Carlos The Jackel

Well put it this way - id rather if I was getting burgled that neither me or the criminal had guns in comparason to us both having guns. Lets face it if you both have guns either your going to get shot or end up in jail for shooting someone else. Great set of options.

I can understand why some Americans have guns - but im sure most would rather there were none at all.

289

Hmm, the anti-Columbine website argies its case well but misses the point. Sure, Moore's a self-publicist, and yes, he's ahem, judiciously edited Charlton Heston's speeches.

But in the interview section with Heston there's no ambiguity - he fails to answer questions and generally patronises.

Regarding the death figures, the website tries to counter Moore's stats (which probably are wrong) but actually ends up making Moore's point for him. Moore's central precept is that it's the American psyche, rather than guns themselves, which are the issue. Pute the two together, however, and you have a huge problem.

So when the website asks the question about Switzerland's low homicide rate compared to the UK (despite the fact that almost all men have a gun), it's only making the same point that Moore was regarding Canada (lots of guns, not many killings) versus the USA.

Moore shot himself in the foot (pun fully intended) with some of his tactics, but the question remains - what is it in American culture which makes them so violent? And why do so many of them cling onto the idea that they need a high-power handgun (whose only purpose is to kill other humans) - do they want a burglar to break in so that they can play at being a vigilante? I wish I knew the answers, but worry that this is the same nation which is currently stomping around the world trying to force its brand of demonracy on others.

tiggers

I work about four months of the year in the US hence feel I am qualified to talk about the differences between the UK and the US.

I see the stats for gun related deaths in the US and they are very high, but how many of them are police shootings, domestic shootings or gangland shootings - if you take those away what are you left with? I don't know the answer, but it would be interesting. Coming from the UK I don't sit easily with the notion of everyone having the right to bear arms, but I'm not prepared to say it's wrong as my experience of living and working in the US is that it is a much safer place than the UK.

For example in the US or at least the cities I have worked in the car crime rate has been minimal as has the likelihood of burglary or for that matter assault. People are friendly, but say what they think whether they know you're going to like it or not and they love their country (something the UK could do to remember). The police have the respect and confidence of the public and are very visible in the community (hint hint to the UK police forces).

As for being a violent society all I can say is that I can go and watch a football game in America without fear of being involved in the pack based violence so often associated with our beloved game of soccer and I have seen more fights and assaults on a Saturday night in Manchester than I've seen in the whole of my time in the US and that includes frequent nights out in Vegas, San Francisco and even New York.

So for those of you ready to judge a country that at best your only experience of is two weeks in a Florida theme park I say this - go and live and work there for a couple of months then come back to the UK and tell me we've got all the answers - NOT!

Regards,

tiggers.

289

So that makes it all right then??

NotoriousREV

Tiggers makes some good points. I personally used to beleive that the blanket hangun ban in the UK was a good thing. However, I've changed my mind over the last couple of years for a few reasons, not least of which is the fact that gun crime has risen in this country despite fewer guns supposedly being out there.

I'm also begining to realise that our liberal, nanny state Government(s) are eroding our personal responsibility which is harming our society, IMHO.

However, I disagree that the police in the US have more respect than here. I'm a moderator on a BBS with a large US-based membership and you wouldn't beleive the bashing that cops recieve, certainly more intense than the cop bashing that goes on here on SN. I don't know many people in the UK that hold the opinion that police officers are mentally deficient, lazy and power mad, whereas it appears to be a common opinion amongst certain groups in the US. In fact, just look at The Simpsons for that exact same stereotype.

civictyper

Agree with 289.

Ok the figures/details may have been doctored but we're still talking thousands of gun related murders in America compared with a few hundred (max) in the rest of the world. That to me is a cause for great concern and where the film makes it's point IMO.

Personally I can't see how the whole 'I'm responsible for protecting my own' mentality helps. If you're going to take the law into your own hands and kill everyone that poses a threat to your family/posessions then what is the point in having a police force in the first place. You may as well live in a lawless state where it's a free-for-all.

Brendan Hughes

Last time I had this argument in about 1998 I checked out the official stats. Of course there are differences, but whereas all the European countries had homicide rates of 1.3-2.5 deaths, I think per 100 000 population, the US had a homicide rate of about 11. It was five times higher than any European country, including Israel and the UK after its Irish problems.

I also made a copy of a thesis a guy had done trying to compare US and UK gun laws. Given that it was just after Dunblane, he'd had problems getting info from the UK side, but it was a fair attempt. Of course it didn't take into account the attitude of paranoia which I think Moore rightly points out is a problem in the US, but it said one of the biggest problems in the US was the rate of accidental killings - cleaning a loaded weapon, kids playing, not seeing a mate while hunting, etc.

So I'd say, from my poorly informed opinion, that it's not gun ownership that's the problem, it's the attitude that goes with it.

tiggers

The police are your first line of defence obviously, but are you seriously telling me that you think what happened to Tony Martin in this country is right. I think that you should have the right to protect what is yours in any way you see fit without fear of reprisal from the pathetic liberal excuse for a judicial system we have in this country.

Well that's not my experience of actually living and working over there, but then maybe I've just been lucky where I've worked. As regards the BBS maybe we should point this fact out to those on here who get so upset when anyone dares to be critical of our beloved police force.

No of course not, but in a country where guns are available so freely they are bound to be used more in these incidents than in the UK for instance hence it would just be interesting to see the number outside of this - e. g. cold blooded murder statistics on non-relations etc.

Regards,

tiggers.

289

tiggers

I think you're missing my point here - I don't want to be shot, and don't differentiate between a stranger, a relative, or the police in terms of who doesn't shoot me!

You're right to say that if there are more guns there will be more use of them ...which is why they shouldn't be available. Of course if they're well-controlled (as in Switzerland) this is not such an issue, but this isn't the case in the States.

Switzerland has a large number of hunting rifles (as in Belgium, Canada, France etc), whereas the US has a far greater proponderance of handguns, which just to add to the problem are not well-controlled. Add to this the American psyche, which has been conditioned (as we in the UK are becoming conditioned) to believe that crime levels are rising, that intruders are likely to break into our houses, that there is a NEED to have an armed response.

And even if there WERE such a potential need, the likelihood of an accident involving said gun is far higher than the chance of in ever actually being used in a genuine defensive capacity. And the reality is that in most cases guns are used in the US in domestic shootings, whereas in the UK it's more likely to be stabbings or broken limbs resulting from a domestic barney. Not pleasant, but in most cases survivable.

tiggers

289,

I think you are missing my point. I am not advocating that guns are a good thing - I am simply interested in finding out why it would appear that Americans use them more often than others. That is why I wanted to strip away the figures. You seem to be gently accusing me of supporting the gun laws which I don't necessarily.

What I do want to do is get to the bottom of the situation to find out if Americans or guns are the cause of the high numbers of gun related deaths simply because it is interesting. The idea of Americans being naturally violent is at complete odds with my experiences of living/working there. What are your experiences of America? Maybe I've just been lucky!

Agreed except that in America crime rates are actually dropping whereas in the UK ... well I'd better not criticise our beloved police force/government again had I now?

Regards,

tiggers.

The Zohan

posted twice

[Edited by Paul Habgood - 12/9/2003 12:47:01 PM]

The Zohan

So I'd say, from my poorly informed opinion, that it's not gun ownership that's the problem, it's the attitude that goes with it.
I'd say that was an informed opinion IMHO!

Tiggers makes some good points. I personally used to beleive that the blanket hangun ban in the UK was a good thing. However, I've changed my mind over the last couple of years for a few reasons, not least of which is the fact that gun crime has risen in this country despite fewer guns supposedly being out there.

Agreed - There are fewer legally held weapons, infact hardly any. Legal ones where never the real problem.


Have a look at
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2002/02/24/nguns24.xml
Taken from artical posted 24 02 02
GUN crime has almost trebled in London during the past year and is soaring in other British cities, according to Home Office figures obtained by The Telegraph.
and
The Home Office had tried to spin its way out of trouble with an avalanche of initiatives but when the crime statistics were published this morning, few had anticipated just how bad the firearms figures would be.
And other rises in recorded crimes have also kept the government on the back foot.
However, as our Home Affairs Editor Mark Easton reports, a closer look at the new crime stats reveals a more complex and less depressing picture.
Despite all the Government spin-doctors efforts to muffle the noise, today's gun crime figures were explosive.
Nearly 10,000 recorded firearms crimes in England and Wales, a rise of more than third in a year. The use of handguns in crimes has gone up 46 per cent - doubling since the Government introduced its ban on such weapons after Dunblane.


Handgun crime is up 46% since Dunblane, a ban has not helped on bit, mores the pity!

It is about peoples attitudes and the lengths people are prepared to go to.







[Edited by Paul Habgood - 12/9/2003 12:50:18 PM]

TAZMAN

The problem with passing a gun law is....by default only the law abiding citizens will abide by such a law! Are there any stats anywhere on the number of privately held guns that were stolen each year here?

Also the point was made that the 'the Americans take the law into their own hands' relating to protecting themselves. Not true each state has variations but all states have the basic precept that you have the right to use 'equal force' to protect both kith,kin and property, that includes lethal force where it was deemed that you or you kith/kin where in a life threatening situation. The laws do not permit you to chase a burglar out into the street and then shoot him as he runs away, that is not deemed lethal force and 'could' be viewed as homicide. The major problem we have today is that peoples views on both guns and American society are heavily influenced by the media and the entertainment industry..
As mentioned earlier a massive amount of 'gun related' deaths in America are accidental, you cannot protect a fool from himself.
Having lived in both the USA and here I would rather have the right to keep a gun for protection of home and family then not.

Criminals don't play fair.

Sorry for the rant..but anti-gun mentality gets me going..a gun is just a lump of metal until someone pulls the trigger.

Oh if you are truly interested in the subject a good book to read would be 'In the gravest extreme ' by Massad F. Ayoob..it may just change the way you think..

Brendan Hughes

Lies, damned lies…

and this one too for an international view. Unfortunately it only gives you %age rise and falls (some rose, some fell; BFHD), it doesn't say absolutes, except for homicides:

And on a different topic, for those of you that want more people locked up:

There's a lot of stuff on the web if you want info for your arguments.

BTW, I just had a look at the international report. The risk of being a victim of most types of crime is higher in England and Wales than in any other country surveyed (including US) except Australia. So what's the verdict? You are more likely here to have your car stolen, your wife raped, your house burgled, but at least you won't get murdered while it happens?


[Edited by Brendan Hughes - 12/9/2003 1:17:52 PM]

BluWagon

I think there are a lot of good points here, which highlight the differences in attitude between the our two societies - people who have a hard time understanding the American "fascination" with guns oft times forget that 100 years ago, signifigant portions of our country were still lawless and wild - the "wild west", as it were. And while it seems to be a very popular to describe Americans as "cowboys", it's best not to forget that it wasn't that long ago - we are a young country, and have come a long way in a short time.

As to the gentleman that suggested that I was advocating "taking the law into my own hands", and "killing everyone who posed a threat to my family/property", I think you're missing the point of rational, personal responsibility. Is it my responsibilty to exact justice for someone keying my car? Of course not - nor it is my responsibility to hunt down someone who burgles my house when I'm away. But is it my responsibilty to defend myself and family when someone invades my home? It most certainly is. I hold the law in fairly high esteem, but your own police in several major English cities have stopped responding to burgleries. Is it right that when I pick up the phone to call for help, that I should have to worry whether the police will think it's important enough to respond?

I consider what happened to Tony Martin to be a disgrace - a black mark upon justice.

As to the bashing of the police on the internet here in the States - well, come on, it's the internet for god's sake. Police are an authority figure, and therefore prone to take abuse no matter what.

The fact that nobody trumpets the statistic, complied by the FBI I believe, that says gun violence is dropping in my country is something I find very revealing. Even with the hugely covered school shootings, violence in schools is down - sounds odd, but it's true. But then again, reporting that wouldn't get the ratings, would it? Every day is a slow news day anymore, so every story needs to get pumped up up up.

Let's look at root causes, here - guns aren't the problem, people and their propensity to violence are the problem. You're now more likely to be assaulted in London than New York - until the issues causing the violence are addressed, it's always going to be a problem.

Not to make this an anti-liberal diatribe, but I lay the blame directly at the feet of the nanny state. Don't worry, the government will take care of you - oh, it's not your fault, you're underpriviledged. Gee, you make a comfortable living - let's give a sizable chunk of your income to support someone with no will or intent to work. The decline of personal responsibility and the rise of the nanny state is the beginning of the end - surely, there's a great ways to go, and we'll certainly never see it, but I wonder what our children's children will think. Ah well, history will be our judge.

civictyper

IMO they would be setting a dangerous precidence if the government gave us all the green light to kill anyone unlawfully on our property.

WRT Tony Martin I'm not sure. Maybe if he was put in a life/death situation things would have been different but he did not need to kill that boy. If he wasn't put away then how many more deaths would have followed because it would have been 'ok' to do as we see fit. I honestly feel for the guy but this society could do without that kind of freedom.

Back to the film though the only conclusion I can draw from it is that it's (some) American people that are the problem. Clearly, from the film, it has nothing to do with guns, history or race etc so what else is left but the people/culture/society.

Jza

Have you ever watched BBC News? CNN?... what do you think they do when they edit footage... they edit it so it goes with what they are talking about....

The Italian nation mourns the death of 19 in Iraq.... (makes news)

... 19 more Iraq's die in US marine fighting (not interested - no news)

This has been going on since day dot... If you write an essay on a subject, you pick the bits that support your case... just as Moore does ??????

Jza

tiggers

BluWagon,

Thank you for your extremely well written and balanced post - being lucky enough to flit between working in the UK and the USA quite often I can vouch for a lot of what you are saying. The fact that you haven't risen to any of the usual anti-American jibes (not so much in this post, but elsewhere on the board) is a credit to you.

To the others who lay the blame of all this gun crime squarely at the feet of (some) Americans you'd think we in the UK and elsewhere for that matter lived in some sort of Utopia. Sorry, but if you're going to hold the UK with all it's social non gun related violence, spiralling crime and a police force/judiciary system that doesn't want to know up as some sort of shining example against society in the US then you need your heads examined.

tiggers.

civictyper

I don't think anyone is naive enough to think that the UK is some sort of Utopia (I certainly don't) but the fact is, compared to most places and Canada especially, America has some incredible gun related murder figures. However safe you feel you cannot escape the fact that thousands of people are being killed each year compared to a few hundred.

As said previously guns are not the problem but people's attitudes. It's just really strange that America seems to have more people willing to misuse them than anywhere else. I'm not having a dig at Americans so apologise if that's how I'm comming across but the facts are just so stunning.

tiggers

civictyper,

No worries.

Even more stunning when you go and live and work there. It's just so at odds with the way it feels and is as regards other crimes.

tiggers.

BluWagon

Jza - I am of course aware that the news is edited to make a point - I had hoped my distaste for the media was showing through with my comments, but I guess not. Media nowadays is more driven by ratings than facts - I find to get a balanced view I need to watch Fox News, the BBC, and then CNN, and average them out, as it were. Or listen to Rush Limbaugh and then NPR. My point is that balance is the key - and sadly, you're never going to see a documentary that's a rebuttle to Moore's, and you're certainly never going to see one win an Oscar. So I just couldn't let this go without saying SOMETHING.

Tigger - I'd be rather silly to rise to Anti-American jibes, given the fact that I am an American, and very happy with the fact - thanks for the nice words, though. Hopefully I haven't mislead anyone into thinking I'm something I'm not - I believe I did mention earlier that I was an NRA member. I should also clarify that I own multiple firearms as a hobby, and have a permit to carry a concealed firearm, which I do as often as lawfully possible. The US, for all it's warts, is a nice place to live - and even if I don't agree with everything it's gov't does (ie free the Iraqi people = good, do it for oil and then lie about it = bad), I will certainly express my displeasure at my next earliest opportunity - within the voting booth.

TypeR - remember, too, when looking at those statistics, that we do have a signifigantly larger population than both the UK and Canada. We also have more population centers (ie cities), which by their nature, pack people together. Also, please remember to take ALL statistics with a grain of salt. Did you know that the highly touted statistics for children killed with handguns includes everyone up to the age of 18 - so that tragic accidents are lumped in with gang bangers and drug dealers? A bit misleading, if you ask me. As to why we have more people willing to misuse guns? 1) We have more people, and 2) Guns have always been easily available, and it's ingrained in our culture. One question I always ask of morals here in America is this - why is it okay for 12 year olds to see people regularly gunned down on television, yet seeing Andy Sipowitz's **** on network television is a scandal? Please... Oh well..

Tiggs

sorry....cant read all the long winded answers- but wanted to say that MM is a fat louis theroux.....tackles a issue where one exists but not quite in the way he portrays it. good TV bad way to learn about the real world.

Brendan Hughes

BluWagon, from the stats I've quoted above, I can only agree with your "ingrained in our culture" argument, your higher population simply doesn't count. Not specifically attributed to guns, but there are higher homicide rates per capita in some of the smaller countries, and some of the smaller capital cities, in the EU. And I think London has a population perhaps comparable with SF and Washington (I think it's a bit more than half that of NYC) yet look at the homicide stats? There is clearly no direct link between size of connurbation and homicide rate, Amsterdam et al are higher than London despite being half or even a quarter of the size. It's clear that there is some sort of link, when you read the reports on the UK most of the gun crimes happen in London, Manchester and Birmingham, but it's not as simple as you suggest. Still, as said earlier, nice to see some reasoned argument rather than emotion on here.

If someone else wants to go and find more detailed stats for gun crimes by city, city population, levels of gun ownership, theft of guns compared to legal ownership levels, etc and do an analysis they can, but I have to do some work this afternoon... AND my internet is really slow today!

BTW, it's true that stats can be misleading. But what else can you use? Joe Public who just shrugs and say "well I feel that's wrong" without anything to back it up is just hot air to me.
[/i]

[Edited by Brendan Hughes - 12/9/2003 3:37:16 PM]

TAZMAN

Civictyper you missed the point again...the US law does not give you carte blanche to shoot anyone who enters your property, you have to have displayed 'equal force' to the situation i.e. he had to have a gun or other weapon or you had to be in very real fear for your life. The Tony Martin case is not a good precedent has it was unusual n the extreme...however my personal view is...if you don't want to get shot/clubbed/hurt..don't break into people's houses. Here in the UK we have devolved to much of our personal responsibility to the state to the point of legislative paralysis..
The reason the crime rate is rising is that the more laws you pass the more you restrict the law abiding and the more recourse you provide to the criminal fraternity.
The 'fluffy bunny' crowd would love a world where we all live in peaceful coexistence but they seem to forget that underneath the thin veneer of civilization we are still animals!

BluWagon

Well said, Brendan, and shame on me for not pursuing your numbers more deeply - but I believe that I might have misrepresented what I was trying to say (that, and I can barely add, let alone do statistical analysis). I was simply trying to say the numbers look bigger because we have a larger sample size - but sadly, as you point out, nothing about this argument is simple.

Tazman - actually, the law is not as cut and dried as that, and it does vary from state to state. While equal force can be applied in some instances, it is in most cases the "fear for your life" you mention that is the deciding factor. It's actually very complex - for instance:

In Maryland, one of the least gun friendly states in the Union, if an intruder enters your home, you are, by law, required to retreat if at all possible, be it leaving your home, running upstairs, etc. If all avenues of escape are blocked, and you are in fear for your life (which, to me, at least, is assumed), you are then allowed to use force. You cannot, however, shoot someone who simply walks into your house, grabs your TV, wishes you a good day, and leaves. BUT

In Pennsylvania, where I currently reside, if an intruder enters my home, it is assumed BY LAW that he has foul intentions, and I am allowed to use whatever force I deem necessary. So, if someone enters my house as in the above scenario, I am within my legal rights to shoot him. I would only have to deal with the emotional consquences of killing someone, rather than having a legal battle as well. Frankly, I hope I'm never in that situation.

Now, continuing the "equal force" theme, let's assume I'm accosted whilst walking down the street. In Maryland, I would have no recourse other than my feet or my fists - my feet hauling my fat **** down the street being my preferred means of "conflict resolution". If I were to shoot the gentleman, I would be liable to be arrested for 1) murder, and 2) handgun violations. I certainly wouldn't want to take the chance that a jury is convinced I wasn't in fear for my life, and that was the reason I shot my attacker with an illegal handgun. Tony Martin took that chance, and look how he ended up.

Now in Pennsylvania, in that same scenerio, were I accosted, I could present my LEGALLY carried firearm, OR, preferably, run like the very hounds of hell were pursuing me. The difference is thatI have a choice, and if trapped, am more than able to defend myself - without fear of being prosecuted for shooting someone threatening my life.

Sorry if that rambled a bit, because you are in a broad sense correct - I just wanted to dispel any notions some people might have that the entire country is as you described, and help reinforce your argument some.

Wow, I guess MM is good for something - this, quite frankly, itsthe first good, non-emotional, non-name calling gun discussion I've seen in a while - particulary with you durn fureners.

289

You’re not going to get a documentary stating that having a huge number of guns and an equally high homicide rate is good? Really??

Why, for heaven’s sake, do you feel the need to carry a concealed handgun “as often as lawfully possible”? In all seriousness, you either live in a bad-*** neighbourhood (in which case, move) or …… well, I really can’t think of any reason other than you’re obsessed with the thought that you'll need to defend yourself at any moment. If I’m mistaken about this, I’ll apologise now, but a concealed handgun has only one use, and you presumably feel you need the protection.

If you don't feel in imminent danger of attack, I'd be interested to know the reasons for wanting to carry a gun. If it’s just that you like the feel and weight of them then it’s strange, and a fetish of sorts, but I’d actually understand that FAR better than the fact that you perhaps thought you were going to be attacked at any second, because that’s surely just paranoid? I thought you said the US was a nice place to live?


Oh, well that makes it all right. Clearly some 18 year olds matter less than others ....

Fundamentally I disagree with the line that “guns don’t kill people, people kill people”. Bollocks – people with guns kill people. Take away the guns, you take away part of the problem. Not all of it by any means, but a significant proportion.


[edditedd cos eye cnat spool]

[Edited by 289 - 12/9/2003 4:46:33 PM]

civictyper

TBH I have to admit my ignorance with respect to US gun law but I wasn't quite suggesting that you could blow someone away for hotwiring your scoob on the driveway

I appreciate what you're saying about using force equal to the situation but there's just no way that this is adhered to all the time and this is what I have a problem with.

Personally if I had a gun and heard a burglar comming up the stairs I would blow the **** away without thinking in order to protect my partner/kids. There just wouldn't be time to ascertain whether my force would be equal to situation. As it stands I have a hefty baseball bat and although not as effective will probably just hospitalise or scare off any intruder. Sure if the situation arose I'd kill to protect my family but this would have to be the absolute ultimate in extreme conditions. I hope (for any of us) the day never comes.

Blu

Really interesting info and agree that it's been cool discussing MM's film etc without a lot of heated moments. I'm interested in the whole situation where you live though. How do people cope with the emotional consequences of shooting/killing intruders ?

[Edited by civictyper - 12/9/2003 4:55:11 PM]

BluWagon

289 - hmmm, I'm at work, so I'll have to keep these short - not that being at work has stopped me in the past, but...

1.) Here you twist my words, whether intentionally or not. You will never see a documentary rebuting Moore - you will never see a documentary that shows how Moore has cut his film to make his point. You'll never see a documentary presenting statistics that refute or present another point of view other than Moores. You'll never see a documentary that shows how many crimes are averted because of legally carried firearms. It's not a popular point of view in the liberal media who would prefer to paint gunowers with the wide brush you use below in the next point.

2.) I actually live in a quiet little Pennsylvania town that has a riducoulsly low crime rate - it's very pleasant, really. And I do carry a handgun, even when going to get groceries - why? Not because I'm obessed with the idea that I could be attacked at any time - I think that's a rather unfair, loaded description. You try and paint me with a paranoid label, but I think I understand were you and I are diverging in thought.

About 10-15 years ago in Texas, before they enacted their current liberal concealed carry law, there was a horrible tragedy (all gun related crimes are tragedies) at a Luby's cafeteria. A man drove his pickup truck through the plate glass window in the front of the restaurant, and began shooting people - truly awful. But the thing that made the greatest impression on me was a woman, who could have stopped the nut - because she had a permit and a gun. Sadly, that handgun was in her car. After that, I always said to myself, if I'm able to carry a firearm, I will - not because I'm paranoid of being under imminent attack, but because life is uncertain. Please don't make me out to be an irrational paranoid.

Here's where we diverge - I view guns as a tool. You don't - you view them as an evil. When I leave the house, I take my keys, my wallet, a leatherman, and a pistol - the tools I might need during the day. My gun will not shoot someone - I will. My keys will not start my car, I will. As much as I hate to admit it, my credit cards to not buy car parts - I do. These might not be valid reasons to you, but to me, they are - I am PERSONALLY responsible for my actions. Call me crazy, but hey - you already have.

3.) I'm sorry you think so little of me to imply that I have no problems with people dying - it's quite the contrary, really. What you have missed is my implication that statistics lie. I understand that you have not been bombarded with the same amount of mind numbing anti-gun propaganda that I, as an American have. But when a television ad shows an 8 year old child playing with a handgun, fades out, and then a shot rings out - followed by the statistic that so many children die each year from handguns, I call that deception. Why doesn't the producer of this ad mention that every year more children die in swimming pools than of accidental gunshot wounds? Because that doesn't make a good television ad. If you want to run ads of that nature, use real statistics - don't lie.

You want to end gun crime, try ending crime - make people responsible. Make the government responsible for passing reasonable laws, make the police responsible for enforcing those laws, make the citizens responsible for obeying those laws, make the schools responsible for teaching those laws, make the parents responsible for raising their kids, and make the kids responsible for acting correctly. But then, that's too hard - it's much easier to blame a gun for society's woes - or an immigrant - or an asylum seeker - or the fellow up the street with the nicer car and house than you.


TypeR - it's never easy to deal with killing someone - there have been some excellent studies on the web, although I'm at a loss to find them at the moment. Hopefully it's something I'll never have to personally deal with. And I'd be careful of using that bat in the UK at the moment - from what I've read, not only could you be done for roughing your gentleman intruder up, but you could later be sued by said individual for loss of income, at taxpayer expense.

BluWagon

289 - here, by the way, is a link to the woman I mentioned..

http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp...&notFound=true

That's why I carry a handgun - because that will never happen to me.

Brendan Hughes

You're joking, right?

You live in a quiet little Pennsylvania town with a ridiculously low crime rate, you're not paranoid, but you carry a gun to do your groceries because 15 years ago some guy in Texas - a different state, different legislation, different mentality, different history, pretty much like comparing London to Rome except you share the language - went on the rampage?

And you're not paranoid?

This is where I start to despair. By similar reasoning, Columbine wouldn't have happened if all teachers carried concealed weapons. THEREFORE, we should let all teachers carry concealed weapons. You'll dispute that, but sorry, I don't see the difference. Do you also drive a massive SUV as the roads are more dangerous?

Gotta sign out now, going home. But I think the quality of argument has just dropped a bit.