Dunblane School Massacre....ended handgun rights in UK

Originally posted by NavyDoc


I'd choose a gun. It is simple common sense. If you have someone smashing in your door in the middle of the night, what would you rather have in your hand: a kitchen knife or a .45?

Well quite. So there is quite a big difference between them!

Originally posted by JuniorDisco

Originally posted by NavyDoc


I'd choose a gun. It is simple common sense. If you have someone smashing in your door in the middle of the night, what would you rather have in your hand: a kitchen knife or a .45?

Well quite. So there is quite a big difference between them!

One being much more "deadly" than the other? Not so much. The difference is that a gun removes the physical strength needed to defend yourself as well as needing to get close to the criminal to defend yourself and others, so, as a tool for self defense, the gun is much more effective and practical than a knife.

Originally posted by oppozed1
There is an obvious dishonesty around this issue for Americans which they don't seem to comprehend appears bizarre to Europeans who are perfectly happy to live without this gun curse on their streets. Attempts to liken knives and cars to guns are frankly deranged.

And as for the UK and so called "violent crime" you have to be kidding me. The vast majority of so called violent crime is a couple off assholes fired up on beer on a Friday night trading a few punches in the street with the worst outcome being a black eye for one or the other and generally not even that. THAT'S the vast majority of violent crime.

It just comes down to what I can only see as a primitive obsession with these weapons which exists nowhere else in the Western world and which appears to be evolving a paranoia all of it's own to support the obsession. We hear rants about protection from tyrannical government and such inanity. Tyrannical government? The civilised nations deal with unpopular government with a vote not a gun yet Americans think it's rational to contemplate shooting people?

And who decides what's tyrannical? Some freak show with a gun decides anything he disagrees with is tyrannical regardless of the fact the majority who elected the government in question do not? The whole thing is insanity and what these gun wackos are preaching is anarchy not democracy.

Absolutely fantastic post, spot on.

Quoted for Truth

Originally posted by NavyDoc

Originally posted by JuniorDisco

Originally posted by NavyDoc


I'd choose a gun. It is simple common sense. If you have someone smashing in your door in the middle of the night, what would you rather have in your hand: a kitchen knife or a .45?

Well quite. So there is quite a big difference between them!

One being much more "deadly" than the other? Not so much. The difference is that a gun removes the physical strength needed to defend yourself as well as needing to get close to the criminal to defend yourself and others, so, as a tool for self defense, the gun is much more effective and practical than a knife.

See this is where I think the gun lobby is a bit disingenuous. Guns are the ultimate in deadly force, unanswerable in the hands of a victimised woman or a homeowner who is threatened, and therefore desirable, but suddenly only as dangerous as a knife when the argument shifts to equivalence. You can't have it both ways.

Originally posted by JuniorDisco

Originally posted by NavyDoc

Originally posted by JuniorDisco

Originally posted by NavyDoc


I'd choose a gun. It is simple common sense. If you have someone smashing in your door in the middle of the night, what would you rather have in your hand: a kitchen knife or a .45?

Well quite. So there is quite a big difference between them!

One being much more "deadly" than the other? Not so much. The difference is that a gun removes the physical strength needed to defend yourself as well as needing to get close to the criminal to defend yourself and others, so, as a tool for self defense, the gun is much more effective and practical than a knife.

See this is where I think the gun lobby is a bit disingenuous. Guns are the ultimate in deadly force, unanswerable in the hands of a victimised woman or a homeowner who is threatened, and therefore desirable, but suddenly only as dangerous as a knife when the argument shifts to equivalence. You can't have it both ways.

It's not disingenuous. What I posted was a practical observation from earned from treating both gunshot and knife wounds.

Anti-gun people put the "hysterical" "more deadly" moniker as if getting stabbed in the chest is somehow "better" than being shot in the chest. They both can kill you quite dead in an instant.

As for the last bit in your post, I already explained why a gun is a better weapon than a knife. It takes away the strength differential: a weak person in a wheelchair can better defend themselves with a gun than a knife and it removes the need to get in close with a criminal to use.

What a coincidence that a "school massacre" is the "last straw" for public opinion to support legislative action....

reply to post by CosmicCitizen


Was you waiting for an attack on a maternity ward before you were going to reconsider your opinions on the usefulness of firearms in US society?

Meanwhile in the UK....

Originally posted by blupblup

Originally posted by oppozed1
There is an obvious dishonesty around this issue for Americans which they don't seem to comprehend appears bizarre to Europeans who are perfectly happy to live without this gun curse on their streets. Attempts to liken knives and cars to guns are frankly deranged.

And as for the UK and so called "violent crime" you have to be kidding me. The vast majority of so called violent crime is a couple off assholes fired up on beer on a Friday night trading a few punches in the street with the worst outcome being a black eye for one or the other and generally not even that. THAT'S the vast majority of violent crime.

It just comes down to what I can only see as a primitive obsession with these weapons which exists nowhere else in the Western world and which appears to be evolving a paranoia all of it's own to support the obsession. We hear rants about protection from tyrannical government and such inanity. Tyrannical government? The civilised nations deal with unpopular government with a vote not a gun yet Americans think it's rational to contemplate shooting people?

And who decides what's tyrannical? Some freak show with a gun decides anything he disagrees with is tyrannical regardless of the fact the majority who elected the government in question do not? The whole thing is insanity and what these gun wackos are preaching is anarchy not democracy.

Absolutely fantastic post, spot on.

Quoted for Truth

edit on 18/1/13 by blupblup because: (no reason given)

Well this was ok till then end. "gun wackos" and anarchy. Were? We do have nut jobs that get ahold of guns but you cant show where "gun wackos" bent on anarchy are doing anything over here save for the craked up gangs down in gangland. And they dont care if there is a 2nd amendment or not.


And you said it. " appears bizarre to Europeans"....." primitive obsession"..." evolving a paranoia"...just ways of putting the understanding of the European model on to what you dont understand.

reply to post by Thunderheart


That's right, the UK, where it's commonly accepted that under 18's aren't the best decision makers in the world and recognising this, limits their choices in some matters, ie. the ability to easily buy a tool that can be used as an offensive weapon. Do you feel this is an infringement on their human rights?

reply to post by IvanAstikov


I moved out on my own when I was 16, in the UK I wouldn't even have been able to buy silverware...pathetic

Originally posted by NavyDoc
It's not disingenuous. What I posted was a practical observation from earned from treating both gunshot and knife wounds.

Anti-gun people put the "hysterical" "more deadly" moniker as if getting stabbed in the chest is somehow "better" than being shot in the chest. They both can kill you quite dead in an instant.

As for the last bit in your post, I already explained why a gun is a better weapon than a knife. It takes away the strength differential: a weak person in a wheelchair can better defend themselves with a gun than a knife and it removes the need to get in close with a criminal to use.

Sorry, but I disagree. You're using the term deadly in a specific and slightly disingenuous manner. Because the 'deadliness' of a weapon isn't contained purely in its potential effect but also in its ease of use.

Originally posted by Thunderheart
reply to post by IvanAstikov

 

I moved out on my own when I was 16, in the UK I wouldn't even have been able to buy silverware...pathetic

When I was in California recently I couldn't drink in the street (my brother couldn't even buy a drink despite being four years older than you when you moved out), gamble, play poker on line, smoke anywhere... the bottom line is that the UK is mostly a lot more liberal than the US.

reply to post by JuniorDisco

in the UK kids can buy alcohol but lord help them should they need to cut up their steak!

Originally posted by JuniorDisco

Originally posted by NavyDoc
It's not disingenuous. What I posted was a practical observation from earned from treating both gunshot and knife wounds.

Anti-gun people put the "hysterical" "more deadly" moniker as if getting stabbed in the chest is somehow "better" than being shot in the chest. They both can kill you quite dead in an instant.

As for the last bit in your post, I already explained why a gun is a better weapon than a knife. It takes away the strength differential: a weak person in a wheelchair can better defend themselves with a gun than a knife and it removes the need to get in close with a criminal to use.

Sorry, but I disagree. You're using the term deadly in a specific and slightly disingenuous manner. Because the 'deadliness' of a weapon isn't contained purely in its potential effect but also in its ease of use.

And the reverse is that the opposite side uses the term "deadly" in a highly disingenuous and hysterical manner. No one disagrees that a firearm can kill, however, unlike the hysterical anti-gun people, we do not imbue them with almost mystical powers of death and destruction.

Originally posted by NavyDoc

And the reverse is that the opposite side uses the term "deadly" in a highly disingenuous and hysterical manner. No one disagrees that a firearm can kill, however, unlike the hysterical anti-gun people, we do not imbue them with almost mystical powers of death and destruction.

T'is true. Instead, you imbue them with amost mystical violence deterrent and protection capabilities, as if merely the act of owning a firearm significantly increases your survival limits, regardless of whether you can aim it purposefully in a high stress situation.

cant US posters just enjoy their victim/fear mentality with out getting all annoyified that we dont share that over here in glorious blighty?

have a cuppa, and a custard cream....it's that coffee thats making you so tense

Originally posted by NavyDoc


And the reverse is that the opposite side uses the term "deadly" in a highly disingenuous and hysterical manner. No one disagrees that a firearm can kill, however, unlike the hysterical anti-gun people, we do not imbue them with almost mystical powers of death and destruction.

Except when they're in the hands of the good guys.

Anyway, I feel we're at an impasse. I respect your position though I disagree with it. And i doubt much is going to be changed by us arguing about it on the internet.

reply to post by Thunderheart


Wrong again. Kids can't buy alcohol.

The knife law was introduced because a minority of teenagers were stabbing people. You see, when we have a problem involving people being hurt we address it.

For some reason in the US this isn't possible without half of you becoming wildly self-righteous and threatening to take to your bunkers with your assault rifles. In a country where ironically you have much stricter, nannying laws than much of Europe.

Originally posted by NavyDoc

Originally posted by babybunnies
reply to post by NavyDoc

 

Not gun murders.

And the british people are actually quite happy with their gun ban.

Shrug. Actually my British friends are very unhappy with them and think they are stupid, but they are outnumbered by the people who do not understand the issue, are afraid of inanimate objects, or are politically correct politicians.

So everyone who is educated and understands the gun issue's in the UK think the gun ban's are stupid?.....but alas they are outnumbered by the rest of us who are all either incapable of logical thinking and are plagued with irrational fears, or are all politician's?

I see a lot of people displaying traits of being incapable of logical thinking and being plagued with irrational fear's.....and I sure as hell don't see them all coming from the anti- gun camp!

I'm sorry...but stating that those in the UK who don't agree with a very small minority on gun issues only do so because they aren't educated enough on the subject thus/ or don't understand it or suffer from irrational fears, actually comes across as rather condescending.....

I've done my homework....I don't want a gun culture in my society....and as far as inanimate objects are concerned the inanimate object in question is man made and not just something that naturally occurs.....so i think it's quite reasonable for people to judge whether it's a good or bad thing for a society as it was born from the mind's and idea's of man.