Brits and handguns.

[DDWW]

It seems to me this is a bit like the discussion about compulsory seat belt use. On average, you're a hell of a lot safer wearing one. Very occasionally, an accident happens where it's arguable that the seat belt was actually counterproductive.

This is a bit like looking at one of these accidents (and I stress I only said "arguable") and arguing passionately that people should be free not to wear seat belts.

It's immeasurably safer living in a society where guns are few and far between. Hard cases make bad law.

Rolfe.

And there are and have been mass killings, rapes, etc. done in societies that do not have private ownership of firearms.

I prefer the armed populace, but that's me.

 

[Ranb]

I am extremely anti gun. So is ever intelligent person I know. So is every educated person I know.

It seems that you need to get to know more people or that you think anyone who thinks differently about guns than you do is unintelligent or uneducated. This is the same attitude I experience from sexists and racists that I have personally met.

My view is that guns are always a very bad idea.

So do you resent the armed police and military that protect your society because they in part use guns to perform their duty?

Ranb

 

[Ranb]

This seems to have become a discussion of "guns I love" and "the fun I have with guns" rather than why Brits don't want handguns in general circulation.

Well my OP consisted mostly of "Is there any truth to this article at all?" I was hopping for a yes or no answer and got it. I am not disappointed that has changed to a polite discussion (except for one post) on guns in the UK.

Ranb

 

[Marcus]

It seems to me this is a bit like the discussion about compulsory seat belt use. On average, you're a hell of a lot safer wearing one. Very occasionally, an accident happens where it's arguable that the seat belt was actually counterproductive.

This is a bit like looking at one of these accidents (and I stress I only said "arguable") and arguing passionately that people should be free not to wear seat belts.

It's immeasurably safer living in a society where guns are few and far between. Hard cases make bad law.

Rolfe.

I would say it's not that much safer wearing seat belts, most of the time the air bags would save you anyway.

Fears like those of Scarlettinlondon are exaggerated, unless you are a gang member or career criminal, your chances of getting shot in the US are quite low.

It reminds me of the response I give when someone asks me if I play the lottery. I tell them that the lottery is a tax on the statistically impaired population.

 

[Giz]

It seems to me this is a bit like the discussion about compulsory seat belt use. On average, you're a hell of a lot safer wearing one. Very occasionally, an accident happens where it's arguable that the seat belt was actually counterproductive.

This is a bit like looking at one of these accidents (and I stress I only said "arguable") and arguing passionately that people should be free not to wear seat belts.

It's immeasurably safer living in a society where guns are few and far between. Hard cases make bad law.

Rolfe.

Immeasurably safer because, if you remove criminal victims and suicides, the homicide rates aren't so different.

In any case, gun control in the USA and UK are totally different cases. Off the top of my head, the USA has:
Significant history of widespread law abiding gun owning population,
Remainder problem (ie 100 million black market guns in circulation),
More widespread hunting tradition,
More dangerous fauna,
More widely dispersed law enforcement,
Greater ethos of self sufficiency rather than state dependency

And that's without starting on the "protection against tyranny" argument or "it's the constitution!"

 

[Newtons Bit]

I don't want a handgun
I don't want any form of a gun
I've never hunted with a gun
I have never seen a handgun apart from on the movies
I would not have a relationship or be a friend to anyone who had a handgun
I would have nothing to do with anyone who had a gun or any kind UNLESS they were a farmer who needed one
I would not live in a country where people were allowed handguns

I am extremely anti gun. So is ever intelligent person I know. So is every educated person I know.

lol

 

[Craig B]

... Also, as much as shiny might be (inaccurately) assumed to make you attractive to the opposite sex, it actually leaves something to be desired in a weapon. A nice matte black finish is much preferred for a handgun that will actually be potentially in use for defense or target shooting (even stainless steel is usually matte finished for minimal reflectiveness).

Mmm. I can see from this conversation that has now developed, that banning handguns in the UK is not a bad idea after all.

 

[fuelair]

I don't want a handgun
I don't want any form of a gun
I've never hunted with a gun
I have never seen a handgun apart from on the movies
I would not have a relationship or be a friend to anyone who had a handgun
I would have nothing to do with anyone who had a gun or any kind UNLESS they were a farmer who needed one
I would not live in a country where people were allowed handguns

I am extremely anti gun. So is ever intelligent person I know. So is every educated person I know. This is partly because we are witnesses to what happens in other countries (such as the states) where the view is different.
I used to know some very foolish and immature individuals when I was very young in London who thought that a gun might be 'cool'. They didn't have guns though and even total idiot me at 18 would have dropped them like a hot potato if they had actually got a gun.

My view is that guns are always a very bad idea. I understand that other people think in a different way. I do not respect their views. I respect their right to hold those views but that doesn't stop me from thinking that they are rather less bright than idiot 18 year old me.

My view is that I am less likely to be attacked/threatened by a gun than I would be if I lived in a different country. I intend that it stay that way.

Regards Scarlett

I wish you luck on that and truly hope you never find out otherwise. My mileage/kilometerage varies.

 

[angrysoba]

I wish you luck on that and truly hope you never find out otherwise. My mileage/kilometerage varies.

We use mileage in the UK.

 

[The Don]

This seems to have become a discussion of "guns I love" and "the fun I have with guns" rather than why Brits don't want handguns in general circulation.

Which shouts "gun nut" to me (in the same way I'm a self-admitted guitar nut).

 

[The Don]

Immeasurably safer because, if you remove criminal victims and suicides, the homicide rates aren't so different.

Well maybe if you remove criminal victims from the US figures but not the other country.

In the UK the intentional homicide rate is 1.2/100k, in the US it's 4.8/100k, that's 4 times the rate:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_intentional_homicide_rate

Here's a breakdown of the US figures:

http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/uc...o-law-enforcement/expanded/expandhomicidemain

The U.S. family homicide rate is more than half the UK total homicide rate.

Of the murders for which the circumstance surrounding the murder was known, 41.8 percent of victims were murdered during arguments (including romantic triangles) in 2010.

So in the US it's not just criminals killing other criminals.

 

[Rolfe]

The "because it's in the constitution" argument has always seemed remarkably obtuse to me. Even ignoring the ambiguities (well-regulated militia), just because someone thought something was a good idea 200 years ago doesn't mean it's a good idea now. In fact, US attitudes to the constitution in this respect are the best argument I can think of for not having one.

The "protection from tyranny" one is even worse. Ask Gabrielle Gifford.

Rolfe.

 

[WildCat]

The U.S. family homicide rate is more than half the UK total homicide rate.



So in the US it's not just criminals killing other criminals.

What on earth makes you think that's just about family arguments? Doesn't that also include street gang arguments?

Also, that number is skewed. 80% of gang-related murders here go unsolved, so "the circumstances" aren't determined. And these account for 80-90% of all the killings here. Your number assumes that in 100% of the murders the circumstances are known, which demonstrably isn't the case by a long shot. Domestic disputes which end up in murder, those have a nearly 100% rate of being solved by the police.

 

[WildCat]

The "protection from tyranny" one is even worse. Ask Gabrielle Gifford.

Rolfe.

Giffords was shot by a severely schizophrenic nutcase upset over the use of grammar, what does that have to do with "protection from tyranny"?

 

[scarlettinlondon]

I feel the same way, that is, I don't respect your views but I respect your right to hold them. Your view that people who disagree with you must be less intelligent is somewhat dim, to put it politely.

No. You misunderstood me. I do not believe that people who disagree with me are less intelligent. I believe that people who keep guns are unintelligent fools.
Clearer?

 

[WildCat]

No. You misunderstood me. I do not believe that people who disagree with me are less intelligent. I believe that people who keep guns are unintelligent fools.
Clearer?

Good for you in your beliefs. I give them the same credence as people who believe in Bigfoot, the Loch Ness Monster, ghosts, homeopathy and that handling rattlesnakes is the ticket to heaven.

 

[scarlettinlondon]

This view is not restricted to gun holders. I also believe that people who keep vicious dogs around children are fools and that people who drive while drunk are fools. I believe that there are accidents waiting to happen and that any amount of protesting that these things are OK in any one individual's hands (because those individuals believe themselves to be sensible gun/dog/car owners) are blinkered foolish attitudes. I am bored of listening to how sensible, reasonable and grown up gun owners are. Utter codswallop.

 

[scarlettinlondon]

Good for you in your beliefs. I give them the same credence as people who believe in Bigfoot, the Loch Ness Monster, ghosts, homeopathy and that handling rattlesnakes is the ticket to heaven.

I know you do. Moves me not a whit.

 

[WildCat]

Moves me not a whit.

Of course it doesn't. This belief is a religion to you, it's not like you believe what you do because of reasoning and research and careful analysis of evidence and such. Hoplophobia, like all other phobias, is irrational at its core.

 

[Captain_Snort]

I did read an article about a research scientist in the US who specialised in researching the gun ownership / crime figures a couple of months ago in Scientific American.

I found it quite shocking the lobbyists have put a halt on all real research into the gun culture, therefore I think it quite honest to say that all the pro gun lobby propaganda is just a tad iffy. Claims like you are more secure with a gun in the house as a detterent while the statistics show they are 2.7 times more likely to be murdered during a robbery (and 4.8 time more likely to commit suicide). A claim that other papers seem to support

It seems that that all on pro gun websites, they compare the USA favourably with countries like Honduras, El Savador, Somalia. Hardly developed and comparable nations, The following image from the Scientific America article (reprinted from Nature) I believe is more trustworthy. I am also rather dubious of many other claims I see on such pro gun websites.