2007-12-27 08:08:36 · 21 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Law & Ethics
I think we would all have to because we wouldn't be safe if only the criminal element did. It would be a really sad day when it did happen.
2007-12-27 08:13:33 · answer #1 · answered by monkeyface 7 · 3⤊ 1⤋
No, definately.
Those who need guns have them: farmers, hunters and the like. Unless I ever become one of those things (not the most likely thing in the world, but nonetheless), I will never own a gun.
I think a right to bear arms in this country would be idiotic (it's bad enough in the US).
Firstly, thugs with knives are bad enough, but in this country very few criminals have guns. I don't care what restrictions you might put on it, increasing the availability of guns will inevitably increase the number of criminals with guns. Especially considering if citizens are likely to be armed for protection criminals will find a need to arm themselves. I would rather face a burglar or whathaveyou when neither of us have guns than both of us.
Secondly, how many times have you ever been in a situation here in the UK where you could, sensibly, have used a gun to defend your family? I'm not talking burglaries here (because, right to bear arms or not, you'll never be allowed to shoot a burglar, look at Tony Martin) but times when your family is in actual physical danger which you could help by shooting someone. Yes, Britain could be safer; there are thugs who beat people up for little reason and violent drug dealers who shoot children in Liverpool, but anyone who thinks the situation could be improved by letting citizens run around with guns is an idiot.
Ugh, I could rant about this all night, but I won't as I have better things to do. Basically, a right to bear arms would be lunacy.
2007-12-27 11:23:45 · answer #2 · answered by AndyB 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Yes I would, I feel I should have the right to defend my home and my family from an intruder. However in the UK we must leave our doors and windows unlocked with a big "Welcome" sign outside as our law, British law favours the lawless, of course we have to leave the lights on and make sure that the perp does not injure themselves during the break-in or we will face prosecution under Health and Safety laws.
A mans house is his castle and we should be able to defend our castle and it's posessions from the scum of the earth, but this is the UK we are talking about here, where criminals are protected by the Governemnt/Police/liberal lefties and the law abiding citizen are forced to stand by while the dregs of society take their posessions freely or to lay down and die when we are attacked in our own homes.
2007-12-27 20:20:13 · answer #3 · answered by tom_p1980 4 · 0⤊ 1⤋
what do you mean by bear arms?
i live in the US and own guns but i don't carry a weapon.
in the early 80's i worked for grand met opening restaurants in London, North Hampton, South Hampton, Woodgreen and a few other areas and knew a number of people who owned firearms, shotguns. we even did some shooting while i was there. i was told that a number of the bobby's were armed and that most of their cars had firearms in the trunk(boot). so do you mean by the right to bear arms walk around with a handgun in your pocket? just wondering, i have not been back to the island since 84 so i don't know much about how things are now.
EDIT:
while there i found that a bloke with darts in his hand and 8 or 10 pints of Guinness in his gut was dangerous enough.
2007-12-27 08:24:18 · answer #4 · answered by michr 7 · 1⤊ 1⤋
No. you in elementary terms ought to examine out u.s. the place there are college shootings, estranged family contributors contributors in seek of revenge and cops getting gunned down almost on a daily basis. confident that's a advantageous concept that we are going to experience greater secure and could have the skill to guard ourselves, yet there'll consistently be a team of people who will abuse the main suitable. I hate how weapons of any style are used for revenge and minor disagreements which includes giving somebody a 'grimy look'. what's incorrect with a sturdy previous shaped bare knuckle combat, loose from weapons and is going as much as ten rounds. in simple terms like combat club yet for justice!
2016-10-20 02:09:08 · answer #5 · answered by mcclune 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I think what happened in Dunblane, and VT should answer that question. UK citizens dont have guns unless licenced for a damn good reason.
Besides, the US Constitution says people have the right to bear arms if they are defending theyre country. Nothing else.
2007-12-27 08:17:07 · answer #6 · answered by chris_p26 3 · 1⤊ 1⤋
We had that right up to 1920 then the government was scared that the surviving soldiers from the disaster of WW1 would rebel so they passes the 1920 firearms act to take away our long held freedom.
Yes I would . I was a Target pistol shooter up to 1997 when Tony Blair took that away too. Since then gun crime in the UK has increased fivefold.
2007-12-27 08:20:11 · answer #7 · answered by David C 5 · 3⤊ 0⤋
No I am a peace loving man and a gun has no place in my home. It is different if I was called up to serve in the armed forces. This is why I think armed robbery should be treated more severely than it is
2007-12-27 09:38:49 · answer #8 · answered by Scouse 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Probably, but it might cause more danger to me since it could be used against me. I hope that the day to bear arms never comes ...
2007-12-27 08:17:16 · answer #9 · answered by Maina 2 · 0⤊ 1⤋
Yeah probably, just because I could, and for defense though I doubt I'd have the guts to use it on someone anyway.
2007-12-27 09:51:13 · answer #10 · answered by Martin 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋