Pretty Funny: UK Gun Crime

[boredelmo]

So apparently at the moment gun crime in London is pretty high. The average citizens see this, and they start pushing for the banning of guns.

Wait, they already did that.

It opens with an image of "RIP, STOP GUNS". The "i" is replaced with a round of .45 (i assume). How do you "stop guns" further? It's like saying "STOP PENCILS".


Why? Ignorance? New generation?

http://youtube.com/watch?v=7VokKgx7j5Y&feature=related

 

[Kind of Blued]

That movie was stupid. Not stupid in that it was anti-gun, I just wish I hadn't checked it out.

If they want people to commit crimes in other (more brutal) fashions, thats fine by me, I don't live there.

 

[Tom Fury]

No more:

No, its' hypocrisy; they can't admit that more laws won't do it. The only thing that has ever done it is armed citizens who could provide their own deterrent and security.

Its' not even about violence or crime...Citizens own guns, subjects don't. 5 minutes there and you'll figure it out.

They argue for their own chains, and wring their hands about violence while accepting and endorsing it. Violence is much more a part of British culture than they can face. (I mean they like it; hypocrisy again).

If you are expected to live in a dangerous culture, shouldn't you have the means of defending yourself? Instead of being lied to about the danger?

In England, when they piss in your ear and tell you its' raining, you just buy a new umbrella.

No cheers here;
TF

 

[LaEscopeta]

So apparently at the moment gun crime in London is pretty high.

Still lower than most big US cities.

 

[mbt2001]

Who knows??? Also, it is comparing apples and oranges. The point is, why try to change the minds of people by education and activism if "bans" worked?

Think about drugs. Just say no programs, when they were supported and taught correctly had more of a impact than outlawing the material did. Why do you think that kids quit using illegal drugs and started stealing the meds from parents and folks like that?

 

[soccergod04]

mbt, neither really works. Most of the kids I know who use prescriptions use them in conjunction with illegal drugs.

 

[Koblenz]

I once read that one is several times more likely to be mugged in London than in New York. Not only have guns been outlawed there, but the very act of self-defense is illegal. I read a story about a young guy who was carrying a bicycle chain to protect himself from London gang members. He was stupid enough to admit to the police his reason for carrying the chain, so he was promptly arrested.

Britian used to be a very safe and peaceful country (outside of Northern Ireland, at least). Then they allowed massive numbers of dangerous third world immigrants to pour into their country, and now they are paying a heavy price for it - crime, terrorism, degredation of their culture, etc. Freedom of speech has been eliminated there as in many other European countries, as one can be arrested for non PC speech if it envolves minorities or gays. The only country where the situaltion is worse is probably Sweden.

 

[R127]

Still lower than most big US cities.

Brilliant! Most big US cities are centers of two things: the push for gun bans and violent crime. Anybody want to talk about Chicago, Detroit or D.C.?

 

[Koblenz]

Most big US cities are centers of ..... violent crime

Most of it is just gang members fighting among themselves, and in those cases I have no desire to see the violence end. Ultimately it makes the rest of us safer, because there are fewer of them to attack us.

 

[Ready2Defend]

but the very act of self-defense is illegal

That is a core issue for Britian (and Australia). While I don't have a direct stake in whether or not these countries allow their subjects to own firearms or not I do know it is a grave injustice to punish a victim for defending themself. If these countries ever turn around it will need to start with a different cultural and legal view of private self defence. Untill then they will just sit there asking ... "why are we in this hand basket and where are we going?".

 

[R127]

How far is it from

Most of it is just gang members fighting among themselves, and in those cases I have no desire to see the violence end. Ultimately it makes the rest of us safer, because there are fewer of them to attack us.

to

"I think criminals should have them rather than us, because at least the criminals will be caught when they use their guns."

 

[MechAg94]

I have also heard that Britain's juvenile justice laws are pretty messed up to the point that these kids don't learn any lessons growing up.

I believe there were articles a year or so ago. One of the newspapers or TV stations did deal where people could vote on what new law they would like to get passed. A local parliament member promised to introduce the bill. Allowing self defense won out. The paper acted horrified. I am sure there were details I am leaving out.

 

[Starship1st]

The government even took long guns from the farmers? How pathetic, and now do they all see that it was wrong since crimnals own the streets?

 

[lanternlad1]

"Still lower than most big US cities."

Most big US cities are bigger than London, which has a population of 7 million. More people=more crime.

Los Angeles - 17 million
New York - 8.5 million
Chicago - 9.7 million.

What's your point?

 

[HK G3]

Most of it is just gang members fighting among themselves, and in those cases I have no desire to see the violence end. Ultimately it makes the rest of us safer, because there are fewer of them to attack us.

Because those idiot homeboys that spray houses that they think belong to rival gang members with AKs make us all safer.

Gangs, and gang violence, are an urban cancer, and need to be excised.

 

[MachIVshooter]

Still lower than most big US cities

The key word there is "still". GB's gun violence and homicide rates have always been lower than ours. Interesting, though, that before their sweeping ban, the homicide rate was 1/5 of ours. These days, it's closer to 1/3. And as pointed out, the UK has higher incidences of other violent crimes than we do.

The point here, however, is that the banning of firearms did not stop the criminal misuse of them. The fact that there is ANY gun crime in Britain is living proof that gun control doesn't work.

 

[LaEscopeta]

Most big US cities are bigger than London, which has a population of 7 million. More people=more crime.

Los Angeles - 17 million
New York - 8.5 million
Chicago - 9.7 million.

What's your point?

The per capital crime rates in London and Britain in general are still lower than most US cities and the US as a whole. That’s my point.

 

[Tyris]

Brilliant! Most big US cities are centers of two things: the push for gun bans and violent crime. Anybody want to talk about Chicago, Detroit or D.C.?

While I honestly feel that detroit should be razed, it is not a bastion of gun control. At all. I can legally carry a handgun in detroit thanks to michigan's pre-emption laws. Criminal hood rats in DC and Chicago, however, have nothing to fear from their victims.

-T

 

[1911Tuner]

The per capital crime rates in London and Britain in general are still lower than most US cities and the US as a whole. That’s my point

Is it...or are you trying to make another, less obvious point that more guns equals more crime?

Crime is a social issue rather than one of equipment. If guns were to all magically evaporate...the criminals would still be here, and they'd find ways to exact their toll on society...with sticks and rocks if need be.

So, what IS your point...exactly?

 

[LaEscopeta]

Is it...or are you trying to make another, less obvious point that more guns equals more crime?

No.

Crime is a social issue rather than one of equipment. If guns were to all magically evaporate...the criminals would still be here, and they'd find ways to exact ther toll on society.

I agree.

So, what IS your point...exactly?

Already stated.

 

[jakeswensonmt]

I have also heard that Britain's juvenile justice laws are pretty messed up to the point that these kids don't learn any lessons growing up.

You mean like... ours?

 

[Skoghund]

Koblenz. I live in Sweden and you would be hard pushed to find a more politicly incorrect person than me. Strange i have never been arrested.
You cannot make threatening statements to or about anybody. I'm sure thats the same in the USA.
I look at the USA and it makes me glad i live here.

America is the only nation in history
which has gone from barbarism to degeneration
without the usual interval of civilization

Georges Clemenceau

 

[hopkin]

I believe there were articles a year or so ago. One of the newspapers or TV stations did deal where people could vote on what new law they would like to get passed. A local parliament member promised to introduce the bill. Allowing self defense won out. The paper acted horrified. I am sure there were details I am leaving out.

"Allowing" self-defence? It's a natural right of man that is legally protected. The myth that it's outlawed is mostly spread on US gun forums either by accident or as tiresome Brit-bashing.

Before anyone mentions 'that farmer who was jailed for murder', read up on his case. Raving about machine-gunning gypsies, shooting one with a black-market gun then prowling your land to see if you can shoot another isn't the best example of self-defence. Anyway, he's been out of prison for years now (he served 3 years).

Edit: the irony of banning handguns which are now mostly owned by drugdealers is amazing. A criminal enterprise centered around illegally importing drugs manages to illegaly import weapons. Who'd have guessed??!!

 

[Focke-Wolf]

I'm not a Brit and did look into the matter. I'm currently studying here though.

Self-defense being punished is a matter of bureaucracy.

Even in the case where a weapon was used for self-defense, none were charged for the act, but for the possesion in public. (pretty much everything is illegal, there's been an argument that Bill of Rights is the lawful authority in offensive weapons act to allow carry weapons for defence and when you are defending direct physical attack, it's necessary force, not reasonable force)

What IS true is that it is not easy as to get self-defence approved as you would in TX or FL.

I know a guy who carries a Monadnock baton daily, he's informed police and home office, but they can't do anything about it because of Bill of Rights. He actually took it to high court and proved his case that citizens still have right to carry anything that falls under offensive weapons act.

Tony Martin(the farmer) shot someone that was running away, at least according to autopsy and such, I don't think that would have got approved anywhere. but Tony DOES deserve sympathy.

But do not forget that he was originally charged for freakin murder. he ended up getting manslaughter charge.

I for the name, but there was a case where this guy shot this scumbag (I dunno he died or got injured) and got approved and the dirtbag didn't have a gun, but the dirtbag stole a shotgun from him not long ago and he had a good reason to believe that he had a gun.

He got away with no charge.

 

[Carl N. Brown]

Since the treatment of the Tony Martin case by the press and
politicians on all sides of the self defense and guns issues is
apparently still important, here are some of my notes on the Martin case:

To make a long story short, dates and newspaper headlines:
23 Aug 1999 Farmer held after body is found in garden
11 Apr 2000 Farmer 'set booby traps and waited in the dark'
12 Apr 2000 Shot burglar Fred Barras 'was serial offender'
20 Apr 2000 Life for farmer who shot burglar
24 Apr 2000 Cash boost for rural policing
29 Apr 2000 Shotgun farmer begins appeal court battle
5 May 2000 Judge reignites self defence row
26 Jul 2000 Killer Martin 'should serve eight years' says Judge
30 Oct 2001 Tony Martin's murder conviction quashed
Reduced from life for first degree murder to 5 years for manslaughter.
31 Oct 2001 Rural policing is no better, say villagers
6 Jul 2002 Legal aid for burglar Brendon Fearon shot by Tony Martin
24 Dec 2002 Burglar shot in legs by farmer seeks L 15,000 compensation
26 Jul 2003 Burglar shot by Martin freed early from jail
28 Jul 2003 Jailed farmer Martin goes free (after serving 2/3 of sentence)
8 Aug 2003 Tony Martin returns home to "Bleak House" overrun by ivy
20 Aug 2003 Legal action by burglar Brendon Fearon 'in doubt'
5 Sep 2003 Burglar Brendon Fearon back in custody
22 Sep 2003 Martin expected to end legal dispute with burglar

The burglar killed by Martin, Fred Barras, had a lengthy criminal
record for a sixteen year old. Barra's partner was Brendon Fearon.

Tony Martin's problems in the case included: possessing a shotgun
without the proper certificate; allegedly laying in wait to ambush
expected burglars; back shooting; giving statements to police that
contradicted the physical evidence; and having the reputation of
being an eccentric recluse, in rural England.

On the other hand, Martin and his neighbors complained that the
local police had done an inadequate job of patrolling the rural
areas prone to burglary and had not been responsive to citizens'
complaints.

Barras' accomplice Brendon Fearon sued Martin for his own
injuries in the incident and claimed that the trauma of
witnessing Barras' death by shooting prevented him from
enjoying violent movies that included gunplay and the shotgun
injuries to his legs by Martin kept him from working (presumably
as a burglar).

A newspaper reported: "A career criminal shot and injured
by Tony Martin during a raid on the farmer's house may not be
able to proceed with his claim for damages since he has been
photographed cycling and climbing with little apparent difficulty."