The handgun ban should be repealed! its a complete joke from a knee jerk reaction! they are still legal to own in northern Ireland and the isle of man yet we don't hear of pistol totting thugs running amok.
And eighty years of the some of the bloodiest conflict in the British Isles seems to have passed you by.
Are there many many examples of guns preventing violence in countries where gun ownership is widespread? Maybe I've missed them, but I cannot recall a single report of an incident in which a gun in the hands of an ordinary person has prevented an an act of violence. Plenty caused by guns in the hands of ordinary people though.
The UK handgun law needs repealing, as stated previously it was a knee jerk and hasn't stopped criminals getting guns. If Hamilton had mowed down citizens in the street with a transit van would vans have been banned?
I do think handguns should be more strictly controlled than shotguns, and in all probability only allowed for shooting club members including full bore.
Hundreds of examples from the US. Here is 10 to start with.
How does it compare to the number of children accidentally shot or the number of adults accidentally shot or the number of people killed by someone with a minor grievance
How does it compare to the number of children accidentally shot or the number of adults accidentally shot or the number of people killed by someone with a minor grievance
are you claiming that those instances didn't happen?
FWIW the first instance is cited in Wikipedia - although I have no idea whether you think that is an impartial source or not.
With the best will in the world, only about half of those incidents are potential fatalities - the rest are burglaries, with no obvious intent to kill. Besides that, in the first incident, five people were still killed.
In the meantime, let's look at another instance cited in Wikipedia:
"According to the FBI, in 2012, there were 8,855 total firearm-related homicides in the US, with 6,371 of those attributed to handguns...In 2010, there were...11,078 firearm-related homicides in the U.S. In 2010, 358 murders were reported involving a rifle while 6,009 were reported involving a handgun; another 1,939 were reported with an unspecified type of firearm."
With the best will in the world, only about half of those incidents are potential fatalities - the rest are burglaries, with no obvious intent to kill. Besides that, in the first incident, five people were still killed.
In the meantime, let's look at another instance cited in Wikipedia:
"According to the FBI, in 2012, there were 8,855 total firearm-related homicides in the US, with 6,371 of those attributed to handguns...In 2010, there were...11,078 firearm-related homicides in the U.S. In 2010, 358 murders were reported involving a rifle while 6,009 were reported involving a handgun; another 1,939 were reported with an unspecified type of firearm."
I'm not sure what point you think you are making, I was simply answering the guys question.
I'm not sure what point you think you are making, I was simply answering the guys question.
Which you did. The more difficult question perhaps is to what extent is higher American gun crime a consequence of allowing more gun ownership? It's a bit chicken and egg isn't it?
I might be more inclined to want legal ownership of handguns if I lived in America. Here in the UK, where crime and gun crime is considerably lower than in the USA, I prefer our less libertarian laws on handguns.
Even if you ignore the fact that "legal intervention" are by LEOs that is still a clear "advantage" to the unintentional - and many legal intervention would not have led to the death of the person defending themselves if they hadn't fired
As for the gun nuts fave "stand your ground" law, it went so badly wrong in Florida they had to show the graph in a "unique way" which "oddly" seemed at first glance to show a massive drop in murders
Which you did. The more difficult question perhaps is to what extent is higher American gun crime a consequence of allowing more gun ownership? It's a bit chicken and egg isn't it?
Not sure that it is - seems pretty definite that the US's high gun crime rate is a result of the high gun ownership rate. That being said, there is evidence that (within the US) States that have high restrictions on legal gun ownership also have high gun homicide rates.
I might be more inclined to want legal ownership of handguns if I lived in America. Here in the UK, where crime and gun crime is considerably lower than in the USA, I prefer our less libertarian laws on handguns.
i dont see that the US gun culture is exportable to the UK.
Even if you ignore the fact that "legal intervention" are by LEOs that is still a clear "advantage" to the unintentional - and many legal intervention would not have led to the death of the person defending themselves if they hadn't fired
As for the gun nuts fave "stand your ground" law, it went so badly wrong in Florida they had to show the graph in a "unique way" which "oddly" seemed at first glance to show a massive drop in murders
The UK has the toughest gun laws in the world, and yet every time there's a mass shooting (roughly once a decade: 1987, 1996, 2010), the media goes nuts about "lax gun laws" and the government reacts by toughening them up even more. I daren't think what they'll do to toughen them up more than they already are if and when the next Michael Ryan or Derrick Bird happens.
Given the amount of rage in the world post social media boom any increase in the chances of people getting hold of lethal weapons is a bad idea in my view.
I wouldn't compare us to US, Switz or Israel. We ned to look solely at how the UK is and increased gun ownership seems a bad idea to me.
Virtually all guns are produced legally by someone. it's the prevalence of them that enables them to get into criminals hands.
The UK has the toughest gun laws in the world, and yet every time there's a mass shooting (roughly once a decade: 1987, 1996, 2010), the media goes nuts about "lax gun laws" and the government reacts by toughening them up even more. I daren't think what they'll do to toughen them up more than they already are if and when the next Michael Ryan or Derrick Bird happens.
Do we? I'm not sure it's quite the toughest, although I'd bet it's pretty close.
I'm slightly surprised they didn't ban rifles after Derrick Bird.
Comments
And eighty years of the some of the bloodiest conflict in the British Isles seems to have passed you by.
Okay, I'll bite, what is it about the gun laws of Northern Ireland that are not liberal enough for you?
Steady now.......make sure you research your answer very, very carefully.
Utter nonsense!!
Hundreds of examples from the US. Here is 10 to start with.
I do think handguns should be more strictly controlled than shotguns, and in all probability only allowed for shooting club members including full bore.
Other than that leave as is.
Wow, an impartial source if ever I saw it.
(note to Mods - we need a rolleyes smiley...)
are you claiming that those instances didn't happen?
FWIW the first instance is cited in Wikipedia - although I have no idea whether you think that is an impartial source or not.
no idea, you tell me.
With the best will in the world, only about half of those incidents are potential fatalities - the rest are burglaries, with no obvious intent to kill. Besides that, in the first incident, five people were still killed.
In the meantime, let's look at another instance cited in Wikipedia:
"According to the FBI, in 2012, there were 8,855 total firearm-related homicides in the US, with 6,371 of those attributed to handguns...In 2010, there were...11,078 firearm-related homicides in the U.S. In 2010, 358 murders were reported involving a rifle while 6,009 were reported involving a handgun; another 1,939 were reported with an unspecified type of firearm."
I'm not sure what point you think you are making, I was simply answering the guys question.
I might be more inclined to want legal ownership of handguns if I lived in America. Here in the UK, where crime and gun crime is considerably lower than in the USA, I prefer our less libertarian laws on handguns.
505 unintentional, 467 legal intervention in 2013
http://webappa.cdc.gov/sasweb/ncipc/mortrate10_us.html
If you accept the FBI figures then there were 201 Justifiable Homicides by private citizens using a gun in 2011 and 390 by LEOs
http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/ucr/crime-in-the-u.s/2011/crime-in-the-u.s.-2011/offenses-known-to-law-enforcement/expanded/expanded-homicide-data
Even if you ignore the fact that "legal intervention" are by LEOs that is still a clear "advantage" to the unintentional - and many legal intervention would not have led to the death of the person defending themselves if they hadn't fired
As for the gun nuts fave "stand your ground" law, it went so badly wrong in Florida they had to show the graph in a "unique way" which "oddly" seemed at first glance to show a massive drop in murders
http://www.businessinsider.com/gun-deaths-in-florida-increased-with-stand-your-ground-2014-2?IR=T
Not sure that it is - seems pretty definite that the US's high gun crime rate is a result of the high gun ownership rate. That being said, there is evidence that (within the US) States that have high restrictions on legal gun ownership also have high gun homicide rates.
i dont see that the US gun culture is exportable to the UK.
If you already knew why are you asking me?
I wouldn't compare us to US, Switz or Israel. We ned to look solely at how the UK is and increased gun ownership seems a bad idea to me.
Virtually all guns are produced legally by someone. it's the prevalence of them that enables them to get into criminals hands.
Do we? I'm not sure it's quite the toughest, although I'd bet it's pretty close.
I'm slightly surprised they didn't ban rifles after Derrick Bird.