Gun grabbers going to town in Britain.

[Zebo]

No matter how many times a gun ban causes cirme to RISE, the gun-grabbers still keep grabbing your guns.

Why? Because an armed citizenry can say "NO" to the government. When you lose your guns, you lose the freedom to say "NO", and there is no freedom at all without the freedom to say "NO.

Text

 

[Czar]

I dont have the freedom to say no to the government because I dont have a gun?

 

[Bigdude]

Originally posted by: Czar
I dont have the freedom to say no to the government because I dont have a gun?

Correct!!!!

 

[eigen]

Might makes right .The govt knows this though people's liberal ideal may obscure the fact.

 

[Witling]

This "no gun, no right to resist" is going to be news to those who have heard of Ghandi.

 

[Zebo]

Originally posted by: eigen
Might makes right .The govt knows this though people's liberal ideal may obscure the fact.

Every major piece of gun grabbing legislation was passed by the police state republicans, you know the so called "conservatives" who willingly shred the consitutution for an ounce of "secuity".


The "Brady Handgun Violence Prevention Act" , which is the background-waiting period and 10 round ammo stuff. And the "Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act " aka AWB. passed by republican controlled congress in 94-95.

Every other piece of feederal gun regualtion was passed under repulican presidencies even.

1972- BATF
1986- Law Enforcement Officers Protection Act and Firearms Owners' Protection Act
1990- Crime Control Act

Dean is more pro-gun than Bush.

 

[Witling]

I don't believe that the following statement from the article is true,

With gun crime in Britain soaring in the face of the strictest gun control laws of any democracy, the UK seems about to prove that warning prophetic."

This is not an area of expertise for me, but I believe Japan's gun laws are much more strict. Perhaps a more knowledgeable person can expand on this.

 

[dpm]

Originally posted by: Zebo
No matter how many times a gun ban causes cirme to RISE, the gun-grabbers still keep grabbing your guns. Why? Because an armed citizenry can say "NO" to the government. When you lose your guns, you lose the freedom to say "NO", and there is no freedom at all without the freedom to say "NO. Text

Oh please, that is both facile and ridiculous. This has more to say about your perceptions of your nation than reality. Banning gun ownership does not in itself lead to an increase in crime. And here in Britain we don't really feel the need to use guns to say no to our government - generally this little thing called *voting* works well enough.

 

[Gaard]

I watched Bowling For Columbine yesterday and one of the miltia men that he interviewed said "If you're not armed, you're in dereliction of your duty as an American. Period."

 

[0roo0roo]

Originally posted by: dpm

Originally posted by: Zebo
No matter how many times a gun ban causes cirme to RISE, the gun-grabbers still keep grabbing your guns. Why? Because an armed citizenry can say "NO" to the government. When you lose your guns, you lose the freedom to say "NO", and there is no freedom at all without the freedom to say "NO. Text

Oh please, that is both facile and ridiculous. This has more to say about your perceptions of your nation than reality. Banning gun ownership does not in itself lead to an increase in crime. And here in Britain we don't really feel the need to use guns to say no to our government - generally this little thing called *voting* works well enough.

well historically europes turned to sh*t a few times..even through voting.

 

[Bulk Beef]

Originally posted by: Whitling
This "no gun, no right to resist" is going to be news to those who have heard of Ghandi.

"Among the many misdeeds of the British rule in India, history will look upon the act of depriving a whole nation of arms as the blackest."

- Mahatma Gandhi

 

[dpm]

Originally posted by: 0roo0roo

Originally posted by: dpm

Originally posted by: Zebo No matter how many times a gun ban causes cirme to RISE, the gun-grabbers still keep grabbing your guns. Why? Because an armed citizenry can say "NO" to the government. When you lose your guns, you lose the freedom to say "NO", and there is no freedom at all without the freedom to say "NO. Text

Oh please, that is both facile and ridiculous. This has more to say about your perceptions of your nation than reality. Banning gun ownership does not in itself lead to an increase in crime. And here in Britain we don't really feel the need to use guns to say no to our government - generally this little thing called *voting* works well enough.

well historically europes turned to sh*t a few times..even through voting.

And what happened when armed American citizenry tried to say "NO" to its government? The American Civil War. That worked well, didn't it?

I think I'll stick with voting. And if needs be, I'm confident that I could protest without needing a gun - after all, no guns were needed to overturn the poll tax.

 

[Orsorum]

Originally posted by: Whitling
I don't believe that the following statement from the article is true,

With gun crime in Britain soaring in the face of the strictest gun control laws of any democracy, the UK seems about to prove that warning prophetic."

This is not an area of expertise for me, but I believe Japan's gun laws are much more strict. Perhaps a more knowledgeable person can expand on this.

Switzerland, with one of the highest gun control (and mandatory training (i.e. military service)) rates in the world, has one of the lowest crime rates.

I don't remember the exact statistics for Japan, although I do remember that their suicide rate is among the highest in the first world.

 

[sandorski]

Originally posted by: Orsorum

Originally posted by: Whitling
I don't believe that the following statement from the article is true,

With gun crime in Britain soaring in the face of the strictest gun control laws of any democracy, the UK seems about to prove that warning prophetic."

This is not an area of expertise for me, but I believe Japan's gun laws are much more strict. Perhaps a more knowledgeable person can expand on this.

Switzerland, with one of the highest gun control (and mandatory training (i.e. military service)) rates in the world, has one of the lowest crime rates.

I don't remember the exact statistics for Japan, although I do remember that their suicide rate is among the highest in the first world.

Ya, but the Swiss are a bunch of McGyver clones. They could bring down any tyrrany with their wiss Army knives and a few household items!

 

[BrunoPuntzJones]

Originally posted by: dpm

Originally posted by: 0roo0roo

Originally posted by: dpm

Originally posted by: Zebo No matter how many times a gun ban causes cirme to RISE, the gun-grabbers still keep grabbing your guns. Why? Because an armed citizenry can say "NO" to the government. When you lose your guns, you lose the freedom to say "NO", and there is no freedom at all without the freedom to say "NO. Text

Oh please, that is both facile and ridiculous. This has more to say about your perceptions of your nation than reality. Banning gun ownership does not in itself lead to an increase in crime. And here in Britain we don't really feel the need to use guns to say no to our government - generally this little thing called *voting* works well enough.

well historically europes turned to sh*t a few times..even through voting.

And what happened when armed American citizenry tried to say "NO" to its government? The American Civil War. That worked well, didn't it?

I think I'll stick with voting. And if needs be, I'm confident that I could protest without needing a gun - after all, no guns were needed to overturn the poll tax.

I don't think saying no worked very well for the colonists.

And what's that one quote...something like "God made man. Samuel Colt made them equal."

 

[WinkOsmosis]

Gun bans increase crime? Doesn't the UK have a lower crime rate than the USA? Wait, you're a conservative, so you must ignore logic.

 

[PrinceofWands]

Originally posted by: WinkOsmosis
Gun bans increase crime? Doesn't the UK have a lower crime rate than the USA? Wait, you're a conservative, so you must ignore logic.

Actually, in many cases no they don't. And almost all british crime is rising, while most american crime rates fall. This is also being seen in Australia with even more drastic figures. For those that don't know, Australia only very recently banned private firearm ownership.

Here's an interesting read (text below):

The Brits speak out

MP calls Radio 4 listeners 'bastards' over vigilante vote
By Vincent Graff Media Editor

02 January 2004

It was trailed as a "unique chance to rewrite the law of the land".
Listeners to BBC Radio 4's Today programme were asked to suggest a piece of
legislation to improve life in Britain, with the promise that an MP would
then attempt to get it onto the statute books.

But yesterday, 26,000 votes later, the winning proposal was denounced as a
"ludicrous, brutal, unworkable blood-stained piece of legislation" - by
Stephen Pound, the very MP whose job it is to try to push it through
Parliament.

Mr Pound's reaction was provoked by the news that the winner of Today's
"Listeners' Law" poll was a plan to allow homeowners "to use any means to
defend their home from intruders" - a prospect that could see householders
free to kill burglars, without question.

"The people have spoken," the Labour MP replied to the programme, "... the
bastards."

Having recovered his composure, Mr Pound told The Independent: "We are
going to have to re-evaluate the listenership of Radio 4. I would have
expected this result if there had been a poll in The Sun. Do we really want
a law that says you can slaughter anyone who climbs in your window?"

Journalists on Today are thought to have been taken aback by the choice of
their listeners. Observers had assumed that the winning suggestion might be
a little more light-hearted - and a little less illiberal.

Indeed, there were suspicions the vote may have been hijacked by supporters
of Tony Martin, the Norfolk farmer who was jailed for shooting a burglar.
The winning proposal enjoyed a late surge in support in the final 24 hours
of the poll, a jump attributed by the BBC to the fact that telephone votes
- which were more firmly in favour of the anti-burglar proposal - were
added at the last minute.

Today's long-running Personality of the Year poll was scrapped in 1997,
after persistent attempts by political parties to fix it.

Mr Pound will go through the motions of presenting the Bill to Parliament
but hoped he would fail. He said it was "the sort of idea somebody comes up
with in a bar on a Saturday night between 'string 'em all up' and 'send 'em
all all home'".

 

[Moonbeam]

Ah for crap sake, guns didn't stop the Supreme Coup from overthrowing the elected government.

 

[0roo0roo]

Originally posted by: BrunoPuntzJones

Originally posted by: dpm

Originally posted by: 0roo0roo

Originally posted by: dpm

Originally posted by: Zebo No matter how many times a gun ban causes cirme to RISE, the gun-grabbers still keep grabbing your guns. Why? Because an armed citizenry can say "NO" to the government. When you lose your guns, you lose the freedom to say "NO", and there is no freedom at all without the freedom to say "NO. Text

Oh please, that is both facile and ridiculous. This has more to say about your perceptions of your nation than reality. Banning gun ownership does not in itself lead to an increase in crime. And here in Britain we don't really feel the need to use guns to say no to our government - generally this little thing called *voting* works well enough.

well historically europes turned to sh*t a few times..even through voting.

And what happened when armed American citizenry tried to say "NO" to its government? The American Civil War. That worked well, didn't it?

I think I'll stick with voting. And if needs be, I'm confident that I could protest without needing a gun - after all, no guns were needed to overturn the poll tax.

I don't think saying no worked very well for the colonists.

And what's that one quote...something like "God made man. Samuel Colt made them equal."

facism arose in europe during the past century.. not in america

 

[Gravity]

Australians lost their guns recently to their gov't, didn't they?

 

[Orsorum]

Aww, crap! NOT gun control! Gun OWNERSHIP! Switzerland has gun OWNERSHIP.

Oops! I'm such an ass.



Cheers!
Nate

 

[Bitdog]

An experiment has a control and a variable.
They are both EXACTLY THE SAME except the variable has had the experiment done on it.

Compairing other countries crime rate compaired to ours as associated with their gun banning or not.
Is not a reliable experiment since the two countries are NOT THE SAME to begin with.
There are many variables involved.

A more valid test to find a crime_rate/gun_ban ratio as associated with America,
is a long term study of two simular towns of close proximity,
one with manditory gun owner ship, and one with all guns banned.
Or some grey area inbetween, might be fine too.

I think that kind of thing has been done in America, and the result was:
banning guns didn't lower the crime rate. Criminals can get guns.
Owning a gun in a banned area is a crime, that doesn't deter criminals.
But times where there is a rapist/murder'r on the loose, and the TV shows lots of
ladies getting purse guns, & or the citisens arming them selves overnight,
does result in a lower crime rate of crimes where the victom could fight/shoot back.
It's a no brainer, 2+2=4 type thing. I'm not going to rob you, if I knew you could kill me.

If a gun ban advocate has other issues, they need to be addressed.
Children shooting children while the parents are out, type thing.
The cure is keeping the gun out of reach of the children.
Fire extingueshers (sp) in public places are put behind break glass.
They don't get messed with or stolen & are there when they are needed?
That might not work well for guns, but you can see that there are other ways to solve
the other problems that come with guns. But folks against guns have already decided
that banning guns is the route to go and reviewing the issues arn't in the picture.
As if they are closed minded and you can't really find their real reasons for pro banning.
This plays into the hands of the government.
The people owning guns TRULY is one of the main reason that corrupt cops respect your rights.
AND, they are all corrupt in one way or another. You probably understand how they don't arrest their own, don't you ?
That is corruption, and there are many other forms of it too.

The government has criminals and private citisens volunteer to comitt crimes in their behalf.
You wouldn't support the rights of a drug dealer would you.
Would you treat the accused or suppected as INNOCENT UNTILL PROVEN GUILTY IN A COURT OF LAW?
That's the American way. Love it or leave it. True Americans don't want you around.
Isn't that obserd? But that's what I hear all the time from those who won't support your rights.

I had a crew of criminals acting in behalf of the local police using illegal electronic
surviellance on me, & because I owned a gun, they were detered some what.
If I didn't own a gun there would have been no deterance to them.
Remember, our corrupt police department would have never arrested them,
under any conditions. Even caught on tape red handed.

Any way, there's just some thoughts, er different ways to look at things.
I'm sure the info/opion/surmization above can be corrected & or updated.
But it's just an eyeopener, or possibly a topic change of direction.

 

[DamnDirtyApe]

Correlation != Causality.

Learn to use statistics properly people...

 

[brjames]

Originally posted by: Whitling
This "no gun, no right to resist" is going to be news to those who have heard of Ghandi.

Ghandi was only successful because the Brits were a fair and humane people. Had Ghandi been a Jew in Nazi Germany, he would have gone to the gas chamber.

Note: "fair and humane" does not mean that they always did good things, or that they did not do terrible things. I mean it mostly in contrast to civilizations that been notoriously unhumane, Nazi Germany being the leading modern example, but there have been many other civilizations that have not been bothered by genocide.

 

[Mill]

Originally posted by: Whitling
This "no gun, no right to resist" is going to be news to those who have heard of Ghandi.

Now would Ghandi have gotten the US independence from Britain? Last time I checked we asked nicely at first, then whooped your ass. Ghandi would have kept askng...

What's funny is most policer officers are happy with personal firearm ownership. I think they are a little more in touch with reality than you are. Britain's crime rates are rising, and part of it due to the fact that only criminals have guns now(well the general populace can still have guns for hunting and farmers can still have guns). Regardless, it was an idiotic move. WTH would criminals care about breaking another law? Now that's liberal logic for you.