NationStates Jolt Archive

http://www.kimdutoit.com/ee/index.php/rant/single/practical_advice_for_brits/


Hope is not fully lost.

http://www.kimdutoit.com/ee/index.php/rant/single/practical_advice_for_brits/


Hope is not fully lost.

Nothing new here. No change to the law just a clarification of what the police intend.
Of course intruders don't tend to carry weapons as they don't expect to face weapons. So they generally leave when confronted. If I own a gun I up the ante.
What are you "hoping" for? A society as violent as the US?
Basically
More guns = more violence
More guns = more people shot
More guns = a bad thing :(

Please we are not completely 'pro-criminal' here, this recent fuss is about vote buying more than any real change in policy. Courts usually side with the homeowner who defends their property, family and life. In fact in the last 15 years there have only been 11 prosecutions for attacks on burgulars (by the way, one of these prosecution was for a man that "laid in wait for a burgular, caught him, tied him up, beat him, threw him into a pit and set fir to him" - Daily Express).


More guns = more violence
More guns = more people shot
More guns = a bad thing

Tell that to the Swiss

Tell that to the Swiss
Someone told me that once, and I've been sitting here trying to do it ever since. Of course, the swiss hasn't responded yet. I don't think it's paying attention But I've kept trying...

I'm beginning to wonder if he didn't mean that I should talk to cheese. But what else could it have meant?


Oh, Goddess above, I've sunk to a new low. Threadjacking within the first 5 posts.
[/threadjack]

EDIT:
I'd like to take some time out from my day and tell you this:
I sound like an idiot.
That will be all, carry on.

murder is still murder as far as i'm concerned

This good news for Duncan Ferguson!

Please we are not completely 'pro-criminal' here, this recent fuss is about vote buying more than any real change in policy. Courts usually side with the homeowner who defends their property, family and life. In fact in the last 15 years there have only been 11 prosecutions for attacks on burgulars (by the way, one of these prosecution was for a man that "laid in wait for a burgular, caught him, tied him up, beat him, threw him into a pit and set fir to him" - Daily Express).




Tell that to the Swiss
OK I was keeping it simple. The Swiss are an excetion but have none of the factors which make gun crime likely. Very little poverty, very little gang or drug related crime. yes they are an exception but wealthy, happy people rarely break into your house to steal your playstation to swap for drugs, in my experience.
I still maaintain that the number of guns help publically is directly related to the number of gun crimes. Japan has very few private guns and one of the lowest gun crime rates in the world. The oppersite is true of the US.
Still nothing here has changed. The police aren't advocated violence they are just explaining under which circumstances they will consider procecution.

The british government offers far too much prot3ection for criminals it's time they started treating victims of crime with the respect they currently give to criminals.

The british government offers far too much prot3ection for criminals it's time they started treating victims of crime with the respect they currently give to criminals.
Evidence please? That doesn't include anything from the right wing press

http://www.civitas.org.uk/data/prisonEU2000.htm
Here's an interesting set of stats which would allow us to prove anyones view point.
For instance England and Wales have high crime on average but low prison populations per 1000 crimes. Bad eh?
But then look at the figures for Sweden that terrible den of violent crime.
Then look at Italy. Peaceful haven in the Med? I think not but they sure lock a lot of people up and have low crime rates. Apparently
The point?
If there was a simple solution at least one country would have it right and looking at these stats. that country surely isn't in Europe.
If anyone with a degree in stats can figure this out. Let us know.

Nothing new here. No change to the law just a clarification of what the police intend.
Of course intruders don't tend to carry weapons as they don't expect to face weapons. So they generally leave when confronted. If I own a gun I up the ante.
What are you "hoping" for? A society as violent as the US?
Basically
More guns = more violence
More guns = more people shot
More guns = a bad thing :(

http://www.geoffmetcalf.com/guncontrol_20010302.html

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/1446260.stm

http://www.tsra.com/Lott107.htm

http://www.bcwf.bc.ca/s=122/bcw1069915015293/

http://www.prisonplanet.tv/articles/september2004/060904banningguns.htm

http://www.findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m0BTT/is_153_25/ai_75211996

http://www.findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m2185/is_8_15/ai_n7072766

Comparing crime rates in Britain, Australia, and the US, we see a meteoric rise in violent crime rates of all types in both Australia and Britain since they enacted stricter gun laws, while in the US the crime rates are actually falling.

It is possible to say that there is less gun crime, but you can only say that this makes people safer if you ignore the bigger picture and stick your head in the sand.

I pity the citizens of Britain especially, who are constrained by law to be almost unable to defend themselves from an attacker at all. :(

I agree with the british government. The best thing to do when a non-law abiding citizen (I don't like the word criminal, because it has perjorative overtones) breaks into my house, while I am sleeping in my bed, to steal my money and property to fund their non-legal pharmacuetical habit, and possible rape my wife and assualt my children, is to call the police and report it. Although make sure not to call 999, because that number is for emergencies only, and the police are very busy using cctv to catch the real criminals who are speeding and paking in handicapped spots - the bastards.

After all you can't really blame the criminals. It's my fault that they are hooked on drugs in the first place. If I hadn't so callously paid my taxes, then they wouldn't get enough from social services to provide food, shelter, clothes and satalite TV, and they wouldn't be so bored that they have to turn to heroine or crack to pass the time. (If only the government would run TV ads and education programmes in schools warning of the dangers of this type of behaviour, sigh).

Remember, it is not important that your life may be in jepordy. At all possible costs the unlawful entrant must be guarenteed safety, as they are the innocent party in these matters.

Good old government, focusing on the key issues in these matters,

Comparing crime rates in Britain, Australia, and the US, we see a meteoric rise in violent crime rates of all types in both Australia and Britain since they enacted stricter gun laws, while in the US the crime rates are actually falling.

I find it extremely tiresome that people still insist on quoting the enactment of tighter gun laws as some way responsible for the increase in crime. Pretty much nobody had guns before the laws were enacted anyway, so I fail to see how it can any way have affected the crime rate. I have never in my entire life met, or met anyone who has themself admitted to meeting, a person who owns or has owned a gun.

Basically
More guns = more violence
More guns = more people shot
More guns = a bad thing :(

Not true. Go to http://www.smallarmssurvey.org/
It's an anti-gun organization.
If you read their papers, you will find that they are unable to find a relationship between the rate of gun ownership and the rate of gun violence.
In some countries, the effect is the opposite of what was expected by people who believe as you do - in fact, there is no discernable connection at all.
They also state that in the US, a great deal of violent crime is stopped by civilians with guns - a positive number ranging from 60,000 incidents per year (an anti-gun study) to 2.4 million per year (a Department of Justice Study) to 2.5 million per year (a pro-gun study). They feel that this is a positive effect in the US that cannot be discounted.
They feel that there are other factors involved in gun violence - patterns of society that are different in each country that in some cases make more guns a bad thing - or more guns a good thing.
Ownership rates of firearms have increased by huge amounts in the US over the past 10 years - an increase in 49 million handguns alone (we're not counting rifles and shotguns). Yet over this period, we've experienced significant drops in violent crime. One factor to consider in the US is that only 7 percent of violent crime involves the use or presence of a gun. So here a violent criminal is unlikely to be armed with a firearm.

That may explain why the drop in crime has been greatest in states where concealed carry has been encouraged. 33 states have all shown drops in violent crime after the passage of the laws that make it easier to carry concealed. The other states have all shown increases in crime. Usually, the more stringent the gun laws in the US, the greater the increase in violent crime. We've seen this in Virginia (more guns, lower crime) and the adjacent state Maryland (less guns, more crime).

This may not apply to other countries - but it seems fairly consistent in the US.

We've made some logical restrictions - it's not legal (and it's hard) to buy a gun if you're an ex-felon, a known wife-beater, or have been treated in rehab for the use of drugs or ever been in a mental institution. Nice computer check to make that determination.

It seems to work well here. You might want to know that Brazil has a much higher death total, more violent crime, and yet their laws make the possession of handguns illegal - and possession of other firearms are more severely restricted than they are in the UK.

I agree with the british government. The best thing to do when a non-law abiding citizen (I don't like the word criminal, because it has perjorative overtones) breaks into my house, while I am sleeping in my bed, to steal my money and property to fund their non-legal pharmacuetical habit, and possible rape my wife and assualt my children, is to call the police and report it. Although make sure not to call 999, because that number is for emergencies only, and the police are very busy using cctv to catch the real criminals who are speeding and paking in handicapped spots - the bastards.

After all you can't really blame the criminals. It's my fault that they are hooked on drugs in the first place. If I hadn't so callously paid my taxes, then they wouldn't get enough from social services to provide food, shelter, clothes and satalite TV, and they wouldn't be so bored that they have to turn to heroine or crack to pass the time. (If only the government would run TV ads and education programmes in schools warning of the dangers of this type of behaviour, sigh).

Remember, it is not important that your life may be in jepordy. At all possible costs the unlawful entrant must be guarenteed safety, as they are the innocent party in these matters.

Good old government, focusing on the key issues in these matters,
I had reason the dial 999 recently and the police were here in minutes.
We live, for better or worse in a country where people are not equal. If we could all be as bright and well educated as you obviously are then we would all hold down a good, high paid job like you do. There are people who have not had your advantages who need support. When you grow up you will see that abandoning those less fortunate than you does not make for a nice place to live. Criminals need to be dealt with whether they are muggers, druggers or speeders. No-one, including the police, advocates protecting "unlawful entrants" from your no doubt mighty wrath they just expect you to manage a little self control once you've floored the bastard.
Of course if you had any self control you wouldn't post such pathetic drivvel.

I had reason the dial 999 recently and the police were here in minutes.


Why? Was someone speeding? They are pretty quick out of the gate for that.

But you are right. People do need to steal. Else how could they pay for their food? I've heard that it is near famine conditions for the poorly educated in England. :rolleyes:

I had reason the dial 999 recently and the police were here in minutes.
We live, for better or worse in a country where people are not equal. If we could all be as bright and well educated as you obviously are then we would all hold down a good, high paid job like you do. There are people who have not had your advantages who need support. When you grow up you will see that abandoning those less fortunate than you does not make for a nice place to live. Criminals need to be dealt with whether they are muggers, druggers or speeders. No-one, including the police, advocates protecting "unlawful entrants" from your no doubt mighty wrath they just expect you to manage a little self control once you've floored the bastard.
Of course if you had any self control you wouldn't post such pathetic drivvel.

Here in the US, the average response time for an emergency call indicating a violent felony in progress varies widely. But the national average is 45 minutes.

Having dealt with a fair number of felons in the course of my work, their condition cannot be boiled down to a simple matter of economic inequity. Some people in this world believe that they are owed everything in exchange for nothing - that's not an economic problem or a drug problem. People don't rape women because they are poor.

While I do carry a gun at all times, and am never out of arms reach of it at home, and I have had personal confrontations with violent felons in the past, I haven't shot any of them. So far, the mere fact that I was armed and awake, and they were armed with a tire iron (in one case) and a chain (in another), made it possible to stop the crime in progress without hurting anyone.

That's gun control. It's the ability to use a gun to stop a crime without hurting anyone and without sending anyone to jail.

Just because I'm defending my home, my wife, and my children with a gun doesn't make me a bloodthirsty murderer waiting for a chance to kill someone. I know that had I not had a gun that something terrible would have happened. But I am fortunate that nothing happened - and the felons in question are fortunate as well - I gave them more of a chance than the police ever would have.

murder is still murder as far as i'm concerned
And burglary, assualt and other crimes are violations of the law, of a person's right to safety and of basic common decency as far as I'm concerned.

My boyfriend's house was robbed a few weeks ago. We were out, but had we been there, I would have hesitated to go for them. OK, so I would not have gone so far as to murder them, but how dare they think they can enter our personal space, take our things and damage our confidence? How dare they?! I would certainly bashed them one, and would have made no apology for it.

No doubt I'd have been sent to jail for twenty years for protecting our property and our persons, and they would've claimed compensation, while being given an all-expenses paid 'rehabilitation' trip to Las Vegas. Killers and rapists would walk the street after being released on parole before the end of their 1 hour prison sentence, while decent people only interested in defending themselves rot away.

OK, I'm deliberately exaggerating, but I despair of this country's so-called criminal justice system, and am very definitely in favour of a more American-style approach in this regard. I hope these latest promises of Blair and Co's, to allow us to actually defend ourselves somewhat, are not completely empty like most stuff that comes out of their mouths.

It's simple...

People who need guns to commit crimes will get them anyways, regardless through legal means or otherwise.

Banning guns only takes them out of possessions of well to do citizens that would get held up by criminals and have no way to protect themselves.

I think guns should be legal, but a background check should be done on someone before selling them guns, and their needs to be strict liscense laws. Any previous criminal record? I'm afraid we're not gonna make it any easier for you to get a gun, especially not legally.

It's simple...

People who need guns to commit crimes will get them anyways, regardless through legal means or otherwise.

Banning guns only takes them out of possessions of well to do citizens that would get held up by criminals and have no way to protect themselves.

I think guns should be legal, but a background check should be done on someone before selling them guns, and their needs to be strict liscense laws. Any previous criminal record? I'm afraid we're not gonna make it any easier for you to get a gun, especially not legally.

We already do that in the US. If you buy a gun, there's a background check.

It's working here.