Is the USA a mini Somalia?


PDA






Highgate
March 15, 2012, 05:36 PM
I am one of those rare British residents who own a firearm.

Visiting this site I'm getting the impression that the USA is almost a Somalia-style war zone.

Why else would so many posters have so many guns, so much ammunition, so much concern about bullet lethality etc?

I have visited Boston & Denver a few times and I didn't see any firefights etc.

The only guns I saw were when an old black guy was dragged off a bus for not paying the fare and was forced to lie on the ground at gunpoint by maybe five armed officers with drawn weapons.

Don't get me wrong - I'm not any sort of commie criminal lover ... but I clearly am missing something about everyday threats in the USA.

Can anyone clarify the situation for me?

Thanks!

If you enjoyed reading about "Is the USA a mini Somalia?" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
David E
March 15, 2012, 05:48 PM
You need to read more of the site.

Many in the USA own guns for recreational pursuits as well as for hunting and more serious applications.

What tool is better, a hammer, saw or drill? It all depends on the job at hand, right?

If you're an occasional handyman, who owns his own hammer, how many nails are "enough?" If you're a professional carpenter, owning a set of hammers, then how many nails are "enough?"

If you like to hammer things whenever you want to, it makes sense to own enough nails to see you through any shortage.

So it is with guns and ammo.

In many places in the USA, one can still own guns without explanation or apology.

Jim NE
March 15, 2012, 05:53 PM
Why else would so many posters have so many guns, so much ammunition, so much concern about bullet lethality etc?



1) Because future gun ownership is not a foregone conclusion. Note the UK.

2) Because ammo availability is also not a foregone conclusion.

3) Because you don't get to hit the "undo" button and try it over again.

Redlg155
March 15, 2012, 05:55 PM
I could go on and give a long speech about independence and the fact that guns have always been a part of our heritage, but I will refrain from doing so. Perhaps the simplest answer that I can give is that we talk about them because we have them. Americans have learned that Governments of all levels, Federal, State and Local cannot gurantee our freedom and safeguard those we love.

You state that you are one of the rare British residents who own a firearm. May I ask why you are granted this ...what we Americans consider, a right? Stature? Money? Lineage?

In America we take pride in the fact that royalty and commoner will have an equal right to own a weapon.

Jim NE
March 15, 2012, 05:58 PM
Also, no I wasn't there, but that old guy was NOT forced off of ANY bus and forced to lie on the ground at gun point for "not paying a fare." That happened for some other reason, which you apparently missed.

PRM
March 15, 2012, 06:00 PM
Doesn't live here! Comparing the USA to Somalia?

Sounds like we have a little trolling going on...

Highgate
March 15, 2012, 06:02 PM
Just curious,Highgate. Was that in Denver or Boston?
Central Denver.

parsimonious_instead
March 15, 2012, 06:04 PM
Most definitely not a mini-Somalia. In fact the reason you didn't get to witness shootouts or other mayhem is that there is an ingrained respect for civil behavior, and law and order.
In addition, the rule of law gives us channels through which to punish transgressors and force recalcitrant parties to make good on contracts.
In places like Somalia, the absence of these mechanisms means violence is frequently the only tool with which to settle disputes.

Sure the talk around here may curl your hair. But leaving aside the deadly serious stuff about lethality, penetrating power, etc... is the plain fact that we simply find the stuff endlessly fascinating.

HarcyPervin
March 15, 2012, 06:04 PM
For most, this is a hobby. For some, a career or lifestyle. The community that is represented on this site is extremely interested in the evolution and performance of guns and gear.

It is also a group of very opinionated people with access to a lot of information. That information can be extremely varied and contradictory which leads to very intense discussion, and sometimes "tough-guy-ness".

People come here, a forum with a very limited scope of discussion, to hash out even the smallest details regarding guns, equipment, and gun culture. It is natural to assume that this is all America is about, if you view this small sampling of people as America as a whole. Visit a car forum, and using the same logic, America is nothing but horsepower obsessed gear-heads. Try the same thing with any topic of your choice...you get the idea.

As I'm typing this, I'm starting to smell troll, but I'm bored, so I'll play too. If that is not the case, I'd think that my explanation should suffice. I'm assuming that if you're one of the rare Brit's who own a firearm, it is due to the fact that you're most likely educated and financially secure, so you should be able to understand that this is a very small sample of a very large populous. Chances are that most of your peers do not and have not had the same opportunities, and therefore have not developed an interest in firearms....or we could just be a nation of toothless hillbillies who engage in shootouts just to get groceries...

Pfletch83
March 15, 2012, 06:04 PM
Maybe you should go shooting at a few local ranges on the U.S. side of the pond.

A firearm isn't just a need to own piece of kit for the majority of us,it's a way of life.

Highgate
March 15, 2012, 06:06 PM
You state that you are one of the rare British residents who own a firearm. May I ask why you are granted this ...what we Americans consider, a right?
My wife & I own a chicken farm so we need to deal with Mr Fox.

I was checked by the police, MI5, MI6 etc before I could have a shotgun permit.

In the UK owning a firearm is a PRIVILEGE not a RIGHT.

steveno
March 15, 2012, 06:09 PM
there is a BIG difference between a right and a privilege

Highgate
March 15, 2012, 06:09 PM
As I'm typing this, I'm starting to smell troll,
Nope, just a 56 year old shotgun owner who lives in rural England.

Your explanation was fine and fully explains the situation.

jad0110
March 15, 2012, 06:10 PM
The only guns I saw were when an old black guy was dragged off a bus for not paying the fare and was forced to lie on the ground at gunpoint by maybe five armed officers with drawn weapons.

I agree with the above poster, there was more to it than simply not paying a fare.

I think David E did a great job of explaining it. It's like a gearhead who has a garage full of very specialized tools that your average slob like me won't have (all I do is change my oil, plugs, airfilters, lightbulbs, wipers and other such small jobs).

I have only one hobby, it is all I really have the funds and time for: target shooting/gun collecting. As hobbies go, its actually not too terribly pricey, unlike golfing or boating. Its simply something I enjoy, I currently own about 30 guns and enjoy shooting and cleaning every one of them. As for ammo, well, there are practical considerations. You can save a fair amount of money by buying in bulk online. Its rather convenient too.

Pfletch83
March 15, 2012, 06:12 PM
And deep down you still don't like the fact that U.S. Citizens were born with a RIGHT to keep and bear arms.

Unlike the U.K. where you are forced through so much red tape most say it is too much of a mess and give up.

benEzra
March 15, 2012, 06:15 PM
Highgate, welcome to THR!

I suspect that US and UK gun owners are more similar than dissimilar. The primary difference is that owning guns for defensive purposes is legal here (as it used to be in your country, some decades ago) and the spectrum of guns we can own is more similar to what you could own a couple of decades ago.

The difference between the United States and Somalia is that the United States has a long tradition of responsibility with guns (and the responsible exercise of rights in general) dating back to when your country and my country were a single nation. Somalia isn't just a region where gun ownership is common, but a region where open warfare between petty warlords is common.

I work with a few British expats (one from IIRC Manchester, one from Liverpool?) and both have told me that they feel safer from random violence here than they did in the UK. The majority of U.S. murders occur in dysfunctional city centers where lawful gun ownership is among the lowest in the nation, and prohibition-driven drug turf wars are a big part of the violence picture.

I put some thoughts together on gun ownership in general a while back on Democratic Underground, that express how *I* feel about it:

http://journals.democraticunderground.com/benEzra/29

FWIW, I am licensed to carry a firearm in the majority of U.S. states; to obtain that license, I passed a Federal background check, state background check, mental health records check, FBI fingerprint check, a one-day class on self-defense law, and demonstrated proficiency with a handgun on a shooting range, live fire. Some states have fewer requirements, some have more, and some (Vermont, Arizona, Alaska) do not require a license at all for concealed carry, but that is the drill for getting a carry license in North Carolina. I am not limited as to what handgun I can carry (and do not have to get permission to change guns), but my primary CCW is a Smith & Wesson 3913 Lady Smith in 9x19mm.

I also shoot USPSA (U.S. IPSC) with 9mm's and with a Rock River AR-15 type rifle, which doubles as a defensive carbine at home should I choose to employ it so.

HarcyPervin
March 15, 2012, 06:15 PM
My wife & I own a chicken farm so we need to deal with Mr Fox.

I stand corrected. I apologize for making assumptions. I'm glad to see that an average person is able to acquire a firearm once they've proved to the government they have a need.

In the UK owning a firearm is a PRIVILEGE not a RIGHT.

Our take on the matter is different. Our government must prove that we should not have that access. Right or wrong, history will decide, but for now...."Yee-haw!!"

Seriously though, we discuss for many reasons, but mostly because guns are fun, the science and history behind them is fascinating, and frankly, because we can.

Highgate
March 15, 2012, 06:16 PM
And deep down you still don't like the fact that U.S. Citizens were born with a RIGHT to keep and bear arms.

Hmm. Not sure about your wording - but I suppose that I don't really like the idea of people owning guns without a fair deal of checking. There are too many weirdos out there.

Unlike the U.K. where you forced through so much red tape most say it is too much of a mess and give up.
Very true!

taliv
March 15, 2012, 06:16 PM
if you happened to surf around the internet and found a car/truck enthusiast forum, would you assume everyone was building their own and racing around the streets at 200 mph all the time?

in fact, why would anyone need a convertible? or a car that does more than 70mph? or does 0-60 in less than 30 seconds?

sure, i know driving a car with more than 100 horse power can be scary.

The War Wagon
March 15, 2012, 06:16 PM
More like a mini-Balkans, given the divisevness the current administration is attempting to stir up. :rolleyes:

Cole.Elliott
March 15, 2012, 06:21 PM
I love the USA and I love guns.

benEzra
March 15, 2012, 06:22 PM
Hmm. Not sure about your wording - but I suppose that I don't really like the idea of people owning guns without a fair deal of checking. There are too many weirdos out there.
The problem is that restrictive systems are easily subverted by those with the will to do so (whether in your country or mine), and restrictive systems are easily exploited by those who wish to make lawful gun ownership exceedingly rare (as in your country).

As an aside, is your username (Highgate) a reference to the London cemetary, or something else? Just curious.

Ranger30-06
March 15, 2012, 06:25 PM
If there's a country that's a mini Somalia, it's England, not the US.


Seriously, it seems worse here on THR because just about every self defense story winds up on here. Also, some states are a bit worse than others, but generally any state with some form of widespread concealed carry tends to be much safer than other more restrictive states.

If you want to pass some time, look up the town of Kennesaw, Georgia. A gun in every home and a non existent crime rate. Talk about town security...

R.W.Dale
March 15, 2012, 06:29 PM
if you happened to surf around the internet and found a car/truck enthusiast forum, would you assume everyone was building their own and racing around the streets at 200 mph all the time?

in fact, why would anyone need a convertible? or a car that does more than 70mph? or does 0-60 in less than 30 seconds?

sure, i know driving a car with more than 100 horse power can be scary.

Absolutely true.

It bears realizing that this website for the most part represents a very thin dedicated cross section of the firearm owning us citizen. As with any enthusiasts website the appearance from the outside is going to appear extreme.

Take Jeep forums as a representative of the phenomena. If you post there about your daily driven Jeep wrangler you depend on as basic transportation folks will lambasted you wondering what's wrong with you for not building an off road only trail machine on 35" tires. When the reality is there's probably ten Jeeps that never see a dirt road for every one owner even mildly interested in off-road capabilities.

posted via mobile device.

steelerdude99
March 15, 2012, 06:29 PM
I am one of those rare British residents who own a firearm.

Visiting this site I'm getting the impression that the USA is almost a Somalia-style war zone.

...


ďIs the USA a mini Somalia?Ē Not at all. As a matter of fact, many parts of the U.S. are safer because of armed citizens. Its areas without armed citizens where itís unsafe. U.S. big city government claim that citizens defending themselves would just make it worse (i.e. escalate the situation). Our nationís capitol, Washington DC, feels thatís itís better to not fight back. See link:

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2012/mar/1/dcs-crime-solution-be-a-victim

Chuck

Highgate
March 15, 2012, 06:30 PM
As an aside, is your username (Highgate) a reference to the London cemetary,
I was brought up in Highgate Village, an upmarket area of London.

Highgate Cemetery is on the edge of this area. As a teenager I would sometimes visit Karl Marx's tomb ... it was regularly attacked, burned, blown up etc.

gym
March 15, 2012, 06:30 PM
Do you collect anything? stamps, butterflies, coins? we tend to collect a more functional hobby item.
Firearms are more complicated as are cars if you get into where they came from and what their condition and worth is. Cars may be an easier parallel comparison, discussions about the camshaft lifters fuel etc. can get very involved. People spend years restoring them, and making sure they have the correct bolt, even though they can get one from Home Depot for a dollar. Instead they send to another state and spend $20.00 just to have the original bolt that came with that car.
There is no difference with guns, it depends on how far you want to take your hobby. Do you race your car on the weekends, go to rally’s etc. Then you would see how there is little difference in this sport than others.
People have been using guns since they were invented, like cars. The only difference is that you can't own guns in Britain, and we can, otherwise you wouldn't be asking this question. Obviously when the IRA was busy blowing up half your country a while back, you could have studied the effects of guns even in a population that doesn't allow them. Even though they used more bombs than guns. But if you want to see gangbangers, I can give you a list of places that you can go to in most cities that would accommodate your curiosity for the more extreme action you seem to be missing.
You simply are looking in the wrong places for the type of venue you appear to be interested in. If you let me know the next time you are in the states, I can forward you a list of places near where you are staying, that can guarantee you will see some of the action you are interested in. I just would not go there alone and unarmed if I were you.
Also Firefights are more reserved for battles in Afghanistan or a war zone. Although we do have crime as do you, firefights are rare. Movies are probably a better place to see these things. You own prince Harry was in a few Firefights and did rather well, so it intrigues me that this all seems so foreign to you.
I have heard you have some pretty tough areas in your neck of the woods. Places where a tourist may not wish to wander off on their own, perhaps he might get slashed or even shot with one of those guns you guys don’t carry. As far as threats go, you really should check you statistics with Scotland yard, you will be surprised to see the level of threats made against the UK every day, they just keep things under wraps a bit more than we yanks do.

mljdeckard
March 15, 2012, 06:32 PM
To the OP, when you were here, did you feel like you were on the streets of Mogadishu?

I would suggest that the circumstances which make Somalia Somalia have little to do with guns, and much to do with poverty, racial strife, and a failure of a nation to take ahold of itself. Guns neither cause nor prevent crime. Crime is a socio-economic problem, not a gun problem.

This leads to the obvious conclusion, that if you did not in fact see blood running in the streets of Denver, that a cultural fascination with guns does not cause violence.

As for background checks preventing weirdos from getting guns, has it prevented gun crime in Britain? Has violent crime gone up or down since your laws locked pretty much everyone out of gun ownership?

Self-defense (and thereby the means to practice it,) is a fundamental human right. It exists whether or not a government allows you to exercise it or not. You have the same rights there which we have here. It is just a difference in how your government chooses to restrict them.

Highgate
March 15, 2012, 06:36 PM
so it intrigues me that this all seems so foreign to you.

Most British residents have seen guns : a few police carry them, although most of our police are unarmed.

Hardly anyone has ever TOUCHED a gun let alone actually FIRED one.

(However you can can get low powered airguns here so I suppose quite a few boys have fired those when young)

Pfletch83
March 15, 2012, 06:37 PM
@ Highgate

And you think that we should have the same restrictions that were forced on the people of your country correct?

Iggy
March 15, 2012, 06:38 PM
Some of us like football and can talk incessantly about it. Other are as deeply involved in baseball. Since we don't have cricket, we have to settle for guns.;):evil:

Cole.Elliott
March 15, 2012, 06:38 PM
You guys must not have a NRA-ILA

Chindo18Z
March 15, 2012, 06:40 PM
In the UK owning a firearm is a PRIVILEGE not a RIGHT.

How very unfortunate.

We retain RIGHTS precisely because our rulers are frightened. Too frightened of a heavily armed populace for them to attempt disarmament of 80+ million American firearm owners and their 300+ million weapons*. This simple reality is the ultimate guarantor of our other legal rights...and our Freedom. By design, the State is incapable of massing the military and police might that would be required to enforce dictatorial powers over the Citizenry.

Which is exactly as it should be and exactly as intended by our founders.

Gun rights in my country are actually on the rebound as average Americans have let their elected representatives know that advancing liberal gun control issues is a sure way to the un-employment line. Americans are pissed off about the encroachment against ownership that was advanced by our socialist clique for a few previous decades.

We've started to do something about it...beginning with re-socializing the premise that the 2nd Amendment means Individuals have the Right to Own and Bear Arms...and that every citizen is ultimately responsible for his own defense. And that guns are inanimate precision tools to be used lawfully and for enjoyment as well as for protection. And that our children will not grow up in a educational vacuum of paranoid fear concerning safe firearms usage. Big Boy Rules. We prefer it that way.

Nowadays, gun control advocacy in the USA has become a political "Third Rail" issue (the kind that will electrocute the career of a politician who unwisely grasps it). Our leaders are windsocks, regardless of their personal feelings on the issue. For the most part, they know which way the current political wind blows...and are beginning to support Gun Rights as never before.

* Those figures are the generally accepted Low Estimate for firearms ownership in my country.

Highgate
March 15, 2012, 06:42 PM
I seem to have kicked off a bit of a fuss!

It's late here on this side of the pond so I'm off to bed.

I'll catch up tomorrow,

Jim NE
March 15, 2012, 06:45 PM
If there's a country that's a mini Somalia, it's England, not the US.

You beat me to it, Ranger. After the riots they had recently.

For decades GB got away with being holier than thou on crime and public civility - until their demographic and social diversity (in urban areas) started approaching ours.

I suspect, however, that the main purpose of his post was to get a lot of responses. And he is succeeding. It's very doubtful he wants to "understand Americans" or to have anything "clarified." I'm getting the impression he pretty much knows everything he wants to know already.

FIVETWOSEVEN
March 15, 2012, 06:47 PM
In Switzerland, more citizens own actual assault rifles then here in the US, they've had a very long history of gun ownership and things are very secure there.

grampster
March 15, 2012, 06:51 PM
Welcome to to THR, Highgate. Let me echo BenEzra's comments and add a bit to it.

I've often commented that if you want a snapshot of America, stand in the middle of a large shopping mall on Christmas eve. What at first glance seems like chaos, is not. You will see, in most communities, a vast crowd hurrying here and there. There will be tall, medium and short. Fat, medium and skinny. Every color of skin on earth. The cultural leavings of about every place in the world. Male, female. Red heads, brunettes, blondes and a cornucopia of hair color, sometimes on one head, and no hair at all. Beards and clean shaven. Tats and no tats. facial hardware and no hardware at all. In other words, just about every critter on earth.

Now the test: Smile at any one of them and say Merry Christmas and you will get nearly universally a smile and a Merry Christmas in return. That is the real America. The land of the free and the brave and the noble.

We have firearms because our founders knew that it was better for our government to fear the people rather than the people fear the government. So far it's working very well. In other places in the world, change comes by bomb, fire, fear and death. In America change comes at the ballot box. That change can be a pardigm. Watch this November. Another pardigm change is slowly and inexorably occurring.

Freedom is a messy thing. The more free the more inherent the danger. The more inherent the danger, the fresher the wind of freedom. But, freedom also brings peace and contentment. Sometimes it seems like irony, that we must shed our blood for peace and contentment. Nobody ever said that freedom was free.

Larry Ashcraft
March 15, 2012, 06:59 PM
Well, consider this; the city I live near has over 100,000 residents and quite a bit of drug and gang activity, but the number of gun homicides in this city rarely exceeds ten in any given year, and most of those are committed by people who are not legally allowed to own guns (felons).

Carl N. Brown
March 15, 2012, 07:07 PM
"Somalia style war zone" would imply a largely disarmed populance caught between various cliques of war lords, the cliques armed often by foreign meddlers via black market proxies.

Locally, a wile back we went about three years between homicides, broken by an unintentional killing as a result of a domestic squabble in an immigrant family.

Recently we did have a drug user commit a murder with a knife then a double murder with a baseball bat. That's the kind of thing that prompts folks to sleep with a pistol in the nightstand.

Plus you can count on a rise in violence coinciding with the "New York boys" (out-of-state crack gangsters) showing up in town.

But Somalia style war zone? No.

Kevin Rohrer
March 15, 2012, 07:09 PM
It is not a war zone, although with the infiltration of the Mexican drug gangs thru Texas, I expect civilization to go downhill a bit. And I saw on Fox news, that the gangs are moving into Britain and the Continent. Some of your people were in El Paso recently getting their eyes opened on what can happen.

You may need that firearm of yours yet.

Iramo94
March 15, 2012, 07:40 PM
Hmm. Not sure about your wording - but I suppose that I don't really like the idea of people owning guns without a fair deal of checking. There are too many weirdos out there.
I have seen some others hinting at the core meaning here, but I'll try to make it as clear as possible.
When Americans originally revolted, we became very scared of oppressive government. That is why we chose to not control the right to own peacekeeping tools much. We also believe that "an armed society is a polite society." Compared to the violent crime rates in many places like UK, America is astonishingly low. And the places where it is the highest are usually where guns are the most controlled, like Chicago and New York City.

harrygunner
March 15, 2012, 07:49 PM
I went to England once, years ago. As my family and I shopped in Harrods, I dealt with the fact that the store had been car bombed before. It felt so uncomfortable being constantly surveilled by cameras I did not return to England. I wondered if a country's fear of life's dangers and even inanimate objects like guns lead to their willingness to be under the constant eye of their government.

Personally, I'm more comfortable with people who carry guns. I've noticed they are more likely to be honest and accountable. And when things go bad, they are more likely to show up, rather than hide.

Weedy
March 15, 2012, 07:54 PM
I've often commented that if you want a snapshot of America, stand in the middle of a large shopping mall on Christmas eve. What at first glance seems like chaos, is not. You will see, in most communities, a vast crowd hurrying here and there. There will be tall, medium and short. Fat, medium and skinny. Every color of skin on earth. The cultural leavings of about every place in the world. Male, female. Red heads, brunettes, blondes and a cornucopia of hair color, sometimes on one head, and no hair at all. Beards and clean shaven. Tats and no tats. facial hardware and no hardware at all. In other words, just about every critter on earth.

Now the test: Smile at any one of them and say Merry Christmas and you will get nearly universally a smile and a Merry Christmas in return. That is the real America. The land of the free and the brave and the noble.

We have firearms because our founders knew that it was better for our government to fear the people rather than the people fear the government. So far it's working very well. In other places in the world, change comes by bomb, fire, fear and death. In America change comes at the ballot box. That change can be a pardigm. Watch this November. Another pardigm change is slowly and inexorably occurring.

Freedom is a messy thing. The more free the more inherent the danger. The more inherent the danger, the fresher the wind of freedom. But, freedom also brings peace and contentment. Sometimes it seems like irony, that we must shed our blood for peace and contentment. Nobody ever said that freedom was free.

Very well said grampster, I think that's an excellent post.

roadchoad
March 15, 2012, 08:26 PM
Highgate, come on over! Shoot some trap, fire a few rifles. Maybe shoot one of Ohio's monster bucks. You night like it.

The Sarge
March 15, 2012, 08:33 PM
Having lived and worked in the UK for ten years I can share this simple observation in the two cultures.
In the UK they are subjects.
In the US we are citizens.
We have the freedom and right to own firearms and do this responsibly.
In the UK it is a privileged to be honored upon those loyal subjects that can be taken away at a whim.

Redlg155
March 15, 2012, 08:36 PM
You guys must not have a NRA-ILA

I'm sure they don't, but they do have an IRA.

Wait...that would make them look like Somalia.....

mio
March 15, 2012, 08:37 PM
i love guns i could talk about them all day, argue calibers and barrel lengths and more, but that doesnt make me an average citizen. i live in a rural area and most people i know own some kind of gun either for hunting or skeet shooting or home defense or just because it was dads or grandpas "so we take it out and shoot in once a year."

my opinion is that i have this right to own several guns and the ammunition for them is because when we earned our independence our elected officials had the foresight to protect that right. mostly from fear that our government could eventually end up like the one we had just rejected. and because our current elected officials havent given in to the un yet. hopefully they never do because all hell will break loose if that happens.

as an aside i have a carry permit as do a few of my friends but neither i nor anyone else that i know has ever been in a firefight outside of military service. we carry guns for the same reason we buy health and life insurance or stick a few franklins in the sock drawer. because even though youll probably never need it if you ever do, you will really need it.

Ragnar Danneskjold
March 15, 2012, 08:38 PM
Huh. I saw this thread when it had zero posts and passed it by because I was sure it was a troll post. Is the US like Somalia? Seriously?

jad0110
March 15, 2012, 08:49 PM
Hmm. Not sure about your wording - but I suppose that I don't really like the idea of people owning guns without a fair deal of checking. There are too many weirdos out there.

Well, the 2nd largest black market trade in the world involves arms (drugs are #1). Though I would agree that I'd prefer sick, predatory scumbags to not have guns, it simply isn't gonna happen. Not without massive infringement on the rights of the people by the State, and even then it is doubtful you could ever keep criminals from getting guns or any other weapon. Or preying on innocents.

http://old.nationalreview.com/kopel/kopel120501.shtml

Movies are probably a better place to see these things.

This brings up an interesting point. Unless one has spent a lot of time in another respective country, you are going to probably base your thougths on that country on a lot of stereotypes, many perhaps incorrect. We yanks probably have a lot of odd notions about our British friends on the other side of the pond. The same is true the other way as well.

Probably a lot of people who've never been to the U.S. form their opinions from what they see and hear on TV, online, etc. I get the feeling that many in the UK that have never been here think most of the U.S. is like a giant Die Hard movie. I recall reading comments in The Telegraph (IIRC) after a shooting rampage in the U.S. about being able to walk into any grocery store in America and buy a machine gun :rolleyes:! I almost posted a question asking where these grocery stores are, as I've never seen one :evil: .

Lastly, as others mentioned, Americans are generally more distrustful of their government than the citizens of most (if not all) other free nations. It's in our DNA.

357 Terms
March 15, 2012, 08:49 PM
Highgate
As a teenager I would sometimes visit Karl Marx's tomb ... it was regularly attacked, burned, blown up etc.

Now that! sounds like Somalia.

Salmoneye
March 15, 2012, 09:19 PM
Huh. I saw this thread when it had zero posts and passed it by because I was sure it was a troll post.

And you were correct...

armoredman
March 15, 2012, 09:27 PM
http://i16.photobucket.com/albums/b13/armoredman/Firearms%20rights%20posters/England3.jpg

Pfletch83
March 15, 2012, 09:40 PM
Armoredman 4 The Win!

bikerdoc
March 15, 2012, 09:52 PM
Gentlemen,

I suggest we not post further. The point has been made several times in eloquent fashion. Time for me and the thread to go nighty-night.

Cesiumsponge
March 15, 2012, 09:57 PM
While firearms, for all practical purposes, banned in the UK, a large volume of violent crime still exists and blamed on "anti-social" groups like hooligans, chavs, and NEETs who are supposedly responsible for terrorizing, assaulting, and murdering citizens with knives and blunt weapons.

As a result, the UK has enacted increasingly stricter knife and bladed weapon legislation. I've seen anti-knife campaigns and knife-turn in programs, doctors campaigning for safety knives and claiming there is no practical purpose of large chef knives. The irony is all this legislation has failed in curbing crime which results in increasingly stricter laws. All those CCTV cameras and a vanishingly small percentage of them deter or solve crimes. I also have friends in Leicester and Redditch so it's not an American making fanciful, baseless assumptions.

What happened to firearms in the UK is happening to knives now...except sharp pointy things are even harder to banish from existence because we've been making them out of glass and metal since the beginning of time.

Panzercat
March 15, 2012, 10:00 PM
Visiting this site I'm getting the impression that the USA is almost a Somalia-style war zone.

Don't get me wrong - I'm not any sort of commie criminal lover ... but I clearly am missing something about everyday threats in the USA. Can anyone clarify the situation for me? Thanks!
Yes. America is abound with ethnic cleansing raging firefights raging down every street. We sectioned off New York and turned it into a prison where only the most hardened of criminals and political dissidents are interred. Thus far, none have escaped...

But seriously, perhaps some of the confusion stems from the right to bear arms as opposed to the daily need to bear arms. Like car insurance. It's always with you whether you need it today or not. You'll likely not, but you might. So why not have it just in case?

diesel
March 15, 2012, 10:01 PM
darn straight

that crap would not happen in the us for long anyway:D
at least in the us we have the RIGHT NOT PRIVELEDGE to defend ourselves and our family

diesel
March 15, 2012, 10:03 PM
it is better to be judged by 12 than carried by 6

MDH90
March 15, 2012, 10:04 PM
I base my views on firearms on the advice of a British man,

"Be Prepared"- Lord Robert Baden-Powell founder of the Boy Scout movement.

Notice that doesn't say what to be prepared for. I'm prepared for a fun day at the range, I'm prepared to hunt for my food, I'm prepared to protect my chickens from a fox, and I'm prepared to protect myself and my family from anyone wishing to do us harm. As such I want to be prepared as possible, I have many different guns for collector value and for different purposes, I stock supplies of ammo so I can go to the range for a fun day if I want or god forbid for the day i need all of that ammo for something much worse. On the matter of bullet lethality, I want to be as prepared as possible and that involves using the best tool for the job.

I think what you missed is that here I have a right to own a gun, for all of those purposes and more, a right not given to me by my country, but a right protected by my constitution, and since I have that right I choose to enjoy it, and make the most of it.

On the issue of the "weirdos" there is checking here too, but no amount of background checks will stop someone intent on committing a violent act from doing it, they'll just find another way, look at the rise in the rate of knife violence and the subsequent knife laws being put into place in your country, armed violence isn't stopped when guns become unavailable, the violent just pick another arm.

Walkalong
March 15, 2012, 10:05 PM
Can anyone clarify the situation for me?
Most of the guns are owned by law abiding citizens who do not commit crimes or shoot people. Simple as that.

Crime? Sure, we have crime, just like any country, but it isn't the law abiding citizens doing it. Matter of fact, law abiding citizens stop crime all the time, using their legally owned guns.

All truly free people in the world are allowed arms. Criminals everywhere have guns, even where the populace is not allowed to own them, so wouldn't you want to be free, and in a country where the politicians trust you to own firearms to protect yourself?

macadore
March 15, 2012, 10:06 PM
Not a mini-Somalia. More like a massive Northern Ireland. Our culture is predominately Scots-Irish. We don't trust the government to take care of us. We trust our clan & kin. Not looking for a fight but aware that fights sometimes come looking you or yours.

The-Reaver
March 15, 2012, 10:12 PM
Wow. Is all I can say.


You had to ask your government....if you could defend your way of life from a fox....


I would rather live on the streets of " Somalia " than be forced to eat from the hand of government that obviously doesn't give a rats about you.

RvR

diesel
March 15, 2012, 10:14 PM
america is by no means perfect, but i would,nt want to live any other place.
it is our right to keep and bear arms that has kept us free

303tom
March 15, 2012, 10:17 PM
i am one of those rare british residents who own a firearm.

Visiting this site i'm getting the impression that the usa is almost a somalia-style war zone.

Why else would so many posters have so many guns, so much ammunition, so much concern about bullet lethality etc?

I have visited boston & denver a few times and i didn't see any firefights etc.

The only guns i saw were when an old black guy was dragged off a bus for not paying the fare and was forced to lie on the ground at gunpoint by maybe five armed officers with drawn weapons.

Don't get me wrong - i'm not any sort of commie criminal lover ... But i clearly am missing something about everyday threats in the usa.

Can anyone clarify the situation for me?

Thanks!


what ?

diesel
March 15, 2012, 10:23 PM
reaver nice:D:D:D:D:D:D

Fred Fuller
March 15, 2012, 10:26 PM
A brief history lesson for you then.

1776

1812

And this, from WW2, at a time when it looked as if Adolph & Co. were about to pay you all a cross-channel visit:

http://www.nraila.org/images/Sendagun.GIF

http://www.nraila.org/images/Sendagun.GIF

Once the war was over, care to guess what Britain's leadership did with most of the firearms your cousins across the Atlantic sent over?

http://www.gunsmagazine.com/1959issues/G1259.pdf

Wanderling
March 15, 2012, 10:32 PM
Just a few things to add...

1) The OP's opinion of the US is based on a couple short visits to a couple of urban areas. Most responders' opinions of Britain are, well, baseless. That's like me trying to compare rugby and lacross because I've seen a single photograph of each game once.

2) US has always had somewhat higher violent crime rate than Western Europe. It's been a frontier nation, after all. For about 2/3rd of country's history, the populace was armed and fighting with Indians, bandits, or each other, without much help from the central government. Plus you have wave upon wave upon wave of immigrants from all over the world, with inevitable spikes in crime rate until the first generation settled & found it's place. So violence, and self defense, was always a part of live. This helped to make weapons ownership an ingrained tradition. This also explains why the crime levels in the US will always be higher than in Switzerland, even if you completely disarm law abiding citizens. It's all about culture and mentality. But Somalia, or even Russia, it's not.

3) Most of the crime in the US happens in inner city ghettos (where most guns are obtained illegally anyway). Detroit is a very violent and dangerous city, yet the suburbs (where I live and work) are pretty safe. It's like two different worlds.

4) I grew up in the USSR where gun ownership was pretty impossible. It was only a relatively safe place while the central gov't was strong. As there was more freedom in the late 80s the levels of violence skyrocketed, even though the gun ownership was and still is prohibited. Never seemed to stop the criminals. I feel much safer walking around in a typical middle class US neighborhood than I was back there.

5) I hate to disappoint the "armed citizenry" advocates, but a well trained army will always win over a ragtag militia, no matter how many guns the militia has. You can buy as many AKs as you want, you're still not going to be even on the level of Iraq Republican Guard, and they were defeated rather easily. The defense against overreaching government is not in accumulating weapons to shoot at army with but in winning the minds and hearts of the army.

diesel
March 15, 2012, 10:55 PM
i see your in fla, i used to live in pensacola north west fla
now im just a hilljack in kentucky with too many guns:D:D:D:D

ApacheCoTodd
March 15, 2012, 11:04 PM
I'll tell ya Hoss, I've been to Denver, Boston, Mogadishu and Kismaayo as well as the East Side of London, Manchester, Liverpool and Belfast. I'd say referring to America as a "mini" anything let alone Somalia - even in the spineless form of a supposed question - smacks of a form of envy and lack of understanding that certainly can't be corrected or effectively addressed on an internet forum.

Additionally, my wife is a former Bayswater/Earl's Court gal and is now a CCWing US citizen who has never been misfortunate nor obtuse enough to confuse this great nation with Somalia.

mljdeckard
March 15, 2012, 11:12 PM
Wanderling, is that why the Soviets gave up in Afghanistan?

Ringolevio
March 15, 2012, 11:28 PM
Reading the responses on this thread has made me proud to be a member of this community.

I was already proud to be an American citizen freely exercising the God-given right to self-defense which the 2nd Amendment pledges to protect.

Some of us even believe that it is our duty and responsibility as American citizens to keep and bear arms and to be competent in their use.

Chindo18Z:
Americans are pissed about the encroachment against ownership that was advanced by our socialist clique for a few previous decades.

When speaking to our "cousins from across the pond" we might need to point out that we Colonials say pissed as short for "pissed off", meaning "upset"; otherwise Limeys might think we Yanks were talking about being drunk.

Tommygunn
March 15, 2012, 11:29 PM
I hate to disappoint the "armed citizenry" advocates, but a well trained army will always win over a ragtag militia, no matter how many guns the militia has. You can buy as many AKs as you want, you're still not going to be even on the level of Iraq Republican Guard, and they were defeated rather easily. The defense against overreaching government is not in accumulating weapons to shoot at army with but in winning the minds and hearts of the army.Wanderling, is that why the Soviets gave up in Afghanistan?

In the second amendment one finds the term "a well-regulated militia." The term "well regulated" is the antithesis of Wanderling's derogatory term "ragtag militia," although Wanderling is not without his point.
During the Revolutionary War the militia was all-too-often "ragtag." In fact even Washington's Continental Army had a problem with recruits who were drunk, unarmed, undisciplined, and so forth.
The training provided by Hessian (German) regulars greatly helped form up the new Continental army and made a good difference.
Militias proved somewhat useful as auxiliaries. I can't recall the name of the engagement right now, but one well known British commander along with an army and a supply train making way down the Hudson River Valley in New York was so severely pestered and roused by a "ragtag" militia (I use the term with slight tongue-in-cheek here) that by the time they'd gotten to their destination, they were either all dead, or POWs.
The point is the militia were intended as a sort of "first responder" used to engage an enemy until the regular army arrived.
No "ragtag militia" is going to be all that much good, but a "well-regulated" one can make a huge difference.
[/thread drift]

MachIVshooter
March 15, 2012, 11:30 PM
2) US has always had somewhat higher violent crime rate than Western Europe.

No.

We have a higher murder rate (about 3.5 times), but overall violent crime is much higher in the UK and Europe.

This web site shows total crime:

http://www.nationmaster.com/graph/cri_tot_cri-crime-total-crimes

UK has a little more than half the total crime as compared to the USA, but with 1/5th the population (62m vs. 313m).

Violent crime per 100k is 400-500 per year in the USA; It is over 2,000 in GB. Incidentally, overall violent crime is also higher in other European countries than it is here.

So, while you're less likely to be murdered in the UK than the USA, you're about 5 times as likely to be a victim of violent crime (rape, assault, kidnapping, etc.) in the UK

blarby
March 15, 2012, 11:44 PM
As has been illustrated, we are not Somalia !

Although you'd think with some of the defenses offered in contradiction, when read carefully, that we just might be a little closer than we'd like to be sometimes :)


I have a few questions along the lines of my favorite areas of THR that pertain to your gun ownership :

1. What kind of shotgun do you keep to dissuade Mr. Fox from the henhouse ?

2. What kind of shells do you keep, and how many are you permitted ?

3. ( if the answer to #1 permits it) Would you be allowed to obtain a rifled barrel for use on your firearm, should the need or occasion arise ?

4. Would you be allowed to load your own ammunition where you reside, and if so, would you be interested in doing so ?

5. What is the cost of a box of your favorite shells, and where and how frequently do you practice shooting ?

Thanks for allowing the queries,

-b

hso
March 15, 2012, 11:53 PM
Visiting this site I'm getting the impression that the USA is almost a Somalia-style war zone.

... I clearly am missing something about everyday threats in the USA.

Can anyone clarify the situation for me?



Hyperbole that extreme is unlikely to get a civil response yet the members here have done so, granted, some better than others. Look to those and consider that expecting a firearms enthusiast website where most of the members live in a country where firearms ownership is a right that is commonly utilized for recreation, sport and, yes, self defense will show the broad range of firearms owners that may not exist in many other countries.

Even the idea of shooting as a noble sport, as it is in the E.U. and U.K., is foreign here in the U.S. where it is a commoners' activity. The most average person may have firearms for sport or recreation or hunting to put meat in the freezer. That changes the very nature of the assumptions and impressions of firearms owners and ownership when viewed from the outside where, for the most part, the priviliged have the privilige of shooting as an activity. The threads on the price of firearms and accessories here compared to Europe and the United Kingdom refelct this in by the prices of the same firearms produced in the E.U. are two to three times the price of them in the U.S.

Lastly, having traveled in S.W. Asia and across North America extensively (I'm on my third trip already this year away from home) the "impression" you've gotten from the farm in the U.K. looking through the lense of this website is decidedly different than the reality of Samalia. Other members that actually served in Somalia can give a more detailed account of the real experience compared to the peacable U.S., but for me the rates of violence that I've seen first hand abroad and here are relatively low in the U.S. even where the population is large.

d2wing
March 16, 2012, 12:07 AM
Part of it is that in the U.S. we have mutual responsibility for our community and public safety. We are government of the people, by and for the people, although the current administration is doing it's best to end that. The need for each able citizen to bear arms
has been proven over and again the best way to protect public safety. Of course there are well know occasional failures but that is the price of a free society. The need to bear arms has not diminished at all. All this depends on citizens being law abiding and a moral people. I am not sure how all this secularism will work out for us. In many countries others are stepping into the moral vacuum of the secular. It is my hope that we can maintain more traditional values here.

archigos
March 16, 2012, 12:23 AM
My wife & I own a chicken farm so we need to deal with Mr Fox.

I was checked by the police, MI5, MI6 etc before I could have a shotgun permit.

In the UK owning a firearm is a PRIVILEGE not a RIGHT.
Incorrect. Self defense and defense from tyranny is a basic human right. The fact that you are denied that right does not make it any less a right - or you and I would be subjects of the same royalty.

Teachu2
March 16, 2012, 12:30 AM
Both Somalia and the US gained independence from British rule, the US in 1776 by war, Somalia in 1960 by well, frankly, abandonment. Both have vast natural resources, but Somalia's per capita GDP is ~$600 US, while the US number is $48,100.

Why? The US Constitution was a radical departure from anything that came before it. It layed the groundwork for a stable central government, with recognition of human rights above all else. It set up a nation where anyone with the desire and ability could thrive. No royalty, no caste system. A nation with respect for the rule of law.

Somalia has no Constitution, no functional central government, no rules. Anarchy in action.

It has to be difficult for Brits to comprehend the scope of freedoms Americans have. This vast country still has vast opportunities for those with desire and ability. Heck, with the advent of reality shows ability isn't even a requirement! Opportunity stretches across the continent, with huge areas of undeveloped land still.

No man is an island, but Britain is. Land area of ~93,000 square miles - a bit smaller than Wyoming. The US is ~3,500,000 square miles. Yet the British number ~62 million (667 people per sq mi) to the US at 312 million (89 per sq mile). Brits are 7x as dense!

Our heritage of taking up arms to rebel initially, to using them in the wars of conquest over the native population, to the stylized popular version of the settlement of the West, to the American Civil War, to gangsters of Prohibition, to the present - to us, firearms are integral to freedom. Armed people are citizens - we grant powers to our government. Unarmed people are subjects, who hope for power from their government.

We are a nation of choice. We chose to form, we choose what we wish to pursue for work, we choose the climate we wish to live in, we choose our President. We don't all or always choose wisely, but we endeavor to choose fairly.

Somalia? Not so much....

mnrivrat
March 16, 2012, 12:38 AM
Many gun owners here is the US do not waste our time associating our firearms with violence and/or criminal activity.

We can leave that mostly up to the media, and to those who do not understand that a firearm is simply a tool. and does not reflect good or evil like some would portray them.

We collect firearms , we hunt with firearms. we use them for all kinds of sporting events. Yes, we also use them for self defense - that is our right, and not a government given privilage.

razorback2003
March 16, 2012, 12:43 AM
There are certainly parts of big cities that are like a third world country or remind me of third world countries. These bad areas are where the huge majority of violent crime, drug dealing, huge unemployed and not willing to work population, and unsavory activities go on.

If you go to rural Nebraska or Missouri there is very little violent criminal activities. Even Boston or NYC has lower violent crime than New Orleans or Atlanta. It all depends on where you go.

Nushif
March 16, 2012, 12:44 AM
Frankly, I can understand where he's coming from.

We're sitting here talking about self defense, ready to go in a split second action all day long, "condition yellow," people putting 100 yard standoff distance between them and the line of their property, fortified houses, preparing for armored intruders armed with AR rifles and paramilitary trained gangs, how unsafe an apartment complex is ...

What is he supposed to get from this?

If I knew nothing about the US, and all I read here I'd be under the same impression. Lets face it folks. The way we sit here and talk all day we do seem as if we're living on a ragged edge of split second violence all day. Contemplating lethality of calibers ranging from .380 to 9x19 or the difference between the capacity tradeoff between .40 and .45.

Am I the only one seeing where he's coming from?

Reality is the firearm in the US has a history of a tool. But it doesn't often shine through in the community. There are times when we arguably do sound the part he's talking about.

exavid
March 16, 2012, 01:01 AM
Regarding the question to Wanderling about why the Russians left Afghanistan. The answer to that is the same as why the US will leave the place. Either the Russians or the US could easily conquer Afghanistan if the object was to hammer their large cities flat, kill most of the people in the country and take severe reprisals against any resistance. I doubt the Russians wanted to go to those extremes along with the cost in rubles and equipment. In the end neither the Russians or the US really has any national interest in the place. We can leave and let them do what they want to each other and slap them down now and then when attacks on us from there occur. The Russians have to patrol their border to keep them out. There is more threat to Russia than the US due to their proximity to Russia. We've again wasted way too many lives and money for little reason in the Middle East, not as bad as Viet Nam but pretty much the same results. Our military is ham strung again with highly restrictive rules of engagement as before. Iraq is already sliding into an Iranian takeover and once we leave Afghanistan it will be as we were never there. The US shouldn't engage in wars unless we mean to win them at whatever cost the enemy must pay. No more "nation building" BS. I'd much rather we brought our guys home, from the middle east, from Korea, from Okinawa, from Europe, etc. Let those folks take care of their own military needs.

diesel
March 16, 2012, 01:04 AM
You have a point, allot of us talk tactics and self defense like we are in a war zone.....guilty as charged i cant speak for anyone other than my self here but i grew up in a place where violent crimes/shooting/stabing that kind of stuff happened every day Dayton Ohio. i have long since moved away to raise my family in the country .
i can see how he might think the way he does but they call it the melting pot for a reason there is allot more people trying to get into america than there is people trying to get out
i say it is a good thing to be prepared to defend your self and family, that doesnt make me a gun nut, but it does allow me to sleep good at night,
that is when im not on the forums lol:D

David E
March 16, 2012, 02:16 AM
What is he supposed to get from this?

If I knew nothing about the US, and all I read here.....
.

He should round out his reading/research to get a better picture.

Has he read anything at Rimfire Central? Any of the Skeet or Trap forums? Etc?

If someone only seeks information from one source, he's extremely naive to think everything is that way.

How is that our fault?

Nushif
March 16, 2012, 02:49 AM
He should round out his reading/research to get a better picture.

Has he read anything at Rimfire Central? Any of the Skeet or Trap forums? Etc?

If someone only seeks information from one source, he's extremely naive to think everything is that way.

Cause we are the pros at unbiased and complete fact finding in our collective rhetoric. AMIRITE?

The-Reaver
March 16, 2012, 02:50 AM
Sounds to me like he is still a little sore after 236 years.

Keep your government given shotgun, make sure to ask them for some toilet paper too.

Teachu2
March 16, 2012, 02:54 AM
One thing that is not often mentioned because it is very political incorrect is that about half of all murders here in the US are committed by Black people, with almost all the victims Black themselves. This despite that Blacks only account for about 12% of the total population.

If somehow the rate of murders among Blacks could be reduced to the levels of the rest of us then the US rate of murder would be close to the rate of murder for most Western European countries.


Not just politically incorrect - it ignores that "Blacks" live all over the world, including most Western European countries.

And nearly ALL the murders in Somalia are Black on Black.

JShirley
March 16, 2012, 03:13 AM
Is the USA a mini Somalia?

Yes. The minions of warlords roam our streets on pickup trucks with heavy machine guns and rocket launchers on the back. Our coasts are aswarm with pirates. Most of our citizens chew narcotics. Our children carry automatic weapons. :rolleyes:


Seriously?

Let's leave out the fact that, in the last 10 years, there have been more murders committed with rocks in some countries in Africa than have been committed with firearms in the U.S.

Did you have a genuine question, or was this just a straight`up troll?

John

idcurrie
March 16, 2012, 03:26 AM
Think of it this way:

Bad people will be bad.

Good people will be good.

It's their nature.

Who do you want to have the balance of power?

Bad people will always find a way to own an illegal weapon if they want one. You can't stop it. If a criminal won't obey laws against arson, murder, and rape why do you think they will obey a gun control law? They won't. Get real.

Gun control puts the power into the hands of bad people.

The second amendment puts the power into the hands of good people.

Do you think a criminal would give a second thought to mugging a good person who they know is unarmed? How about if there's a good chance that the person IS armed?

How about a home invasion?

Let's take columbine for example. A trajedy. Why? Because of gun control.

No, seriously. Hear me out.

At columbine, those crazy kids obtained the firearms illegally. They weren't theirs. They had evil intentions and would act on them no matter the obstactle. Due to gun control (gun free zone) the balance of power was in favor of the bad people.

Now, imagine, if you will - that the good people had firearms in that situation too.

Imagine that every teacher, principal, janitor, cafeteria worker, etc also had a firearm.

How do you think that situation would have played out? Would there have been as many innocent victims? Or would the bad guys quickly become dead?

-OR-

Would the bad guys have not even attempted the act knowing that the good guys had the means to defend the kids at the school?


When seconds count, police are only minutes away.


Also, the second amendment prevents a tyranical government from being able to rule the people.


P.S. I am a Canadian and unfortunately firearms ownership is a priveledge here. That does not mean that I do not understand what the founding fathers of the USA intended and envisioned.

LAK
March 16, 2012, 03:43 AM
There is as much to shooting as there is to any other sport. How this applies to defensive shooting combines what is both an art and virtually a science in itself with several facets.

There are some parts of this country that currently experience a high level of crime; consider that where this is less so, the consequences of being a victim can be no less very high. So many reasonable and prudent folk take it very seriously, regardless of the percentage risks.

Walkalong
March 16, 2012, 07:34 AM
Frankly, I can understand where he's coming from.
I can't, as his comparison is ludicrous. No reasonably educated person, with obvious internet access, taking the slightest effort to research both countries, would make that statement.

More like someone kicking the anthill to watch folks react.

Wanderling
March 16, 2012, 08:13 AM
Tommygun - you are of course correct. But we don't have a "well regulated" militia do we ? Not even a poorly regulated one. So when a bunch of individual citizens with no experience or training to fight as a regular army and no real modern battlefield weapons think they keep the Government in check because of their collection of small arms, it seems pretty naive to me. At least back in the revolutionary days the arms employed by the army were exactly the same as the arms employed by the lay people. Today, the technological gap alone is immense. And then you still have the issue of training and organization and discipline.

Americans are very proud of their freedoms. And for most of the history nobody had anything close. But the world has changed in the last 60 years. Most western countries (using the term loosely, I would include Israel and Japan here too), have freedoms now. The freedom to own firearms is but one of them. I think, personally, that the level of citizens control over government actions in the US is not as high as in some other countries due to our two-party political system, our rather disfunctional candidate selection process, and no real instruments of day to day feedback / control of elected officials - we have nuclear option of impeachment but that's, frankly, about it. Today, the US is a free country with a certain set of rules, Britain is a free country with a different set of rules, and chest pounding on either side is silly.

Regarding Afghanistan - the Soviets left it because they shouln't had entered in first place. It was a poorly thought though misguided decision driven by internal Party politics, against the best judgement of the Army. Still, they achieved their objectives and I should say controlled more of the country than the NATO does now. But Afghan is impossible to fully subdue.

Blackhawk30
March 16, 2012, 08:39 AM
This IS why so many Americans own guns.To protect themselves from the thugs ,like the one that got dragged off the bus AND from the cops.Many feel Amerika is being turned into a police state.






<The only guns I saw were when an old black guy was dragged off a bus for not paying the fare and was forced to lie on the ground at gunpoint by maybe five armed officers with drawn weapons.>

Highgate
March 16, 2012, 08:44 AM
1. What kind of shotgun do you keep to dissuade Mr. Fox from the henhouse ?
Remington 870, 28", full choke. Also an A5 3" 30" full choke - but I don't use that much. Both very old, very cheap ($300 each roughly) used guns.

2. What kind of shells do you keep, and how many are you permitted ?
I have a few birdshot but I have mostly UK or US BB. I'm allowed as many as I like UNTIL the total powder weight reaches some limit which would require me to have an explosives licence. This seems to be around 15000 cartridges I believe. I would need a major bank loan to buy this quantity! Alos even though permitted, if the local police firearms officer saw I had that amount of ammunition he would most likely cancel my permit!

3. ( if the answer to #1 permits it) Would you be allowed to obtain a rifled barrel for use on your firearm, should the need or occasion arise ?
I could apply for a Firearms Certiciate for a rifled weapon. I would howver:
- be 110% checked by the police etc
- have a stated & very valid reason for the weapon
- be told by the police what calibre etc to use
- be restricted to a certain place or places for my shooting, such places having been checked & approved by the police
- be restricted to a maximum number of cartridges - maybe 100.
Overall it would be a REAL nuisance to obtain a rifled weapon.
Handguns are TOTALLY banned here.

4. Would you be allowed to load your own ammunition where you reside, and if so, would you be interested in doing so ?

I think I could - but I might need a licence to buy the powder. However I know so few people with firearms I haven't met anyone who does it. I would probably be too nervous to try it myself - I don't fancy picking bits of exploded shotgun out of my teeth!

5. What is the cost of a box of your favorite shells, and where and how frequently do you practice shooting ?
Expensive! About 75 cents in US money per cartridge when bought in 250 cartridge amounts. (The clay pigeon shooters pay maybe half this for their lighter weight cartridges) Don't forget that the UK is very heavily taxed. for example my diesel fuel costs me $8.80 per US gallon. Due to these tax levels we have relatively little 'disposable income' at the end of the month, so 75c a shot is painful. We do however have our National Health System which is 'free'!

I practice on our farm - maybe 20 shots a week. I used to practice more but the neighbours wrote letters to the local council complaining about the noise. They were ignored - but I decided to back off a bit.

Highgate
March 16, 2012, 08:55 AM
Fact is, foreigners have us confused with someone who cares what they think.

Err, OK.


We just love guns.

Err, OK.


And if memory serves correctly, the last time Britain was threatened, who did they ask for guns?

What ARE you talking about?
Whose soldiers are dying alongside yours in Afghanistan? Mostly British.
My son spends time in Afghanistan in the forces. He has a BRITISH rifle.
When he is away from home we dread the phone ringing, just as parents of US soldiers must do.

My original query was about the place of firearms in US domestic society.

No more, no less.

JShirley
March 16, 2012, 09:01 AM
No, you deliberately picked one of the most violent armpits of the world for comparison. You were seeking an emotional reaction. That's pure trolling.

JohnM
March 16, 2012, 09:03 AM
My original query was about the place of firearms in US domestic society.

No more, no less.

You certainly phrased you question in such a manner to incur a lot of wrath.
And ended up creating a thread hardly worth a comment.

JohnBT
March 16, 2012, 09:15 AM
Quote:
And if memory serves correctly, the last time Britain was threatened, who did they ask for guns?

What ARE you talking about?
_________________________

I can answer that. The U.S. National Rifle Association collected guns at the beginning of WWII and sent them to England because England needed them. More than 7,000 guns.

I copied the following from the NRA site some time ago.

"the NRA's call to help arm Britain in 1940 resulted in the collection of more than 7,000 firearms for Britain's defense against potential invasion by Germany (Britain had virtually disarmed itself with a series of gun control laws enacted between World War I and World War II).

After the fall of France and the Dunkirk evacuation in 1940, Britain found itself short of arms for island defense. The Home Guard was forced to drill with canes, umbrellas, spears, pikes, and clubs. When citizens could find a gun, it was generally a sporting shotgun ill suited for military use because of its short range and bulky ammunition."

Other American groups did the same.

www.twinbuttebunch.org/index.php?fuseaction=misc.sendguns

http://www.twinbuttebunch.org/misc/i/british_ad.gif


Be prepared.

Speaking of Somalia, whatever happened to those two men who drove a couple of hours from Manchester to Devon to rob and kill Joss Stone with a sword. A sword? The two men who got so lost the neighbors called the police. The two men found with masks and rope and stuff and a to-do list that included 'throw body in river'.

HOOfan_1
March 16, 2012, 09:25 AM
In the UK owning a firearm is a PRIVILEGE not a RIGHT.

That type of attitude by the British Government is why they haven't ruled in the United States for 236 years. I think we have been doing pretty well over here for those 236 years. We haven't had an internal war for nearly 150 years.

Somali War Zone? Seriously? :scrutiny:

You came to a forum dedicated to discussing firearms and you found people discussing.....firearms. What did you expect, discussions of how we take our Earl Grey before an afternoon of riding down foxes?

valnar
March 16, 2012, 09:33 AM
This is a gun forum. If you visited a forum about the Circus, you'd think we were all clowns.

JustinJ
March 16, 2012, 09:34 AM
In regards to the original post, i do see his point. The Somali reference was obviously tongue in cheek but i see what he is saying. Many threads, ecspecially in ST&T could certainly give that impression as many come off as though they expect an attack around every corner. Stashing guns in the bathroom and driving around the block instead before pulling into one's driveway if any other cars are on the street sound paranoid to me too.

Personally, i like discussing things like balistics and own so many firearms because i find them to be interesting topics and enjoy collecting and shooting them. If i didn't have a passion for guns i'd probably do what the majority of gun owners do. Buy one or two, load it with what the guy at the gun store says and practice a couple times a year. As was said earlier, this is a gun forum about with a subculture of gun enthusiasts. We are not representative of the average american in regards to firearms.

hogshead
March 16, 2012, 09:35 AM
You certainly struck a nerve comparing us to Somalia. Made my blood boil didn't even read all the post.We lost some good men down there trying to help them. Personaly I think we should have leveled the place. Then you have the nerve to compare us to them. I'm am proud to be an American and even prouder that we whipped the Red Coats and sent them home crying in their tea. I think if you care to study our crime rates as compared to yours you will see who has the war zone. Now I'm gonna go throw some tea in the river.

MagnumDweeb
March 16, 2012, 09:48 AM
No America is not a mini Somalia. The comparison seems completely lacking in intelligent thought. Our country is far more massive and more productive. Plus in Somalia, roving gangs and tribal sects run amok killing people as they please. We don't quite have that here in the U.S. and if some of the more "European" thinkers in our government would abandon their misplaced ideals and allow for more American ideas to take root, crime again would sharply decrease as well. States with more American beliefs have seen far sharper drops in crime or never really had crime problems to begin. European thinking locations like Washington D.C. have only seen their crimes rates shoot up.

Now do we have crime in this country, yes. But lets look at the cause of that. The war on drugs is a large part of it, so if we were to act like Portugal and basically decriminalize it we would see a sharp drop in crime after about ten years. Then the next big cause is poverty, well self-inflicted poverty actually. The explanation of which I shall skip for it is not exactly high road material.

A simple fact is the USA is not Europe, we will never be Europe. Think of the Atlantic like a great Pan, in the terms of panning for gold so to speak. Those who can make it over here from Europe have typically brought great ideas, devotion, loyalty, and innovation (thank you Tesla).

Now to our English thread starter. I have had the privilege of teaching close to two-dozen English immigrants how to shoot. Each of whom was happy with our laws and way of life. And had chosen America over your former country, as a place to spend the rest of their careers and subsequent retirement. So don't think for a second I dislike all English people, I just dislike certain kinds of European thinking.

Most Americans will never consider Europe important, and that's just how it is. Our entire country is larger than Western Europe. Since 1990 the U.S.'s population has grown by more than 64 million immigrants. More people have immigrated to the U.S. then there is the entire population of France. And we've largely absorbed them well and hospitably. Oh are we perfect, nope, but we're not Somalia, or even Germany, France, or dare say England with its troubles over the minor trickles of immigrants into their countries. So do pardon some of the members venom(couldn't remember how to spell vitruole) in their responses, equality breeds respect, potshots from those who bear not our Atlas-like burden or ability breeds indignation.

Oh I typed out a nice articulate and large speech but I doubt it would be very high road. To capture simply many a Southerner's opinion of certain kinds of thinking, much like our thread starters. "We don't really care what you have to say, but I'd like to see you try and take this here gun out of my hand."

Posts further on this thread should only act to solidify our resolve and ostracize the thinking presented by our thread starter.

NoirFan
March 16, 2012, 09:53 AM
A lot of that talk here is about people attempting to justify to themselves their large gun collections. So there a lot of talk about what rifle is best if MS-13 busts down the door, what if there is a grizzly in my daughter's bedroom, that kind of thing. These same people will then get upset if you openly ask them why they need all these guns, usually the terms "liberal" and "anti-gun" will get thrown around. In the end it's just a bunch of harmless hot air with the occasional bit of useful information, just like the other 99% of the internet.

Tommygun - you are of course correct. But we don't have a "well regulated" militia do we ? Not even a poorly regulated one. So when a bunch of individual citizens with no experience or training to fight as a regular army and no real modern battlefield weapons think they keep the Government in check because of their collection of small arms, it seems pretty naive to me. At least back in the revolutionary days the arms employed by the army were exactly the same as the arms employed by the lay people. Today, the technological gap alone is immense. And then you still have the issue of training and organization and discipline.

Small arms would be useful in a crackpot evil government scenario because they are still pretty good at the kind of fighting useful in insurgency warfare: killing soft targets like collaborators and the families of soldiers, police, and politicians. Look at why the Iraqi soldiers and police are so ineffective; even if a bomb or drive-by shooting doesn't kill you at work, what's to stop the insurgents from paying your family a little visit when you're on duty? I wish the 2nd amendment fantasists would think hard about the kind of dirty war they would be bringing to our shores if they really did decide to overthrow the government.

Ryanxia
March 16, 2012, 10:13 AM
While I think his question has been answered in volume let's try to be civil in our discussion. After all this is a place of knowledge and learning, anyone and everyone should feel welcome to come and ask questions (even poorly worded ones).

Highgate
March 16, 2012, 10:15 AM
The Somali reference was obviously tongue in cheek
Thank you.

I wanted to kick of the discussion with a bit of zing ... and it seems to have worked ... maybe a bit too well. :uhoh::uhoh:

blarby
March 16, 2012, 10:15 AM
Well highgate, you certainly got some varied responses, eh ?

Quite a feisty cross-section of the gun owning population we've got here, dontcha think? You managed to pick quite a sore-spot for some of the current and prior service members we have, and the general ire of a portion of the rest.

If the comment was designed to stoke some lively discussion...you certainly got it.

We're a warlike , gun toting people...always have been, always will be. At 26 or so conflicts ( 6 before we were independent ) involving sons of our soil in 229 years we actually average a major combat more than once a decade. Every generation knows multiple wars. Every gradeschool has a lesson about our current gunfight. Its not surprising that this culture of violence begets a continuing culture of it....but we kinda like it that way, it keeps us sharp....so to speak.

Its also not surprising that such a culture would have a set of individuals ( armchair or no, depending on your forum choice) who preach, tacticize, and romanticize all of the aspects of gun ownership.

I'd hope you'd realize that this subset isn't reflective of the populace as a whole, we're just frequently the part that gets noticed...especially by foreigners and those intending to take our hard earned right to keep and bear arms away. To both these parties, we are " the rifle behind every blade of grass" and we like it that way. It helps to have a fringe element that scares the dickens out of both....makes 'em consider what taking our land OR our rights away would entail.

*passes the spf5000 flame retardant around*

With that said, I'll send this one adrift AGAIN on things that bring us closer, not farther, apart ....as gun owners discussing guns !


We do have some similarities on shot prices, believe it or not.

We're forced to use non-toxic steel shot when hunting waterfowl, and decent BB or comparable #4 in Hevishot configurations cost north of $1 US a shot !

I purchased 50 cartridges of a hybrid hevishot/steel shot mix in BB for goose this season and it cost me $54 at the height of the season.

Of course lead shot can be had for sporting purposes like trap and skeet for far less...but don't get caught shooting real birds with them !

So you would need all that "permitting" to add a rifled barrel eh ? Well, thats a shame. I guess its rifled slugs, not sabots for you !

JohnBT
March 16, 2012, 10:21 AM
"These same people will then get upset if you openly ask them why they need all these guns"

We do? I never noticed. Maybe I'm too new around here. :cool:

Highgate
March 16, 2012, 10:22 AM
I guess its rifled slugs, not sabots for you !
Nope.

Our law says:

Minimum of 6 pellets per cartridge. Max pellet size around US 00.

Max 3 shots in a shotgun.

Min barrel length 26".

Min weapon length for autos and pumps: 40".

Not that many in the UK ever shoot such heavy shotgun ammunition.

Highgate
March 16, 2012, 10:27 AM
We're a warlike , gun toting people...always have been, always will be.
The Brits too.

... Boer War, WW1, WW2, Korea, Malaysia, Borneo, Falklands, Balkans, Iraq #1, Iraq #2, Libya, Afghanistan - more than once.

We just don't encourage bringing the war toys back to our homes.

mcdonl
March 16, 2012, 10:29 AM
Highgate, I have to ask you. Dont you wish you could just buy whatever you want to buy and not have the government telling you what is safe and not safe? I want YOUR opinion on this not your nations.

Highgate
March 16, 2012, 10:29 AM
Quite a feisty cross-section of the gun owning population we've got here, dontcha think? You managed to pick quite a sore-spot for some of the current and prior service members we have, and the general ire of a portion of the rest.

If the comment was designed to stoke some lively discussion...you certainly got it.
Too true!

Thank you everyone for all your comment - they WERE useful & interesting.

Art Eatman
March 16, 2012, 10:31 AM
The firearms violence problem is primarily associated with facets of the world of illegal drugs. That is, there are turf wars over who gets to sell what drugs where. There are armed robberies which are done to get money to buy drugs. And much of our gang warfare, if not racial in nature, is allied to drug sales.

People who do not live in or move through areas where gangs are prevalent and drug sales are a regular activity generally only know about gun violence via their television news.

As far as all the posting in discussions of strategy and tactics, it seems to me that the general attitude is tied to the concept of a form of insurance against disaster. Similar to having an insurance policy against fire, flood or civil liability--but not just a paper thing. "The odds are low, but the stakes are high."

All in all, our system--warts and all--gives us more individual sovereignty than in any other country. Nobody can guarantee safety except the individual himself. We at least have the means.

steelerdude99
March 16, 2012, 10:35 AM
Highgate,
A better comparison is comparing how much government a place has would be Somalia vs. U.K. U.K. with a government everywhere approach and Somalia where government is hardly anywhere. U.K. streets are ripe for the pickings for criminals who manage to get a firearm. The police are mostly unarmed and potential victims are unarmed as well. IF they are armed with a handgun, then per UK law, they themselves are criminals. The U.K. Government does not have a constitution saying that they ďcannot pass a lawĒ that infringes on a right. On the Somalia side, you have warlords who are so brazen that they kidnap, take over villages, rape, loot, pillage Ö. and thus become extremely wealthy. All the while, not much fear of being stopped by government. In either U.K. or Somalia, the law abiding person on the street (or in the village) is left defenseless.

In the USA, we are in the middle and have the Constitution that limits government from passing laws which are unconstitutional. One amendment to the Constitution is the right to bear arms. Would it stop a tyrannical government with tanks and other modern military weapons? Not likely. Will the right to bear arms allow the person on the street to defend their selves? Yes (as long as the locality has not taken away that constitutional right). If laws are broken while defending themselves (such as hunting down the perpetrator), then the person faces prosecution. Every firearm IF MISUSED will enable its owner to attempt to do something illegal. In the much of the USA, itís not the ability to attempt to commit a crime thatís a crime, it the action of actually doing so.

chuck

Highgate
March 16, 2012, 10:36 AM
Highgate, I have to ask you. Dont you wish you could just buy whatever you want to buy and not have the government telling you what is safe and not safe? I want YOUR opinion on this not your nations.
Very good question.

I would indeed like to buy what I want.

But do I really need an AR-15 'just for fun'?

And more importantly do I want the local unemployed dope dealers to have easier access to firearms? (UK crooks can currently get access to guns - but usually imitations or blank-firers modified to fire bullets. A wider retail gun market would improve their chances of obtaining decent weapons)

And do I really want to see armed police in the UK?

Hmmm ... not too sure.

Maybe our current level of gun control is a tad overbearing ... but I suspect that it's better than a free-for-all.

leadcounsel
March 16, 2012, 10:38 AM
I've lived in and been to the UK (Scotland and England) many times since 1995. I was there when you had 'sorta' gun ownership. I have actually been shotgun clay shooting to a range in 2007 with a friend. A round of clays was bloody pricey, about 3 times what we'd pay in the states. But now, gun ownership is much too difficult for an average person and your self defense laws are non-existent.

Anyway, if you think the US and Somalia are on par then you need to get out more. The answer is no.

With my experiences in the UK, you folks are about as Non-free as I could imagine for a nation. Social welfare nanny craddle to grave police state where the people are subjects with no real rights. It is truly a shame. You need to fix it, but I don't know how.

I think the real trick that the Government did on the UK citizens is that you are still oppressed, but you have a lot of entitlements and pleasant lifestyles so you don't realize it. And you're brainwashed to think that you don't need rights.

evan price
March 16, 2012, 10:38 AM
Um, let's see..about 200 or so years ago, your King told us we couldn't have guns and tried to take ours away. We wound up starting a war and kicking his troops' behinds back to Merrye Ye Olde Englande.

Then in 1987 and 1997 your government did the same thing to you subjects of the Crown, and y'all decided to meekly turn them in. Soon thereafter y'all introduced the ban on air guns, the ban on things that look scary, the ban on knives, and forced a special dispensation to be required to hold the Olympics including shooting events. Then you came out with the stab-proof steak knife and the shatterproof pint glass. Soon I'm sure they will wrap the entire island in foam and outlaw acute angles entirely.

Tommygunn
March 16, 2012, 11:06 AM
Tommygun - you are of course correct. But we don't have a "well regulated" militia do we ? Not even a poorly regulated one. So when a bunch of individual citizens with no experience or training to fight as a regular army and no real modern battlefield weapons think they keep the Government in check because of their collection of small arms, it seems pretty naive to me. At least back in the revolutionary days the arms employed by the army were exactly the same as the arms employed by the lay people. Today, the technological gap alone is immense. And then you still have the issue of training and organization and discipline.

Unfortunatly, the militia system, as idealized by our founders, fell out of common use a long time ago. With regards to those motley groups who call themselves "militia," I regard them as nothing other than John Q. Public who gather in groups and wear camo and shoot empty bearcans off logs on weekends.
Not to really disparage all militias. Some of them do have ex military types and these (few) probably would be somewhat effective in skirmishes.
But others contain dangerous nutcase extremists and need monitoring by the Fibbies.
That's one of the problems; there's a wide range of types ensconced in what we call "militias" (which really aren't) today.
If we were to be faced with a true situation in which we had a tyranny that we needed to overthrow, what I think might happen is:
In the initial stages it would be the police who would be the initial responders to deal with the militia. I actually think the militia might have some chance of doing well against a police force, as they are not military and are hogtied by "miranda" concerns and not primarily tasked to "kill people and break their things."
But I think that soon the military would be brought in. Here the only advantage a militia would have would be (A.) guerrilla warfare, and (B.) the size of our country. To me it's doubtfull a ragtag bunch of weekend warriors would, however, have the smarts and savvy to use these to their advantage. A few with those ex military guys might.

Long and short of it: Preserving our liberty as we know it and have it (even restoring what's been lost) through peaceful measures (voting, and participation in politics) is a far better, and more efficacious manner of obtaining our goal than violence.

For those who are too enamored of the weekend warriors, I'd advise to study the Revolutionary War.
It was never written in granite we would win.
We COULD HAVE LOST.
It would have been easy. Even small instances might have turned the tide at some points. General Washington had his "butt" kicked out of New York City by the British. He led his defeated, ragtag Continentals to Trenton and achieved victory -- a necessary one -- there.
But, if one British officer had actually read one note he'd been given, rather than stuffing it in his pocket, the British would have known about Washington, and Trenton would have been lost.
Then what? Washington's army, either dead, or POWs, or at best dissolved....the British would have had the momentum....and we'd now be sipping tea at 4:00PM and be using poundsterling notes rather than dollar bills.
We honor and admire Washington, and others who fought and gave us our freedom today -- and well we should; it so easily could have gone the other way for them.
Some of the Revolutionaries had better weapons than the British. The rifled musket, for example, gave its user greater range and accuracy. The British hated and feared the colonists who used them because they could and did pick off individual commanders. The downside of the rifled musket was it took longer to load, as the rifling had to be engaged. In the then typical volleyfire warfare, the rifle was actually a detriment as the muskets reloaded much faster.
The technology though, is sso much different today .........


Really want to face off against an AH - 64 Apache gunship or an M1A1 Abrahms tank armed with your M4orgery? Naaaaaahhh, didn't think so .... ;)

hardluk1
March 16, 2012, 11:27 AM
Highgate If you had total freedom to hunt or shoot freely at different gun ranges would you, if you had them? Travel 500 or 2000 miles with out jumping through hoops at the border crossing or state lines with your forearm, would you? Just to be able to travel freely with in your borders with a firearm or to own and shoot a handgun freely and legaly would you.

There are allways people that will go over the top no matter what or where. We also do go through federal back ground checks and if you carry a handgun, there are class's and range time plus finger prints and federal background checks . In your country it is possible for the BG to find a way to acquire a firearm if they work at it,right?

Remember when times were not so fine with the irish ? That sort a sounds like Somalia over there to us. People screw'n with another "states" way of life and policical controls. Are there areas that a brit would not go to for lunch or even care to travel around in certain areas of britsh controled countries freely and comfortably. Just figure some of bigger cities here can be like that.

Concedering the size and population difference of our two counties it might sound worse here with our very slanted news but we all know what a straight up fine job the news does by both sides of the ocean ,right. All ways the real truth!!!

Many of us also shoot in matchs of different types like you use to have the right to do.

Highgate , Maybe your problem is that you have not had the freedoms we do to really have any idea of what you want.

Is waisting all that money on a queen really worth it ? Would be nice to read reply about that as some other brits will see it and read it. Glad I am here even as crappy as some things can be at times.

HOOfan_1
March 16, 2012, 11:29 AM
But do I really need an AR-15 'just for fun'?


Does anyone need a Corvette to drive back and forth to work?
Do recreational golfers need a titanium head golf clubs?

Your government expects you to leave your protection up to them.

Our government provides us protection, as well as respecting our right to protect ourselves. Unfortunately there are plenty of people in our government who are trying to deny us that right.

Do you not find it odd that you are allowed firearms to protect the life of your chickens, but not to protect the life of yourself and your family? I'd say those are some backward priorities.

steelerdude99
March 16, 2012, 11:35 AM
...
For those who are too enamored of the weekend warriors, I'd advise to study the Revolutionary War.
It was never written in granite we would win.
We COULD HAVE LOST.
It would have been easy. Even small instances might have turned the tide at some points. General Washington had his "butt" kicked out of New York City by the British. He led his defeated, ragtag Continentals to Trenton and achieved victory -- a necessary one -- there.
But, if one British officer had actually read one note he'd been given, rather than stuffing it in his pocket, the British would have known about Washington, and Trenton would have been lost.
Then what? Washington's army, either dead, or POWs, or at best dissolved....the British would have had the momentum....and we'd now be sipping tea at 4:00PM and be using poundsterling notes rather than dollar bills.
We honor and admire Washington, and others who fought and gave us our freedom today -- and well we should; it so easily could have gone the other way for them.
;)

Not trying to take away from the David vs. Goliath fight of the colonist, the French were also fighting England at the time of the US Revolutionary War. They kept the most well equipped military of its time from giving the colonistís rebellions their full attention. However, why England lost the colonies is now irrelevant. The founders of the new nation recognized that having guns allowed citizens to gain freedom from tyranny. It must have been important as it was the second amendment to be written.

chuck

David E
March 16, 2012, 11:39 AM
.

But do I really need an AR-15 'just for fun'?


If you ever shot one, you wouldn't even ask that question. Instead, you'd post pictures of your AR collection.

Neverwinter
March 16, 2012, 11:39 AM
The Brits too.

... Boer War, WW1, WW2, Korea, Malaysia, Borneo, Falklands, Balkans, Iraq #1, Iraq #2, Libya, Afghanistan - more than once.

We just don't encourage bringing the war toys back to our homes.

The Swiss do, and it certainly makes sense for their situation.

Sent from Tapatalk

LawScholar
March 16, 2012, 11:43 AM
I've read every post in this thread, and will observe only this, highgate:

A government powerful enough to give you all you want, or regulate every facet of what you can own, is powerful enough to take everything you have. In a heartbeat.

I find the massive list of regulations on length, barrel, rifling, and ammo, for a freakin' SHOTGUN (a very uncontroversial weapon here) frankly terrifying.

My high-cap handgun, AR-15, and 18" shotgun, all bought with a simple 5 minute NICS check, stand ready against a massive and overreaching incursion by my own government.

Britain was the bulwark of freedom, once. I'll never understand how you fight so nobly for it abroad but allowed your government to steal so much of it at home.

Better my Somalia than your Brave New World.

Tommygunn
March 16, 2012, 11:48 AM
...
For those who are too enamored of the weekend warriors, I'd advise to study the Revolutionary War.
It was never written in granite we would win.
We COULD HAVE LOST.
It would have been easy. Even small instances might have turned the tide at some points. General Washington had his "butt" kicked out of New York City by the British. He led his defeated, ragtag Continentals to Trenton and achieved victory -- a necessary one -- there.
But, if one British officer had actually read one note he'd been given, rather than stuffing it in his pocket, the British would have known about Washington, and Trenton would have been lost.
Then what? Washington's army, either dead, or POWs, or at best dissolved....the British would have had the momentum....and we'd now be sipping tea at 4:00PM and be using poundsterling notes rather than dollar bills.
We honor and admire Washington, and others who fought and gave us our freedom today -- and well we should; it so easily could have gone the other way for them.


Not trying to take away from the David vs. Goliath fight of the colonist, the French were also fighting England at the time of the US Revolutionary War. They kept the most well equipped military of its time from giving the colonistís rebellions their full attention. However, why England lost the colonies is now irrelevant. The founders of the new nation recognized that having guns allowed citizens to gain freedom from tyranny. It must have been important as it was the second amendment to be written.

chuck

Also true.

I would never deny the original intent of the second amendment.
I was only trying to point out real life practical realities.

CmdrSlander
March 16, 2012, 11:52 AM
People forget that the US still has a great many "wild" places. Semi auto rifles that you suggested people have "just for fun" are often needed for the elimination of animals such as the vicious wild hogs that plague Texas and the American South. Had such hogs attacked a disarmed populace, such as England, the human death toll would have been tragic. Furthermore, we have integrated the "evil" semi autos into our sporting culture with competitions like three gun matches, which require self loading rifles and shotguns. Not to mention that we have and jealously guard our right to keep and bear arms (arms that a framer of the constitution described as "all the terrible weapons of the soldier.")

AethelstanAegen
March 16, 2012, 11:54 AM
The training provided by Hessian (German) regulars greatly helped form up the new Continental army and made a good difference.

You're thinking of some Prussian officers (ie Von Steuben). The Hessians were on the other side as British mercenaries.

Tommygunn
March 16, 2012, 12:00 PM
Yeah .... always get those two cornfoosed.....

Nushif
March 16, 2012, 12:02 PM
Yeah .... always get those two cornfoosed ...

Coming from a south German expat ... I am offended. I am not a Prussian. 8) Also not a Bavarian. But I'd take that over a Prussian.

Sam Cade
March 16, 2012, 12:04 PM
That's one of the problems; there's a wide range of types ensconced in what we call "militias" (which really aren't) today.

errr..

Militia is legally defined and you don't get a choice as to whether or not you are in it.


10 USC ß 311 - Militia: composition and classes

(a) The militia of the United States consists of all able-bodied males at least 17 years of age and, except as provided in section 313 of title 32, under 45 years of age who are, or who have made a declaration of intention to become, citizens of the United States and of female citizens of the United States who are members of the National Guard.
(b) The classes of the militia areó
(1) the organized militia, which consists of the National Guard and the Naval Militia; and
(2) the unorganized militia, which consists of the members of the militia who are not members of the National Guard or the Naval Militia.


So, I'm a member of the national militia whether I like it or not.

..also, you may be subject to state militia laws as well.

In my case:

Section 219
Militia, what to consist of.

The militia of the Commonwealth of Kentucky shall consist of all able-bodied male residents of the State between the ages of eighteen and forty-five years, except such persons as may be exempted by the laws of the State or of the United States.

and

Section 221
Government of militia to conform to Army regulations.

The organization, equipment and discipline of the militia shall conform as nearly as practicable to the regulations for the government of the armies of the United States.

jbrown50
March 16, 2012, 12:16 PM
I am one of those rare British residents who own a firearm.

That is because the British people, including you, want it and allow it to be that way. As mentioned earlier the root causes of crime are socio-economic. People scapegoat guns as the cause of violence and crime because they don't want to do the hard work and commit the necessary resources toward tackling the real causes. It's much, much easier to blame it on guns and continually enact stricter gun laws thereby making the naive public feel like something significant is being done.

Visiting this site I'm getting the impression that the USA is almost a Somalia-style war zone.

So....you based your impression of the US on one website? I find that hard to believe unless you've simply never heard of the word 'research'. I think, as earlier posters pointed out, that you are trolling for emotional responses.

Why else would so many posters have so many guns, so much ammunition, so much concern about bullet lethality etc?

How many TVs, pairs of shoes, suits, computers, stereos, etc. do you own? If your hobby is computers for instance you'll likely have access to more than one and usually multiple. As far as bullet lethality goes, why would you not want to do 'research' (again with that illusive word) in order to find the most effective loads in case you have to use your firearm for hunting or even, heaven forbid, self defense?

I have visited Boston & Denver a few times and I didn't see any firefights etc.

If a criminal robbed and/or attacked you and/or your family at gun/knife point in a remote area, like maybe a parking garage, would that be the result of a firefight? Crime is everywhere, especially in the UK. Just because the violence isn't anywhere near the same level as in Mogadishu it doesn't mean that the need to be able to defend oneself doesn't still exist.

The only guns I saw were when an old black guy was dragged off a bus for not paying the fare and was forced to lie on the ground at gunpoint by maybe five armed officers with drawn weapons.

If you think you witnessed excessive force you can report the incident. Our cops carry guns because they regularly encounter criminals who carry guns. Sometimes these criminals are ready and willing to shoot at the police. Just because it didn't happen this time doesn't mean that it hasn't happened in the past and won't happen in the future. It doesn't matter what the gun laws are in a given jurisdiction criminals don't obey gun laws.

Don't get me wrong - I'm not any sort of commie criminal lover ... but I clearly am missing something about everyday threats in the USA.

I wouldn't call you that. I would say though that you're very naive if you think that the heavy firearms restrictions, implemented by your government, are in your best interest.

jk2008
March 16, 2012, 12:18 PM
Soon I'm sure they will wrap the entire island in foam and outlaw acute angles entirely.

Thank you, evan price, I really needed a good belly-laugh today!

Tommygunn
March 16, 2012, 12:19 PM
errr..

Militia is legally defined and you don't get a choice as to whether or not you are in it.


Sam, I am aware of that law.... but I just really hate to think of a bunch of wanna-be mall ninja types who swill beer to be a "serious" militia.
"Serious" militias report to the state governor and hold regular excercises and have regular elected officers and evince some type of discipline and good order.
The SEAL type wannabes out in the woods on Saturdays may, in the legal sense, still be considered part of the "unorganized militia," but I'd rather depend upon Captain Parmenter & F Troop than most of them should TSHTF.
Just sayin' .......

Tommygunn
March 16, 2012, 12:27 PM
Yeah .... always get those two cornfoosed ...

Coming from a south German expat ... I am offended. I am not a Prussian. 8) Also not a Bavarian. But I'd take that over a Prussian.
__________________

Wie geht es Ihnen gesundheitlich? ;)

Sorry Nushif, I meant no offense. Purely a memory problem on my part, nothing more.

throdgrain
March 16, 2012, 01:39 PM
Hi guys

I've read some of this thread (it's long!), but I'd like to add a couple of bits.

Firstly, in Britain if you want a shotgun you apply for a licence, but the police have to prove a reason why you cant have one, rather than you having to prove a reason to have one. This is somewhat at odds with the other posts on here.

Second, I know lots of people with shotgun licences ;)

Third, MI5 do not investigate your application :p

Fourth, How can the USA be a little Somalia? I've never heard anything so daft ... have what guns you want folks, and do with them what you want. I wish I could.

razorback2003
March 16, 2012, 01:44 PM
People have always come to America to be independent and have freedoms. We have fairly cheap land compared to European countries. Our houses are generally cheaper. For what I pay for a mortgage I could not have the kind of home I have in TN for the same money in the UK. I probably would be in an apartment over there.

A lot of people in the South especially are descendants of Scotch Irish people who have always been fighting to survive, whether it be in Ireland or the Southern US. Look at the Ozarks, Smokey Mtns and what settled those areas. Generally they were independent people who wanted to be left alone and not controlled by the government in every aspect of their lives.

When I look at the UK and the rest of Europe, I see a place that makes our TSA crap at the American airports look like a walk in the park. Cameras, random searches, extreme government reg from a pocket knife to a real gun, barriers to starting new businesses, very heavy taxes, high labor costs, extremely expensive gas.

We have a lot of folks that like their space, big trucks, fast cars, homes with yards, rural homes with acreage. A good chunk of the population here can afford it. You'd have to be really wealthy to afford the space that we have here that is not handed down in the UK.

Is one way right and one way wrong? Probably not. It is what you are used to, grew up with, and local customs. You adapt to what you are in and make it work.

mberoose
March 16, 2012, 01:47 PM
Lol.

Sambo82
March 16, 2012, 01:50 PM
This is a forum dedicated to firearms, of course we will be talking about firearms. I happen to have, as I'm sure others here have, numerous other hobbies and interests as well. I mean would you go t oa Martha Stewart website and assume that American is composed entirely of knitting enthusiasts?:confused:

Wanderling
March 16, 2012, 01:53 PM
fully agree with Tommygun. The best guarantee of freedom is ability to control one's government via lawful means. Which we have, sort of, but not enough IMHO, and use very little. The right to bear arms isn't an indication of freedom. There's plenty of countries where citizens can easily buy a machine gun yet are ruled by a bloody dictator and his death squads. A determined well trained modern army will always win a battle against home insurgency as long as the army stays loyal to the government (barring foreign invasion). All, without exception, succesfull revolutions happened when armed forces were demoralized and unwilling to fight, or outright joined the rebels.

I don't think the US has more freedom, overall, than Western Europe. We simply have different sets of laws than Germany or UK. I could certainly argue that in the countries with multi-party parliaments an average citizen's voice is better heard. But let's keep politics out of this. I think the gun laws in the UK are overreaching, but that alone doesn't make the UK a less free country. Does it mean that Switzerland or Finland are more free just because they may have fewer restrictions on gun ownership than US does ? What about their system of government ? Their election process ? Their system of legal checks and balances making sure the government doesn't spin out of control ? Their courts ? What kind of protection from arrest or search or surveillance do citizens of each country have ? How easy is it for the Govt to bypass this constitutional protection ? I think when you compare different counries based on this criteria, it's unlikely that USs will emerge having the most freedoms. Not at the top, at least. Hopefully close.

Owen
March 16, 2012, 01:53 PM
Alos even though permitted, if the local police firearms officer saw I had that amount of ammunition he would most likely cancel my permit!



They can cancel your permit for doing something legal?

Highgate
March 16, 2012, 01:59 PM
So....you based your impression of the US on one website? I find that hard to believe unless you've simply never heard of the word 'research'. I think, as earlier posters pointed out, that you are trolling for emotional responses.
This IS research. In real-time!

My original post was indeed intended to catch the eye ... and by the number or responses it seems to have worked.

The responses in this thread are so wide ranging and detailed that this data could be used as a course project for a student.

I now have a much clearer idea of the gun culture in the US ... which was the main point of the original post.

I also suspect that some Americans reading this thread may have learned a thing or two.

To be frank I was NOT expecting all the 'constitution' type & quasi-political replies.

It's hard for me to see how gun ownership etc is so embedded into the American political & social culture. Some posters suggest that guns are just tools ... but they clearly are more important than that to Americans.

I had expected much more discussion about criminal risks etc.

The passion (I'll refrain from calling it rudeness or hostility) of some posters was also a bit of a shock.

Firearms are of no particular interest to most Europeans - and they certainly never come up in any political discussion, unless a firearms crime murder has just taken place,

It seems that the USA and Europe differ greatly in their attitude to gun ownership.

In Europe owning a gun is like owning a camera or a car or a power saw - no big deal.

In the USA gun ownership appears to have an almost religious importance ... which seems a bit scary to me.

Anyway, it's your country so if it works for you, fine.

Interestingly, having made this post and seen the responses plus doing some web research I very surprisingly find myself MORE in agreement with the UK gun control laws. I wasn't expecting that because I like guns and I'm not at all keen on the UK government.

SilentStalker
March 16, 2012, 02:02 PM
The thing I find ironic about this thread is that all British people I know tell me not to let the government take our right to own and bear arms away! I wonder why this is? They say it is because the U.K. in general has gone to **** since the removal of that right in your country. I do not know because I do not live there. I have visited there several times and never really encountered any lawlessness or violence of any kind, especially in London, but everyone I do know that lives there claims the country is much more violent and disorderly now than it ever has been. They seem to think this has to do with the gun laws your country now enacts but who knows for sure.

And to answer you question, "No, the U.S. is nothing like Somalia!" I mean we do have lots of guns and we have our fair share of violence as everyone else in the world does but nothing like Somalia LOL. A lot of people here hunt, are interested in shooting sports, long range competitions, and various other things guns can be used for. We don't just all run around shooting people and we aren't as crazy as they make us out to be on TV ;)! Well, at least most of us aren't anyways.

Highgate
March 16, 2012, 02:09 PM
Firstly, in Britain if you want a shotgun you apply for a licence, but the police have to prove a reason why you cant have one, rather than you having to prove a reason to have one.

You do now need a reason. My firearms officer specifically required that I give one at my interview. Try getting a shotgun certificate without a reason!

MI5 do not investigate your application
My firearms officer recited a list of official bodies that had been checked prior to the interview. Apparently the security services are asked in addition to the various police checks. The home interview is simply the final step of the process : to ensure that no 'identity theft' has taken place ... and also to make sure that your walls aren't painted black and that you don't have any 'unusual' flags on the walls!

Highgate
March 16, 2012, 02:13 PM
They can cancel your permit for doing something legal?
If I had 10,000+ cartridges at home? Sheesh, yes. My guns would be GONE.

You can also lose your guns for a while if you get divorced or separated.

I know one guy whose hearing got very bad - so they took his guns permanently.

Overkilll0084
March 16, 2012, 02:16 PM
Interesting. Like Somalia you say?
There is a UK phenomenon that I'm curious about. Is it mandatory for young british hooligans to steal and burn a car at any particular interval? No, they can't just steal it and strip it. No, they have to burn it too.
How'd all those riots work out in London & other metro areas? Law abiding shopkeepers fighting off rioter with cricket bats.
FWIW, Riots after sports events are still relatively rare over here. How many drunken rugby fans does it take to destroy a town center?
Which country looks more like Somalia? Glass houses....

Owen
March 16, 2012, 02:16 PM
If I had 10,000+ cartridges at home? Sheesh, yes. My guns would be GONE.



Then why is it legal to have 15k something? hardly sounds fair. Sounds like an intentional trap.

Tommygunn
March 16, 2012, 02:18 PM
In Europe owning a gun is like owning a camera or a car or a power saw - no big deal.

Actually, it's usually like THAT in America.
I understand europe is not monolithic and each country has its own laws. However, in a country with severe laws (like England ....not to put too fine a point on it) I find it hard to believe owning a gun is "no big deal."

Wanderling
March 16, 2012, 02:22 PM
This site is not very representative of the general US population. I watched "Trainspotting", should I form my opinion of life in the UK based solely on the subculture shown in that movie ?

US gun laws and attitudes (general public, not gun centered website crowd) are not as extreme as you may think. Still, they are shaped by American history and mentality. I came here 20 years ago firmly believing in strict gun control because this was the norm in Europe. I have since seen that the majority of gun owners here are law abiding and reasonable people, and I now believe that prohibiting gun ownership UK style will only disarm these law abiding citizens without making a dent in the ability of criminals to arm themselves. I do support better checks, especially mental health checks (a different issue altogether) but I don't think total weapon ban would work here. And I really don't know if it works over there in the UK. It definitely doesn't work in Russia or Ukraine where violent crime has skyrocketed since the breakup of USSR, the criminals are armed to their teeth, yet the populace is disarmed.

Teachu2
March 16, 2012, 02:23 PM
I don't think the US has more freedom, overall, than Western Europe. We simply have different sets of laws than Germany or UK. I could certainly argue that in the countries with multi-party parliaments an average citizen's voice is better heard. But let's keep politics out of this. I think the gun laws in the UK are overreaching, but that alone doesn't make the UK a less free country. Does it mean that Switzerland or Finland are more free just because they may have fewer restrictions on gun ownership than US does ? What about their system of government ? Their election process ? Their system of legal checks and balances making sure the government doesn't spin out of control ? Their courts ? What kind of protection from arrest or search or surveillance do citizens of each country have ? How easy is it for the Govt to bypass this constitutional protection ? I think when you compare different counries based on this criteria, it's unlikely that USs will emerge having the most freedoms. Not at the top, at least. Hopefully close.

Wanderling, you missed the boat on this one. Any US citizen can become a Congressperson - we've got farmers, lawyers, doctors, engineers, housewives, the whole bunch. Ethnicly diverse, too. And a rather unconventional President (by our standards) in office.
We know a wee bit about checks and balances, as well. Pretty high on citizen's rights, and it's still pretty hard to bypass our Constitution - although 9/11 has loosened it slightly.

There are a lot of reasons people wish to come here. Not so many want to leave.

Highgate
March 16, 2012, 02:24 PM
I find it hard to believe owning a gun is "no big deal."
It's unusual, yes. I meant that it isn't any sort of major political statement.

Midwest
March 16, 2012, 02:27 PM
This IS research. In real-time!



In the USA gun ownership appears to have an almost religious importance ... which seems a bit scary to me.




Maybe it seems that way. Or maybe we have come close a few times to really losing our gun rights and we are protective. Protective, not because we are being greedy...But rather fully recognize that when the citizens are armed...the government is less likely to make it into a police state.

And we do NOT want to end up like other countries where they HAVE disarmed their citizens and then have established a dictatorship. Or become a police state where there are cameras are on every corner, nook and cranny, alley ways, and out in the country and where people are forbidden to defend themselves.

Gun ownership is NOT limited to 40 year old + white males like some would like to believe. There are a growing number of women who are now carrying a pistol to protect themselves from muggers and rapists. There are the elderly who would be an easy victim except for that shotgun they keep handy if they ever need it. In addition to huge rise in gun ownership is the huge rise in those seeking carry permits in states that allow them.

If protecting oneself or ones family is a 'religion', then so be it. Why is the idea of protecting oneself or their family a foreign or illegal concept across the pond anyway? Why are people being charged with a crime for protecting themselves or their property there? We here in the U.S. do not want to end up with the laws that you have there, no offense. I am sure the U.K. is a fine place to visit, but I feel safer here in the U.S. knowing that I can defend my self and my family should the need ever arise.

Tommygunn
March 16, 2012, 02:28 PM
It's unusual, yes. I meant that it isn't any sort of major political statement.

For many in America it isn't really a political statement either. In my extended family, I am not the only gun owner, but I probably am the most politically minded. Most cousins, etc own rifles and shotguns and hunt with them and don't worry too much about politics save when they vote.

phil dirt
March 16, 2012, 02:31 PM
Yes, we americans have a lot of guns. We have a God given right to do so. After our long and bloody war to free ourselves from Great Britain and King George III, we wrote a Constitution that makes this right a part of the law of our land. We are freedom loving citizens, not subjects of the crown!

Wanderling
March 16, 2012, 02:41 PM
Teachu2: in Italy they had a prostitute win a seat in parliament back in the 90s. Does it make Italy "freer" ? And the political entry ticket price in the US is now in million$. When was the last time that an average person without much money and with no political party affiliation had won a seat in the US Congress ? And how often does it usually happen ? I bet you not more often than in a parliament of any other democracy. Maybe even less often. The monetary and political (party membership) barriers are pretty high.

The US is a desirable place for an immigrant because it's democratic and free - just like many other countries - but on top of it, it has a very large and until recently very vibrant economy, and being historically a melting pot it lacks the xenophobia so typical of European countries. Many people every year are trying to get into Canada for same exact reason - freedom, decent economy, and significantly less hostility towards people from other places when compared to Europe. US is great, but not the only free country on Earth, so lecturing others on how we have great freedoms and they don't isn't always justified, and may come across as... well, let's say it may not have the desired effect.

throdgrain
March 16, 2012, 02:58 PM
You do now need a reason. My firearms officer specifically required that I give one at my interview. Try getting a shotgun certificate without a reason!



Sorry, thats bollocks mate. All you say is - at most - I want to shoot clays with it, the end. The police still have to prove your unsuitability for ownership, i,e you're a criminal or whatever.

Having said that, I have 3 criminal convictions that my friends on here tell me would constitute "felonys" (from 25 years ago) and I've had a shotgun certificate over 7 years now. My friends on here also advise me that in the United States I wouldnt be allowed to own a firearm because of these offences.

So you could say that from a firearms point of view, I'm better off in Britain ;)

Odd Job
March 16, 2012, 03:00 PM
Wow, what a thread! It's like a bag of liquorice allsorts, so much variety...

Firstly the Somalia vs USA comparison wasn't literal, the implied question is "why do you need all these evil military weapons when a gentlemanly weapon like my shotgun here in the UK will do." Some of you getting all heated up about that comparison seem to be lacking a bit of "nous" and need to stop looking at it literally.

I was born in South Africa and lived there until 1999. I've been in the UK since, but I visit the US every year (and make sure I shoot at a range while I am there). It's quite a simple thing: the Americans and South Africans share an enjoyment of shooting as a pastime, hobby and for hunting.
On the self-defense side a firearm is recognised as a useful tool for this purpose in SA and USA.
Not so much in the UK (although we did get a huge spike in visitors to the range here in London after the riots)

In my opinion the UK is ahead on a universal curve which leads to a nanny state where there is a culture where "the government will look after me" and there is an accompanying decline in good old-fashioned individual responsibility.
It may well be that the USA is heading in the same direction. It is not just in matters of policing and security but in matters pertaining to health and education also. We here on this forum are a minority. Our "brethren" out-number us and do not subscribe to our values. That's a subject for a whole different discussion that could go on at length...

To Highgate:

1) A firearm is just a tool. I have two rifles, one is a military-style SIG522 and the other is a Thompson Center R55 Benchmark. You can have these on a firearms certificate here in the UK. They are two completely different rifles but they fire the same cartridge. Yet one is an "evil black rifle" and the other is a more "traditional" bench rifle with a laminated wood stock. They'll both do the same damage. It wouldn't make sense to frown upon the ownership of the SIG but not the R55.

2) The London riots showed exactly why it is not a good idea to disarm law-abiding members of society. When that happens, you are at the mercy of the criminal and all that stands between you and him is the police. And if they don't stand between you, you end up with people losing their livelihood, being killed, having to jump out of flaming houses and all the other things that happened. In my opinion a Chav setting fire to a residence or a Chav inflicting bodily harm on a person is fair game and if there was any sense or justice in this country, those home-owners at risk of death by arson or direct violence should have been afforded the wherewithall to gun those Chavs down immediately. Instead here we were, blissfully unarmed....

3) As far as I am concerned, if a person's life is threatened he should not be punished for applying whatever tools are available to stop that threat. I couldn't give a damn if he drops a grand piano on the Chav's head or cuts him in half with a minigun, but if that's what it takes for him to stop, then so be it. There is too much focus on the tool and not enough focus on what's right. If you disagree with that, perhaps you can advise me what course of action is preferable.

To the others:

This citizen vs subject argument is moot. You could call the Brits whatever you like, but what you seem to be ignoring is the fact that in both the US and UK (and even SA) there are restrictions which make it less than ideal to own and use certain firearms. These restrictions weren't always there but are there now. Call it what you like but unfortunately we are all subject to the whims of our brethren.

To flip it around, how would you like it if I ridiculed you because you live in a State where you can't have a magazine with more than 10 rounds?
How would you like it if I started a great big hoo-ha about how you are not a free man because in the State where you live you either can't have a suppressor or you have to wait 6 months and pay several hundred $ for one?
Should I say you are in a nanny state because you can't be trusted to purchase alcohol until you are 21?

See what I mean?

It wasn't always like that, was it? How did that happen, ask yourself that...

I'll make a comment about rights also: I hate to break it to you but rights don't exist. Rights are benefits which are afforded you only whilst such "rights" are subscribed to by the majority of your brethren. Your right to own this and your right to do that are a human-manufactured entity and can be taken away just as easily.

In all three countries firearms owners had it much better in years gone by. Ask yourself why it is no longer so...

brickeyee
March 16, 2012, 03:00 PM
In Europe owning a gun is like owning a camera or a car or a power saw - no big deal.

So you are saying cameras, cars, and power saws require justification to the government for their ownership?

Like guns in Merry Old England? Or are you disowning Europe?

I need no justification for routine firearms.
There remain large numbers of more regulated firearms, like machine guns and rifled barrel weapons above .50 caliber.

No permission asked.

A quick criminal background check and I walk out with a gun.

The portion of guns used in crimes in the USA is vanishingly small, and criminals avoid occupied houses like the plague.

Even they realize there is unlikely to be anything worth their life inside.

It is far from a 'free for all' except in Hollywood movies.

throdgrain
March 16, 2012, 03:01 PM
Wise words Odd Job.

browneu
March 16, 2012, 03:18 PM
It's unusual, yes. I meant that it isn't any sort of major political statement.

And that is why you have to go through so many hoops to obtain a shotgun and ammunition.

It's not about firearms for us but about control. Our politicians know that firearm control, like other sensitive issues could end their political careers.

It's not a free for all over here like you think. I have to jump through hoops to own certain types of firearms and some states have become more like your country than remaining our own.

You state that you agree with your laws regarding gun control. Please tell us how stricter controls on your firearms and ammunition leads to less crime or violence?

You've already stated that criminals are already able to get firearms with such laws. I'm curious how these laws help, someone like you who has to go through hoops to defend chickens, reduce crime?

You also state that you don't want armed police. I don't want unarmed police. There jobs are dangerous enough armed, it would be even more dangerous unarmed. How does an officer of the law apprehend someone whose threatening them with a weapon like a knife, blunt instrument, or firearm if they're unarmed?

Officers had to shoot someone went on a stabbing spree here in Columbus. The invididual stabbed three people in an office building and was threatening the police even though they had their guns drawn. From what I heard they had to shoot him several times before he would succumbed to his injuries. So my question to you is how would British police react in that situation?

Come over and you'll change your mind regarding the AR.

chhodge69
March 16, 2012, 03:23 PM
Can anyone clarify the situation for me?
Yes. We're still a little touchy about that whole King George III thing.

browneu
March 16, 2012, 03:32 PM
This citizen vs subject argument is moot. You could call the Brits whatever you like, but what you seem to be ignoring is the fact that in both the US and UK (and even SA) there are restrictions which make it less than ideal to own and use certain firearms. These restrictions weren't always there but are there now. Call it what you like but unfortunately we are all subject to the whims of our brethren.

To flip it around, how would you like it if I ridiculed you because you live in a State where you can't have a magazine with more than 10 rounds?
How would you like it if I started a great big hoo-ha about how you are not a free man because in the State where you live you either can't have a suppressor or you have to wait 6 months and pay several hundred $ for one?
Should I say you are in a nanny state because you can't be trusted to purchase alcohol until you are 21?


You need to read this forum more often. We're constantly telling those living in California, Illinois and New York to either move to a free state or elect officials that better support freedom.

I'll make a comment about rights also: I hate to break it to you but rights don't exist. Rights are benefits which are afforded you only whilst such "rights" are subscribed to by the majority of your brethren. Your right to own this and your right to do that are a human-manufactured entity and can be taken away just as easily.

You don't understand our constitution. We call them rights because we created them for us to remain a free state. You're correct in that they could be changed or taken away but that will go against the highest law in our land. Changing these rights are not as easy as you might think without some type of change in government that could lead to civil war.

exavid
March 16, 2012, 03:33 PM
I agree, well spoken Odd Job.

jeepnik
March 16, 2012, 03:35 PM
I am one of those rare British residents who own a firearm.

Visiting this site I'm getting the impression that the USA is almost a Somalia-style war zone.

Why else would so many posters have so many guns, so much ammunition, so much concern about bullet lethality etc?

I have visited Boston & Denver a few times and I didn't see any firefights etc.

The only guns I saw were when an old black guy was dragged off a bus for not paying the fare and was forced to lie on the ground at gunpoint by maybe five armed officers with drawn weapons.

Don't get me wrong - I'm not any sort of commie criminal lover ... but I clearly am missing something about everyday threats in the USA.

Can anyone clarify the situation for me?

Thanks!
Oh it's pretty simple. A couple hundred odd years ago, we cast off the king, and went our own way. Now, the smart folks of the time realized that you couldn't trust a king or for that matter any other type of government. They figured out that an armed populace is the only thing that keeps a government in check, and some fool from declaring himself king. Ergo, the Second Amendment to our Constitution.

Many folks still feel that way. And try as some folks might, we still don't have a king. Heck, we've fired a president. Kings seem to be in it for life. Well except for that fellow that had the audacity to marry a commoner, a divorcee, and gasp an American.

CountryUgly
March 16, 2012, 03:44 PM
Somalia we are not. There the gangs get to run down the street blindly shooting their AK's in the air or into peoples huts terrifying the normal village folk who are unable to defend themselves. I could see how you may have gotten us confused with them if you had visited Chicago but not Denver. Oh wait you said you were in Boston I see where you may have gotten confused now.

JustinJ
March 16, 2012, 03:45 PM
Next time a thread like this pops up i'm opening a pool on how many posts in before people start espousing their politics.

Who had Obama bashing at post #23?

Highgate
March 16, 2012, 03:46 PM
All you say is - at most - I want to shoot clays with it, the end.
So if you lived in say Brixton and applied for a shotgun certificate then you would get it?

The police can do what they like at the end of the day.

MagnumDweeb
March 16, 2012, 03:50 PM
I have to add a point to the Revolutionary War discussion. The South gets no respect for its contribution. William Clinton and Nathaniel Greene are all but forgotten (Can you say Saratoga, got to love that it was an Irish sniper who picked off the English General and turned the tide of the Battle, One Can Make a Difference, if he can hit what he is aiming at). When the militias were playing tag in the forests during the Battle of Lexington, South Carolina took on and beat the British Navy when the Navy tried to take some of its fortresses. Oh and the folks in the Appalache had declared independence thirty years before our founding fathers, and when the British came in during the Revolutionary War with over a thousand soldiers, the settlers there formed up a hundred and fifty guys and kicked their teeth in and the British left with less than six hundred soldiers.

We after all had another victory over in South Carolina, that I now can't remember, that they used in "The Patriot" with the whole retreating Militia thing. Cornwalis didn't lose a single battle till he ended up in New York. And he went on to use the lessons he learned fighting us to subjugate India and help kill more than thirty million Indians, at least the Mongols built up something good and lasting.

Okay back to guns, AR-15s are fun, fun but expensive. And are the local hoodlums better armed in our country, yup. But when the good guys start shooting back with even just pistols, the bad guys tend to turn and run, just look on Youtube anytime you like. On a good day I can beat up three normal guys that are unarmed, I've had to do it in New Orleans once (granted my face looked awful for a month, and my ribs hurt like heck for a few months) but the second you start adding knives, pipes, and bricks to the mix. I'm not going to stand a chance.

So I'd rather go up against three guys armed with guns, with me having a gun myself, than taking on three guys bare-handed. Boxer fractures take forever to heal it feels like (my bench dropped twenty pounds and I couldn't curl bells heavier than sixty pounds). Three bad guys come walking up on me with guns drawn and looking to do wrong, I'll be sending no less than six bullets there way.

gp911
March 16, 2012, 03:55 PM
Doesn't the Constitution actually state that certain rights including the right to bear arms are given us by our Creator, thereby defining the right to bear arms as a God-given right rather than a mankind-determined privilege? Pretty sure that's in there fellas...

Jim NE
March 16, 2012, 03:59 PM
You can also lose your guns for a while if you get divorced or separated.

I know one guy whose hearing got very bad - so they took his guns permanently.

So Great Britain doesn't trust it's citizenry. What else is new? Just one of the many reasons we said "Thanks, but no thanks," a couple of centuries ago.

throdgrain
March 16, 2012, 04:02 PM
So if you lived in say Brixton and applied for a shotgun certificate then you would get it?

The police can do what they like at the end of the day.

Yes you would. Do you go on British shooting forums? Like Airgun BBS or Pigeon Watch? (To the American readers - AirgunBBS is about airguns but also has a very busy firearms section, full of very vocal, firearm supporting, Troops supporting shooters)

I think you should go on there mate :) If you did, and asked the question is GB becoming a mini Somalia, you would get the same response you've got here!

highlander 5
March 16, 2012, 04:05 PM
I've not read all 7 pages of post but I will say this if no one else has, Highgate I live outside of Boston should you come to the States again if you come to Ma send me a PM and I will take you to the outdoor range that I belong to and you can try any firearm that I have at that time free of charge. You might learn something and have some fun at the same time.

Tim37
March 16, 2012, 04:14 PM
In the US your innocent until proven guilty. So unless you are proven guilty of a crime then there is no reason that you shouldnt be able to own a firearm or vote or be free to move around as you please. once you have commited a crime then you are guilty and then you forfit certian rights.

shappa357
March 16, 2012, 04:15 PM
Is there a U.K. version of THR?

HoosierQ
March 16, 2012, 04:17 PM
This is going down as maybe the dumbest thread ever to make it to 8 pages. To suggest there is anything similar between the United States and Somalia is just beyond rediculous.

Sol
March 16, 2012, 04:22 PM
Everyone stop! There are caloric restrictions on troll feeding, the last thing we need is mich obam to stop in here to talk about troll obesity.

Highgate
March 16, 2012, 04:22 PM
I've not read all 7 pages of post but I will say this if no one else has, Highgate I live outside of Boston should you come to the States again if you come to Ma send me a PM and I will take you to the outdoor range that I belong to and you can try any firearm that I have at that time free of charge. You might learn something and have some fun at the same time.
Thanks HL5 !

I doubt I'll be coming over any time soon as I've changed career and so no longer travel much.

I used to work in bank vault technology which meant a lot of foreign travel ... and a lot of exposure to guns in various countries ... but very little exposure to sunlight!

Nowadays I run a high tech consultancy business in the middle of the British countryside whilst my wife runs the farm.

jk2008
March 16, 2012, 04:32 PM
Sol said, "Everyone stop! There are caloric restrictions on troll feeding,
the last thing we need is mich obam to stop in here to talk about troll obesity."

Awwww not yet! We're just now getting to the good part were throdgrain is walloping on highgate!

Highgate
March 16, 2012, 04:36 PM
This is going down as maybe the dumbest thread ever to make it to 8 pages

I posted a serious question in a slightly contentious manner.

I learned what I wanted - although I hadn't expected everyone and their aunty to post a response!

Also, the majority of the responses have been informative, polite and helpful.

Anyway, maybe it's time to call an end to this thread as almost all points seem to have been covered by now,

Sol
March 16, 2012, 04:45 PM
Comparing THE greatest and one of the wealthiest countries in the world to a Sub-Saharan dust country with practically no electricity and clean running water sounds like trolling to me.

Owen
March 16, 2012, 05:01 PM
The police can do what they like at the end of the day.

And that my friend, says it all. That is a statement that makes most American's blood run cold, liberal, conservative or otherwise.

Cosmoline
March 16, 2012, 05:16 PM
The big difference is we waive to each other from our technicals.

If you're ever in the Anchorage area drop me a line and I'll be happy to take you out to the range.

It's unusual, yes. I meant that it isn't any sort of major political statement.

It isn't up here, either. And in that sense there's a pretty big difference between the states. In "border" states such as Virginia where there are large groups of both factions, you find that gun ownership is politically volatile. Up here everyone owns them. Almost everyone, anyway. And they're just part of life. Not typically a political statement.

To see an example of this, take Sarah Palin (please lol). When she ran for Governor the issue barely came up, as most Dems here could outshoot her pretty handily and it was a Dem who introduced unrestricted concealed carry. Some are hard core subsistence hunters who either hit the mark or have to eat ten year old spam. But the second she hit the national scene she started posing with iron. At the national level guns have become a culture war issue.

Maybe our current level of gun control is a tad overbearing ... but I suspect that it's better than a free-for-all.

I wouldn't be too sure about that. When you boil it down, there may not be any difference between a place where, as far as firearms, just about anything goes (like AK) and a place where almost nothing is allowed (like the UK). The crime rates are different, but not necessarily better or worse. And in the end there are underlying demographic and cultural reasons for crime rates that aren't impacted by gun policy at all. So even if Alaska had stronger gun control, you'd see similar patterns of high rural violence linked to endemic alcohol abuse and lower crime rates in the urban areas where policing is more thorough. Just look to northern Canada and you'll see that same pattern, thought hey have stronger gun control policies. I believe you'd see the same pattern if firearms were replaced with axes.

Likewise while gun ownership changes crime patterns, it doesn't stop crime overall. It's just squeezing the other end of the toothpaste tube. So you see far fewer muggings and petty assaults here, because people don't want their heads blown off. But you see more shootings, of course. And you see crime targeting firearms, because they're a form of cash money here. I could, this afternoon, buy a car with some rifles and ammo no problem. I'd have the keys by seven tonight. I've bought camping gear with primers, too. (so I guess that's another similarity with Africa)

In other words I think we're all missing the real causes when we look to firearms as the cure or cause of crime. Firearms are a side issue with only peripheral impact on crime.

Bush Alaska and the UK do have one interesting thing in common--both are among the only places with UNARMED peace officers. So you have the interesting situation of an unarmed VPSO (village public safety officer) dealing with village population with near 100% firearm ownership. There are armed troopers, but often need days or weeks to get in depending on the weather. It does preclude any heavy-handed tactics by law enforcement. The VPSO needs to persuade and rely on cultural traditions to keep things under control. It sometimes prevents decisive action, of course. And it remains controversial.

Sam Cade
March 16, 2012, 05:24 PM
The big difference is we waive to each other from our technicals.

:D

Ok, that made me honestly laugh out loud.

blarby
March 16, 2012, 06:13 PM
In the US your innocent until proven guilty. So unless you are proven guilty of a crime then there is no reason that you shouldnt be able to own a firearm or vote or be free to move around as you please. once you have commited a crime then you are guilty and then you forfit certian rights.

Huh ?

I thought I knew what you were trying to say, and then my reasonable English intent-o-meter exploded.


Highgate : How many times have you got Mr. Fox over there ?

If you are limited to multiple-projectile cartridges, are the projectiles limited in formulation ? ( IE, we have the ban on lead in certain areas, for certain species, etc) Or are the restrictions on shot size/ number about the only limits ?

Sounds like there might be a market for a brit SD shell based on these parameters.... other than buckshot.

What brands do you use/ what brands are popular in your area ?

I'd love to hear from other brits on this'n too !

blarby
March 16, 2012, 06:19 PM
"Slightly contentious?"

I guess we can add "tact" and "diplomacy" to the many things you fail to learn in British public school.

If THR members and their espoused content were to be examined against this precondition...

I guess we can add "tact" and "diplomacy" to the many things you fail to learn in ANY public school.

Andela
March 16, 2012, 08:41 PM
Disgusting, England has fallen.

happygeek
March 16, 2012, 08:50 PM
I can't believe we're 8 pages in and no one has even mentioned this: http://www.ligali.org/pdf/home_office_gun_crime_the_market_in_and_use_of_illegal_firearms.pdf (rather interesting 2006 study on the black market in firearms in England) or this: http://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/20110218135832/http://rds.homeoffice.gov.uk/rds/pdfs09/hosb1109chap2.pdf, specifically the top of page 18. Why did homicides go up in England after the handgun ban, spiking in 2003? Was there a nasty turf war between two rival gangs that year?

Black Duck Charlie
March 16, 2012, 08:57 PM
Chindo, there is a world of difference between socialist/liberal and anti-gun. Being Socialist means that a person cares about the Society they are a part of. Liberal means allowing others to enjoy the rights/liberties/privileges that you enjoy. Being anti-gun means that a person does not like guns.

I know of a lot of Conservatives who "just happen" to be anti-gun.

Owen
March 16, 2012, 09:15 PM
Being Socialist means that a person cares about the Society they are a part of.

Straying off topic here, but that's not what Socialist means at all.

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/socialism

I think the word you are looking for is "Patriot"

230therapy
March 16, 2012, 09:27 PM
The thread is not over! We need pictures of your shotgun. Show it off, preferably with dead Mr. Fox.

Regarding the "crime" comment several pages back: http://smallestminority.blogspot.com/2006/02/culture.html

For essays on guns in America, check out the left column on http://smallestminority.blogspot.com/

Ohio Gun Guy
March 16, 2012, 09:38 PM
The last group of Brits that came here looking to take our guns didn't work out so well.....;)

It is precisely the Difference. It is what prevents that. Look at Mexico with it's insane high levels of crime. Mexico has very restrictive gun laws..... That line on the map and the boarder guards keep out some of that, but otherwise it's the US Police and Armed Population that keeps the criminal gangs from running the place.

Old krow
March 16, 2012, 09:46 PM
So quick to judge the views of others -- and yet so slow to understand the views of others.

That's not the case at all. He has referenced several times how "most" Europeans would react and "this or that" wasn't common place. This is a gun board, not in the least an accurate cross-sectional representation of US gun ownership. This isn't the "common place" mentality of US gun ownership at all, this is a firearms advocacy center.

This forum represents of sub-group of firearms owners that fairly enthusiastic about them. What other reaction could one possibly expect? His statements are roughly the same as walking into a bowling alley and explaining to the patrons why rugby is a better sport.

It just so happens that I have been to England, even married a Brit, and I've spent time in most of Europe. I have nothing bad to say about it (except that it costs 2 pounds to use the public bathroom in London :cuss: ). However, I do not openly converse with them about why I think their rules are too strict or too lax.

To stray even further from the original topic: "Patriot" is also a term for someone who supports their "Nation" without bothering to even ask why they should do so.

The Patriots fought against England looking to gain independence from England, thus they epitomized "questioning government."

IMHO this was a troll. This isn't research at all. This is polling an extreme point of view and applying the results of said poll to represent the whole.

blarby
March 16, 2012, 09:51 PM
You don't know what you're talking about. I've never seen members of THR violate any rules of decorum. They maintain the highest levels of tact and diplomacy.

Lolz. Literally, Lolz.

I agree, we need pics of the shotgun, Highgate !

exavid
March 16, 2012, 09:53 PM
I didn't take Higate's comparison of the US to Somalia as an insult. It seemed to me to be a bit of a deliberate exaggeration for a satirical effect. If I came from a country that severely limited firearms I'd think I was in the wild west as a lot of outsiders view the US. On a gun forum of course we will showcase the whole gamut, views moderate to extreme which should be expected considering the venue. I naturally prefer our system and think it should be less restrictive than it currently is. Since there's no chance criminals will obey gun laws it seems foolish to have laws just for the law abiding. Less restrictive gun laws with harsher penalties for those who commit crimes with guns.
BTW - Mexico has very serious problems with armed criminals and their citizens have no legal way to protect themselves. The worst part about it is that Mexicans are guaranteed the right to carry arms in their constitution but that 'right' has been limited by laws nearly as restricting as the UK but with much more severe penalties. I believe the current situation is that a Mexican citizen can have a pistol of .38 or less in caliber, a shotgun with a barrel at least 25" long and a bolt action hunting rifle. Even for those one would have to possess a gun license. In othe words their constitution has been gutted as the antis are trying to gut ours.

blarby
March 16, 2012, 11:01 PM
..you're in Oregon. And I'll bet you're originally from **********. They don't call it the left coast for nothing.

Literally, LOLZ!!

:D

Yes, quite literally.... As relayed by this PM.

We all have lapses of judgement and decorum...its part of belonging to a BBS.

Some lapses are more outrageous than others...but this being a public forum, we keep things as civil and on topic as possible.

FWIW, Detroit by birth, but I did spend a lot of time in California....some areas of which were quite Somalia like, actually...just like home, If you consider the examples of Somalia offered up here.

Contentious and evocative as the thread launch may have been, the OP wanted our unabashed opinion... and cut right through a lot of the niceties in doing so.

I may add that he did actually go about it in a manner on the side of civility and discourse- unlike a fair amount of which ( earned or no, depending on your opinion) he got. But, he got what he got.

We have been able, as a result of that discourse, to learn a little bit more about the differences in the two cultures, and the similarities as well.

Would seem highgate is a little less pro 2nd A than the majority of members here, but still believes in gun ownership. In the land of allies- thats one I'll take over the legion of adversaries we face on a daily basis.

I'd still like some pics of his shotty, and perhaps a skin of mr. fox !

Tommygunn
March 16, 2012, 11:10 PM
"Patriot" is also a term for someone who supports their "Nation" without bothering to even ask why they should do so. I would much rather care about the health, welfare and safety of my neighbors, and help them attain it and keep it, than be a "Patriot".

I disagree. What you're describing is a martinet. The only reason why a patriot wouldn't ask why he should support his country is because he already knows the answer.

Tommygunn
March 16, 2012, 11:19 PM
So many of y'all have beaten on Highgate for his question, without even bothering to consider the REASON for his question. So quick to show the "Liberal Socialist Know-nothing" how wrong he is -- and all while ignoring that he admitted straight out that it was the impression gained from reading posts here and from what he sees in the news and elsewhere.

So quick to judge the views of others -- and yet so slow to understand the views of others. Yet here you say:there is a world of difference between socialist/liberal and anti-gun. Being Socialist means that a person cares about the Society they are a part of. Liberal means allowing others to enjoy the rights/liberties/privileges that you enjoy. Being anti-gun means that a person does not like guns.
How's that for "understanding the views of others." Being socialist means you believe the government should own the means of production. "Caring about society" is a meaningless term, really. Hitler was a National Socialist and some might claim he "cared about society," but very few outside his own circle would try to claim his concern for it was evidenced in very constructive ways.
And please don't tell me conservatives & republicans don't care about the rights & priviledges of others.

blarby
March 16, 2012, 11:38 PM
Circling the drain..... this thread is.

For reference, however.... as the following of links provided is optional, not mandatory...

so∑cial∑ist noun \ˈsō-sh(ə-)list\

Definition of SOCIALIST

1
: one who advocates or practices socialism
2
capitalized : a member of a party or political group advocating socialism

so∑cial∑ism noun \ˈsō-shə-ˌli-zəm\

Definition of SOCIALISM

1
: any of various economic and political theories advocating collective or governmental ownership and administration of the means of production and distribution of goods
2
a : a system of society or group living in which there is no private property
b : a system or condition of society in which the means of production are owned and controlled by the state
3
: a stage of society in Marxist theory transitional between capitalism and communism and distinguished by unequal distribution of goods and pay according to work done.


What socialism IS by definition and what its PERCEIVED to be based on cultural inference are quite different. Much like communism. Section 3 in the definition of socialism is arguably the important part there...its a period of transition.

If you don't desire or condone communism, it would be very hard to be a socialist by definition.

With those statements in mind, there are very few socialists...just as there are indeed very few communist countries or governments that actually follow the proscribed tenets of Marx.

If this is how this thread is gonna end, I wish it'd at least end with something relating to Somalia, or us crazy machine-gun toting Americans. Thats at least on topic.

happygeek
March 16, 2012, 11:48 PM
http://t2.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcQmdyYe1GHteeUCIW96qzSTKjFzaA9fV4gnMs38r4my3HCAPOpYraJN7CVs

hermannr
March 16, 2012, 11:59 PM
I would say we have so many firearms, so we don't become like Somalia. It is very difficult to start a revolution unless most of the citizens are on board if the general population is armed.

1 million military and law enforcement Verse 300 million citizens...not good odds. If the military and the citizens are all on the same side it is just fine, and then a small group of anarchist/revolutionaries would not do so well.

BTW: Here in Washington state, our state constitution specifically gives the right to bear arms to the individual, but at the same time, it also makes private armies illegal.

vtuck2
March 17, 2012, 12:19 AM
This has to be the most articulate, moving, passionate, and entertaining thread I've yet read on THR.

Best to all.

Vernon

hang fire
March 17, 2012, 01:35 AM
We have many guns so we don't become like the UK.

exavid
March 17, 2012, 01:35 AM
The problem with Somalia isn't a lack of guns. Those they have. The problem with Somalia is they don't have any enlightened leaders. It's a strong reminder of how lucky the English Colonists and we their descendents were to have the men they had to lead the revolution and form a government.

Davek1977
March 17, 2012, 02:18 AM
I live in a peaceful town, in an overall peaceful state. I've never seen a person shot, nor have I been shot at myself. I don't foresee it happening, either, but that doesn't mean I'm some sort of radical for owning several rifles (including multiple center-fire semi-autos in mock military configurations), 3 handguns, and a couple of shotguns. I'm not deranged because I have 10k rounds of various ammo around at any given time. I enjoy shooting, I enjoy collecting, I enjoy hunting. i do not enjoy paying exorbitant prices during shortages, or having to stop and purchase ammo each and every time I go shooting. I like knowing I likely have over a year's supply on hand at the very least at any time for most of my weapons. I'm not unstable, scared, paranoid, or obsessed with SHTF or TEOTWAWKI scenarios or afraid "zombies" are coming. I'm simply an American who enjoys the freedom to responsibly own guns. As radical or foreign as the concepts of stockpiling unlimited amounts of ammo or buying a semi-auto rifle and high capacity magazines, some of us would be equally as shocked if someone tried to take away our access to such things. You weren't raised here, so its not surprising you don't get the "gun culture" as many of our own residents do not either. However, from a historical standpoint...from a security standpoint....from a safety standpoint....from a patriotic standpoint, and yes, even from a legal standpoint....gun ownership is a right that many of us have chosen to embrace for completely honorable reasons. A love of guns does not equate to a love of violence.

hso
March 17, 2012, 02:22 AM
This one's going sour so let's just take the lessons learned and move forward.

If you enjoyed reading about "Is the USA a mini Somalia?" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!