Do you think the British public should have the right to keep a firearm at home for protection as in USA?
2007-03-15 11:47:52 · 34 answers · asked by harryfeelinlean 1 in Politics & Government ➔ Law & Ethics
Yes.
2007-03-15 11:50:13 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 4⤊ 1⤋
Yes I do and I'm so glad I do not live in the UK. I don't expect government to be there. If a thief decides to break into my home some night while I'm sleeping. I have 2 dogs, if that isn't enough deterrent. An armed home owner will be. I live in a rural part of the USA. The robbers and thief's has a real good chance of finding an armed home owner. That's why there is a better chance of a break in during the day. When people are at work. If you have a couple dogs the thief will move on. The barking attracts attention. In the UK the bad guys know nobody has a gun. Then if you put up a defense, the victim of the crime will be charged. Sad affair if I may say. Its the USA the if Ted Kennedy and Clinton among other would like to see in the USA. By gun control laws, then the crooks would be the only armed ones.
2007-03-15 12:39:59 · answer #2 · answered by David A 3 · 0⤊ 1⤋
As a Policeman in Britain, I can hardly wait to enjoy the prospect of knocking on someone's door to be confronted with some gormless fool & his latest purchase from 'HandCannon & Ammo' - knives are bad enough! - we dont have enough mortuary space to cope with this mental idea
P.S - there used to be a general right to posses a firearm in the UK - it was repealed in the 19th century because of the abuses we see in the USA now. We have had 2 nasty weapons incidents in the UK - Dunblane & Hungerford, (the 1st was with handguns, the other AK47, both legally held) - both types were subsequently banned from lawful ownership, & we have had no repeats. Gun deaths here are generally occasional gang type shooting of teenagers. How many Columbines has the US suffered?
2007-03-16 06:25:46 · answer #3 · answered by skipper409 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
According to studies in the US the gun is taken away less than 1% of the time, guns are used in defense over 300,000 times a year in the US with about 1,000 odd 'good shootings'. The typical result is that the offender flees. About 1% of registrations are revoked in 'conceal carry states'.
Also, violent crime goes down and minor property crime (car stereo type stuff) goes slightly up, according to the same studies.
Mind you, the US experience is predicated on the fact that there are already 500,000 guns in the general population, so why should the good guys be the only ones not able to have them?
2007-03-15 12:09:56 · answer #4 · answered by DAR 7 · 0⤊ 1⤋
You can count the number of people killed by hand guns in the Uk in a year on the fingers of your hands,some years one hand.In the USA it is thousands and the majority are accidents in the home primarily involving children playing with guns do we really want that in the UK.If you were allowed them in the home how long would they stay there/ until someone finds out their spouse is having and affair with the next door neighbour until a burglar steals it and uses it on your neighbour who points a gun at him.
2007-03-16 05:33:57 · answer #5 · answered by frankturk50 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Absolutely!!!!!
Look at Carl Marx
One of the planks of Marxism is to first disarm the public.
The reason the American constitution prohibits the government from taking away the right to bear arms, is that the authors of the constitution wanted to make sure that the people had a way to protect themselves from the GOVERNMENT!
Read the Federalist papers. This is the book that Chronicles the creation of the U.S. constitution.
2007-03-15 11:58:54 · answer #6 · answered by Delphi 4 · 2⤊ 1⤋
America is one of the last nations with the right to own a firearm. And globalists would like nothing more than to take those rights away from you.
2007-03-15 11:51:52 · answer #7 · answered by jeb black 5 · 1⤊ 1⤋
In my opinion, yes and no, yeah for protection as you never know what happens however if you use it to defend yourself from a burglar, you might get put in prison because of the silly law of not harming those who trepass. No, because not many people can be trusted with them and can use them for the wrong reasons.
2007-03-15 12:00:00 · answer #8 · answered by Amore vole fe 6 · 0⤊ 1⤋
No the money would be better spent on more home security if you are worried about these matters. Guns would get into the wrong hands and it would only lead to more killings
2007-03-15 11:53:27 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 1⤋
Yes. It should be a written constitutional right, the Labour government is taking away our freedom piece by piece.
No US government would dare do that to Americans because they know the people are armed and ready to defend their rights.
2007-03-15 12:40:52 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋
nice idea but no look at that poor bloke from Norfolk went to prison for protecting his property also ended in a loss of life.
you cant beet a good base ball bat
2007-03-15 12:02:18 · answer #11 · answered by keiths box 1 · 2⤊ 0⤋