1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

Positive UK Article (with stupid comments from the public)

Discussion in 'Legal' started by Fosbery, Aug 13, 2006.

  1. Fosbery

    Fosbery Participating Member

    Jun 21, 2006
    Great Britain

  2. El Tejon

    El Tejon Elder

    Dec 24, 2002
    Lafayette, Indiana-the Ned Flanders neighbor to Il
    Not using weapons to hone "killing skills"???:confused: Then why have them, mate?

    Firearms are not golf clubs; firearms are weapons to be used against fellow human beings. That's why we have them.:)
  3. Jim March

    Jim March Mentor

    Dec 24, 2002
    SF Bay Area
    That's exactly the problem.

    The British "gun community" gave up self defense as an issue LONG ago.

    At that point, if your "hobby" is seen as potentially killing people, you'll lose your "hobby".

    In the US there is a balance between the criminal downside and the legal self defense upside of guns. The upside is winning.

    Take away that upside, we'd be more screwed than Britain.
  4. Malum Prohibitum

    Malum Prohibitum Active Member

    Jun 3, 2006
    You gotta read the comments! 2 examples:

    I think the comparison between knives and guns is unfair as knives still serve a useful and practical purpose in society. Guns on the other hand serve no useful purpose except for indulging the self esteem of men and, well, killing. Look at the United States, a prime example of gun ownership, and a prime example of a huge gun related death rate, whereas looking at countries with lower gun ownership like Britain/Europe you begin to see an incredible reduction of gun deaths. Is it worth it to indulge this sport if it means risking even one human life?
    Marty B, London, UK

    Hmmm. Shot down in flames by one of his own sentences: "We use them as a recreational device and most of us use them safely." So he accepts some don't use them safely and he thinks it's an acceptable risk. Well, democracy doesn't work like that, the safety of the majority has to take priority over the indulgencies of a few. Would his opinion remain the same if he suffered directly in one of the tragedies he mentions?
    Simon Ward, Newcastle

Share This Page