Gun Control's Twisted Outcome. . .

[6hold]

Restricting firearms has helped make England more crime-ridden than the U.S.

Joyce Lee Malcolm | November 2002 Print Edition

On a June evening two years ago, Dan Rather made many stiff British upper lips quiver by reporting that England had a crime problem and that, apart from murder, "theirs is worse than ours." The response was swift and sharp. "Have a Nice Daydream," The Mirror, a London daily, shot back, reporting: "Britain reacted with fury and disbelief last night to claims by American newsmen that crime and violence are worse here than in the US." But sandwiched between the article's battery of official denials -- "totally misleading," "a huge over-simplification," "astounding and outrageous" -- and a compilation of lurid crimes from "the wild west culture on the other side of the Atlantic where every other car is carrying a gun," The Mirror conceded that the CBS anchorman was correct. Except for murder and rape, it admitted, "Britain has overtaken the US for all major crimes."

THE COMPLETE ARTICLE CAN BE READ AT:
http://www.reason.com/news/show/28582.html

 

[Finalygotabeltfed]

It doesn't matter, they will never get the picture.

Not once, but twice in the same century they have disarmed their "subjects". They fully deserve everything bad that befalls them for their willful and deliberate ignorance of reality.

 

[Ripach]

Maybe the next time the fascists are knocking on their door we should keep our "wild west" guns on our side of the pond and see how things play out.

 

[Chris]

When I'm normally out and about, I carry my cell phone clipped to my left front pocket.

While in the UK, I was told to not do that as I would lose it quickly and find all kinds of calls to the middle east before I could get the service canceled.

In fact, coming home from London on the tube, one of the guys in the office patted himself down and claimed "I didn't lose anything."

When I commented that I've never been worried about that kind of petty crime in the US, I was told that "no, you just worry about getting killed."

My boss kicked me in the leg as i was about to tell them why I didn't worry about that.

Turns out that so many people in the UK are just so willing to accept petty crime so long as they get to walk away.

I was informed the next day at the office that I should not say "Baaa" so loudly.

It really is a land of victims. Everything gets locked up tighter than you can imagine. Lets put it this way, the AC condensers are in a fenced off enclosure with spiked tops. There are cameras EVERYWHERE. "and those are the ones you can see".

I'm so glad I'm back here where my office staff can run around naked and I can walk around the building with whatever gun I want.

(^_^)

 

[Chris]

Oh, and you might get a kick out of this....

One of my wife's friends that lives in London. (She is a surgeon and owns a home on Abby Road) got to talking about how bad it's become in London.

They are expecting their first child and simply don't want to raise a kid there. Now, we are not talking about a bad section of London, or a family that would have to 'settle' with a public school.

Yet, they are getting out. They tried the US, but she would have to take so many tests to transfer her medical certification that she was just totally turned off.

Instead, they are looking to British Columbia in Canada. She needs to take one test, and the hospital she applied to will not only cover her costs to move and get certified, but is paying better than what she is making in London. Not to mention living costs will be about half.

She said that plenty of others she knows are looking to leave for similar reasons. AND, she won't have to deal with a certain type of patient anymore. (lets just say they don't read the bible)

If those that are able to pretty much live where they want are looking to get out, it must be a real lovely place to live.

 

[pdm]

I'm so glad I'm back here where my office staff can run around naked and I can walk around the building with whatever gun I want.

(^_^)

Self-employed?

 

[Chris]

Self-employed?

Better. Work from home. All the perks of a large global company but none of the office hassles. AND, I usually get to work on my projects in peace because my boss reminds people that my work now accounts for something like 40% of the revenue and we don't want to annoy me too much. (^_^)

 

[Paulm]

I have had the pleasure of taking a course from Professor Malcolm at Bentley College. She is a wonderful person and a strong supporter of the second amendment. She has written several books on the failures of gun control. Her book To Keep and Bear Arms: The Origins of an Anglo-American Right is a great read. I recommend her work to everyone!


Paul

 

[pdm]

Better. Work from home. All the perks of a large global company but none of the office hassles. AND, I usually get to work on my projects in peace because my boss reminds people that my work now accounts for something like 40% of the revenue and we don't want to annoy me too much. (^_^)

Nice. Been thinking about asking my boss about leaving cubeville, especially when I heard they pay a differential. That and I could finally carry while at work then.

 

[calsdad]

Oh, and you might get a kick out of this....

One of my wife's friends that lives in London. (She is a surgeon and owns a home on Abby Road) got to talking about how bad it's become in London.

They are expecting their first child and simply don't want to raise a kid there. Now, we are not talking about a bad section of London, or a family that would have to 'settle' with a public school.

Yet, they are getting out. They tried the US, but she would have to take so many tests to transfer her medical certification that she was just totally turned off.

Instead, they are looking to British Columbia in Canada. She needs to take one test, and the hospital she applied to will not only cover her costs to move and get certified, but is paying better than what she is making in London. Not to mention living costs will be about half.

She said that plenty of others she knows are looking to leave for similar reasons. AND, she won't have to deal with a certain type of patient anymore. (lets just say they don't read the bible)

If those that are able to pretty much live where they want are looking to get out, it must be a real lovely place to live.

I have heard similar stories to this. I also read something recently that really hit home - the gist of the article was that if we go down the tubes here on this continent there will be nowhere left to run. The pessimistic side of me says that all of this is leading up to a really big fight somewhere down the road as I believe there is a sizable portion of the population here ( and probably in Canada too ) that will resist the ultimate takeover of our country and confiscation of firearms if the socialists really try to push it that far. It might not be a large enough percentage - but then again from what I have read it was only about 25% or so of the population of the 13 colonies that really supported the revolution. So you don't even need overwhelming numbers.

The problem I see with a lot of the people that escape from their downward sliding socialist countries is that they don't really subscribe to the America of old - they want to go somewhere that is a functioning version of the socialist utopia they left - instead of embracing the less government - constitutional republic we were supposed to be. So as more of these people come in - we just slide that much faster down the chute.

 

[pipmaster1971]

OK, I'm going to be unpopular around here. But the article is (somewhat) B.S. (WRT the gun laws/crime part). The gun laws in the UK are crap, of that there is no doubt (I was born and bred there so I know). But there is no corrolation between the gun laws in the UK and the crime rate; zero, zilch, none. Bad article, making piss-poor correlations. In the same way as there's no corrolation between lack of gun control and crime in the US. In fact, if they were making the reverse corrolation we'd be bitching and complaining (rightly so).

The main reasons for the crime rate in the UK is: Uncontrolled and illegal immigration (sound familiar?). And a horrible "yob culture" that has crept its way into society (from god knows where, but in my opinion it's the result of a generation of entitlement lazyasses whose kids are now in their teens/early twenties).

Don't get me wrong, I wish they would change the UK gun laws...but that won't happen anytime soon (although there maybe a loosening for the 2012 Olympics - which may stay around after the event).

 

[Mr Weebles]

OK, I'm going to be unpopular around here. But the article is (somewhat) B.S. (WRT the gun laws/crime part). The gun laws in the UK are crap, of that there is no doubt (I was born and bred there so I know). But there is no corrolation between the gun laws in the UK and the crime rate; zero, zilch, none. Bad article, making piss-poor correlations. In the same way as there's no corrolation between lack of gun control and crime in the US. In fact, if they were making the reverse corrolation we'd be bitching and complaining (rightly so).

I don't think the author was stating that England's gun laws caused crime, he was pointing out that they were ineffective.

The British government made it quite clear that it was the job of the government to protect its citizens, even going to the extreme point of removing its subject's means of self-defense. As is obvious, that strategy was unworkable.

 

[pipmaster1971]

I don't think the author was stating that England's gun laws caused crime, he was pointing out that they were ineffective.

The British government made it quite clear that it was the job of the government to protect its citizens, even going to the extreme point of removing its subjects means of self-defense. As is obvious, that strategy was unworkable.

Agreed. In fact, a re-read of the article indicates that. The stupid thing is, that the most "deadly" firearm around, the shotgun, is actually reasonably easy to obtain - even in the UK.

 

[drgrant]

OK, I'm going to be unpopular around here. But the article is (somewhat) B.S. (WRT the gun laws/crime part). The gun laws in the UK are crap, of that there is no doubt (I was born and bred there so I know). But there is no corrolation between the gun laws in the UK and the crime rate; zero, zilch, none. Bad article, making piss-poor correlations.

Well, the problem is in the UK there was never a way to prove
this wrong- if you had the same level of CCW, and home
gun ownership that we have on average in say, the US free
states, I'm sure you'd start seeing an improvement in the UK, at
least WRT crimes committed against random persons. (rape, armed
robbery, carjackings, etc. )

Course, some of it is a mindset issue. In this country a lot of
thugs get the shit kicked out of them by their victims, etc... in
the UK it seems to be a lot of "don't hurt me" sheeple mentality,
save for maybe the few switched on (eg, ex military) people there.
(EG, I'd love to see what happens to a thug that tries to rob a
veteran of the SAS.... )

I'm willing to concede that even in the US, that increasing gun
ownership will not solve all crime problems; because eventually
there is a law of diminishing returns on just about everything... but
it probably would keep a lot of crime categories depressed; eg,
the criminals would have to be a lot more crafty in how they
select their victims, etc. If one in three homes had a loaded
gun behind it, home invasions would probably plummet and
be traded for more opportunistic crimes. (eg, like fraud, etc)
The main argument for legal gun ownership for self defense is a
moral one; denying a citizen the right to keep and bear arms is
effectively denying an individual's right to defend themselves if they
so choose.

-Mike

 

[drgrant]

Agreed. In fact, a re-read of the article indicates that. The stupid thing is, that the most "deadly" firearm around, the shotgun, is actually reasonably easy to obtain - even in the UK.

Yeah, but IIRC, you're not allowed to defend yourself with it- correct
me if I'm wrong, but they'd probably charge you with a crime in the
process of using it to defend yourself, regardless of the matter of
exigency at hand. A lot of socialist dumps also have terrible
force continium laws... eg, if a guy attacks you with a knife, you
can't shoot him, because it's not "fair" or some bullshit.

Edit: Even in communist shitholes like CA, illegal use/carrying of firearms
under duress (eg, lawful self defense) is often a "mulligan" legally
speaking. (Courts have upheld dropping charges for illegal CCW
in CA when the carrier could prove that that they had some compelling,
overriding reason to do so. (not something I'd ever rely on, but this alone
shows you the kind of mindset differences at hand. )

-Mike