English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

This is from FOX news: "Gun crime is rare in Britain, and handguns are completely illegal. The ban is so strictly enforced that Britain's Olympic pistol shooting team is barred from practicing in its own country.

Britain's 46 homicides involving firearms was the lowest total since the late 1980s. New York City, with 8 million people compared to 53 million in England and Wales, recorded at least 579 homicides last year." http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,266509,00.html

Doesn't this prove that you're living in complete denial and don't have a single leg to stand on? If it doesn't, please provide your proof that everyone having a gun would result in fewer homicides and also prove why banning guns wouldn't work, they're banned in the UK and it works there. Thanks.

2007-04-17 05:42:45 · 8 answers · asked by MATTHEW A 2 in News & Events Current Events

8 answers

Here's a great example:

"On January 16, 2002, the Dean, Anthony Sutin, Professor Thomas Blackwell, and student Angela Dales were shot and killed by disgruntled student Peter Odighizuwa, 43, of Nigeria. Three other students were shot but survived. The abrupt ending to Odighizuwa's shooting spree is attributed to two students with personal firearms who quickly took action."

Also British police tend to fudge their facts to make it look like things are going their way, much like CNN.

2007-04-17 06:06:41 · answer #1 · answered by Land Warrior 4 · 2 0

The fallacy in these statements is, 1. The Swiss as a nation mandate that every home have a firearm, for national defense. 2. The comments about England are about legal firearm ownership. They make no mention of the illegal firearms being brought in and used in England. There are more calls for English Police to be armed now than ever before,due to the increased crime rate. We could ban and collect all registered firearms, in this country, but how would we ever get the "war souvenirs" or the ones that great grandpa had, prior to registration? How many old trunks in attics are found to have a pistol in it, that everyone had forgotten about? Confiscation of firearms will be like prohibition was, an encouragement to illegalities.

2007-04-17 06:06:10 · answer #2 · answered by Beau R 7 · 2 0

Banning guns doesn't curb safety. The largest concentrations of crime are actually in the areas with the most gun control. Sure, a gun isn't the only way to save lives, but it's much more convenient (and less expensive) than if we were to put a cop every block or two. We also have this thing called the second amendment, which is why this couldn't happen in the first place. So, given the options here, allowing all who want to go armed to go armed is the best bet to curb crime.

2016-05-17 08:41:51 · answer #3 · answered by ? 3 · 0 0

Jan Yasidro, Columbine, Lubies Cafe, all victims were unarmed. Auschwitz, Dachau, ask the Jewish survivors what the first act against them was, it was disarming them. The guns are there, they aren't going away, they come across our borders daily. Did the report you heard mention that the Brit Bobbies are fighting to become armed? They're discovering the Jamacan communities in the North are well armed with high-end shotguns and millitary weapons coming from all over. Only the wealthy can own guns in Brittan, if you follow the law. You need to examine your denial issues a bit first, an armed society is a polite society.

2007-04-17 05:56:24 · answer #4 · answered by The Forgotten 6 · 1 1

you answered your own question actually. It works in the UK, because it is an island, and much less populous than the US.
You take weapons away from the citizens in this country and only criminals and law enforcement will have weapons. Are you aware of what happened in Australia when they banned guns? Home invasion rates went up 25 fold!!! Criminals had essentially free rein. Besides, the UK hasn't got the rights and protections granted to US citizens by our constitution. Personally, I think we should go the other way. Everyone should go armed and trained to use the weapon they have. It would be a much more polite society, and a great deal safer.

2007-04-17 05:53:37 · answer #5 · answered by essentiallysolo 7 · 1 2

The US and the UK are two totally different places.

Here in the US it has been proven over and over again that once you start to ban the weapons, violent crimes and deaths of the general populace start to increase. Any short term decreases are far outweighed by the marked and dramatic increases in subsequent years.

Now, FYI, in the past two years, violent crimes and murders have been on the increase in the UK. There has been a surge of 14% in the rate of violent crimes. Nearly 43% of all crimes commited in the UK are now violent crimes.

There are more child killers and more female murderers per capita in the UK than anywhere else in the world.

2007-04-17 05:52:11 · answer #6 · answered by MrKnowItAll 6 · 1 1

Life in the USA is not the same as life in the UK. Criminals here would LOVE for the general public to be completely disarmed. Do you honestly think our criminals would obey gun laws while ignoring any other law they choose? Making guns illegal is not a solution. It is only a recipe for disaster.

2007-04-17 05:52:03 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 1 1

If handguns were banned, then only criminals would have them. Law abiding people should have the right to defend themselves. Dispute that, you liberal bed-wetting mama's boy!

2007-04-17 05:56:08 · answer #8 · answered by Angela 1 · 4 3

fedest.com, questions and answers