Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free
    • Political Ambassador
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    I support gun ownership but only with slightly fewer restrictions on gun licenses as the law is now. Increase the restrictions on ownership and I'll support.

    Does this allow citizens to buy fully-automatic weapons? Because I'd be against that.
    • Political Ambassador
    • PS Reviewer
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Connor27)
    Good, now join the libertarians already! We could use an MP to make legalisation easier to pass for the rest of the term, which aspects are the so-called "deal breakers" as you call them?
    I anticipated we might have an issue if the other natural libertarians defect as well so I have already reached an arrangement with an MP in another party to submit all of our legislation for us

    Jammy is still welcome to join of course.
    • Political Ambassador
    Online

    21
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Connor27)
    Good, now join the libertarians already! We could use an MP to make legalisation easier to pass for the rest of the term, which aspects are the so-called "deal breakers" as you call them?
    No, if you want me to put out legislation you come to me.
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Jammy Duel)
    Counter cases: Norway , Serbia, Switzerland, Canada, Germany. All have very high gun ownership and very low homicide rates.

    Or how about the violent crime rates (remember crime is possible without a gun) which is lower in the US, even when you factor out different classifications.

    Or Jamaica, where the banning of guns was followed with increased homicide and violent crime rates (with the same happening in the likes of the UK, Ireland, and Australia to a lesser extent)
    Gun ownership in these countries may be high, however, in some of these countries, such as Germany, the possesion of a firearm just for self protection is not permitted. Therefore I doubt people use guns in Germany for self protection.

    Additionally in Norway, the most common reason to why people obtain a firearm licence is for hunting or sport shooters however people rarely use "self protection" as a reason.

    Here is a counter counter case for you: Japan. Gun ownership is benned but the homicide levels are very low.
    • Political Ambassador
    Online

    21
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by stoyfan)
    Gun ownership in these countries may be high, however, in some of these countries, such as Germany, the possesion of a firearm just for self protection is not permitted. Therefore I doubt people use guns in Germany for self protection.

    Additionally in Norway, the most common reason to why people obtain a firearm licence is for hunting or sport shooters however people rarely use "self protection" as a reason.

    Here is a counter counter case for you: Japan. Gun ownership is benned but the homicide levels are very low.
    Puerto Rico has even lower gun ownership and one of the highest homicide rates.
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by stoyfan)
    Gun ownership in these countries may be high, however, in some of these countries, such as Germany, the possesion of a firearm just for self protection is not permitted. Therefore I doubt people use guns in Germany for self protection.

    Additionally in Norway, the most common reason to why people obtain a firearm licence is for hunting or sport shooters however people rarely use "self protection" as a reason.

    Here is a counter counter case for you: Japan. Gun ownership is benned but the homicide levels are very low.
    And a counter example for you: Switzerland.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by ByronicHero)
    Pew pew pew.
    I would support if you could give evidence of how this would go good and not bad.
    Figures etc. Where has it worked in the past?
    • Political Ambassador
    Online

    21
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Gladstone1885)
    And a counter example for you: Switzerland.
    That's what he's countering, among others
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    Mindless. The only way to describe the bill being proposed.

    This country has one of the lowest rates of gun homicides in the world. The legitimate uses for firearms are so limited and the

    The Dunblane massacre? You argue that widespread ownership would reduce the severity of mass shootings. The inception of the Acts you're proposing to repeal are the very reasons as to why mass shootings are far far less likely to occur in the UK.

    I don't see the merits in the bill.
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Jammy Duel)
    Puerto Rico has even lower gun ownership and one of the highest homicide rates.
    Most of the homicides victims were gang members and drug traffickers with
    80 percent of the murders committed in Puerto Rico are directly linked to drug trafficking.

    At the moment the UK doesn't have such problems as Puerto Rico (as they have a very large gang and drug trafficking problem).

    You may say that gun ownership in Puerto Rico may be very low but you need to consider that these gangs may own illegal firearms (which the police/government are unaware that they own them). Therefore gun ownership can actually be much higher in Puerto Rico as many people could own unregistered firearms.
    • Political Ambassador
    Online

    21
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Conceited)
    Mindless. The only way to describe the bill being proposed.

    This country has one of the lowest rates of gun homicides in the world. The legitimate uses for firearms are so limited and the

    The Dunblane massacre? You argue that widespread ownership would reduce the severity of mass shootings. The inception of the Acts you're proposing to repeal are the very reasons as to why mass shootings are far far less likely to occur in the UK.

    I don't see the merits in the bill.
    What is it with people suggesting that gun homicide is the only thing to consider and that all other crimes are seemingly irrelevant?

    I also ask you: before Dunblane when was the last mass shooting? 1987 before that? 1966. Before that? No earlier than 1842.
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Conceited)
    Mindless. The only way to describe the bill being proposed.

    This country has one of the lowest rates of gun homicides in the world. The legitimate uses for firearms are so limited and the

    The Dunblane massacre? You argue that widespread ownership would reduce the severity of mass shootings. The inception of the Acts you're proposing to repeal are the very reasons as to why mass shootings are far far less likely to occur in the UK.

    I don't see the merits in the bill.
    The effect of this bill on gun crime is completely unknown given the inability to compare the U.K. to other nations in different situations and with different levels of legality of firearm ownership. To suggest that it would either increase or decrease crime would be naive, which is not the point. The point is liberty and the right to self defense.
    • Welcome Squad
    Offline

    21
    ReputationRep:
    Nay

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    • Political Ambassador
    Online

    21
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by stoyfan)
    Most of the homicides victims were gang members and drug traffickers with
    80 percent of the murders committed in Puerto Rico are directly linked to drug trafficking.

    At the moment the UK doesn't have such problems as Puerto Rico (as they have a very large gang and drug trafficking problem).

    You may say that gun ownership in Puerto Rico may be very low but you need to consider that these gangs may own illegal firearms (which the police/government are unaware that they own them). Therefore gun ownership can actually be much higher in Puerto Rico as many people could own unregistered firearms.
    Right, and we can't have the same higher ownership here already?

    You still haven't explained why the more guns=more homicide mantra only applies to the UK and US, why it doesn't apply to all the previously listed countries, something tells me the police won't let you have a gun in the UK for defence. And even if we remove the 80% gang related homicides we still get is being significantly higher than the UK, and still higher than the US, the poster child of the anti gun lobby.
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    If I were an MP, I'd say nay.
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Jammy Duel)
    What is it with people suggesting that gun homicide is the only thing to consider and that all other crimes are seemingly irrelevant?

    I also ask you: before Dunblane when was the last mass shooting? 1987 before that? 1966. Before that? No earlier than 1842.
    They don't seem to realise that everything is linked, in New Hampshire 'hot' burglaries don't happen often in the uk it is the most common type it seems that the possibility of a homeowner having a gun might reduce this number, it is important to note as hot burglaries are the most likely to have someone killed
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Conceited)
    Mindless. The only way to describe the bill being proposed.

    This country has one of the lowest rates of gun homicides in the world. The legitimate uses for firearms are so limited and the

    The Dunblane massacre? You argue that widespread ownership would reduce the severity of mass shootings. The inception of the Acts you're proposing to repeal are the very reasons as to why mass shootings are far far less likely to occur in the UK.

    I don't see the merits in the bill.
    Why did the homocide rate and firearm homocide rate rise after the ban?
    • Political Ambassador
    Online

    21
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by joecphillips)
    They don't seem to realise that everything is linked, in New Hampshire 'hot' burglaries don't happen often in the uk it is the most common type it seems that the possibility of a homeowner having a gun might reduce this number, it is important to note as hot burglaries are the most likely to have someone killed
    Doesn't matter, one person being shot is was worse that dozens of other crimes.
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Jammy Duel)
    Doesn't matter, one person being shot is was worse that dozens of other crimes.
    They will ignore what actually happened to reduce the homocide rate which was more police officers
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by SoggyCabbages)
    How many illegal immigrants could I shoot if this bill was passed?
    We limit it to seven unless you find a larger group speaking a foreign language on a train.


    Posted from TSR Mobile
 
 
 
TSR Support Team

We have a brilliant team of more than 60 Support Team members looking after discussions on The Student Room, helping to make it a fun, safe and useful place to hang out.

Updated: January 23, 2017
  • 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.

  • Poll
    Will you be richer or poorer than your parents?
  • 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.

  • 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

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