Anti Gun Control propaganda by stealth

twist83

asquithea wrote:

deerman wrote:

Just to cover the other side of the argument, can any of you tell me how much gun crime has reduced since the government banned handguns in the UK ?

I wasn't in favour of the handgun ban (I used to shoot), but you might as well ask how much the price of milk has reduced since the ban. The two things are entirely unconnected.

It isn't legal to own a gun for self-defence in the UK, and the ban was never about getting guns off the streets (since those are already illegal). It was about removing the opportunity for a repeat of Dunblane - a lesson that clearly hasn't been learned in the US, demonstrated by repeated school shootings.

Now if you'd asked how many deaths there have been using lawfully owned handguns since the ban, your question would make more sense. It's worth pointing out that gun deaths are literally 40 times higher in the US than the UK per 100K population.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_co ... death_rate

The Handgun ban was never really about stopping a repeat of Dunblane it was about votes. It was around Election time. The Cullen Report suggestion keeping Legally held Pistols at clubs rather than home ownership. The entire report was disregarded and then taken one step further with .22 pistols going as well.

Since then we have had Derek Bird and on the flipside Raol Moat (Spelling?) who used an illegally held weapon. Also Hamilton should have had his licence revoked some time before he went on his spree.

Also in this country you can still legally hold on licence plenty of firearms that would enable you to cause some serious damage should you choose too. High Capacity Section 1 12G Shotgun. Yet because they are tightly controlled no one has gone on a killing spree with one.

I am a shooter however I can see serious flaws in the US. Does not take a brain surgeon to realise their are problems. However a complete ban now in the US would achieve little to nothing. Yes much tighter regulations need to be put in place to stop certain types getting their hands on them and more restrictions on Storage.

I shoot quite often in the US and the responsible gun owners are all for this if it means they get to keep their sport. They are not hill billys, and are not interested in killing school children. It is a sport for them and yes they also have the right to protect themselves and obviously will if the need arises.

The whol assault weapon thing has been blown WAY out of proportion. Regardless if a rifle looks like an AR15 like the Military use or say a ruger Mini 14 which has wooden furniture and looks like a 'normal' rifle. However each squeeze of the trigger ends in the same result. They just look different.

Also a comparison with 'Assualt weapons' is a mute point as they are fully auto and civilian versions are not. Also the AR15 platform which is taking all this flack is so widely spread because it is versatile and is chambered in numerous calibres so is used in hunting, competition and self defence.

Magazine size again makes little to no difference. A magazine change on ANY rifle is a few seconds max even with an inexperienced hand. So if it holds 10, 20, 30 rounds it does not matter.

IMO tackling the culture and dealing with closing loopholes, education in the use of firearms, restrictions on purchasing through checks etc are the way to deal with it. Guns are so deep rooted into the US you will never get rid of them completely.

Piers is a complete idiot and a very very poor choice IMO for an anti gun campaigner because he has not clue about the average US citizen or how the US gun culture works and he just insults people to the point of making any point he is trying to get across null and void. He is a pompous asshole and I feel sorry for the americans having to put up with him.

No doubt this post will be slated and torn down by the Anti gun brigade but these are my views and I feel pretty balanced considering I am a shooter and always will be

asquithea

twist83 wrote:

The Handgun ban was never really about stopping a repeat of Dunblane it was about votes. It was around Election time. The Cullen Report suggestion keeping Legally held Pistols at clubs rather than home ownership. The entire report was disregarded and then taken one step further with .22 pistols going as well.

Since then we have had Derek Bird and on the flipside Raol Moat (Spelling?) who used an illegally held weapon. Also Hamilton should have had his licence revoked some time before he went on his spree.

Also in this country you can still legally hold on licence plenty of firearms that would enable you to cause some serious damage should you choose too. High Capacity Section 1 12G Shotgun. Yet because they are tightly controlled no one has gone on a killing spree with one.

I am a shooter however I can see serious flaws in the US. Does not take a brain surgeon to realise their are problems. However a complete ban now in the US would achieve little to nothing. Yes much tighter regulations need to be put in place to stop certain types getting their hands on them and more restrictions on Storage.

I shoot quite often in the US and the responsible gun owners are all for this if it means they get to keep their sport. They are not hill billys, and are not interested in killing school children. It is a sport for them and yes they also have the right to protect themselves and obviously will if the need arises.

The whol assault weapon thing has been blown WAY out of proportion. Regardless if a rifle looks like an AR15 like the Military use or say a ruger Mini 14 which has wooden furniture and looks like a 'normal' rifle. However each squeeze of the trigger ends in the same result. They just look different.

Also a comparison with 'Assualt weapons' is a mute point as they are fully auto and civilian versions are not. Also the AR15 platform which is taking all this flack is so widely spread because it is versatile and is chambered in numerous calibres so is used in hunting, competition and self defence.

Magazine size again makes little to no difference. A magazine change on ANY rifle is a few seconds max even with an inexperienced hand. So if it holds 10, 20, 30 rounds it does not matter.

IMO tackling the culture and dealing with closing loopholes, education in the use of firearms, restrictions on purchasing through checks etc are the way to deal with it. Guns are so deep rooted into the US you will never get rid of them completely.

Piers is a complete idiot and a very very poor choice IMO for an anti gun campaigner because he has not clue about the average US citizen or how the US gun culture works and he just insults people to the point of making any point he is trying to get across null and void. He is a pompous asshole and I feel sorry for the americans having to put up with him.

No doubt this post will be slated and torn down by the Anti gun brigade but these are my views and I feel pretty balanced considering I am a shooter and always will be

Far from tearing it apart, I mostly agree with you.

Like I said, I wasn't in favour of the pistol ban, and I thought it a knee-jerk reaction. But the basic policy of minimising the number of people owning guns, and the lethality of the weapons, is undeniably effective in this country.

You mention shotguns, for example, but following the Hungerford massacre, restrictions were imposed on centre-fire semi-auto rifles, and to reduce magazine size - an interesting parallel with the discussion in the US.

I support the idea of shooting for sport - it's something I used to enjoy doing, and it's a very safe activity. We have very few killings involving legally held guns in the UK, and an important component is the level of vetting and monitoring that takes place. This will never be perfect, so I think it always has to go hand-in-hand with constraining the kinds of weapons that can be owned and used.