A shooting in Britain on New Years day with legally-held firearms

Sorry to hear that. We've had few here in the States over the holidays.

What's with the taxi drivers? You know about our American phrase "Going Postal"? It seems that for a while back in the 1970's and 1980's certain postal employees thought it would be a good idea to take out their frustrations on fellow workers with firearms, leading to the great hue and cry and pushing the "assault weapons" ban here.
Are we now going to have "Gone Taxi" in our lexicon?

Theres no shortage of crazy people, and no shortage of people who will exploit their actions.

Only when your elected officials find that anti gun measures will result in fewer votes for them, will they see reason. Our legislators have experienced such reverses in recent elections and are not so quick to adopt reflexive anti gun measures.

In several cases in the U.S., a gun control law has been introduced, either in Congress or in a state legislature. Not long after, a mass murder has been committed with the exact same type of gun whose ban is proposed in the law, or by someone whose actions would be made illegal under the proposed law (like buying a gun in another state). The killer is always described as acting dazed, like a robot, "with a slight smile on his face." The killer always commits suicide, making it impossible to question him.

Most of the time, the law passes and the anti-gun lobbies celebrate.

Coincidence? I don't know, but after a dozen or so "coincidences", I tend to wonder.

Jim

Sorry to hear that, Enfield. Prayers to the unfortunate victims and their families.

In 1966, I was an eyewitness (as were several thousand other people) to the Charles Whitman Texas Tower massacre. As horrific as that was, there was no big groundswell of sentiment here to ban the kinds of firearms Whitman used to kill 14 people and wound dozens more.

Personally, that's about the time I started my own gun collecting.

@ armybrat

Sorry to hear that, Enfield. Prayers to the unfortunate victims and their families.

In 1966, I was an eyewitness (as were several thousand other people) to the Charles Whitman Texas Tower massacre. As horrific as that was, there was no big groundswell of sentiment here to ban the kinds of firearms Whitman used to kill 14 people and wound dozens more.

Personally, that's about the time I started my own gun collecting.


Guess you missed the 1968 Gun Control Act that served no real purpose.

I too remember that shooting and it was a gun owner AND an LEO that finally took out the sicko.

I see England and the 'colonies' there [ Ireland,Scotland ] as not have the same controls as Londoners have and yet they dont go "Taxi" on each other.

But there was a mention of the "Troubles" a few times and that involved bombs as well as guns.

I know this may sound off the wall,but I would rather take my chances with gunmen,than with bombers.

Especially if I too am allowed to own a gun.

Armybrat wrote:

In 1966, I was an eyewitness (as were several thousand other people) to the Charles Whitman Texas Tower massacre.

Click to expand...

I was there too, crossing the campus just as the shooting was breaking out. Most of the victims were hit in the first few minutes, while they were still in a state of shock and surprise. Thereafter, most people took cover, and a large number of rifles appeared as if out of nowhere (some students apparently had them in their dorms). The civilians fired a lot of shots at the Tower, forcing Whitman to keep his head down. He was finally brought down by a policeman, Officer Martinez, armed with a shotgun, assisted by a civilian with a personally-owned M1 carbine.

At the time, there was no great hue and cry in Texas against guns. In fact, private gun owners were praised for their part in containing the incident. The 1968 Gun Control Act was passed only after the assassinations of Martin Luther King and Bobby Kennedy, and the riots which followed.

19&41 said:

Only when your elected officials find that anti gun measures will result in fewer votes for them, will they see reason. Our legislators have experienced such reverses in recent elections and are not so quick to adopt reflexive anti gun measures.

Click to expand...

Well said. Much as many lib pols hate guns they know if they touch it gun control they won't see another term.

I'm gonna go out on a limb here and venture a guess that more Brits perished in either double-decker bus crashes or from smog rather than by firearms in 2011......

Great--tell the general populace that they are guilty and should not have guns because .001% of the population is whacko.

It seems they'd be better off banning taxi drivers as they seem to be the real problem.

It is tough for Americans to understand the social attitude toward firearms in Britain. Likewise, it is difficult for many Brits to understand the pro-firearms attitude (some) Americans have.

Unfortunately, in Britain there is widespread belief that control of objects is the way to reduce violence.

What ever happened to those two guys from Manchester who set out to rob and murder Joss Stone with a sword? They even had a to-do list that included 'dump body in river.' Luckily they got lost when they got to Devon.

The world is full of nut cases.

Access to a firearm doesn't make "crazy" it just gives crazy an alternative tool. And Draconian gun laws remove that same tool from everyone else.

Gun/no gun, legally owned or not, it's the madness that should be focused on and not the method.

Guess you missed the 1968 Gun Control Act that served no real purpose.

Click to expand...

The '68 GCA had nothing to do with Charles Whitman, and everything to do with this:


But that's OT.

What ever happened to those two guys from Manchester who set out to rob and murder Joss Stone with a sword? They even had a to-do list that included 'dump body in river.' Luckily they got lost when they got to Devon.

The world is full of nut cases.

Click to expand...

The world is full of nutcases friend and that is a fact

Thankfully we have a (fairly) right wing government here nowadays, (by our standards) so there wont be any further trouble to gun owners, I dont think.

Having said that, the only way they could make the gun laws any worse would be to ban guns alltogether!

This fellow must have been seen as reliable by most of his workers and friends. Sometimes humans just reach the end of pressure and do stupid things.

Couple of points, first "The Troubles" referred to the on going at the time Northern Ireland issue. I am from Camden Town, NW London and we had a few pub bombs and shootings. No one paid it to much attention. The bombers were mostly the Provisional IRA.

Secondly its been a smog free city for several decades now.

The UK is run by a bunch of liberal do good newspapers. After Dunblane the press whipped up a frenzy and the politicians wanting to be re-elected rushed through new jerk "nanny" legislation. They really didn't care just ran along with the press. Just like the hunting ban, a bunch of city dwelling liberals pushed through law a ban based on not a shred of real fact or understanding of country life.

Hence I left for the land of the free.

The taxi driver in question had threatened self harm a few years earlier and was suffering from depression, but the police didn't take any action regarding his suitability to possess firearms. The taxi driver who carried out the Whitehaven killings had served a prison term and was under investigation for tax fraud. Thomas Hamilton who carried out the Dunblane killings was a known paedophile but was still allowed to possess firearms.

The police have made these mistakes and its us, the sensible UK gun owners who are now under scrutiny.


During the year to June 2011 there were approximately 32,000 recorded offences involving knives or other sharp instruments, accounting for 7% of selected offences.
http://www.parliament.uk/briefing-papers/SN04304


There were 360 firearm offences in which there was a fatal or serious injury, 21% lower than in 2007/08. The number of offences resulting in slight injury in 2008/09 was half the number recorded in the previous year. In almost 80% of firearms offences no physical injury occurred.
http://www.parliament.uk/briefing-papers/SN01940

The man in this shooting had his guns taken away in 2008 but then returned to him. Again however, the argument for more gun control will be: If it saves one life, then surely it's worth it. In the case of Dunblane, nobody could argue over the bodies of those children.

sidibear wrote:

The taxi driver in question had threatened self harm a few years earlier and was suffering from depression, but the police didn't take any action regarding his suitability to possess firearms. The taxi driver who carried out the Whitehaven killings had served a prison term and was under investigation for tax fraud. Thomas Hamilton who carried out the Dunblane killings was a known paedophile but was still allowed to possess firearms.

The police have made these mistakes and its us, the sensible UK gun owners who are now under scrutiny.

Click to expand...

The assumption here is that all firearms can be controlled, and that therefore the police can "allow" people to possess firearms. However, by Scotland Yard's own estimates, there are hundreds of thousands of illegal, unregistered firearms in Britain. By some strange coincidence, these sorts of high-profile shootings seem to be carried out with legally-held weapons (thus feeding the frenzy for further restrictions), while the illegally-held weapons are what are being used in day-to-day street crime. Perhaps polite society in Britain isn't too concerned about what happens in the immigrant ghettoes, where apparently many of the illegal weapons are to be found.

This is a characteristic throughout Europe: the stricter the gun legislation, the greater the rate of defiance of it. There are huge numbers of illegal guns in France, Germany, etc. In Greece, compliance with the strict gun laws is a joke, with thousands of Kalashnikovs circulating in Athens. Not a night goes by without them being used in robberies of kiosks, supermarkets, people's homes, etc. On the other hand, there are few illegal weapons in the Czech Republic or Finland, where the gun laws are much more reasonable.

Oh my God... it is almost scary how similar this is to the situation in the Netherlands...

We had a "sportshooter" go absolutely mental in april last year and shot and killed 7 persons ( I believe) including himself.
This 'man' had a known history of pshychological illness.. and get this.. it even gets better... This guy had to be committed in a psych ward a few years back and the Chief of Police had to sign for this. A few years later that same Chief of Police signed for his gun license. Strictly forbidden for people in holland to have a gun license when having psychological illness. Further more, this guy had already applied for a gun license a year back and it was declined. The guy applies again a year later and Police 'lost' all the old info on him and gave him the license. Also, the parents had already talked to the people who treated their son about their worries with him having a gun license... guess what... nobody did nothing....

And what's even better... now the legal gun-owners need to suffer and this year we can expect nice new regulations restricting gun-ownership even more..

This lunatic used a Smith & Wesson MP 15-22... so.... this one will be forbidden for sportshooting in the near future. Together with the other .22 AR15 lookalikes... and who knows what else is going to happen...

Our culture is simply completely different... We don't have a right to have arms. For us it's a privilege. It is forbidden, with a few exceptions... and 'the people' don't realy care about illegal weapons, cause you can't do anything about it, and criminals mostly shoot other criminals.... but the idea that your neighbour who from time to time you have an arguement with... can own an AK47!!! noooooo..... that's too scary for 'the people'..

I wish I could move to the USA and find a job somewhere in Texas, create a range like Hickok45 and forget about this nonsense....

P.S. I'm 'ranting' about gun ownership but of course the most terrible thing is that a crazy man shot and killed 6 person.... let that be said...

J.W.

In the case of Dunblane, nobody could argue over the bodies of those children.

Click to expand...

You need to ask the relatives of the 6,000,000 or 7,000,000 German and Polish Jews exterminated by Nazi Germany in WW2 if they think that there might be a case for civilians to keep guns, even if it does cost the lives of several dozen children a year.

Some people see the logic of taking the risk that some local wackos might be able to take out a few people each year in exchange for the right to defend themselves and others. Latest claim I recall for democide (murder of civilians by their own government, not military casualties) is 262,000,000 in the past century. That averages to just over 7,000 PER DAY for the last 100 years.

There is no way to stop someone if they unexpectedly decide to start killing other people. If someone is going to go on a rampage, they can kill many more people with a gallon of gasoline than a firearm.

It's not the guns, it's the nuts and the lack of - I don't know what on the part of the authorities. I saw this in the Washington Post today.

www.washingtonpost.com/local/dc-man...2005-slaying/2012/01/04/gIQAOpnzaP_story.html

He was charged with first-degree murder in Baltimore in 2005 after police said he stabbed a man with scissors during a fight. He pleaded guilty to manslaughter and served 5 of the 8 year sentence before they let him out.

Now he's gone and stabbed his on-and-off-again girlfriend 41 times, probably with scissors says the medical examiner. He nearly severed her head too.

John