The Student Room Group

For all you anti gun hoplophobes on here

Scroll to see replies

Original post by Selkarn
lol, source?


relative to the UK, you possible cant tell em more gun crimes happen here?
Reply 521
Original post by Good bloke
Now your grip on reality is completely suspect. How could a few lightly armed, untrained amateurs expect to defeat the British army?


If we had the same system as the swiss where every male citizen is a reserve soldier this problem wouldn't occur. If we had a similar gun ownership per capita as the US it wouldn't be a few and they wouldn't all be untrained, alot of civilians attend the shooting range and do shooting drills as a hobby
Reply 522
You can't cure a gun problem with more guns. Are you seriously suggesting that peopel should be allowed to carry guns around to defend themselves?

What happens when somebody loses their temper? Currently they might be in court for hitting somebody - if they had a gun in their hand, maybe they'd be in court for shooting somebody.

This is a ridiculous idea.
Original post by Hardballer
If we had the same system as the swiss where every male citizen is a reserve soldier this problem wouldn't occur. If we had a similar gun ownership per capita as the US it wouldn't be a few and they wouldn't all be untrained, alot of civilians attend the shooting range and do shooting drills as a hobby


If. The decent into madness continues.

To justify and make possible your strange desire to walk down the high street toting a gun, you now seem to be advocating that we change our entire defence infrastructure. Have you considered that you are very much in the minority?
Reply 524
Gun's don't kill people, people do. That argument always makes me laugh.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KsN0FCXw914
Reply 525
Original post by Good bloke
you now seem to be advocating that we change our entire defence infrastructure. Have you considered that you are very much in the minority?


In the minority doesn't mean wrong, it worked for the swiss, they are very prosperous, they don't see the need to intervene in wars and have a very good defence system that has deterred any potential invaders including hitler. Yes we should change our system and copy the swiss. Get the **** out of Libya and Afghanistan is another good idea.
Reply 526
Original post by FloatOn
Gun's don't kill people, people do. That argument always makes me laugh.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KsN0FCXw914


Guns make it easier to kill people, but they also level the playing field so a 130 pound woman can defend herself against a 250 pound attacker. The bad guys will always have guns. Law abiding people should too.
Reply 527
Original post by Hardballer
No not at all, its best to fight back rather than be sheep to the slaughter, even if you have inferior weapons, like the warsaw ghetto uprising for example


Original post by Aphotic Cosmos
Indeed.

I find it kind of laughable that pro-gun Americans think that "armed resistance" is a valid reason for arming themselves to the teeth. You think that some amateurs with semi-automatic rifles and shotguns, maybe a few heavy rifles and possibly explosives, is going to defeat the military of a nation which spends the best part of a trillion dollars on defence? :rofl2:


Original post by WeekendOffender
So the crux of your argument is that you want to own a gun so that if the government turns on you (which it won't), you will be able to "fight back"? And even at that you admit that you would be defeated anyway?

That is a ridiculous reason to legalise these kinds of weapons, in the face of all the disadvantages that it would bring.


Guys, he has an extremely valid point about the government resistance factor. You simply cannot argue that a government would be a lot more reserved about pushing around its civilians if each and every civilian was armed to the teeth. I am not saying that every civilian should be armed to the teeth, but no matter what your stance is on gun control, you cannot deny that this specific thing is not an advantage.
(edited 13 years ago)
Reply 528
Original post by Hardballer
Guns make it easier to kill people, but they also level the playing field so a 130 pound woman can defend herself against a 250 pound attacker. The bad guys will always have guns. Law abiding people should too.


The bad guys will always have guns? I find it hard to believe that every criminal around my area walks around with a gun in their pockets. You seem quite paranoid to be honest. And if we learnt anything from the Cold War, it's that paranoia = not good. And ofcourse Russians are evil.

I do see your point about self-defence though, I keep a cricket bat in my kitchen. Very effective. Never had to use it though. And that's my point, I don't feel like I'm in danger of being shot everytime I walk down the street. Despite living in Nottingham ''Customary brap brap''. You're not going to going to change your mind about the gun thing though, so thank god we live in a democratic society in which the majority would never allow guns to be legalised (I hope)
Reply 529
Original post by FloatOn
The bad guys will always have guns? I find it hard to believe that every criminal around my area walks around with a gun in their pockets. You seem quite paranoid to be honest. And if we learnt anything from the Cold War, it's that paranoia = not good. And ofcourse Russians are evil.

I do see your point about self-defence though, I keep a cricket bat in my kitchen. Very effective. Never had to use it though. And that's my point, I don't feel like I'm in danger of being shot everytime I walk down the street. Despite living in Nottingham ''Customary brap brap''. You're not going to going to change your mind about the gun thing though, so thank god we live in a democratic society in which the majority would never allow guns to be legalised (I hope)


Just goes to show how little these anti-freedom advocates know. For example, this guy thinks guns are illegal.
Original post by Selkarn
Guys, he has an extremely valid point about the government resistance factor. You simply cannot argue that a government would be a lot more reserved about pushing around its civilians if each and every civilian was armed to the teeth. I am not saying that every civilian should be armed to the teeth, but no matter what your stance is on gun control, you cannot deny that this specific thing is not an advantage.


That is all very well unless the people who decide they don't want the incumbent government and start a rebellion are a despotic, totalitarian-minded minority. In which case your armed populace is a civil war waiting to happen. The UK government, of whatever colour, does not have a history of oppressing the citizens.

Hardballer
Get the **** out of Libya


A page and a half ago you were using the poor down-trodden people of Libya as a shining example of how the small man needs to be armed to succeed. Now you are saying we shouldn't help them. These extreme swings must mean something.
Original post by Good bloke
This is the first sensible post from someone on the pro-gun side of the argument - well thought out, analytical, coherent, mature.
The others have done their arguments no favours at all by making the gun lobby appear to be a bunch of gung-ho loonies who want to play cowboys and indians, rescue the free world from the baddies, act as vigilante judge and jury or fight mythical rogue governments - or all of these. Well done.


Thankyou! That is the precise reason why I hope this thread dies - I don't think it's doing shooters any favours whatsoever. Some of the people putting forward pro-gun arguments related to self defence etc should try putting forward these same arguments at target shooting clubs (or, at least, the sort of ones I visit). I suggest that they would be immediately snubbed. The reality is that, although one might assume that they would be on the same side, often the people who want guns legalised for self defence are actually the worst nightmare for the majority of target shooters who just want to get on with their hobby and find the idea of using their skills to shoot a very unpleasant thought. It is certainly something I would not relish. I suspect that some people in this thread would.
(edited 13 years ago)
Reply 532
Original post by Good bloke
That is all very well unless the people who decide they don't want the incumbent government and start a rebellion are a despotic, totalitarian-minded minority. In which case your armed populace is a civil war waiting to happen. The UK government, of whatever colour, does not have a history of oppressing the citizens.


I'm guessing that literally hundreds of countries have more liberal gun laws than the UK, and none of them have any form of civil war on the horizon. Oh wait, the only civil war we do have is where a horrible dictator is being overthrown. I'm no expert on Libya but perhaps the uprising may not have occurred if there was harsh gun control.

Let's face it, the following support gun control:

Adolf Hitler:
"The most foolish mistake we could possibly make would be to allow the subject races to possess arms. History shows that all conquerors who have allowed the subject races to carry arms have prepared their own downfall by so doing. Indeed, I would go so far as to say that the supply of arms to the underdogs is a sine qua non for the overthrow of any sovereignty." -- Adolf Hitler (H.R. Trevor-Roper, Hitler's Table Talks 1941-1944)
Castro
Gaddafi
Stalin
Idi Amin
Mao Zedong
Pol Pot
Kim Jong-Il
Criminals

"Gun control? It's the best thing you can do for crooks and gangsters. I want you to have nothing. If I'm a bad guy, I'm always gonna have a gun. Safety locks? You'll pull the trigger with a lock on, and I'll pull the trigger. We'll see who wins." -- Sammy "The Bull" Gravano, Mafia hit man

The following have endorsed gun ownership:

Gandhi: "Among the many misdeeds of the British rule in India, history will look upon the Act depriving a whole nation of arms, as the blackest." -- Mahatma Gandhi (An Autobiography OR The story of my experiments with truth, by M.K. Gandhi, p.238)

Orwell: "That rifle on the wall of the labourer's cottage or working class flat is the symbol of democracy. It is our job to see that it stays there." -- George Orwell, the author of Animal Farm and 1984, himself a socialist

Even the frikin' Dalai Lama, to an extent:

"If someone has a gun and is trying to kill you, it would be reasonable to shoot back with your own gun." -- The Dalai Lama, (May 15, 2001, The Seattle Times) speaking at the "Educating Heart Summit" in Portland, Oregon, when asked by a girl how to react when a shooter takes aim at a classmate

"It is, of course, no coincidence that the right to have guns is one of the earlier freedoms outlined in U.S.A.'s Bill of Rights. Without guns in the hands of the people, all the other freedoms are easily negated by the State. If you disagree with that statement, ask yourself if the Nazis could have gassed millions of Jews, had the Jews been armed with rifles and pistols--there weren't enough SS troops to do the job. Lest we forget, in the Warsaw Ghetto Uprising of 1944, a couple of hundred Jews armed with rifles and homemade explosive devices held off two fully-equipped German divisions (actually about 8,000 men) for nearly two months.

Closer home take the case of the Godhra carnage and the anti-Sikh riots of 1984. Would wanton mobs have slaughtered so many innocent people with such disregard to consequences if their potential victims had been armed and ready to defend themselves? A serious consideration should be given to an armed civilian population as a solution to religious and racial riots as well as other crimes. Since all criminals are instinctively driven by self-preservation allowing legal ownership of firearms by law abiding citizens would act as a serious deterrent. This will make sure that if the Govt. fails to do its duty to protect the life and liberty of its citizens (as it has so often done in India's recent past), citizens will be able to protect themselves."
Original post by Good bloke
That is all very well unless the people who decide they don't want the incumbent government and start a rebellion are a despotic, totalitarian-minded minority. In which case your armed populace is a civil war waiting to happen. The UK government, of whatever colour, does not have a history of oppressing the citizens.


Sorry to play devil's advocate here, but are we excluding Peterloo from that? :cool:
Reply 534
Original post by Hardballer
has strict gun laws really worked in this country?

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1371371/Stockwell-shop-shooting-Girl-5-critical-condition-gunman-fires-indiscriminately.html

**** no they haven't, we need our right to bear arms now, how was anyone on this street meant to defend themselves? and how does making it harder for law abiding sports shooters like me prevent shootings like this? I wonder if the shooter had a licence for his gun, yeh......****ing.......right


what a silly argument, lol. more guns to solve the problem? YEAH THAT'S SUCH A GOOD IDEA! LMFAO.
Reading this thread has made me glad that the anti-gun laws aren't going to be changed any time soon.
Original post by Selkarn
I'm guessing that literally hundreds of countries have more liberal gun laws than the UK, and none of them have any form of civil war on the horizon. Oh wait, the only civil war we do have is where a horrible dictator is being overthrown. I'm no expert on Libya but perhaps the uprising may not have occurred if there was harsh gun control.

Let's face it, the following support gun control:

Adolf Hitler:
"The most foolish mistake we could possibly make would be to allow the subject races to possess arms. History shows that all conquerors who have allowed the subject races to carry arms have prepared their own downfall by so doing. Indeed, I would go so far as to say that the supply of arms to the underdogs is a sine qua non for the overthrow of any sovereignty." -- Adolf Hitler (H.R. Trevor-Roper, Hitler's Table Talks 1941-1944)
Castro
Gaddafi
Stalin
Idi Amin
Mao Zedong
Pol Pot
Kim Jong-Il
Criminals

"Gun control? It's the best thing you can do for crooks and gangsters. I want you to have nothing. If I'm a bad guy, I'm always gonna have a gun. Safety locks? You'll pull the trigger with a lock on, and I'll pull the trigger. We'll see who wins." -- Sammy "The Bull" Gravano, Mafia hit man

The following have endorsed gun ownership:

Gandhi: "Among the many misdeeds of the British rule in India, history will look upon the Act depriving a whole nation of arms, as the blackest." -- Mahatma Gandhi (An Autobiography OR The story of my experiments with truth, by M.K. Gandhi, p.238)

Orwell: "That rifle on the wall of the labourer's cottage or working class flat is the symbol of democracy. It is our job to see that it stays there." -- George Orwell, the author of Animal Farm and 1984, himself a socialist

Even the frikin' Dalai Lama, to an extent:

"If someone has a gun and is trying to kill you, it would be reasonable to shoot back with your own gun." -- The Dalai Lama, (May 15, 2001, The Seattle Times) speaking at the "Educating Heart Summit" in Portland, Oregon, when asked by a girl how to react when a shooter takes aim at a classmate

"It is, of course, no coincidence that the right to have guns is one of the earlier freedoms outlined in U.S.A.'s Bill of Rights. Without guns in the hands of the people, all the other freedoms are easily negated by the State. If you disagree with that statement, ask yourself if the Nazis could have gassed millions of Jews, had the Jews been armed with rifles and pistols--there weren't enough SS troops to do the job. Lest we forget, in the Warsaw Ghetto Uprising of 1944, a couple of hundred Jews armed with rifles and homemade explosive devices held off two fully-equipped German divisions (actually about 8,000 men) for nearly two months.

Closer home take the case of the Godhra carnage and the anti-Sikh riots of 1984. Would wanton mobs have slaughtered so many innocent people with such disregard to consequences if their potential victims had been armed and ready to defend themselves? A serious consideration should be given to an armed civilian population as a solution to religious and racial riots as well as other crimes. Since all criminals are instinctively driven by self-preservation allowing legal ownership of firearms by law abiding citizens would act as a serious deterrent. This will make sure that if the Govt. fails to do its duty to protect the life and liberty of its citizens (as it has so often done in India's recent past), citizens will be able to protect themselves."


Who cares if they support/supported gun control or ownership. Those quotes have no relevance in modern British society.
Reply 537
Original post by Philbert
Who cares if they support/supported gun control or ownership. Those quotes have no relevance in modern British society.


Yes they do. Liberty doesn't change, no matter what society or age you live in, liberty stays true. Just because you are pro-authoritarian and anti-liberal in terms of gun control doesn't mean that you can dismiss the opinions of so many prominent figures.
Original post by Selkarn
Yes they do. Liberty doesn't change, no matter what society or age you live in, liberty stays true. Just because you are pro-authoritarian and anti-liberal in terms of gun control doesn't mean that you can dismiss the opinions of so many prominent figures.


I'm not pro-authoritarian. I just don't want idiots with guns running around on the streets. I would argue that one aspect of liberty is feeling safe in one's own country. And besides, I'm sure you can find just as many quotes from people who aren't weren't dictators and criminals who advocated gun control. But that would invalidate your point wouldn't it?
(edited 13 years ago)
Reply 539
Original post by Selkarn
Just goes to show how little these anti-freedom advocates know. For example, this guy thinks guns are illegal.


My bad, I meant that the current tough gun ownership laws will not be relaxed.

Quick Reply

Latest

Trending

Trending