Root

I don't believe I said guns are or should be illegal because people are stupid. We have laws against guns because incidents like Hungerford and Dunblane are blown out of proportion. Gun crime in the UK is usually committed with guns that are already illegal. Hungerford involved an AK47 that was fully auto, if nothing else, the magazine size in dunblane was larger than permitted by law. Incidents like these are used by the anti-gun lobby to get laws passed that prevent me being able to prevent myself being assaulted. Hang on - people ARE stupid. Just not in the way you think that I claimed.

Root

__________________

DudeMan

Negative, actually i think if you look it up the guns at hungerford were legally collected, and then put to an illeagle use,

and your entitled to your opinion on gun ownership, although i think a sizable majority of this country would disagree with you, including myself. you complain about people blowing these events out of all proportion then saying how you need a gun to stop these events from happening to you.

im sorry, i do not believe a vigilante society is at all in any way porductive. and i know that will piss off a few yanks, but if i went to the states i feel i would require a gun for safty because alot of other people have them, i do not feel it here. i like that,and im not saying we are better ect ect, im just saying i feel secure without a gun, and i dont think a gun law passed here would be productive to keeping that feeling safe.

__________________


The Queen
"Those who perpetrate these brutal acts against innocent people should know that they will not change our way of life,"
Atrocities such as these simply reinforce our sense of community

TheFeniX
"Guns don't kill people: effeminate men in green tunics do"

Root

The gun may have been bought legally, but it was still illegal when it was made fully auto.

Root

PS - Happy birthday Dudeman!

__________________

DudeMan

thank you,

point is root, it was still bought legally, as was all the other guns he had, he had 9mms aswell i believe,

even the gun at dunblain was bought legally as you say the magazine was not.

so its not an issue of the crimes only being committed by the criminal who gets guns illeagle, these were upstanding citizens, dunblain was about custody over a mans child, i think i read (im not sure) that the guys boy was in the school, his wife had been cheating on him.... and they divorced, she made him pay maintenace, refused visits and won custody... so he went in with the intention if he couldnt have his son noone could.

now that is a pretty ****ed up frame of mind yes, but to be honest, that situation could occur over and over. therefore given the fact i have never, nor has anyone i know ever had to defend themselvs with a gun, means i agree with hand gun restrictions. use them at the range, keep them at the range, i have no problems with that. i will never agree to arming a population for vigilante purposes, unless it is absolutly required on a large scale because society is getting that dangerous. although some people are being scared by popular media, we actually live in quite a safe country you know.

__________________


The Queen
"Those who perpetrate these brutal acts against innocent people should know that they will not change our way of life,"
Atrocities such as these simply reinforce our sense of community

TheFeniX
"Guns don't kill people: effeminate men in green tunics do"

CingularDuality

Heh... I just ran across this photo and, of course, this thread came to mind. By sharing this with everyone here, I mean no disrespect. We all know that there are two schools of thought on nations that allow their citizens to be armed. And I think we all know which school of thought that I, and the creator of this photo, fall into.

That said, I found this humorous:
http://www.a-human-right.com/RKBA/s_solution2.jpg

__________________

Become a supporting member! -- Shop at the Tactical Market!

Take the world's smallest political quiz! "I was touched by His Noodly Appendage."
TacticalGamer TX LAN/BBQ Veteran:

TheFeniX

So, you're telling me without a gun this man would not have murdered his wife? Considering most men outweight women and could beat them to death with their bare hands he wouldn't have used a bat, knife, axe, or anything else? Without the gun, he wouldn't have murdered her? Please, crimes of passion are routinely done using knives and bare-hands even in a "gun-nut crazy" land like America.

As long as that opinion sticks with the UK only, that's fine.

So anyone who carries a handgun is a vigilante? Do you know what a vigilante is? Would you consider a person using pepper spray to disable an attacker/robber a vigilante? What about anyone who defends themselves? Are they vigilantes?

__________________

Root

Nice Mind you, I'm pretty much in your camp on this issue Cing.

Roor

__________________

Root

You beat me too it on vigilante's. Ancient Rome, and napoleon appeal to me more than American history, but am I not correct in thinking the historical reason behind the right to bear arms was so that there was a standing militia, which may have been needed considering a couple of niggles various european nations might have had back then? Am I correct in thinking this was becuase America didn't have enough of an army? As always, if I'm factually wrong, I look forward to being corrected, but if my facts are anywhere near correct, I fail to see how these people were vigilantes. Would you apply the same term to the minutemen during the war of independance Dudeman? Because I fail to see any difference between the minutemen, the national guard and the territorial army.

I fail to see how me (legally were it possible in the UK) carrying a loaded firearm, concealed on my person, and killing or injuring someone who attacked me would make me a vigilante. I don't know about other countries, but in most towns in the UK, the shops are all on a radio net to share info about thieves, and to call for assistance. I've responded to many such calls at work, one urgent call simply gave a location followed by "police officer down". How would it make me a vigilante if I'd responded with a legally carried firearm? Am I a vigilante for responding as anyway? Until recently, it was a criminal offence to NOT go to the aid of a police officer that asked for your assistance. Why any political party would pass a law that changed that is beyond me. Actually, that incident actually illustrated the TOTAL and ABSOLUTE waste of money that we in the UK call police community support officers by the way, but that's another story.

Root

__________________

9 v

Root

Roflmao - nice one 9!

You up late or early?

Root

__________________

CingularDuality

LOL, nice! Is that you?

__________________

Become a supporting member! -- Shop at the Tactical Market!

Take the world's smallest political quiz! "I was touched by His Noodly Appendage."
TacticalGamer TX LAN/BBQ Veteran:

Wintermute

The look that conquored the colonies. Spiffing job!

__________________
Wintermute

Play EVE online. It's like being an accounting addict in space.

www.MakePovertyHistory.com

9 v

Well, i fell asleep at 8pm and woke up just after 4am...so i'm not sure really...

No, far too intelligent looking for me!

Oh, the irony. He's actually a guy called Mark from Gettysburg College (i found on him google images)

Glad you liked it

DudeMan

im sorry people may say i should not say any post is ignorant, but are you looking at the same story i told, he went to the school to kill his wife??? duh wrong... please if you are going to argue, make it on the same subject at least.

again more insults about how inferior my country is to yours... oh big deal havernt heard it before, want to try some more.

i was watching worlds most amazing videos today, a guy got out of his car to chase down a suspect the police were chaising, he was trying to help, (this is in america) he catches him and tackles him in another mans yard, the man seeing this pulls his gun and shoots him. in England he would have had a few briuses from a beating, or at worst a couple of broken bones.

you can believe what you want, carry your firearm, but why you choose to try to insult other cultures because they dont agree with your own is beyond me. you cant make your point loud enough so you piss people off in the process. i couldnt care less that you carry a gun, i dont want to, the officers of the MET dont want to, most of my country dont want to. so why dont you leave us alone in our country to make our democratic decisions without trying to insult for effect.

this may be beyond you... we will soon see im sure.

__________________


The Queen
"Those who perpetrate these brutal acts against innocent people should know that they will not change our way of life,"
Atrocities such as these simply reinforce our sense of community

TheFeniX
"Guns don't kill people: effeminate men in green tunics do"

TheFeniX

You gave imcomplete information, I made assumptions based upon the point I thought you were trying to make from the information you gave: A man wanted to kill his wife, so he shot her. The gun was the cause of the problem. If you try to make a point, you should provide complete information for people to work with.

Never said that. My comment was in reference to your opinion about gun-control in the UK, which will (and should) differ greatly from the USA's view. But since we're on the subject, with the exception of California: America is #1. Good times......

The man who fired at him was the home owner? I would have been hard-pressed not to shoot at two guys in a drag-out fight on my lawn. Besides, guns in the home is not the same arguement as civilians carrying guns in public. This story is a red herring.

Now, what you could have mentioned was an incident in America where a man witnessed a homeless man on top of a clean-cut man presumably trying to rob him. The witness was a CHL holder and once he noticed the homeless man carrying a gun, he drew his and yelled for the homeless man to stop what he was doing.

When the homeless man reached for his gun, the man fired. Long story short, the homeless man was an undercover DEA agent and the clean-cut man was a drug dealer he was trying to arrest. Hence, now it is not a defense to prosecution to fire your weapon in defense of an unknown third-party. Your gun is only to protect you and those people you know.

That man should not be doing the officers job, what happened was no different than if the home-owner had cracked that mans head open with a bat.

I'm not insulting your country. I just want to make sure that you don't try to apply UK thinking in reference to the USA, like you have done in the past.

The only thing beyond me is my plans for world domination, but I do have other plans in the works for the time being.

__________________