman on a killing spree was stopped by the actions of an armed member of the public? I'd be interested to know whether the proposition that arming the public prevents armed serial killings has a reasonable existence theorem.

Dave
Click to expand...

Change it to attempted killing spree and there are several. Here's one. http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2010/03/07/national/main6275888.shtml

Also look how an armed civilian prevented from being carjacked by using his gun. There are several of those cases as well.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom