NationStates Jolt Archive

Abstract from “The Only Cause of Crime – Criminals”

Another misguided policy that comes from the “crime prevention” approach is that of banning the possession of so-called “offensive weapons”. According to Section 1 of the Prevention Of Crime Act 1953, the Restriction of Offensive Weapons Act 1959, Section 139 of the Criminal Justice Act 1988, the Crossbows Act 1997, the Offensive Weapons Act 1996, and the most recent Knives Act 1997, people can be arrested without warrant for possession of a sharp object that falls into the category of being an “offensive weapon”. The person can then be charged and be given a jail sentence of up to 4 years unless they have lawful authority or a reasonable excuse.

This law is ludicrous when considered in the practical context of catching criminals. If an attacker decided to use a kitchen knife then the chance of being caught with it while he or she was travelling to the place to commit the crime is practically negligible. Given that a criminal with even just the most basic level of common sense would obviously know this, it should be justified to assume that the deterrent of being caught and punished for committing the actual crime, would by a million times outweigh the deterrent of being caught in possession of the kitchen knife.

“If an attacker decided to use a kitchen knife then the chance of being caught with it while he or she was travelling to the place to commit the crime is practically negligible.”

For this reason, the case for having any laws against possessing “offensive weapons” looks awfully weak. However, what would make sense would be to change the law so that an actual crime that was committed with an offensive weapon carried a stiffer punishment than if the crime was committed without it. Since the criminal has a far greater chance of being caught for committing the actual crime than for simply carrying the “offensive weapon”, having the law so that they get a stiffer sentence for using the weapon to commit the actual crime would go more to deter him or her than would having a law about simply possessing the weapon.

Those members of the “hang-em and flog-em” brigade who think that having harsh penalties for possessing weapons is being “tough on crime” are wrong. Laws against weapon possession are primarily polices of the “crime prevention” approach advocated by the liberal left. They do not in principle have any part to play in the “crime repression” approach that is traditionally advocated by right-wing conservatives. The weapon laws are essentially another scheme of the liberal left that refuses to hold the criminal responsible for his or her actions and that instead it is the “weapon’s fault”.

People should be allowed to carry any weapon they want to - even firearms.

That's absurd. Think about how many innocent people will likely be charged. Imagine this common scenario.

Let's say you're cutting some vegetables with a machete, because it's the only sharp knife you have around the house. The phone rings, and you drop the machete, which ends up in a sheath tucked into your waistband. Suddenly you realize that you're late for work, and run for the bus, where you trip and accidentally slash a guy six or seven times. Now because of the stupid laws against carrying knives you've gone from being a law abiding, if somewhat accident-prone citizen to being a wanted criminal.

Why does the public need to carry weapons around on their person? To protect themselves? Well if the public begins to routinely carry weapons then surely criminals would as well. In which case the general public is no safer than before. Why not allow them to have guns then so that they are more able to defend themselves. And we get a nice little logical spiral that ends with the public have tomahawk missles concealed on their person.

The law is probably targeted at organised crime. If you can't convict them for the more serious offence then at least they can be convicted for possessing an offensive weapon.

I think that crime should be prevented, but I don't think weapons laws are much of a prevention. If someone wants to commit a crime, they will either: carry a weapon despite it being illegal or carry something that is not classed as a weapon but can still hurt people.

Why does the public need to carry weapons around on their person? To protect themselves? Well if the public begins to routinely carry weapons then surely criminals would as well. In which case the general public is no safer than before. Why not allow them to have guns then so that they are more able to defend themselves. And we get a nice little logical spiral that ends with the public have tomahawk missles concealed on their person.

The law is probably targeted at organised crime. If you can't convict them for the more serious offence then at least they can be convicted for possessing an offensive weapon.
Guess what? Criminals already carry weapons. They won't stop because it's illegal. That's part of being a criminal.

legality in carrying concelaed weapons would make me feel a lot less safer. I know alot of people who don't but would if it was leagla, and I don't trust any of them with a pea shooter let a lone a knife or a gun.

Guess what? Criminals already carry weapons. They won't stop because it's illegal. That's part of being a criminal.You miss my point. If you allow the public to carry weapons then the criminals will carry the next up category of weapons that are illegal.

The criminals will always carry illegal weapons and the public legal weapons. The more weapons that are illegal then the more likely a criminal is to carry a less lethal weapon. Therefore there being a smaller chance of a victim of crime is likely to be killed.

Say a member of the public who carries a concealed gun when he/she is confronted by an attacker with a gun. If the victim makes a move to get his/her gun there is a high probability that the attacker by fire in the heat of the moment.

You miss my point. If you allow the public to carry weapons then the criminals will carry the next up category of weapons that are illegal.

The criminals will always carry illegal weapons and the public legal weapons. The more weapons that are illegal then the more likely a criminal is to carry a less lethal weapon. Therefore there being a smaller chance of a victim of crime is likely to be killed.

Say a member of the public who carries a concealed gun when he/she is confronted by an attacker with a gun. If the victim makes a move to get his/her gun there is a high probability that the attacker by fire in the heat of the moment.
I'm not sure your argument works. It's hard to get guns in the UK. Most criminals don't have access to them. Unless you're going to ban the sale and possession of knives though, everyone will still have access to them. That means that passing a law making it illegal to carry them won't deter criminals from carrying them, only law-abiding suckers, um, I mean citizens.

Well the OP was suggesting that the public be able to carry firearms.

Personally I just not like the idea of blade/gun obsessives being able to carry their idols and suddenly if their little tempers flares I've got psycho threatening me with a gun.

Bleh. Weapons. Probably the only authoritarian stance I have.

I'm not sure your argument works. It's hard to get guns in the UK. Most criminals don't have access to them. Unless you're going to ban the sale and possession of knives though, everyone will still have access to them. That means that passing a law making it illegal to carry them won't deter criminals from carrying them, only law-abiding suckers, um, I mean citizens.


Knives are never going to be banned. They have a legitimate use other than as a weapon. Firearms do not. Well unless you're really stuck for a hammer, or the little ring thingy broke off your can of coke.

Knives are never going to be banned. They have a legitimate use other than as a weapon. Firearms do not. Well unless you're really stuck for a hammer, or the little ring thingy broke off your can of coke.
Regardless of what you think of firearms the fact remains that you're not going to ban knives, so criminals will still carry them. If you allow law abiding people to have concealed knives, the criminals in your country still won't make the switch to guns because guns are so hard to get over there.

In the UK we have a culture of binge drinking and enormous amounts of alcohol fuelled violence, particularly between about 11PM - 1AM, I often wonder how many more of these violent incidents would be fatal if more of the people involved were carrying weapons. It is not simply a matter of taking a weapon with you because you plan on committing a crime as people on this thread have said, many crimes are spontaneous (especially violent ones) and are wrought from alchol, opportunism or anger.

Regardless of what you think of firearms the fact remains that you're not going to ban knives, so criminals will still carry them. If you allow law abiding people to have concealed knives, the criminals in your country still won't make the switch to guns because guns are so hard to get over there.

And then those criminals found carrying the aforementioned items will be arrested, convicted and incarcerated.

Guns are also becoming more and more available over here particularly in highly urbanised areas Nottingham especially, which is why criminals are switching to them and why gun crime is on the rise.

In the UK we have a culture of binge drinking and enormous amounts of alcohol fuelled violence, particularly between about 11PM - 1AM, I often wonder how many more of these violent incidents would be fatal if more of the people involved were carrying weapons. It is not simply a matter of taking a weapon with you because you plan on committing a crime as people on this thread have said, many crimes are spontaneous (especially violent ones) and are wrought from alchol, opportunism or anger.
Which is the reason I wonder why some people talk about 'Criminals' like they were some kind of different race compared to 'law-abiding citizens'.

And then those criminals found carrying the aforementioned items will be arrested, convicted and incarcerated.

Guns are also becoming more and more available over here particularly in highly urbanised areas Nottingham especially, which is why criminals are switching to them and why gun crime is on the rise.

Private ownership of firearms is increasing or criminals obtaining them illegally?

Maybe it also has to do w/ the rise in gang culture, the lack of police deterrence of crime and smuggling.

People should be allowed to carry any weapon they want to - even firearms.

How about cruise missiles?

How about cruise missiles?

But how will the common Britisher defend himself against countries armed with ICBM's?

Hmmmm???!?!?

How about cruise missiles?
They're kind of heavy. A more practical option would be this.

http://i2.tinypic.com/qyiums.jpg

But how will the common Britisher defend himself against countries armed with ICBM's?

Hmmmm???!?!?

Privately owned particle beam satellites, silly.

But how will the common Britisher defend himself against countries armed with ICBM's?

Hmmmm???!?!?Dial-a-Star-Wars-missle-intercept? You sign up to a service which warns you whenever a missle launch is detected and whether or not it is coming your way. You then phone up a company that has a lazer satelite and you hand over your credit card details and then the company blasts the missle right out of the sky for you. Maybe $50,000 for the service?

Dial-a-Star-Wars-missle-intercept? You sign up to a service which warns you whenever a missle launch is detected and whether or not it is coming your way. You then phone up a company that has a lazer satelite and you hand over your credit card details and then the company blasts the missle right out of the sky for you. Maybe $50,000 for the service?

What, with BT? I'd have a better chance of hitting the damned thing m'self...

You miss my point. If you allow the public to carry weapons then the criminals will carry the next up category of weapons that are illegal.

The criminals will always carry illegal weapons and the public legal weapons. The more weapons that are illegal then the more likely a criminal is to carry a less lethal weapon. Therefore there being a smaller chance of a victim of crime is likely to be killed.

Say a member of the public who carries a concealed gun when he/she is confronted by an attacker with a gun. If the victim makes a move to get his/her gun there is a high probability that the attacker by fire in the heat of the moment.

Yeah, Duh Drunk COmmies deleted, they are obviously going to walk around with rocket launches! Duh, GOSH!

SEriously though, criminals have access to rifles, shotguns, pistols and assault weapons. You really can't go any higher


Oh and that is not true at all. I saw this interview done by ABC news where they interviewed a bunch of maximum security prisoners. THey said the thing they fear the most is another gun owner. THink about it though, I'd be more likely to shoot a person who I know couldn't hurt me back than a person I knww that could. If you ever watch any police videos... notice how the criminals ALWAYS RUN AWAY when a law abiding gun owner decides to bust some caps in his own defense.

Yeah, Duh Drunk COmmies deleted, they are obviously going to walk around with rocket launches! Duh, GOSH!

SEriously though, criminals have access to rifles, shotguns, pistols and assault weapons. You really can't go any higher


Oh and that is not true at all. I saw this interview done by ABC news where they interviewed a bunch of maximum security prisoners. THey said the thing they fear the most is another gun owner. THink about it though, I'd be more likely to shoot a person who I know couldn't hurt me back than a person I knww that could. If you ever watch any police videos... notice how the criminals ALWAYS RUN AWAY when a law abiding gun owner decides to bust some caps in his own defense.
Now I'm going to have to charter a plane to randomly drop Javelin and Stinger missiles all over England just to prove you wrong.

Outlaw guns and only outlaws have guns

Outlaw guns and only outlaws have gunsOutlaw rape and only outlaws will rape people.

Laws create criminals, it's kinda the whole point.

In the UK we have a culture of binge drinking and enormous amounts of alcohol fuelled violence, particularly between about 11PM - 1AM, I often wonder how many more of these violent incidents would be fatal if more of the people involved were carrying weapons. It is not simply a matter of taking a weapon with you because you plan on committing a crime as people on this thread have said, many crimes are spontaneous (especially violent ones) and are wrought from alchol, opportunism or anger.

Those who can't learn the virtues of self-disipline and personal restraint so that they can't learn to possess a weapon responsibly ought to be sent to jail if they attack someone with a weapon, just like they are in the United States. We should do away with all of this community sentencing rubbish for these violent and drunken scumbags.

Yeah, Duh Drunk COmmies deleted, they are obviously going to walk around with rocket launches! Duh, GOSH!

SEriously though, criminals have access to rifles, shotguns, pistols and assault weapons. You really can't go any higher.

Well, you could go with pipe bombs/homemade incendiary devices. However, it's alittle too messy for most people's tastes.

Well, you could go with pipe bombs/homemade incendiary devices. However, it's alittle too messy for most people's tastes.Indeed, just look at London and Madrid. Sure wasn't an assault rifle that did that.

Indeed, just look at London and Madrid. Sure wasn't an assault rifle that did that.

Yep, fortunantly they are not used too often. Nasty stuff...

Why does the public need to carry weapons around on their person? To protect themselves? Well if the public begins to routinely carry weapons then surely criminals would as well. In which case the general public is no safer than before. Why not allow them to have guns then so that they are more able to defend themselves. And we get a nice little logical spiral that ends with the public have tomahawk missles concealed on their person.

The law is probably targeted at organised crime. If you can't convict them for the more serious offence then at least they can be convicted for possessing an offensive weapon.

criminals already do, that's part of what makes them criminal

Yep, fortunantly they are not used too often. Nasty stuff...Unfortunately they are...

The IRA (only activities in the 1990s)
1990: Car bombings in Northern Ireland kill seven and wound 37. [Northern Ireland]
July 20, 1990: The IRA exploded a large bomb at the London Stock Exchange causing massive damage.
30 July 1990 Ian Gow MP is killed when a device explodes under his car as he is leaving his home. [England]
September 19, 1990: The IRA attempted to kill Air Chief Marshall Sir Peter Terry at his Staffordshire home. Sir Peter had been a prime target since his days as Governor of Gibraltar, where he signed the documents allowing the SAS to pursue IRA terrorists. The revenge attack took place at 9pm at the Main Road house. The gunman opened fire through a window hitting Sir Peter at least 9 times and injuring his wife, Lady Betty Terry, near the eye. The couple's daughter, Liz, was found suffering from shock. Sir Peter's face had to be rebuilt as the shots shattered Sir Peter's face and 2 high-velocity bullets lodged a fraction of an inch from his brain. [England]
18 February 1991: A bomb explodes at Victoria Station. One man is killed and 38 people injured. [England]
1991: Mortar attack on members of the British Cabinet and the Prime Minister, John Major in Cabinet session at Number 10 Downing Street at the height of a huge security clampdown amid the Gulf War is launched by the IRA. The Cabinet collectively got under the table to protect themselves. [England]
1991: Two IRA members are killed in St Albans when their bomb detonates prematurely. [England]
28 February 1992: A bomb explodes at London Bridge railway station injuring 29 people. [England]
10 April 1992: A large bomb explodes at 30 St Mary Axe in the City of London killing three people and injuring 91. Many buildings are heavily damaged and the Baltic Exchange is completely destroyed. [England]
12 October 1992: A device explodes in the gents' toilet of the Sussex Arms public house in Covent Garden killing one person and injuring four others. [England]
1992: Eight builders are killed by an IRA bomb on their way to work at an army base near Omagh. [Northern Ireland]
1993: Two IRA bombs at opposite ends of a shopping street in Warrington, timed to go off within minutes of each other, kill two children. [England]
1993: The PIRA detonates a huge truck bomb in the City of London at Bishopsgate, which kills two and causes around £350m of damage, including the near destruction of St Ethelburga's Bishopsgate. [England]
1993: A bomb at a fish and chip shop underneath a UDA office on the Protestant Shankill Road in Belfast detonates prematurely, killing ten, including one of the bombers and two children. [Northern Ireland]
8 March 1994: Heathrow Airport, four mortar shells were fired toward Heathrow Airport from a car at night following telephone warnings in the name of the IRA, but police said none of the shells exploded and no injuries were reported.
10 March 1994: Heathrow Airport evacuated staff and passengers from Terminal Four and closed its southern runway after the second attack on the airport in 30 hours. No one was hurt when four mortar shells were fired.
13 March 1994: Heathrow Airport, the IRA launched their third mortar attack on Heathrow defying tightening security. They fired four mortar bombs from a heavily camouflaged launcher buried in scrubland close to the southern perimeter. Later that night both Heathrow and Gatwick airports were closed for 2 hours after renewed coded telephoned bomb threats were received.
10 February 1996: The IRA ends its 1994 ceasefire, killing two civilians in a bombing adjacent to the South Quay DLR station in London's Docklands. [England]
15 February 1996: A 5 lb bomb placed in a phone booth is disarmed by Police on the Charing Cross Road in London.
18 February 1996: An improvised high explosive device detonates prematurely on a bus travelling along Aldwych in central London, killing Edward O'Brien, the IRA operative transporting the device and injuring eight others. [England]
15 June 1996: The IRA detonates a 3,300 lb (1,500 kg) bomb in Manchester, injuring 206 people and damaging 70,000 square metres of retail and office space. [England]
7 October 1996: the IRA kills one soldier and injures 31 people at the British Army's Northern Ireland HQ, Thiepval Barracks. [Northern Ireland]
David Copeland's Nail bombs
April 17, 1999 - Electric Avenue, Brixton, London
April 24, 1999 - Brick Lane, East London
April 30, 1999 - Admiral Duncan pub, Old Compton Street, London.
Red Action's bombing campaign
Janurary, 1993 - Victoria Station, London
Janurary, 1993 - Harrods, London
March 2, 1993 - Hackney, London. 22lb of Semtex found at a house in Hackney after a morning raid by police.
And finally:
July 7, 2005 - Multiple areas around London bombed by Islamic extremists.

Terrorism is common and can be easily commited. In the last 15 years there have been about 30 terrorists attacks on the UK.

Those who can't learn the virtues of self-disipline and personal restraint so that they can't learn to possess a weapon responsibly ought to be sent to jail if they attack someone with a weapon, just like they are in the United States. We should do away with all of this community sentencing rubbish for these violent and drunken scumbags.

I'm certainly not condoning it, people who commit violent crimes should receive stern sentencing whatever their motivation. That said, I would much rather these individuals not be armed with firearms when these brawls break out.

Guess what? Criminals already carry weapons. They won't stop because it's illegal. That's part of being a criminal.

Yes, but making it illegal makes it much harder for them to get weapons.

Yes, but making it illegal makes it much harder for them to get weapons.

Well, in Debehanams thay were giving out free knives today...

I've no problems with our offensive weapons laws. Personally, it makes me feel safer. That's all, really...