Turn on thread page Beta
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    If I ever visit America I'll probably get one, shoot some cans off a wall, pose and stuff. It'd be fun I think. But as things stand we can go elsewhere to do stuff like that whilst keeping guns illegal here to minimise the risk to ourselves. So I'm in favor of lax gun laws everywhere but here. France or Ireland maybe.
    Offline

    12
    ReputationRep:
    Hahaha just so y'all know, real life ain't GTA if you get shot you don't appear at the hospital and stars don't just go away after driving round for a bit.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Lee R)
    This pretty much ends the thread for me. Guns are simply not needed in the UK or anywhere outside the Armed Forces, Swat, Police and such.
    Shooting is however an enjoyable hobby.

    We've pretty much banned firearms in the UK.

    Criminal elements merely get hold of them anyway.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by cole-slaw)
    Because a small, rich, mountainous country is such a valid comparison for the largely poor, urban population of the UK. :facepalm2:
    Every male between 18 & 40 stores an assault rifle in their house with ammunition.

    But you do have a valid point.

    There was a study performed some time ago on gun control and crime. As usual it was deemed 'controversial' because it made comparisons that some people didn't like.

    The conclusion was that the driving factor to gun crime wasn't access to guns, it was cultural differences.

    Predominantly white Canada for example has high gun ownership and relatively low gun crime. Ethnically diverse America has relatively high gun access and gun crime.

    The crime isn't driven by access to weapons. It's driven by cultural norms within that country.

    Hence the reason why gun toting Swiss and Scandinavian people don't go round shoring each other.

    The other conclusion in the paper was that concealed firearms reduce the risk of major gun massacres.

    For the life of me I can't remember the authors. But I'll try and dig it out.
    Offline

    9
    ReputationRep:
    I think its a bad idea for the most part. Theres too many yungens who wanna be part of that 'Thug Life'...but if it was legal id get a
    Smith Wesson revolver ASAP
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by cole-slaw)
    Because a small, rich, mountainous country is such a valid comparison for the largely poor, urban population of the UK. :facepalm2:
    That's not the point. Switzerland is less statist. When there is more statism, you get more violence. Public schools breed socialists, anarchists and criminals.

    Switzerland can afford to let go of guns because it is less statist. We are pretty statist, so we needa tighter hold on guns to stop people using them against the state.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by The Dictator)
    That's not the point. Switzerland is less statist. When there is more statism, you get more violence. Public schools breed socialists, anarchists and criminals.

    Switzerland can afford to let go of guns because it is less statist. We are pretty statist, so we needa tighter hold on guns to stop people using them against the state.
    I don't think anyone is concerned against their use against the state. That's a real fringe conspiracy theory right there, you need to spend less time on youtube.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by cole-slaw)
    I don't think anyone is concerned against their use against the state. That's a real fringe conspiracy theory right there, you need to spend less time on youtube.
    Always some complacent ignorants out there...
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by The Dictator)
    Always some complacent ignorants out there...

    sure sure. I look forward to not voting for you some time in the future.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by cole-slaw)
    sure sure. I look forward to not voting for you some time in the future.
    You can't look forward to anything since you won't be doing what you mentioned.
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by FreedomCostsTax)
    In my view, I can see no valid reason as to why the state should prevent its citizens from owning a firearm for the purposes of self-defence (as people were previously able to do prior to 1920).

    Statistics show that in the UK: A rape is reported every 6 minutes, every 30 minutes someone is robbed at knife-point, a house is broken into every two minutes and on average two women a week are murdered as a result of domestic violence.

    People should be able to fully defend themselves and their families.

    What are your thoughts?

    Edit: Many people are commenting 'Firearms are legal, you idiot!' - yes, certain firearms can be acquired once being issued a licence after strict conditions are met (generally being a member of a shooting range or something of that nature), but not for the purposes of self-defence, which is what this thread is about.
    Those numbers will go up if you allow guns. Most killings, violence happens in the home, add a gun into the mix and more will die. Your mass shootings where some cowboy hero can save the day aren't that common. Its mostly the domestic disputes where having a gun won't make anything better just more deadly.

    Also, the reason there is so much police brutality in the US can be attributed partially to guns. In the US, when you pull someone over, theres a very good chance they have a gun, if you smell marijuana they almost definitely have one, would you be as kind to the person you stopped if they could very easily kill you?
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by MatureStudent36)
    Shooting is however an enjoyable hobby.

    We've pretty much banned firearms in the UK.

    Criminal elements merely get hold of them anyway.
    Teenagers will get ahold of them if you legalize it. Is it easier to get a hold of a gun in the UK or the US where you could get a 18+ friend to walk to a gun show and buy one without even proof of a criminal background check?
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    The way my local neighbourhood is at the moment, I wouldn't even dare set foot out of my bedroom if the gun laws were the same as in the US! :eek:
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    This would not decrease crime rates, in fact it will make it easier for would be criminals to get hold of a gun, therefore actually increasing crime rates.

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-20759139

    Furthermore, in the US, statistics show that owning a gun makes you far more likely to get injured or die as a result of gun use.
    Finally using a gun in self-defence, if it results in the death of an attacker, is manslaughter (or murder depending upon the intention behind it), therefore complicating matters for the victim. It also supports the idea of victim blaming, that it is a persons fault for being attacked because they "didn't defend themselves enough/properly". This supports the mindset of would be criminals, which is the very mindset that we need to eradicate if we wish for crime levels to decrease.
    Having a gun also makes it more likely to be used against you.
    Guns should not be legalised for self-defence purposes as it would just make matters worse.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Thinking_Aloud)
    This would not decrease crime rates, in fact it will make it easier for would be criminals to get hold of a gun, therefore actually increasing crime rates.

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-20759139

    Furthermore, in the US, statistics show that owning a gun makes you far more likely to get injured or die as a result of gun use.
    Finally using a gun in self-defence, if it results in the death of an attacker, is manslaughter (or murder depending upon the intention behind it), therefore complicating matters for the victim. It also supports the idea of victim blaming, that it is a persons fault for being attacked because they "didn't defend themselves enough/properly". This supports the mindset of would be criminals, which is the very mindset that we need to eradicate if we wish for crime levels to decrease.
    Having a gun also makes it more likely to be used against you.
    Guns should not be legalised for self-defence purposes as it would just make matters worse.
    The use of a gun in self defence doesn't result in manslaughter.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by MatureStudent36)
    The use of a gun in self defence doesn't result in manslaughter.
    If your use a gun kills someone then it is arguably manslaughter. Think I missed a word out there.
    It was not intentional but resulted in the death of a person, even in self defence you do not have to kill the person (you could just hit them or shoot them in the knee etc).
    As I said it depends on the intention behind it.
    Edit: Sorry brackets were in the wrong place.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Thinking_Aloud)
    If your use a gun kills someone then it is arguably manslaughter. Think I missed a word out there.
    It was not intentional but resulted in the death of a person, even in self defence you do not have to kill the person (you could just hit them or shoot them in the knee etc).
    As I said it depends on the intention behind it.
    Edit: Sorry brackets were in the wrong place.
    Depends what the local law states.

    In some American states using a firearm in self defence where the other person is killed can be manslaughter. It can also be classed as self defence.

    It's a bit like fighting in the UK. If you have a fight with somebody and kill them, the. You can be charged with manslaughter. If you can prove they attacked you and you acted in self defence then you walk away.

    The issue is proving that there was no other course of action open to you.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by MatureStudent36)
    Depends what the local law states.

    In some American states using a firearm in self defence where the other person is killed can be manslaughter. It can also be classed as self defence.

    It's a bit like fighting in the UK. If you have a fight with somebody and kill them, the. You can be charged with manslaughter. If you can prove they attacked you and you acted in self defence then you walk away.
    In what I was saying I was referring to UK law as I was talking about the UK overall. Though I admit that might have not been clear.

    (Original post by MatureStudent36)
    The issue is proving that there was no other course of action open to you.
    True.
    There is the worry that legalising firearms risks the adoption of them as 'one-stop' solutions, therefore people using them in 'self defence' without actually engaging their brains.
    This is seen in the US with multiple high profile cases with people using weapons when there is no cause.
    This makes it quite probably that the legalisation of guns for self defence would result in people using them when there are other options available, causing the death of the attacker. This is arguably manslaughter.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Thinking_Aloud)
    In what I was saying I was referring to UK law as I was talking about the UK overall. Though I admit that might have not been clear.



    True.
    There is the worry that legalising firearms risks the adoption of them as 'one-stop' solutions, therefore people using them in 'self defence' without actually engaging their brains.
    This is seen in the US with multiple high profile cases with people using weapons when there is no cause.
    This makes it quite probably that the legalisation of guns for self defence would result in people using them when there are other options available, causing the death of the attacker. This is arguably manslaughter.
    You can actually use a firearm in the UK for self defence if your entitled to have one. But again you need to demonstrate it was self defence.

    ISTR a farmer killing a burglar a few years back. He was charged as the burglar wasn't armed and he laid in wait and ambushed him.

    Had for example an armed burglar entered the garners home and there was enough evidence to demonstrate the burglar was intent on causing harm to the farmer he would've gotten away with it.

    I'm not a huge advocate of gun control. Shootings fun and I'm a great believer in personal freedoms.

    What is like to see though is a reduction In legislation, but firearms being required to be stored in secure locations such as gun clubs. The cost of implementing those types if controls though would scare a lot if people away from doing it.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by MatureStudent36)
    You can actually use a firearm in the UK for self defence if your entitled to have one. But again you need to demonstrate it was self defence.

    ISTR a farmer killing a burglar a few years back. He was charged as the burglar wasn't armed and he laid in wait and ambushed him.

    Had for example an armed burglar entered the garners home and there was enough evidence to demonstrate the burglar was intent on causing harm to the farmer he would've gotten away with it.
    Indeed. Though that sounds more like murder than manslaughter as it was premeditated.

    (Original post by MatureStudent36)
    I'm not a huge advocate of gun control. Shootings fun and I'm a great believer in personal freedoms.

    What is like to see though is a reduction In legislation, but firearms being required to be stored in secure locations such as gun clubs. The cost of implementing those types if controls though would scare a lot if people away from doing it.
    Personally, I think guns are more trouble than they're worth. So I do support gun control.
    I don't think the right to kill someone else comes under personal freedoms, which is basically what wanting a gun is about. You would only want a gun for self-defence if you can imagine a situation in which you would use it against another human being.
    Though as you said controls could be put in place, there will always be people trying to get around it. Always be people who don't keep their guns in secure locations, even if the law required it. Relaxing the law is asking for trouble.
    There is nothing wrong with the system we've got at the moment. You can still use guns (air rifles etc) on licensed premises, but you don't have to own one.
    If it's not broken, don't fix it.
 
 
 
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.