Gun control out of control, England

[stephenw]

Originally Posted by kai

and yet Ireland? with its so recent armed struggle doesnt feel the need to be armed just in case.

Like American football, I think it's just one of those Yank things I'll never understand.

[Father Heathen]

Originally Posted by kai

and yet Ireland? with its so recent armed struggle doesnt feel the need to be armed just in case.

How the **** should I know?

[kai]

Originally Posted by Father Heathen

How the **** should I know?

How the **** should you know what?

[Mike182]

Originally Posted by Makaveli

Well, I'm going to thank God right now I was not born in your police state. Even in California, we can ride with a long gun unloaded in the front, with shells attached to the stock for quick loading, or a magazine in the door.

If you prefer to forego your natural right to kill government officials when needed (which is the point of our 2nd Amendment), then that is your right as a people. Your government is responsible to you, the British citizenry, and not to the sensibilities of the rest of the world; it would be better if the tyranny of the majority did not restrict the rights of everyone, but I suppose in a country with iris scanning at the airports draconian gun control isn't much of a stretch. I, however, prefer, to reserve the right to vote from the rooftops when Lady Liberty calls.

Police state? Have you ever even been to England?

Sorry, but murder isn't a natural right in England, and I'm damn proud of that. I would like to see an actually substantiated reason as to how limited/no access to guns equates loss of liberty in England.

[Makaveli]

Originally Posted by Mike182

Police state? Have you ever even been to England?

Sorry, but murder isn't a natural right in England, and I'm damn proud of that. I would like to see an actually substantiated reason as to how limited/no access to guns equates loss of liberty in England.

Yes I have, and I was quite disturbed by the iris scanning services at Heathrow. I was further disturbed by how many cameras you have in London, and to a lesser degree in the rest of the country; do you have such fear of each other that you feel it necessary to be constantly watched by the government? It may not be a police state now, since you can still vote, but it has the mechanisms put in place for absolute state control.

It's also very cold and dreary there and the food, besides fish and chips, is terrible.

Murder? Killing corrupt government officials when all other methods of democracy have been extinguished is not murder, but the natural right of every person to dissolve their government by force if necessary, when it has become contrary to the good of the people.

I was further disturbed by your sheep politicians calling for knife control, every day on the news, when your whole epidemic of knife crime is caused by your draconian restriction of gun rights ergo the natural right of self defense. When a human being of ripe years cannot defend itself with the best means available, liberty has been infringed

[Troublemane]

I am all for people defending themselves, and like it or not weapons are the equalizer. If you are an 80 lb weakling you can still pull a trigger and stop a 250-lb manic from killing you. Sorry, but I have no pity for someone who invades another's home and steals/rapes/kills. If they attacked someone I cared about and i could stop them, I certainly would and not feel bad about it at all.

Perhaps if more people were trained to use firearms they wouldnt be so scared of them. They are after all, just another tool. You can kill someone with a hammer, but its alot messier.

[Mike182]

Originally Posted by Makaveli

Yes I have, and I was quite disturbed by the iris scanning services at Heathrow. I was further disturbed by how many cameras you have in London, and to a lesser degree in the rest of the country; do you have such fear of each other that you feel it necessary to be constantly watched by the government? It may not be a police state now, since you can still vote, but it has the mechanisms put in place for absolute state control.

I don't see iris scanning is disturbing, I'm very happy for the government to sift through people entering the country and confirming who they are. Without wanting to make a cliche, if you've got nothing to hide, there is nothing to fear. Airports however are very much the exception, and Heathrow understandably more so than other airports. We have very high security at airports which is nigh on never seen anywhere else in the country.

As for cameras, I don't think we have more cameras than other countries, including America. I maintain that Britain is not using security measures above and beyond those the rest of the world uses.

That said however, if Britain did become a police state, the whole of the police and military services dedicated to surpressing my individual rights, I doubt a shotgun will do me much good anyway - other than make me an obvious target anyway.

It's also very cold and dreary there and the food, besides fish and chips, is terrible.

Not that this matters to the topic, but it really does depend upon where you eat. We have places that will serve you salmonella on a plate, and places that are so damn amazing you have to go through the entire menu... Just like any other country really

Murder? Killing corrupt government officials when all other methods of democracy have been extinguished is not murder, but the natural right of every person to dissolve their government by force if necessary, when it has become contrary to the good of the people.

If redefining murder in that way helps you sleep better at nights, have at it.

Besides, let's be honest, America certainly isn't as 'free' as you are making it out to be. You seem to worship and covet your freedom and ability to act in all situations, but let's be honest, your rights are compromised when you actually start using that freedom you so claim to have. Let's take Palin as a current example, the whole email-hack and her involvement in an employer scandel make her the prime candidate of what one would define as a "corrupt government official". Yet, if she were elected into VP position, and you were to act on this in the way you so believe is your undeniable right by taking a gun to her head, the Federal agencies would crash down on you worse than a ton of bricks. I don't see how that is any more liberating that not having the gun in the first place.

I was further disturbed by your sheep politicians calling for knife control, every day on the news, when your whole epidemic of knife crime is caused by your draconian restriction of gun rights ergo the natural right of self defense. When a human being of ripe years cannot defend itself with the best means available, liberty has been infringed

Our laws are based around what is reasonable and unreasonable usage of force in a given circumstance. We allow for the practicalities of the situation while still maintaining civil obedience. A fine balance and one that is inevitably hard to come by, granted, but one always worth striving for non the less.

At least our "sheep politicians" act on these things, since the outcry for knife control we have had many national amnesty days/weeks on knives and other weaponry, where thousands and thousands of knives were handed in anonymously to the authorities. That fact in itself demonstrates the mentality of Britain in general to knives and weapons.

[Makaveli]

Originally Posted by Mike182

I don't see iris scanning is disturbing, I'm very happy for the government to sift through people entering the country and confirming who they are. Without wanting to make a cliche, if you've got nothing to hide, there is nothing to fear. Airports however are very much the exception, and Heathrow understandably more so than other airports. We have very high security at airports which is nigh on never seen anywhere else in the country.

Then, obviously, we are of a very different mentality. I don't like the notion that a government can know where I'm going and what I'm doing at all times. It's a possible slippery slope scenario so do inform me if it is, but have you seen the film Minority Report? You have to cut out your eyes for the government not to know where you are, since everything is based on iris scanning and cameras. Disturbing.

Originally Posted by Mike182

As for cameras, I don't think we have more cameras than other countries, including America. I maintain that Britain is not using security measures above and beyond those the rest of the world uses.

That said however, if Britain did become a police state, the whole of the police and military services dedicated to surpressing my individual rights, I doubt a shotgun will do me much good anyway - other than make me an obvious target anyway.

Have you been to America? Because in my country, the only time I have ever seen a camera is at a police station, government building, or sporadic ones at traffic stops. In London, I couldn't walk down a street corner without having a camera poking me in the face. I decided I would take a picture of every camera I saw, but then I ran out of room on my digital camera.

Originally Posted by Mike182

If redefining murder in that way helps you sleep better at nights, have at it.

Besides, let's be honest, America certainly isn't as 'free' as you are making it out to be. You seem to worship and covet your freedom and ability to act in all situations, but let's be honest, your rights are compromised when you actually start using that freedom you so claim to have. Let's take Palin as a current example, the whole email-hack and her involvement in an employer scandel make her the prime candidate of what one would define as a "corrupt government official". Yet, if she were elected into VP position, and you were to act on this in the way you so believe is your undeniable right by taking a gun to her head, the Federal agencies would crash down on you worse than a ton of bricks. I don't see how that is any more liberating that not having the gun in the first place.

There is a clear delineation between murder and legitimate killing. You obviously do not make that delineation, so shall we agree to disagree?

The 2nd Amendment is a safeguard, as I have said numerous times, to be used only when all democratic safeguards have failed, and the people are left with no method of redress. You are not presenting a correct scenario according to my theory of rebellion. To utilize our 2nd Amendment rights, the American people must first exhaust every safeguard and diplomatic action before it is time to dissolve government by force.

Originally Posted by Mike182

Our laws are based around what is reasonable and unreasonable usage of force in a given circumstance. We allow for the practicalities of the situation while still maintaining civil obedience. A fine balance and one that is inevitably hard to come by, granted, but one always worth striving for non the less.

At least our "sheep politicians" act on these things, since the outcry for knife control we have had many national amnesty days/weeks on knives and other weaponry, where thousands and thousands of knives were handed in anonymously to the authorities. That fact in itself demonstrates the mentality of Britain in general to knives and weapons.

What do you consider reasonable use of force? If there is a man in your house with a knife, or a gun, would you be allowed to kill him? That is a legitimate use of self defense, but there are always other scenarios I could list. Under my understanding, having a firearm for self defense isn't a legitimate reason to have one, according to your government. That is unjust.

And we have gun turn in days, where hundreds of illegal guns are handed in by people on the street to the police in exchange for money. It doesn't seem to have dented our crime rate much, and I doubt that knife turn-ins have dented your crime rate much either.