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

Before the ban there had been two tragic incidents, Hungerford and Dunblane, both preventable if the Police had done their job properly. Both perpetrators had been known to the Police as unsuitable to own firearms (they both held legal firearm certificates). Within months of the second incident (Dunblane) why did gun crime start to rise in the UK?

For those that answer this please research your answers, do not give smartarse answers as comedy and needless deaths do not go together.

2007-04-21 01:55:30 · 25 answers · asked by Brian R 5 in Politics & Government Law Enforcement & Police

It was the Idiot Blair who in 1997 finished the ban by outlawing smallbore (.22) handguns, thus making people such as our Olympic shooting team unable to train in their own country. Also people who used to shoot legally were checked out by the police, including their homes. If the police had done their checks properly Hungerford and Dunblane almost certainly would not of happened.

If guns are the problem, how is it that in Switzerland where the Government issue people with guns, there is almost no gun crime?

2007-04-21 23:14:41 · update #1

25 answers

you just answered your own question, criminals are the only ones with the handguns

2007-04-21 02:00:17 · answer #1 · answered by plhudson01 6 · 4 1

No important consequence on gun crime, or crime in any respect. If a psycho makes a decision to kill others, they'll stumble on a thank you to do it - in accordance to government information, there have been over 550 murders in England & Wales final 365 days, with yet another 500+ tried. human beings have been killing one yet another for the reason that they figures out the thank you to %. up rocks and branches - ban knives, hammers and regardless of else has been used for homicide and that's what they might motel to. Banning a 'device' that has the two criminal and unlawful makes use of basically stops sincere human beings using it - criminals _don't_ obey the regulation... a sturdy parallel is an attempt some years in the past to have Radio scanners made unlawful, as criminals have been using them to hearken to in to the Police, so as that they could tell if the police have been after them or had detected against the regulation in progression. Does anybody heavily have self belief a criminal might turn in or wreck their scanner through a sparkling regulation? the only human beings affected may well be the hobbyists who did no injury. that's the comparable with gun regulation - criminals do not obey.. the huge distinction that somebody legally studying to suited cope with and use a gun, with the tiers of have faith and duty in contact, is in all probability to grow to be a greater suitable and greater accountable individual throughout the time of their existence.

2016-10-13 02:42:14 · answer #2 · answered by duthill 4 · 0 0

I cant answer your question because it is quite specific, however as a few 'pointers' , I was always of the opinion that a total ban on guns would be a good idea, until I read a report recently. Maybe if your reply from 'anon' had read this he may think again?
Here are a few details of the report:-
Gun crime prosecutions perv100,000 people in the following countries:-
Switzerland some one has already mentioned, virtually nil, just about everyone can carry arms!
Germany 8179
UK all guns banned 7206
France 6316
USA 5278
Amazing isnt it????

2007-04-22 08:06:54 · answer #3 · answered by budding author 7 · 0 1

It's simply the way society is going all over the world at the minute not just here. Think of it this way. When the Gun laws were uped there was no immediate rise in Gun crime. It's only fairly recently that gun related crime has been on the increase. Also keep in mind that i believe (someone please correct me on this if i'm wrong) that replica guns also come under gun crime if someone is seen with them.
You can also think of this another way. Gun laws were uped and now in a society full of drug dealers and such you need to be very resourceful to get a gun. If gun laws were suddenly relaxed again then not only would you get the people with guns carrying guns but the people who used to just have knives too.
Also keep in mind that in just one state of the usa (LA) there is more gun related deaths in one year than there is in the whole of the UK. This has to make you wonder who the real morons are here.............you to be sure would be one of them.

2007-04-21 07:31:39 · answer #4 · answered by Paul S 1 · 1 1

Dont be so bloody naive.

Do you honestly think that the immediate result over 9 years of the ban is the increase in gun crime.

You dont think its the lapse in immigration and boarder control that has made it easier to smuggle in immigrants let alone guns and anrcotics.

You dont think it hasbeen in the increase in eastern european organised crime, and their support structures moving equipment money and drugs.

You dont think it;s the change in culture over the more recent years making firearms more accessible, and interesting, as well as more acceptible.
5 years ago shooting somebody was a disgusting thing even in gangs it was big-bog status. but over the last few years it has become moreacceptible for idiots just to resolve their issues with a 9mm.

You ask other people research their answer hoewever i think you have researched your answer with the intent of finding Blair a scapegoat, so yo ignore some vital evidence of other trends.

Yes when innocent people cant self arm to a degree it renders them a bit helpless, as the criminals who dont listen to that silly law have all the weapons.


this isnt a smartass answer this is thought out, and you would do well to do the same.

2007-04-22 10:33:24 · answer #5 · answered by the mofo 4 · 0 1

I agree with your start, Blair is an idiot. However the rest of your "question" is utter tripe.

What makes you imply that there a link between banning legal ownership of handguns and gun crime? Where is your evidence of that?

Your logic implies that the same people who would have bought handguns legally and got licences previously now buy them illegally and those same people go out and commit crimes with those guns simply because they can't get a handgun licence. What an insult to the people who previously owned handguns under licence. What utter RUBBISH.

You say there were only two tragic incidents before that, again absolute rubbish. Yes there were the two infamous tragic incidents you quoted but what about all the other less notorious guns crimes.

Your are manipulating circumstances to suit your beliefs.Your arguments are fatally flawed.

You say you don't want "smart ****" answers, well in that case don't post ridiculous, biased and factually incorrect questions.

2007-04-21 02:23:24 · answer #6 · answered by Captain Sarcasm 5 · 3 3

Outlawing handguns means only outlaws have handguns.
We live in a crap country with crap politicians , with no constitution and a populace who can't even get off their fat backsides to vote the crooks out, Let alone do what this country really needs, which is a good old fashioned revolution.
Now pass me my guillotine !!

2007-04-24 04:07:05 · answer #7 · answered by iusedtolooklikemyavatar 4 · 0 0

Drug related violent crime has escalated. There always was a criminal element who had guns. In recent years drug gangs, people smugglers and others have become more active; hence more gun crime as the gangs 'protect' their patch.
A bit like prohibition era Chicago they have no regard for 'civilians'.

2007-04-24 09:57:19 · answer #8 · answered by Paul 5 · 0 0

Let us for arguments sake, say all private ownership of guns are banned. Where are the souceses you can ALWAYS get them from? The military, and the police. These people will be sitting ducks for anyone one seeking guns and ammo. They will have to watch their backs every minute.The other source is the black market, wher you can buy ANYTHING if you have the money.Blair and his ilk just can't get it through their skulls that the guns they confiscated from law abiding citizens never are used to commit crime.Criminals will ALWAYS have access to guns.

2007-04-21 03:53:18 · answer #9 · answered by WC 7 · 2 1

Is simple.

When Gun legal, if bugler go in Haus with Gun owner could easily shoot him ded and claim self defens.
Now wit illegal homeowner get sentens for haf gun longer tan fore murder, so no likely shoot, so is safer taek gun on robery.
Also people wit Guns rater get few quid fore tan hant in Polis or hav disarm.
I do plenty disarm, 2 simlar gun, spike 1 barel and file of firing pin one gun, swap barels, den two disarm gun, if need shoot put back together good bits maek up working gun agen.
I do plenty, charge £150 a frow. easy marney.
Also I haf spare firing pin and frent in Birmingham he maek replase barel to patern, vere god tool steel.
Best buy is 9mm, from China, we stove enamel Blue ant Red liek Child Toy, taek anywhere in clear plastic wrapping, no won realise it real till dey shot ant dying. Onli few left, get some moer next monf.

2007-04-21 21:49:57 · answer #10 · answered by petrovitch m 2 · 1 1

I thought hand guns were banned before Blair came in.

He's an idiot anyway. A few gun crimes and they have to spoil the fun for everyone. Loads of killings (by guns) in USA every day and no change to gun laws at all.

wish i was American.

2007-04-21 02:00:21 · answer #11 · answered by 90210 aka Hummer Lover 6 · 4 3

fedest.com, questions and answers