Turn on thread page Beta
    Offline

    12
    ReputationRep:
    I don't need a gun to defend myself because the chances of someone using a gun on me are quite slim. I

    We are totally different to the US, if we were suddenly allowed to own guns for self defence the number of deaths caused by guns would increase significantly.
    Offline

    11
    ReputationRep:
    No thanks OP. Even if it did put normal people and criminals on the same level (it doesn't because it is so hard to get a gun in the UK) the odds would still be in the attackers favour because they are choosing when to commit the offense and will be more willing to cause harm than the average person. All that changes is the amount of damage done to innocent people. Get into violent situation and the very worst you expect to get is a knife attack (which is still unusual), which is significantly easier to survive than being shot.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    When you say legalize, what do you mean exactly? An American-esque style system where you have a right to bear arms and can get them as easily as an ID flash and a clean criminal record?

    If that is so, I don't entirely agree with you on that then as I feel that is far too lax. I am not anti-gun in anyway and feel the semi-automatic rifle and pistol ban was a knee jerk reaction that played off the publics shock at the recent tragedies and the bans shouldn't of taken place, but I also feel there is a need for proper regulation and licensing of firearms to make sure they only reach the hands of those most responsible.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Scumbaggio)
    I don't need a gun to defend myself because the chances of someone using a gun on me are quite slim. I

    We are totally different to the US, if we were suddenly allowed to own guns for self defence the number of deaths caused by guns would increase significantly.
    You make the assumption that because someone isn't attacking you with a gun, then you won't need a gun to defend yourself from them.. that is pretty poor logic to be fair. If someone comes at you with a bladed or blunt object and is trying to hack your face off or smash your head in, how are you supposed to effectively defend yourself with your bare hands? You are just going to get cut to pieces and your bones smashed. Not a very nice demise.

    Also nice slippery slope.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Aoide)
    No thanks OP. Even if it did put normal people and criminals on the same level (it doesn't because it is so hard to get a gun in the UK) the odds would still be in the attackers favour because they are choosing when to commit the offense and will be more willing to cause harm than the average person. All that changes is the amount of damage done to innocent people. Get into violent situation and the very worst you expect to get is a knife attack (which is still unusual), which is significantly easier to survive than being shot.
    Nice slippery slope.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by buchanan700)
    There are maniacs in the UK! They just don't have the ease of access to a gun that the maniacs in the US do. Do you really think aren't mentally ill people in the UK that would shoot up somewhere if they could?! Of course there are! It's just maniacs in other countries can just head on down to a gun show/ steal a gun from their mothers and go ahead and do it, whereas here they have to jump through all sorts of hoops before they can carry anything out, and before they actually gather up the resources they are likely to run out of steam/ get caught.

    The fact they you can't be bothered to read the most important part of what I said really illustrates where this is going where this is going so I can't be bothered to debate this anymore.

    Like I said, move to America and you can have all the guns you want. Just keep them out of my country.
    Sorry, but how do you propose a mentally ill person would pass the vigorous licensing procedure we have here in the UK and obtain a weapon to start killing people with? If this was really true, why isn't it happening all the time here already? You can own semi-automatic shotguns here with no magazine capacity limit. A loony could absolutely go to town on Mr's Potters nursery class with one of them. It doesn't happen though does it?
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by lucaf)
    Legalize firearms and that "robbed at knife point every 30 minutes" becomes "robbed at gunpoint every 30 minutes".

    Guns may make it easier to protect yourself from crime, but they make it even easier to commit it.
    How do you propose the type of scum who would do such a thing would pass the vigorous licensing procedure to obtain a gun? They wouldn't. The type of person who would do such a thing would be the type of person who doesn't abide to laws and would just acquire a black market weapon if they desired one, no need for those silly licensing procedures and gun registration making it easier for the police to come find them then.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by 0kaySadia_)
    Legalising guns wouldn't lower crime rate, it'd just introduce a new way to increase it. People are hardly going to walk around with guns in their handbags or pockets for the purpose of possibly needing it for self defence, but people with the intention to kill would easily have the opportunity to. Someone has commented that it's the fault of "black gangs" that gun crime is such a problem in America. In which school mass shooting were black gangs so heavily involved? I can't think of any, personally, and anyway, making guns readily available in the UK would enhance gang crime in this country as well.


    Posted from TSR Mobile
    The guy who shot all them people up at the US Naval yard recently was black. You are also ignorant if you do not think there are thousands of incidents each year of black on black gun violence and murder in the US. You never heard of the crips and the bloods? You think they just sit about all day playing hopscotch or something? All their guns are just for show? Lol.
    Offline

    21
    ReputationRep:
    Bad people can still get guns now.
    Good people won't and are therefore at a disadvantage. Guns don't kill people, people do.

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    5
    ReputationRep:
    Sorry for the massive wall of text, I can't make paragraphs for some reason. Every country has a different set of issues involving firearms. Whilst I am very pro-gun, I don't think relaxation of the law regarding firearms will help lower crime rates massively, maybe a slight reduction, though obviously it will help enormously on an individual basis, for those who chose to arm themselves. I don't think that there is any strong connection either way between ease of firearms ownership and firearms crime. E.g. Switzerland, Rural American states, canada, the UK, have a fairly strong amount of legal gun owners, and relaitively little firearms crime committed by those legal gun owners. Compare to palces like columbia, mexico, south America in general, and big American cities. Very high misuse of guns, but much harder to own them legally. It's pretty much always the underlieing social issues that lead to a high crime rate. We should tackle those first (Maybe end the war on drugs by undercuttingg drug dealers with very cheap or free hq drugs, and gradually reducing the number of addicts) and not attack legal gun owners. I would love to see a massive relaxation in firearms law in the UK because I am unapologetically pro-gun, I love shooting even though I'm not very good, I think that in order for a free country to remain free, the right of the people to keep and bear arms as part of a well organised system of militias shall not be infringed. Plus I'm very into self sufficeincy, And I think owning guns is a big part of being truly independent.
    Offline

    11
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Nadheer_Ishak)
    Nice straw man.
    Care to explain?
    The point made by the OP is that allowing guns brings criminals and innocents to an even footing, I illustrated why this is never going to be the case.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    I dont know why people continually make comparisons between the USA and UK without even considering other countries or without comparing the UK with itself or without realizing the huge difference between the UK and USA. I don't understand why it needs to be either a US system or a UK system. There are a lot of different ways which other countries deal with firearm ownership. I would suggest that even if the UK did change the system to a copy of the US system, the UK would not suffer the same violence as seen in the US. There are countries with "looser" gun restrictions which have comparable or even slightly lower homicide rates and gun violence. I think a lot of people are exaggerating the effects of loosening gun ownership laws in the UK by a massive amount.

    OP it will never happen and this is really not something worth arguing in the UK. British peoples views on guns are extremely entrenched, you can present all the facts and data you want you will not change many peoples minds (if any). Not many people take the time to read about the gun control and the media does not help the pro gun cause at all. No political party is going to touch this issue either as people are so strongly anti gun here. It will never happen

    Ive read about this topic quite a lot and I am pro gun. My personal view is that you could alter the existing laws in the UK to allow for certain things whilst still maintaining fairly strict gun control laws.
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by ansermyquestion)
    OP it will never happen and this is really not something worth arguing in the UK. British peoples views on guns are extremely entrenched, you can present all the facts and data you want you will not change many peoples minds (if any). Not many people take the time to read about the gun control and the media does not help the pro gun cause at all. No political party is going to touch this issue either as people are so strongly anti gun here. It will never happen.
    Its not that people's views are entrenched its that the pro-gun individuals have little to no ground to support what they usually propose. On the one hand you have a risk of guns becoming readily available to criminals and mental ill people. You have the large expense of integrating a larger pro gun system, including armament of the police force as a whole, the increased requirement for security in the cases of schools and airports. To summarise there is a whole host of things that will require review and introduce risk. You are going to need to balance out those risks or dangers with positives and reasons. People compare to the US because unlike Switzerland we don't have the military component, and the debate around gun is focused on the self-defence element in the UK which is not grounds in countries such as Norway. The only leeway you are going find in the UK gun debate is on a sporting basis, not a self defence basis.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Aoide)
    Care to explain?
    The point made by the OP is that allowing guns brings criminals and innocents to an even footing, I illustrated why this is never going to be the case.
    Sorry, I called the wrong fallacy. Should be "nice slippery slope". A slippery slope fallacy is when you say, if we allow A to happen, consequently Z will happen therefore we shouldn't allow A to happen.

    The problem with this is that you avoid debating the the issue at hand and instead shift the attention to baseless extreme hypotheticals, which you did do.

    Prove what any of your saying is true. Cite some scientific studies or something. Otherwise that was nothing other than an emotion based argument with no factual credibility.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by doggyfizzel)
    Its not that people's views are entrenched its that the pro-gun individuals have little to no ground to support what they usually propose. On the one hand you have a risk of guns becoming readily available to criminals and mental ill people. You have the large expense of integrating a larger pro gun system, including armament of the police force as a whole, the increased requirement for security in the cases of schools and airports. To summarise there is a whole host of things that will require review and introduce risk. You are going to need to balance out those risks or dangers with positives and reasons. People compare to the US because unlike Switzerland we don't have the military component, and the debate around gun is focused on the self-defence element in the UK which is not grounds in countries such as Norway. The only leeway you are going find in the UK gun debate is on a sporting basis, not a self defence basis.
    Let me ask you something. If the firearms licensing procedure didn't change at all and it was still kept as strict as it always has been, would you agree with/wouldn't care about the overturning of the semi-auto rifle and pistol ban?

    I just don't understand how anybody could be opposed to this proposition. There is 800k~ licensed firearms holders in the UK and hardly any of them use their guns for malicious purposes. I don't understand how anybody could believe that if we let them add a semi-auto rifle or pistol to their current collection, how firearm crime would rise in any way. Surely if these people where the type to be doing wrong with their weapons, they would be doing it already with the ones they already own, but they aren't.
    Offline

    8
    ReputationRep:
    Hell no crime will only increase. No no no. The us has firearms allowed for self defence, the crime\rape rate is very high so what's your point? We don't need it, learn to fight if you're so worried about self defence.

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by rainingmen)
    There hasn't been a school shooting since 1996, the US has had 31 since Columbine. Guns on their own can cause no good or bad, but the more guns there are the more likely they are to be used incorrectly
    I think we should have a middle ground where people should be able to acquire guns after rigorous background checks and mandatory training. A complete ban just seems overkill. The US states where you're allowed to walk around Walmart with an AK-47 strapped to your back - well, that's just insane.
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Nadheer_Ishak)
    Let me ask you something. If the firearms licensing procedure didn't change at all and it was still kept as strict as it always has been, would you agree with/wouldn't care about the overturning of the semi-auto rifle and pistol ban?

    I just don't understand how anybody could be opposed to this proposition. There is 800k~ licensed firearms holders in the UK and hardly any of them use their guns for malicious purposes.
    Opposition is pretty obvious, 'hardly any', so a few are going to use them for malicious purposes. So you have the balance those deaths with good reasons. Why does someone need a semi auto rifle or a pistol. You are going to need a sporting argument on why shotguns and rifles are not sufficient. The emphasis on rifle ownership, as opposed to shotgun ownership, is on the individual to provide evidence they require a gun not the state to prove they don't. How are you going to prove your need for either of those in the event of a overturning of a blanket ban.

    I don't understand how anybody could believe that if we let them add a semi-auto rifle or pistol to their current collection, how firearm crime would rise in any way. Surely if these people where the type to be doing wrong with their weapons, they would be doing it already with the ones they already own, but they aren't.
    The argument is based around the point, 'but they arent'. Of the 4 big massacres in modern British all were committed by legal gun owners or with a legally owned gun for a start. The idea that gun owners are somehow above normal people is incorrect, its an anti gun position anyway as it assumes the normal person isn't capable of responsible gun ownership and its something that is reserved for a special few which puts restrictions on who can own a gun. Legal gun owners are capable of committing crime with their weapons, having their weapons stolen or losing them, when they happens people can die. A semi automatic rifle or a concealable pistol make that even more dangerous, and needs to be balanced against 'why do you need this?'
    Offline

    4
    ReputationRep:
    You are chatting absolute bs on this topic. Guns are not that easily gotten in the UK seen through the lack of gun crime.

    Therefore they should stay illegal to protect society.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by doggyfizzel)
    Opposition is pretty obvious, 'hardly any', so a few are going to use them for malicious purposes. So you have the balance those deaths with good reasons. Why does someone need a semi auto rifle or a pistol. You are going to need a sporting argument on why shotguns and rifles are not sufficient. The emphasis on rifle ownership, as opposed to shotgun ownership, is on the individual to provide evidence they require a gun not the state to prove they don't. How are you going to prove your need for either of those in the event of a overturning of a blanket ban.

    The argument is based around the point, 'but they arent'. Of the 4 big massacres in modern British all were committed by legal gun owners or with a legally owned gun for a start. The idea that gun owners are somehow above normal people is incorrect, its an anti gun position anyway as it assumes the normal person isn't capable of responsible gun ownership and its something that is reserved for a special few which puts restrictions on who can own a gun. Legal gun owners are capable of committing crime with their weapons, having their weapons stolen or losing them, when they happens people can die. A semi automatic rifle or a concealable pistol make that even more dangerous, and needs to be balanced against 'why do you need this?'
    Banning certain types of firearm don't mean anything. The firearms still available you could easily commit massacres with, there is no point restricting certain types of weapons because it isn't making anybody safer at all. You are just negatively affecting the law abiding shooter.

    Why shouldn't we have semi-auto rifles or pistols? I don't understand. We can have semi-automatic shotguns filled with 12g slugs but we can't have semi-auto rifles? Why? It was a complete knee jerk reaction punishing everybody for the actions of one person.

    Semi-automatics should not of been banned at all, if you look at the statistics rifles are the least used weapon in criminal activities. They are just too big and bulky for criminals to waste time with them. They prefer small concealable pistols you can just tuck into your waistband and these small concealable pistols they opt for are not usually legally acquired ones, they are illegal unlicensed ones. Taking the privilege away from law abiding citizens to own one doesn't stop the criminals from getting one.

    I just don't understand why guns specifically are singled out and demonized. There is like 30 odd shootings a year, mostly with illegal guns used in gangland murders. Thousands die every year from smoking, alcohol, cars, knives etc. and nothing is done to ban those things yet when someone kills a couple people with a gun there is uproar and calls for them to be banned. It is just ridiculous. You can tell these people who call for gun bans do not care about their "if we can just save one life we gotta ban this" bull**** because all the other things that kill way more they don't even pay attention to. They have an agenda.
 
 
 
Poll
Black Friday: Yay or Nay?
Useful resources

Groups associated with this forum:

View associated groups

The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

Write a reply...
Reply
Hide
Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.