If Everybody Had a Gun.....

reply to post by Hopeforeveryone


In Switzerland, they do not have a standing army, and the people who wander around with guns tend to be people who are undergoing military service. Civilians, who are not involved in military training or professional gun-related activities, do not carry guns around with them.

Still, many of the more clued-in younger generation in the Switzerland think the civilian army culture of Switzerland is an outmoded joke. It was meant to stop neighbouring countries from invading Switzerland, whereas the rugged Alpine landscape ( and Swiss bank accounts ) was the main reason why Switzerland hasn't been invaded in recent times.

In 2011, however, civilians bearing arms is not going to stop any invasion, because Swiss cities, roads and infrastructure would just get flattened in air-raids, and any insurgents would be starved out in the mountains. Civilians with pea-shooters are going to be pretty impotent against a modern-day military attack.

reply to post by seagull


''Due reason'' would be people who need firearms in their daily lives, such as farmers and hunters.

It's reasonable enough for you to own those rifles, but there's no necessity for you to own that handgun. A baseball bat would suffice for you to protect your home and family.

Originally posted by ManBehindTheMask
Yes, no burglar in the UK packs heat........

I have not heard of a case in my lifetime where a burglar goes into a random house with a firearm. The whole idea is a complete joke. The only time a burglar would risk such an action is if they were carrying out a professional burglary where the potential booty of their raid would override the risk of the prison sentence for ''packing''.

Originally posted by ManBehindTheMask
And whats with this last sentence about them having to worry about a 5-10? THEY ARE BREAKING THE LAW, do you really think you should underestimate the fact that they could be carrying a gun?

Get real, bro.

You are going to get a far longer prison sentence for possessing a firearm than you are for burglary.

I don't know where this myth that criminals are stupid stems from. Criminals are generally separated from non-criminals by their differences of opinion on the societally accepted body of morality.

Originally posted by Sherlock Holmes
You are going to get a far longer prison sentence for possessing a firearm than you are for burglary.

Are these the sentences you speak of?

The section requires that a Crown Court shall impose a minimum sentence of:

5 years' imprisonment if the offender is aged 18 or over when convicted; or,
3 years detention under s. 91 PCC(S)A 2000 (long term detention) if the offender was under 18 but over 16 when the offence was committed.

link

It's roughly the same in the US. link Yet offenders offend over and over and over.

Pretending as though the UK has some extra-tough sentencing and that said sentencing is making a difference is a bit disingenuous dont you think?

reply to post by Sherlock Holmes


What I meant by saying...".. the shape Britian is in."...I mean you have to have a license for a TV, your trash is suspect and you can be cited for violations, the mayhem of the recent protests...really quite violent compared to the US, all of those regulations for even the most indiscriminate act, high tax rate that rivals and esceeds the US, ...why go on?

And what is with the generalizations and insults...? Many intelligent and cultured people own firearms, not just ..."hillbillies."

As for the "latex gloved" inspections...I recently flew to Mexico and returned. I purposely went through the scanner and the inspections to see what all of the big hoopla was about. Frankly, I was disappointed. The entire inspection was over in mere seconds...no gropping, no inserted fingers, frankly I have more intimate contact with people on a crowded bus or in a bustling restuarant. It was not what I had been led to believe at all... the cases alluded to are few and far between and considering the tens of thousands of people that fly daily... the whole experience was quite inconveniant as possible.

Our guns preserve our rights...as intended by the US Constitution. People should not fear their government, a government should fear it's people... and the 2nd Ammendment assures American citizens that they are feared. I dare say that in such extreme emergencies and times of trouble as we have now, certain steps may have been taken and rights violated had the spectre of private gun ownership not been in the back of the leaders and advisors minds.

Many will say.."How could a motley group of armed ill trained civilians with the Constitution on their side fight a highly trained US Army?" Well, the Taliban, the Al Quaida, and insurgents seem to be holding their own against such a "highly trained" army overseas. Further, exactly such was the premise when colonists defeated the greatest army in the world in 1775-1781. Likewise, it was just such ill trained civillians that fought a war of rebellion between 1861 and 1865... and with a high degree of merit.

In Japan a few years back.. a non-gun owner killed 12 people with a steak knife...ban all steak knives.
An individual killed someone with a tire iron/ lug wrench... ban all lug wrenches.
Recently, a man killed a person in a shopping center with his car... ban all cars.

Bad things happen sometimes..and sometimes guns are involved. Banning guns will not stop killing and murders.

In the US... gun ownership is not always a neccessity, but it is always a right.

Originally posted by wasco2

First, guns are no more "evil" than a hammer or a wrench. To say different is just silly.

With the big difference being that if a kid picked up a hammer or a wrench damage would most likely be limited to a bad bump on the head. If a gun was picked up by a kid...well...we've seen what happens in mulitple news stories, so I don't think it's silly to say differently. I know it's the parents responsibility to keep the guns away but some parents are stupid and shouldn't be allowed guns yet they are, due to the law.

Originally posted by thisguyrighthere
Are these the sentences you speak of?

Yes.

Originally posted by thisguyrighthere
It's roughly the same in the US. link Yet offenders offend over and over and over.

What exactly do they mean by ''firearms offenders'' ? You've got to be more specific here.

Originally posted by thisguyrighthere
Pretending as though the UK has some extra-tough sentencing and that said sentencing is making a difference is a bit disingenuous dont you think?

There's nothing ''disingenuous'' about my comments.

Nowhere did I suggest that the UK has ''extra-tough sentencing''. However, in comparison to sentencing for other crimes, then a mandatory 5-year term for illegally possessing a firearm - possibly being extended to somewhere in the region of 10-years if the firearm is used threateningly - is a very severe deterrent.

A burglar would have to be a complete clown to burgle a house while carrying a gun.

Originally posted by Sherlock Holmes
A burglar would have to be a complete clown to burgle a house while carrying a gun.

I was going to go into a whole thing about deterrence and why crimes are committed but upon seeing that a sentence for burglary in the UK is only a few months I would have to agree that comparing the cost of burglary without a firearm to the cost of burglary with a firearm that, yes, one would have to be a complete clown to burglar a house while carrying a gun. A complete clown or some hardcore career criminal up to something greater than burglary.

Even for category 3 repeat offender it's just 18 months.

The question I have to ask myself is if in the UK why not burglarize?

Burglary of a dwelling

reply to post by thisguyrighthere


I agree with you, why not rob the unarmed?

What about "crimes of opportunity?" A 2-bit thief breaks into a home to grab some cash and jewelry, but then notices your beautiful sleeping wife or daughter? A gun is for PROTECTION! A girl I know was spared as a victim in a horrendous crime about 15 years ago. She lost her next door neighbor, best friend and her best friend's family to a psychopath that was never caught. They were each tied up, raped, abused, and then executed one by one. She survived by hiding and not being found. Too bad no one in that family had a gun, because the assailant surely did.

From the quoted piece earlier....

The gun is the only weapon that's as lethal in the hands of an octogenarian as it is in the hands of a weight lifter. ... It removes force from the equation... and that's why carrying a gun is a civilized act.

It is just as effective in the hands of a 14 year old girl (assuming she's been properly trained) as it is in the hands of a 25 year old thug. You can't say that about a baseball bat, or a knife, or anything else. A gun is the only true force equalizer, and if everyone carried a gun, we would all be forced to deal with one another by persuasion instead of force. It would be a more civilized world.

reply to post by AlreadyGone


I thought you might find this pic amusing. This is what happens when police lack the proper tools to even defend themselves.

i82.photobucket.com...[/IMG]]PIC

reply to post by Hawkwind.


I was objecting to you calling guns "evil". I'll be more specific: Anyone who calls an inanimate object "evil" is an idiot.

reply to post by OtherSideOfTheCoin


Seeings as how I was raised in a gun totten family...I can tell you that I was given a very good education in the powerful respect a gun can have on a life. If you don't respect the gun the gun will kill you or someone you love.

If you choose to own a firearm, you must learn to care for it, learn to keep it safe from harm and harming others, learn to shoot it and learn when to shoot it and if you are going to shoot it will you be able to.

I was taught if you are going to point that firearm you had better be able to pull the trigger. These life or death choices are not easy to make and can you live with them when made. It is easy to go in and buy a gun but what then? I made my choice and I don't make choices for anyone else.

I know myself, my abilities and have respect for firearms.

What life would be like if everyone had a gun from childhood...that is unanswerable since it hasn't happened.

Admiral Isoroku Yamamoto - “You cannot invade the mainland United States. There would be a rifle behind each blade of grass.”

Originally posted by wasco2
reply to post by Hawkwind.

 

I was objecting to you calling guns "evil". I'll be more specific: Anyone who calls an inanimate object "evil" is an idiot.

Who called guns evil? I think you'd better backtrack through the thread because that post above is my first one in this thread so I don't see how you can object to something I've not even said.

Originally posted by shebearhus
reply to post by OtherSideOfTheCoin

 

Seeings as how I was raised in a gun totten family...I can tell you that I was given a very good education in the powerful respect a gun can have on a life. If you don't respect the gun the gun will kill you or someone you love.

If you choose to own a firearm, you must learn to care for it, learn to keep it safe from harm and harming others, learn to shoot it and learn when to shoot it and if you are going to shoot it will you be able to.

I was taught if you are going to point that firearm you had better be able to pull the trigger. These life or death choices are not easy to make and can you live with them when made. It is easy to go in and buy a gun but what then? I made my choice and I don't make choices for anyone else.

I know myself, my abilities and have respect for firearms.

Elequent quote. Just like a car, or a bottle of medication, or anything else, you need to be responsible and have a healthy "respect" for a firearm. It's no different than any other tool.

Visit switzerland. Polite people, each had mandatory training in responsible gun ownership, every family has a gun and knows how to use it. Gun ownership to all deters criminals pure and simple.

reply to post by OtherSideOfTheCoin


Well giving kids a gun is just insane we would have 4 year olds shooting other kids. Maybe once they hit 18. I wish this was the sword/bow & arrow era, the playin field would be even.

Originally posted by student777


The strange thing is, this is how things were in the old west. People got shot all the time. Very few people lived to old age. The next guy tends to fear the crook who has become good with a gun. Whole towns backed down to gun fighters.

That is totally incorrect! You are making a generic and inaccurate generalization based on nothing more than your idea of the old west as formed by either tv or movies or fictional novels.

The reality of the old west was much more boring than the romanticized version, as with most things. Small towns in the old west had less crime because they had less people. Many towns/saloons/brothels/hotels required that people check in their guns at the sherrifs office, or the main desk. Large cities still had more crime and more violent crime. People like to talk about places like Tombstone, and the O.K. Coral and nefarious shoot outs but neglect to realize you are talking about a handful of towns, and a handful of instances when covering an area that covered thousands of square miles, hundreds of towns and hundreds of thousands of people.

Again the reality was much more mundane than the fantasy. Most people didn't live to old age because of lack of medicine, proper diet, clean water, extremely harsh working/living conditions, and the constant exploitation of business men who valued human life less than clumps of minerals scraped from the dirt or out of streams.

People lived tedious and boring lives trying to carve out a place for themselves in an unforgiving land that had no infrastructure.
Criminals were not just hanging around on every street corner in these tiny two street towns. For the most part they lived marginalized lives on the outskirts of territories in mining camps or waiting to be hired for a cattle drive or attempting to plan come caper while living off of animals they hunted. They couldn't live in town. People knew they were criminals.

Major cities had riots, racist gangs that would beat people to death for being outside of their "ethnic" district, corrupt police that beat people regularly, swarms of homeless pick pockets and sneak thieves and muggers, and unsanitary conditions rivaling those seen in Europe during the black plague.


The wild west was not called the wild west because of the gun fighters and criminal gangs. It was the Wild West because the territories had no infrastructure and no support systems. It would be more accurate to call it, the Untamed West.

But there is no adventure in that.

reply to post by Evanzsayz


My 3 and 4 year old don't have guns, that would be insane.

BUT, they are aware of guns, they know how mine work, they know not to touch them, and they know the guns will kill things and they never come back. They also do not point their toy guns at anything alive.

I have promised them BB guns at age 6, and maybe a .22 by age 8 or 9 depending on how they handle the BB gun.

In the UK most people can't imagine a life 'with' guns and in the US most people can't imagine a life 'without' guns, because each people have grown up with and without guns. This debate is more than about self defence, it's about defence of our cultures. That's the real reason why people are this passionate about the subject.

Originally posted by Monkeygod333
I have often wondered the same thing. No robber would enter a house knowing there's no less than 5 guns lying about. I'm no gun toting crazy person but the idea just makes so much sense.

 

Posted Via ATS Mobile: m.abovetopsecret.com

 

What if he waits for everyone to leave so he can steal the valuable guns he knows are there?