Stop the carrying of knives in Britain Watch

34253
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#121
Report 10 years ago
#121
(Original post by Crosseyed And Painless)
'a mandatory minimum 5 year setence for the possesion of knives in public.'

That sounded like anyone to me. I don't know what the petition starter wants, just what his petition suggests he wants. He's managed two typos in one sentence though, which would be fine, but it's a sentence he's chosen to present to the world as his views. However this gives me hope that he's just a bit of a reactionary fool, rather than a psycho moron who's thought long and hard and concluded that anyone possessing knives in public should be jailed for five years.
He's probably just some chump that has taken his head out of the Daily Mail to voice his brilliant idea on the internet for other chumps to agree with. I'm sure if you asked him he would say he doesn't wish people with legitimate reasons to be carrying to go to jail.
0
reply
burningnun
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#122
Report 10 years ago
#122
(Original post by Elipsis)
If you have two houses and regularly move knives between the two this would clearly provide an appropriate defense.
I agree, it would. Better that we don't get to the point of that by enacting this sort of silly legislation though.

You have to draw the line somewhere to stop people carrying knives to hurt people;
Banning them won't work, because it never does. It will just waste a bunch of money stopping/investigating innocent people, and since have determined that the subjective notion of intent is so critical, it would be really easy for guilty people to make an excuse as to why they have a knife, further muddying the waters for the innocent. Education, finding ways to get kids out of gangs and in the short term, PR stunts might help somewhat, but at the end of the day people will always kill each other. You said it yourself, "if they were that strong they wouldn't need a weapon". You still didn't answer my question regarding exactly how strong one would have to be for that to work, but after weapon crime stops (obviously we would ban cars, bats, sticks, stones, axes etc.), will people be prohibited from getting strong without showing that they don’t intend to hurt someone? Will you be saying “oh, you don’t need to be that strong unless you’re a professional WL, SM or PL, so we should ban gyms for all except the above”?

I hope you can see how stupid that would be. It's quite similar to banning knives in that respect.


By the way, I edited out the fallacies, personal attacks and other nonsense from your post. Hope you don't mind.
0
reply
34253
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#123
Report 10 years ago
#123
(Original post by burningnun)
I agree, it would. Better that we don't get to the point of that by enacting this sort of silly legislation though.
Banning them won't work, because it never does. It will just waste a bunch of money stopping/investigating innocent people, and since have determined that the subjective notion of intent is so critical, it would be really easy for guilty people to make an excuse as to why they have a knife, further muddying the waters for the innocent. Education, finding ways to get kids out of gangs and in the short term, PR stunts might help somewhat, but at the end of the day people will always kill each other. You said it yourself, "if they were that strong they wouldn't need a weapon". You still didn't answer my question regarding exactly how strong one would have to be for that to work, but after weapon crime stops (obviously we would ban cars, bats, sticks, stones, axes etc.), will people be prohibited from getting strong without showing that they don’t intend to hurt someone? Will you be saying “oh, you don’t need to be that strong unless you’re a professional WL, SM or PL, so we should ban gyms for all except the above”?
I hope you can see how stupid that would be. It's quite similar to banning knives in that respect.
By the way, I edited out the fallacies, personal attacks and other nonsense from your post. Hope you don't mind.
I never said 'ban every knife in the land', because that would just be stupid. I attacked peoples attacks on the petition from the angle of 'what about legitimate reasons' because I don't believe the petition creator could truely be so stupid as to want to imprison innocent people who happen to need a knife. The government does need to be stricter on teenagers who carry anything that can be construed as a weapon that they don't have a legitimate reason for carrying, the waters might be muddy but that's no reason to stand back and let them carry on, especially as there are very few legit reasons for a teen to be carrying a knife that isnt a pen knife down the park.
The reason I didn't intially reply to your post about getting strong in prison is because you added it AFTER I replied to the first part of your post, if you look at the bottom of the post it says in red: Edited. Anyway. My point was that of course people who are big now need to carry weapons because those who are weak have gotten hold of weapons thereby making themselves stronger than those are big. I was arguing against the banning of gyms in prison because it's a release for the inmates that's a lot better than a prison guards face. You can take stuff out of the context of the post to make yourself look clever if you so wish, it doesn't bother me.
0
reply
nothingspek
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#124
Report 10 years ago
#124
Sadly, I doubt the petition will solve anything.
0
reply
burningnun
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#125
Report 10 years ago
#125
(Original post by Elipsis)
I never said 'ban every knife in the land', because that would just be stupid. I attacked peoples attacks on the petition from the angle of 'what about legitimate reasons' because I don't believe the petition creator could truely be so stupid as to want to imprison innocent people who happen to need a knife. The government does need to be stricter on teenagers who carry anything that can be construed as a weapon that they don't have a legitimate reason for carrying, the waters might be muddy but that's no reason to stand back and let them carry on, especially as there are very few legit reasons for a teen to be carrying a knife that isnt a pen knife down the park.
I disagree, because just about anything can be construed and used as a weapon. Banning field hockey sticks and skateboards in parks probably won't work, but take it from someone who has been hit with both - they hurt, and regarding the former in particular, it is very possible to kill someone with one, if the intent is there.
0
reply
34253
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#126
Report 10 years ago
#126
(Original post by burningnun)
I disagree, because just about anything can be construed and used as a weapon. Banning field hockey sticks and skateboards in parks probably won't work, but take it from someone who has been hit with both - they hurt, and regarding the former in particular, it is very possible to kill someone with one, if the intent is there.
But it isn't 'anything' that is being used as a weapon really though is it? 99% of these murders are with knives and guns, not bare hands and various other objects. Quite clearly you could always be carrying a skateboard for a legitimate purpose but there's no way someone would carry one purely for defense because they're easily stopable and not practicle in a gang war.
0
reply
CHAMON
Badges: 11
Rep:
?
#127
Report 10 years ago
#127
Anybody with a knife should be taken into custody and charged with INTENT to kill! It matters not if they have or not, they have a knife this is reason enough. ANIMALS!
0
reply
burningnun
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#128
Report 10 years ago
#128
(Original post by Elipsis)
But it isn't 'anything' that is being used as a weapon really though is it? 99% of these murders are with knives and guns, not bare hands and various other objects. Quite clearly you could always be carrying a skateboard for a legitimate purpose but there's no way someone would carry one purely for defense because they're easily stopable and not practicle in a gang war.
Remember that this is EVEN IF a knife ban actually worked. Banning guns didn't, banning drugs didn't... I think if knives are banned people will not start killing each other with other stuff, they will just carry on killing each other with knives.

Good post BTW CHAMON.
0
reply
wildforwilde
Badges: 0
#129
Report 10 years ago
#129
arresting people with knives is silly and will only aggrivate them further. Having a law like that passed will mean lots more stop and searches (lots of people treated like suspects), the kids will feel like victims, making the police even more like foes than friends (police representing state, government etc) which will make them feel more isolated and supressed which will only encourage further rebellion.

I think Community Support officers are great, and a good way to build a relationship between police and the youth. The officers should be able to talk and treat them like adults and offer advice opposed to shouting rules. I think giving police the power of arrest in possession of a knife is silly. Instead it should be confiscated and counseling should be offered. It has been proven that sending kids to prison does not solve the problem, it not only costs the government alot of money, there is also a 40% chance of reoffending afterwards. In Chicago however, where youth crime also became a problem they devised a strategy of not sending the kids straight to prison, offering them counciling support, and there the reoffending rate went down to like 5%.

Don't put them in prison!
0
reply
34253
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#130
Report 10 years ago
#130
(Original post by burningnun)
Remember that this is EVEN IF a knife ban actually worked. Banning guns didn't, banning drugs didn't... I think if knives are banned people will not start killing each other with other stuff, they will just carry on killing each other with knives.

Good post BTW CHAMON.
Although people have continued to carry guns and knives you can't correlate that fact to prove that a policy of banning it doesn't work. The people who are in prisons would be on the outside using guns and knives, there is a finite number of people who will undergo the risk of doing so. Drugs are a different kettle of fish, you aren't hurting anyone else and anyone can become a drug user. Tbh if drugs were legalised and heavily monitored all this crap would stop anyway, that's where my answer lies.
0
reply
SuperhansFavouriteAlsatian
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#131
Report 10 years ago
#131
(Original post by 1721)
so you have to wait till they turn round any show their massive sawn off shotgun then you can shoot them if they dont shoot you first.
How many burglars carry "massive sawn off shotguns" when they rob a house? Anyway, the point isn't that if they're facing away from you, they're less dangerous. It's that if they're facing away from you, it typically means they're leaving the property (and THAT means they're less dangerous). Assuming they know you're there (and if they don't, you're probably fairly safe), that's the only time they would have their back to you.

I was listening to a thing on the radio, it was a few years back now. There was a lawyer guy on their basically dispelling the idea that you can't defend yourself in your own home. Apparently, in the last decade or so there had only been four charges against people whilst defending their homes against burglars. One was Tony Martin, and one guy captured the burgler, tied him up, poured petrol on him and set him on fire. I can't remember the other two, but it really isn't a widespread issue.

As for the actual OP, man, who freakin' cares? The people we have to be worried about are the ones going round stabbing people. If they're willing to break that law, I doubt they'll stop carrying just because of another law, and the idea that the police will stop and search enough people to make it worthwhile is ridiculous. You can only carry, what, a 2.5" blade as it stands? Does anyone out there really think that the police are stopping loads of kids with 2.4" blades, patting them on the shoulder and saying "off you go then, you little scamp!"? Of course not. It's worthless, reactionary rubbish.
0
reply
Angel_Cake
Badges: 2
Rep:
?
#132
Report 10 years ago
#132
(Original post by 1721)
i seriously doubt it will be a law....ever. doesnt detract from the fact soemthing should be done.
Yes - but what? It's easy to sit at home and say "how awuful, something should be done", but nothing will change if we can't come up with viable, realistic solutions.
0
reply
traxhill
Badges: 0
#133
Report 10 years ago
#133
(Original post by Elipsis)
If you take away their gym and sporting activies they won't have anyway to relieve their already high testosterone, giving them a gym and exercise has been proven to reduce violence in prisons. If they were so strong in the first place they wouldn't have needed a weapon.
Well, there is a lot you can do about theirs "balls"
They can receive medicines and total isolation between leaders and apprentices.
In fact I was not talking about those who are making prison for bank fraud or car accidents (they are humans), but I was writing about criminals that should be treated as “things”, not humans or animals.

I saw a film on Discovery about a prison in the US and it was scary, because there were convicts ordering murders outside that prison. How is that possible? Why do we continue to treat them as humans or animals, giving them food and shelter?
0
reply
X

Quick Reply

Attached files
Write a reply...
Reply
new posts
Latest
My Feed

See more of what you like on
The Student Room

You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

Personalise

Have you registered to vote?

Yes! (125)
39.06%
No - but I will (17)
5.31%
No - I don't want to (20)
6.25%
No - I can't vote (<18, not in UK, etc) (158)
49.38%

Watched Threads

View All