"Paul J. Adam" wrote in
:

"Jim Yanik" wrote in message
.. .
"Paul J. Adam" wrote in
:
Of course, and always have been, but they don't get used for
burglary.

Because they know they are safe,protected by UK's laws against self-
defense,at the expense of the citizenry.

Or because they can't afford guns, because if they had that sort of
cash they wouldn't be out burgling or nicking car stereos. And because
if they *had* a gun they'd use it for something more lucrative.

Appeasement,that's what it is.

If you think any intruder in my house is safe, then come and try to
break in. Stop trying to tell us what life's like here.

Well,just because YOU are so capable,doesn't mean that everyone else is,nor
should they be restricted by your self-limitations.

delete elephant nonsense.

But actually,in parts of the US,attacks by
large animals such as bears or cougars is a fair possibility.

Yep, there's a thread on the subject elsewhere. If I were living in
the US I'd eagerly investigate the options for acquiring a firearm or
two: mostly for entertainment but with security in mind. Different
place, different needs.

Exactly;one size does not fit all,different people may need differing
levels of security.

Thanks, but we like having handguns be rare and unusual. You do it
your way, we'll do it ours.

yes,keep those criminals safe,while your citizens suffer crimes.

I'm not quite sure how proliferating firearms is going to help the
situation. Most British citizens aren't familiar with firearms, don't
particularly want them around and don't see why they should spend
significant sums on buying, properly securing, and becoming proficient
with a weapon when they have no particular need. One reason the 1997
handgun ban passed easily was that very few people owned and shot
them, and the political pressure was all to ban those horrid nasty
implements of Death.

And yet the same thing can still happen again.If the Yardies can get
machine guns,and others make,steal or smuggle in guns,the guns ARE
available inthe UK.

On the other hand, I can see the many criminals who haven't suffered
conviction

Are there a lot of those in the UK? In the US,most criminals have long
histories of crimes.

yet considering this would be Christmas come early, buying
weapons for resale to those less able to legally purchase. (One
presumes that background checks, limits on purchases, and any attempt
to track weapons once sold would be considered as unfair and
unreasonable in the UK as they would in the US)

End result? Unarmed citizens, but the Bad Guys have even freer access
to weapons. Not sure why this is supposed to help. Presumably some
ODCs will then buy weapons, but isn't that a little late?


Folks like me who *did* happily pay up to turn a few hundred rounds a
week into .45-calibre holes in paper were a rarity.

Appease them.

No, keep them disarmed as a rule.

except that it really does not keep them disarmed. Note the Yardies and
other gangs having guns in the UK.If they want them,they can get them.

Not if one or two of the group have guns: outnumbered and outgunned
is a bad place to be.

You're STILL better off than being unarmed.

Why? Dead is still dead.

But you may not always die.And that's generally the case as its been in the
US.It shouldn't be any different where you are.

And at least you will get some
of them before they get you,maybe even the ones with the guns.

And this makes you "less dead" how, precisely?

you seem to think that evey shootout results in everyone dead.It doesn't
happen that way.

Then the
next
group will have second thoughts about trying such attacks against
others.

And this helps *you* how, precisely? Meanwhile that gang now have more
weapons to play with.

If these armed gangs aren't deterred by one in four USAians owning
firearms, what level of ownership is needed before they stop their
rampages?

Many of those owning such guns do not have carry permits,and cannot carry
them in public,but their homes are much less attacked.The worst places for
gun violence in the US are largely where gun control is the strictest.


Meanwhile we're largely bereft of such gangs and like things that way.

Thus leaving the ODC open to a lifetime of legal nightmares,
apparently.

Better to be judged by twelve than carried by six.

My attitude precisely, but then others claim the advantage of "shoot
early, shoot often" is that dead men can't sue. (Which appears to
suppose that killing strangers on suspicion is viewed with
enthusiasm...)

Where are you keeping it while you're asleep?

Nunya bidness.

I just remember the rules I learned in the Army: I don't think my wife
would appreciate sharing our bed with a firearm of any type.

YMMV.


(And for the endless whines about Jill Dando - she was shot in
the back of the head on her doorstep, caught completely
unawares. She could have had a MAC-10 in each hand and it
wouldn't have made the slightest difference)

Well,so she was caught unawares;that's the result of a false sense of
security that the UK residents have,from their "gun control".

So having more weapons means we get to be perpetually paranoid?

It might make you more concerned with what goes on around you.Maybe.

Give her a gun. Give her two guns. Give her a hundred guns. What's the
difference? No matter how heavily armed she was or was not, she was
killed on her doorstep by an assailant she never saw.

You seem to be advocating that more weapons will make us safer, which
means we'll all be much more paranoid... doesn't compute, Jim. Either
being armed makes us safer, or it makes us more alert and aware, but
you don't go to higher alert states because the risk level dropped.

And how "being armed" is far from the panacea quoted. Note also
that this incident was five years ago - haven't you had any other
examples to cite?

Why,what's changed in the last 5 years? Nothing.But UK gun crimes
have risen every year,I believe,despite gun "control".

Yeah, I think we had 23 killed last year as opposed to 17 in 1999.
That's *how* much more dangerous than the US?

(Remember, Jim, someone using a banana in his pocket as a 'gun' is a
firearm crime in the UK. Be careful what you're claiming.)

It would not surprise me to find that the UK gov't has classed some crimes
as other crimes,skewing the data.

--
Jim Yanik
jyanik-at-kua.net