Should everyone be allowed to own a gun?

No1Doyen


Joined: 04/07/2008
Posts: 16617

Message Posted:
12/03/2009 10:28

We’ve all heard of the horrific murders that took place yesterday in Germany. I fear that it will not be long before a similar incidence in the UK.



Should we relax our laws in the uk and let everyone, over a certain age, be armed?

simbas



Joined: 16/07/2007
Posts: 5943

Message Posted:
12/03/2009 11:00

Yes if you're sane

No if you're not

Lilli



Joined: 21/07/2008
Posts: 13081

Message Posted:
12/03/2009 11:13

No and a you say particulary after the terrible tradgey in Germany. The knife culture is bad enough. xx

britvic



Joined: 05/09/2008
Posts: 3039

Message Posted:
12/03/2009 11:44

............I do! so if that sex offender comes near me or mine, there will be no need for 'chemical castration'!

craig2536


Joined: 09/06/2007
Posts: 277

Message Posted:
12/03/2009 12:52

When I was living in Czech Republic, I had a full gun licence, to obtain that licence you had to fill in a multi choice form in Czech, have a doctors report that you are not crazy or mentally imbalanced. Prove that you knew the law etc. Many business men carried guns, in my casino we had a special safe made so that they left them in reception before entering the casino. I have not heard of any abuse there. The system works, if properly controlled.

erolz


Joined: 17/11/2008
Posts: 3456

Message Posted:
12/03/2009 12:55

"Should we relax our laws in the uk and let everyone, over a certain age, be armed?"



No no no absolutely not - this way madness lies.

No1Doyen


Joined: 04/07/2008
Posts: 16617

Message Posted:
12/03/2009 13:01

Guns don’t kill people – people kill people.



Surely there's an argument for self-protection. Law-abiding citizens deserve the right to protect their families in their own homes, especially if the police are judged incapable of dealing with the threat of attack.

TRNCVaughan


Joined: 27/04/2008
Posts: 4578

Message Posted:
12/03/2009 13:10

The UK has steadily introduced more regulation regarding the owning and/or possession of firearms, since WW2 and each time there has been a incident such as Hungerford and Dunblane. We now cannot own most types of firearms and have reached the point where our Olympic pistol shooters have to train abroad. Having removed most legal firearms from society we have now reached the point where almost only illegal firearms exist outside of the armed forces etc. Legislation of law abiding gun owners has gone about as far as it can go and it still does not prevent these shootings.

Both the Hungerford and Dunblane shootings were carried out by people who should never have been issued a firearms certificate (which they had) and it was the vetting of them which failed. Stringent vetting is the answer not total blanket ban.

Guns don't kill people - people kill people.

david


Joined: 28/04/2007
Posts: 43

Message Posted:
12/03/2009 13:20

all the crackpots have all ready got guns in England the public should be allowed to defend themselves

erolz


Joined: 17/11/2008
Posts: 3456

Message Posted:
12/03/2009 13:29

"Surely there's an argument for self-protection."



Not really in my view, at least not with the legalising of guns. The reports of people who have mistakenly killed their own loved ones with such 'protective arms', or familiy members (children) who have killed themselves by accident with them, or where they have ended up being used by an UNARMED intruder to kill people they supposedly protect are legion.



On a slightly lighter note , though insigntful imo, I recommend this brief clip on youtube



http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PdJGcrUk2eE



For a longer more serious look at the issue Michael Moore's bowling with coloumbine is worth a watch.



"Guns don’t kill people – people kill people."



True but people with guns kill alot more people a lot eaiser than people without them.

erolz


Joined: 17/11/2008
Posts: 3456

Message Posted:
12/03/2009 13:45

"Legislation of law abiding gun owners has gone about as far as it can go and it still does not prevent these shootings."



Legislation restricting gun ownership does not remove all deaths by guns and never will, but it does reduce them. The more guns there are in a given society the more people , innocent or not, who die by them. That seems pretty obvious to me.



Yes criminals in the UK can obtain guns with relative ease, but legalising the ownership of guns to the general publc will only INCREASE the amount of guns obtained and used by criminals.

TRNCVaughan


Joined: 27/04/2008
Posts: 4578

Message Posted:
12/03/2009 13:57

Hi erolz,



Canada has a far higher per capita level of gun ownership than the USA, but it's homicide rate is tiny by any standard. This anomoly says something about Americans but more to the point it says that it isn't the number or incidence of gun owners that is crucial.

In the USA home owned guns involved in accidental deaths tend to be not locked away in a secure gun cabinet and many of the owners are not proficient in handling firearms.

"True but people with guns kill alot more people a lot eaiser than people without them." Most car drivers who kill people don't do it with a gun. They do it with their car and these far outweigh gun deaths. Shall we ban cars?

TRNCVaughan


Joined: 27/04/2008
Posts: 4578

Message Posted:
12/03/2009 14:00

Hi erolz,



"The more guns there are in a given society the more people , innocent or not, who die by them. That seems pretty obvious to me."

It isn't obvious to Canadians.

erolz


Joined: 17/11/2008
Posts: 3456

Message Posted:
12/03/2009 14:40

TRNCVaughan



I do appreciate what you say about the Canadan example and that it was a key theme of Bowling with Coloumbine that gun control per se was not the 'big difference' when comparing Canada with the US and there very different gun death rates. That cultural differences made a mssive difference. I am still of the opinion though that a Canada with no public gun ownership would have less gun related deaths than a Canada with it, even though with it Canada has massively less than the USA does with it.



Re the comparission with cars, the difference is the massive utility that cars provide to indivduals and society that I do not think guns would or do. I know people will say that 'self defense' is a utility but if I look over my 35 odd years in the UK mostly in London and in some farily rough areas, I can not think of a single occasion where having a gun would have been of real use to me.



[cont]

erolz


Joined: 17/11/2008
Posts: 3456

Message Posted:
12/03/2009 14:42

Sure I have had my house burgled, 3 times I think, but in none of these cases would owning a gun have protect my property. In my youth I have been involved in 'altercations' that have led to a few brusies here and there but still fail to see how me or the other people involved having guns would have improved the situation at all. However if I think of the number of times having a car has been useful to me in that period, then I think the difference between legalised cars and legalised guns is plain ?

TRNCVaughan


Joined: 27/04/2008
Posts: 4578

Message Posted:
12/03/2009 14:55

I do not necessarily advocate the use of firearms for self defence, although I am sure there is a case for it. Burglary usually takes place in the owners absence so, clearly, a gun wouldn't make a difference.

I mention cars because they are also subject to legislation, if for no other reason than that they can be driven too fast and therefore dangerously - speed kills and all that. If speed kills why don't we reduce the speed limits from say 70mph to say say 25mph. We would save an awful lot of lives but at what cost and inconvenience? If drink driving costs lives, why don't we have a no alcohol limit with a lifetime ban? Many people would say my suggestions re speed and alcohol were going too far, and that is my point. A total ban on guns would not solve the problem but would be seen as going too far.

erolz


Joined: 17/11/2008
Posts: 3456

Message Posted:
12/03/2009 15:30

Personally I would support a no alcohol limt for driving and long bans even lifetime. I am not so sure about reducing speed limits everywhere to 25mph. I am alos not convinced that 'speed kills' to be honest. I accept and understand that if and when something goes wrong the speed is diectly realted to the damage done, but remain unconvinced that speed is the 'cause' compared to 'stupidity'. My personal view to reducing car fatalities would be to legislate that all cars must have a 6 inch steel spike comming out of the streeing wheel pointing towards the driver. Whilst it might seem at first that such would increase car fatalities I suspect that it would address the route cause of so many accidents - namely stupidity, that over all numbers would reduce.



For me personally on your main point , the benfits vs the downsides for legalised gun ownership do not justify introducing it but for cars even with legislation as is they do.

irishvixen


Joined: 25/05/2007
Posts: 63

Message Posted:
12/03/2009 15:31

Well said TRNC Vaughan, especially message 8. Gun's don't kill people - people do.

I enjoy some clay pigeon shooting and to hold a legal firearm you have to go through all sorts of checks and forms to fill out. Then more follow up checks with a firearms licensing officer form the local police, checking up with landowners,witnesses,local G.P.and your security arrangements for said weapon.Bascially, if you are not sound of mind or hold a criminal record you have no chance of legally holding a firearms certificate.

kellybelly


Joined: 08/03/2009
Posts: 263

Message Posted:
12/03/2009 15:53

SIMPLE ANSWER.No way

Blackie


Joined: 20/12/2007
Posts: 129

Message Posted:
12/03/2009 16:09

Pre Dunblane I was a firearms certificate holder. I was friendly with our local firearms certificate officer, we were both in the same gun club. A comment he made which I always remember was that when you visit a house to ensure that the applicant has the correct security measures in place to secure firearms and the applicant greets you wearing black combat gear and has samurai swords and replica firearms all over the wall this is not someone you want to issue a firearms certificate too. But if he has no criminal record there was very little you could do to refuse him permission. Britain today is awash with illegal firearms gun crime has not decreased because of the ban on firearms. Guns do not kill people, people kill people.

Dusterbruce


Joined: 03/08/2007
Posts: 1125

Message Posted:
12/03/2009 17:56

Britvic mssg 4



So you would appoint yourself judge, jury AND executioner?