So this is like banning guns reduces gun crime? Whatever..... How is banning something going to reduce it's use? Show me an example of something that is banned actually end up not being used? All your doing is banning responsible people owning them as the criminals will not care if it is illegal, hence why they are criminals!

Stupid, but entirely normal, Government reaction. Instead of trying to treat the disease they just fight the symptoms.

How will this affect those that enjoy Airsoft (basically paintballing but with BB Guns). Will responsible people have to be punished again for doing something that they enjoy, when it is only a small handful of twats that are spoiling it?

Guns, reproduction wall hanger guns, pointy butcher knives... I guess if I lived there, I'd be sleeping a whole bunch better at night. :@@:

Sorry England... It's jus that it looks like you're a step on the banana peel away from being closed down and locked up. I hope, sincerely hope that I am wrong.
My "Big Problem" is, if you go, how far behind can we be in the USofA? :dn:



edited because I still can't spell.

[edit on 8-6-2005 by sigung86]

Guns don't kill people, knives do!

Remember, if the UK bans replica guns, the criminals will abide by the new law and not get replica guns, either. Besides, I'd rather be held up at knife point than with a replica gun. Them replicas are dangerous!

Here is a link to my thread on wether or not the UK gun ban is working!

And also.......74 views, 4 replies and yet still no 'up or down' vote......This is getting ridiculous now!
If the story is not right then vote it down, otherwise vote yes....all it takes is one click of the mouse!!!!!

:up:

Yes the gun ban has worked.

Gun crime with people usign real guns has gone down, not that it was any where near the high rate of places such as the US in the first place.

The down side of this is that gun crime using replicas has gone up, because people find it harder to get real ones.

Banning replicas would decrease this statistic. Many have lumped gun crime using replicas and real guns together, silly of course.

I'd like to see the actual 'numbers' of crimes committed using replica guns. 66% sounds suspiciously like 2/3 of a very small number... convenience statistics. ;)

Here are the figures for gun crime in the UK over the last 2 yrs:



Notice the 48% rise in crimes involving replica weapons!

:up:

I think there should be a special approval to own replica guns.

They look all to real (that's why they're replicas) and they can easily be confused for the real thing. Don't ban them....just make sure that mature adults have to get authorization from a polic station or something....Im not talking about an extensive background check either...just a simple yay or nay and maybe records check

Can you get the figures comparing the replica gun crimes to knife crimes in the UK?

Also a 15% decrease in firearm crimes, yeah the ban on firearms is a waste of time isnt it! I'd rather the ban and the gun crime figures the UK has to deal with compared to the United States rampant gun culture and crime.

The figures clearly show that free access to guns directly relates to increased gun crimes. Yes, bans do not take the weapons out of the hands of all criminals but they do reduce the amount of crimes.

Forcing a criminal to buy a gun on the blackmarket means higher prices. Which means less access to them to most criminals. If there wasnt a ban on guns these same criminals would still have access to the them.

Ok, so really a 5% rise in gun crimes after banning guns. There's just been a shift to replicas now that the real thing's harder to get.

It seems to me that criminals haven't been affected at all, maybe even committing more crimes now to pay for those more expensive illegal guns. :)

Without replica weapons, criminals will just start using something else. When they ban that, they'll start making their own. The real numbers of violent crimes won't drop because weapons are harder to get, the types of weapons and statistics will just move around.

quote:

---

Forcing a criminal to buy a gun on the blackmarket means higher prices
 

---

Criminals get guns on the blackmarket anyways.....cuz they can't legally get them, that's why there is a black market for guns now.

And the prices are cheaper on the black market I think.

I wonder if "replica" includes the CO2 powered air pistols?
If so, then the government itself is guilty of causing the problem. Handguns were banned after the Dunblane incident so many sports pistol shooters were deprived of their sport. The handguns they used were licenced firearms, traceable, kept in strictly controlled and audited conditions, checked by county police forces. After the ban, the CO2 powered pistols started arriving and many sports shooters, deprived of their fullbore firearms switched to these to continue the sport.
The problem is, these low powered air pistols although looking very much like, and modelled on their fullbore counterparts, are not a licenced product and can be bought over the counter by anyone over the age of 17.

The sale of replica guns should definitley be brought under, i dont believe they should be banned because that is not very fair on people that use them responsibly.

How real does this look........


If somebody ran up to you with this would you:

A.) Think, oh its ok, its probably just a replica!
Or
B.) AAHHHH, PANIC, curl up in a ball, produce a brown log in your undies and cry for your mother!

I know which one i would do!!!!!

:up:

And just for the record......141 views, 14 replies and STILL no 'up or down'!!!!!

[edit on 9/6/2005 by MickeyDee]

quote:

---

Originally posted by SportyMB
And the prices are cheaper on the black market I think.

---

Wrong, the manufacture and legal sale of the weapons are set priced. The extra level of handling (the black market) adds a markup for the risk of smuggling the weapons into the country. Pay offs and the bribes as well as increased transportation costs all add to a much higher priced weapon when compared to the RRP.

 

quote:

---

Originally posted by mythatsabigprobe
It seems to me that criminals haven't been affected at all, maybe even committing more crimes now to pay for those more expensive illegal guns.

---

Well lets just break the issue down to its basic components.

America
No ban on fire arms

Population (2000): 275,264,999

Total Deaths from firearms per year (2000): 28,663

Firearm deaths per 1000 persons: 9.6

------------------------------------------------------------------------------

United Kingdom
Ban on fire arms

Population (2005): 60,441,457

Total Deaths from firearms per year (2004): 10,670

Firearm deaths per 1000 persons: 5.6

------------------------------------------------------------------------------

As can clearly be seen from the basic statistics, a ban on weapons has given us a death toll from firearms 58% less than the in the USA. Its incontrovertible.

[edit on 9/6/05 by subz]

The percentages are what counts when comparing two different countries of two different sizes

Accordong to your stats..

America
No ban on fire arms
Population (2000): 275,264,999
Total Deaths from firearms per year (2000): 28,663
0.010412874903866727% of the population

------------------------------------------------------------------------------

United Kingdom
Ban on fire arms
Population (2005): 60,441,457
Total Deaths from firearms per year (2004): 10,670
0.017653446044492274%

Hey, the is US lower...not by much....but it is lower.

this might help...I think we've gone thru stats before..on the knife thing.

How did you come up with 58%????

[edit on 9/6/2005 by SportyMB]

No Sporty its ratios, not to sure how you got that. Its very simple and obvious how he got the 58%.

Also Subz, I imagine, although I have not looked up the statistics, that non lethal injuries in the US are massive compared to the UK.

Violent Crime Statistics
In 2003-2004, the UK experienced 2,708,000 violent crime incidents
The UK's population is 60,270,708
This means there was about a 4.5% chance of someone living in the UK being the victim of a violent crime.
Source

In the year 2000 (couldn't find stats for 2003), the US had a population of 281,421,906 and experienced 2,440,736 violent crime incidents (combined violent crime, murder, agrivated assault, and rape). This means there is a .87% of an American being the victim of a violent crime. Source

While the UK may have fewer gun crimes by over 50%, there is a remarkably larger chance of being the victim of a violent crime there than in the US. The gun laws may have limited gun crimes there, though they do still happen, but it has done nothing to curb violent crime.

But that isn't really the point junglejake and not relevant to the thread.

I would much rather be punched in the face than shot by a gun.

I would say it is relevant. The conversation has turned to banning guns and that lowering crime. Yes, it (may) have lowerd gun crime (I've seen 3 totally different sets of numbers in my searches, not sure which is accurate), but was replaced with knife crime. Personally, I would rather be shot in the head than stabbed 284 times before I die.

quote:

---

No Sporty its ratios
 

---

Only when dealing with countries of equel popilation.
Percents are used to do stats because they compensate for population differences. Using numbers of gun crimes alone and coming up with ratios without compensating for the population is wrong.

the ratios he provided are wrong

Anyways, what's wrong with percents.....

I voted you a "yes". If people would bother to check and read the topic he posted:
http://politics.abovetopsecret.com/thread141540/pg3
I've clearly displayed in that, that Britain has an increasing gun problem not decreasing. Over the last 8 years, gun crime has gone up six times, stayed the same once and gone up once. But go see the statistics for yourself. You're more likely to be shot or stabbed in the U.K. then you are in America, it is a fact that the labour government do not like to admit.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Odium
You're more likely to be shot or stabbed in the U.K. then you are in America, it is a fact that the labour government do not like to admit.

---

Well now you're just being dishonest.

According to the FBI statistics, there were 9,638 murders by firearms in the US in 2003. link
According to the UK homeoffice, there were only 79 murders by firearms in England and Wales in 2003. link

There were 1,816 people killed with knives in the US in 2003. link
There were 237 people killed with knives/sharp insruments in the UK in 2003/2004 link

I'll see if I can find assault statistics to go along with that.

Also just another note, Im sure this applies to the UK as it does to the states....maybe. Gun crime and kinife crimes that end in a death have actually gone down over the past few years. But you must also look at the violent crimes and attempt involving guns and knives...they have gone up. This is due to advancments in medicine and medical practice and technology that keep people alive after they have been shot or stabbed.

If it were not for the medicine and technology, the death rate would be higher.

[edit on 9/6/2005 by SportyMB]

quote:

---

As can clearly be seen from the basic statistics, a ban on weapons has given us a death toll from firearms 58% less than the in the USA. Its incontrovertible.
 

---

Can you place a percentage on your freedoms?

How are you going to defend your freedoms? Banning knives, look alike guns what next Squit guns because you could put someones eye out. Maybe some day the british governmnet will tax you per mile that you drive. ooops!!!!

I feel for you guys. Are you guys going to draw a line in the sand or are you just going to take it like a good servant?

I just got a permit to carry a concealed firearm.

(U.S) 0.010412874903866727%
(U.K) 0.017653446044492274% of the population get shot to death.

Which shows you're more likely to get shot to death in the U.K. then in the U.S.A. You need to move away from the number of dead to the percentage of dead. As I said, government statistics are made to look good and always will be.

quote:

---

Originally posted by SportyMB
Also just another note, Im sure this applies to the UK as it does to the states....maybe. Gun crime and kinife crimes that end in a death have actually gone down over the past few years.
[edit on 9/6/2005 by SportyMB]

---

Nope, they're gone up 6 times since the 1997/1998 statistics.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Odium
(U.S) 0.010412874903866727%
(U.K) 0.017653446044492274% of the population get shot to death.

Which shows you're more likely to get shot to death in the U.K. then in the U.S.A. You need to move away from the number of dead to the percentage of dead. As I said, government statistics are made to look good and always will be.
 

---

You are very bad at math Odium.

There are 293 million people in the US and they had 9,638 murders by firearms.
There are 60 million people in the United Kingdom and yet they had 79 murders by firearms.

The US has 4.8 times the population of the UK. (293/60)
The US has 122 times the number of murders with firearms. (9,638/79)

How do you figure that a person in the UK has a greater risk of being shot to death?

I can't really see how crimes involving real guns has gone down just because of the ban on handguns, considering that registered legal firearms have hardly ever been used in crimes.
The Dunblane incident sparked off the handgun ban, registered firearms do not generally
pose much of a problem.

There should be very strict penalties for carrying replica handguns in public and/or using them in an incident. Banning them is not a real answer.

Violent crime has gone up becasue ordinary people are having their abilities to defend themselves stripped away. Any weapon is relatively easy to get hold of unless your someone who walks around with their eyes, ears and mind shut.

At the end of the day:

It has ALWAYS been illegal to criminally hurt or kill people. If someone is willing to overlook this 'minor' detail then are they really going to actually care if owning or carrying a gun/knife/weapon is also illegal?

The problem is that people are scared to admit the blindingly obvious -
There are bad people out there, and they do not care about ANYTHING. They will hurt you and they will find a way and they don't care how.

The solution - though not perfect by any means - is to allow people to defend themselves! The only people that suffer from all these crazy laws are decent law abiding citizens who are too scared to break the law and curl up into a little ball and do nothing.. Too scared of being prosecuted to even save their own life. And even if they did try and do something, they have nothing to defend themselves with, while the assailant has a gun/knife/CS Gas/Baton/Taser/etc.

CRIMINALS don't care about the law... keep making them because it's just another one for them to break.. WAKE UP and try and grasp this simple fact - until people just start accepting the SCARY truth about the whole thing (that there are people out there that really, really don't care), the sooner we can move forward and start doing something to REALLY solve this problem.

With regards to this specific situation, it is going totally over the top, they should have had stricter controls in the first place and controlled it more, but they could still do that now. The real people that suffer will be the people that collect these items.
All that it will accomplish is that they will become a more exotic and sought after item, fetching more money on the black market and becoming more comparable with a real firearm. Petty crime, robberies, etc will go up to fund it.
Criminals will still acquire them, commiting worse crimes to get the money to buy them. Though as they will be more expensive, they'll probably go the whole hog and get a proper gun instead.

The only people that will not be purchasing them anymore will be collectors.

I assume then, by what the pro-gun control in England folks are saying is that I am a gun freak. I am not going to get into percentages. I don't have the patience for it. I am simply wondering, bottom line, why such a wonderful group of people (the English) are so willing, as a group, to simply roll over and let anyone run their lives.

I don't have a real problem with you surrendering. It is, after all, your life. I just am wondering where it stops for you. No one in here seems to take individual freedom or individual responsibility for actions or crimes committed into account. Just put everyone in the same light. No one in England has sense or personal recognizance, to be responsible for their actions. So, the solution is to simply assume that everyone is stupid and a criminal oriented individual, and take away their rights so that the sickly/criminal progeny may live and devise other methods to kill with.

Sorry... I still see it as "a", if not, "the" beginning of the end for the Brits as a freedom loving peoples. Mayhap Orwell was right... :(

quote:

---

Originally posted by sigung86
I assume then, by what the pro-gun control in England folks are saying is that I am a gun freak. I am not going to get into percentages. I don't have the patience for it. I am simply wondering, bottom line, why such a wonderful group of people (the English) are so willing, as a group, to simply roll over and let anyone run their lives.

I don't have a real problem with you surrendering. It is, after all, your life. I just am wondering where it stops for you. No one in here seems to take individual freedom or individual responsibility for actions or crimes committed into account. Just put everyone in the same light. No one in England has sense or personal recognizance, to be responsible for their actions. So, the solution is to simply assume that everyone is stupid and a criminal oriented individual, and take away their rights so that the sickly/criminal progeny may live and devise other methods to kill with.

Sorry... I still see it as "a", if not, "the" beginning of the end for the Brits as a freedom loving peoples. Mayhap Orwell was right... :(

---

I'm glad someone else can see it.. I, sadly, am English and I am ashamed of the way this country is going.. They seem to be bringing up bill after bill designed to destroy Freedom of speech, responsability for one's actions, rights to owning items.. etc etc as you say..

Instead of making people face up to their actions they are taking away the rights of good people and making an enviroment where the evil and criminal can grow and take control. The problem is everyone has become too dumbed down to see it.

Population Trends 103. Office for National Statistics. London, Spring 2001
Population: 52,689,900 - 7million less then what you give. I doubt the population has gone up that much.

United Nations (1998), United Nations International Study of Firearms Regulation. UN: New York.

The statistics for firearms deaths in England and Wales (although I did say U.K.) do not include shotguns or rifles; to help keep the numbers down. They only include illegal firearms not legal ones.

London’s Evening Standard reported that armed crime, with banned handguns the weapon of choice, was "rocketing." In the two years following the 1997 handgun ban, the use of handguns in crime rose by 40 percent, and the upward trend has continued. From April to November 2001, the number of people robbed at gunpoint in London rose 53 percent.

Your chances of being mugged in London are now six times greater than in New York. England’s rates of assault, robbery, and burglary are far higher than America’s, and 53 percent of English burglaries occur while occupants are at home, compared with 13 percent in the U.S., where burglars admit to fearing armed homeowners more than the police.

In a United Nations study of crime in 18 developed nations published in July, England and Wales led the Western world’s crime league, with nearly 55 crimes per 100 people.

The murder rates of the U.S. and U.K. are also affected by differences in the way each counts homicides. The FBI asks police to list every homicide as murder, even if the case isn’t subsequently prosecuted or proceeds on a lesser charge, making the U.S. numbers as high as possible. By contrast, the English police "massage down" the homicide statistics, tracking each case through the courts and removing it if it is reduced to a lesser charge or determined to be an accident or self-defense, making the English numbers as low as possible.

In 1981 the American rate was 8.7 times the English rate, in 1995 it was 5.7 times the English rate, and the latest study puts it at 3.5 times. (2002) If this trend continues we'll out rank America in every type of crime by 2010.

Guns and Violence: The English Experience by Joyce Lee Malcolm

Jan Berry, chairman of the Police Federation, called for more and better trained armed police to counter gun crime.

She said: "We urgently need more trained armed police officers throughout England and Wales to tackle the growing menace of gun crime, otherwise lives will increasingly be put at risk."

If the Police Federation think there is a problem, I tend to agree...

It's exactly what the government are trying to do with the this latest ban of replicas, trying to mask the facts and look like their tackling the problem whn really they are too scared to admit that the real problem was banning legitimate firearms in the first place and taking away peoples rights to defend themselves.

To go back now would be to admit that they made a mistake, and then they would lose the little faith that people have in them.
That's assuming they are not too blind to see the obvious.
They've made the problem worse and it's going to carry on getting worse.

I repeat:

Criminals don't care about the law, any law. If they don't care about killing or injuring you, they definately don't care about a minor offence like possessing a banned weapon. Criminals make a habit of breaking laws, it's why they are criminals.

Laws only govern law abiding citizens at the end of the day.

It's SO obvious I can't believe that the majority of people miss this simple yet crucial, fundamental fact. Or maybe they are too scared to.

All firearms are designed for one perpose only...to kill

There is absolutely no reason for any person in the UK (or for that matter anywhere else) to legally own a firearm. It is not a case of rolling over, the british fully support all gun control because we have no wish to own a gun.

The simple point of it is to make it harder to someone to obtain a firearm which it does if you remove the legal avenue and very few people would have the slightest idea where to get a blackmarket firearm.

quote:

---

Originally posted by arnold_vosloo
All firearms are designed for one perpose only...to kill

There is absolutely no reason for any person in the UK (or for that matter anywhere else) to legally own a firearm. It is not a case of rolling over, the british fully support all gun control because we have no wish to own a gun.

The simple point of it is to make it harder to someone to obtain a firearm which it does if you remove the legal avenue and very few people would have the slightest idea where to get a blackmarket firearm.

---

If you would bother to read any of this a lot of British people do not support it, I would like you to display such "full" support?

Full
Containing all that is normal or possible: a full pail.
Complete in every particular: a full account.
Baseball.
Amounting to three balls and two strikes. Used of a count.
Having a base runner at first, second, and third base: The bases were full when the slugger stepped up to bat.

Of maximum or highest degree: at full speed.
Being at the peak of development or maturity: in full bloom.
Having a great deal or many: a book full of errors.
Totally qualified, accepted, or empowered: a full member of the club.

Rounded in shape; plump: a full figure.
Having or made with a generous amount of fabric: full draperies.

Having an appetite completely satisfied, especially for food or drink: was full after the Thanksgiving dinner.
Providing an abundance, especially of food.
Having depth and body; rich: a full aroma; full tones.
Completely absorbed or preoccupied: “He was already pretty full of himself” (Ron Rosenbaum).
Possessing both parents in common: full brothers; full sisters.

adv.
To a complete extent; entirely: knowing full well.
Exactly; directly: full in the path of the moon.

v. fulled, full·ing, fulls
v. tr.
To make (a garment) full, as by pleating or gathering.

v. intr.
To become full. Used of the moon.

n.
The maximum or complete size or amount: repaid in full.
The highest degree or state: living life to the full.
__

Doesn't look like full support to me.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Odium
Population Trends 103. Office for National Statistics. London, Spring 2001
Population: 52,689,900 - 7million less then what you give. I doubt the population has gone up that much.

United Nations (1998), United Nations International Study of Firearms Regulation. UN: New York.

The statistics for firearms deaths in England and Wales (although I did say U.K.) do not include shotguns or rifles; to help keep the numbers down. They only include illegal firearms not legal ones. ...

----
The murder rates of the U.S. and U.K. are also affected by differences in the way each counts homicides. The FBI asks police to list every homicide as murder, even if the case isn’t subsequently prosecuted or proceeds on a lesser charge, making the U.S. numbers as high as possible. By contrast, the English police "massage down" the homicide statistics, tracking each case through the courts and removing it if it is reduced to a lesser charge or determined to be an accident or self-defense, making the English numbers as low as possible.

---

OK, the population figure I gave was for the entire UK. link
Perhaps the ones you have are for England and Wales (excluding Scotland and Northern Ireland). That's fine as that's what the statistics cover.

I would appreciate links to your information that you are presenting to me about not including shotguns or rifles and not including legal weapons because I believe you are mistaken.

The PDF I linked to earlier even had a breakdown on the types of weapons used.

Long-barrelled shotgun 7
Sawn-off shotgun 4
Handgun 35
Rifle 0
Imitation firearm 1
Unidentified firearm 20
Other firearm 1

homeoffice.gov.uk

I think you are also mistaken about the way that they count homicides.
The figures I gave earlier (perhaps in another thread) included Murder, manslaughter and infanticide. On the numbers of persons murdered in the US by firearms, I actually left out a category that was counted seperatley, called Justifiable Homicides. That adds an additional 363 killings by firearms to my additional figure. link


[edit on 9-6-2005 by AceOfBase]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Odium
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by arnold_vosloo
All firearms are designed for one perpose only...to kill

There is absolutely no reason for any person in the UK (or for that matter anywhere else) to legally own a firearm. It is not a case of rolling over, the british fully support all gun control because we have no wish to own a gun.

The simple point of it is to make it harder to someone to obtain a firearm which it does if you remove the legal avenue and very few people would have the slightest idea where to get a blackmarket firearm.

---

If you would bother to read any of this a lot of British people do not support it, I would like you to display such "full" support?

Full
Containing all that is normal or possible: a full pail.
Complete in every particular: a full account.
Baseball.
Amounting to three balls and two strikes. Used of a count.
Having a base runner at first, second, and third base: The bases were full when the slugger stepped up to bat.

Of maximum or highest degree: at full speed.
Being at the peak of development or maturity: in full bloom.
Having a great deal or many: a book full of errors.
Totally qualified, accepted, or empowered: a full member of the club.

Rounded in shape; plump: a full figure.
Having or made with a generous amount of fabric: full draperies.

Having an appetite completely satisfied, especially for food or drink: was full after the Thanksgiving dinner.
Providing an abundance, especially of food.
Having depth and body; rich: a full aroma; full tones.
Completely absorbed or preoccupied: “He was already pretty full of himself” (Ron Rosenbaum).
Possessing both parents in common: full brothers; full sisters.

adv.
To a complete extent; entirely: knowing full well.
Exactly; directly: full in the path of the moon.

v. fulled, full·ing, fulls
v. tr.
To make (a garment) full, as by pleating or gathering.

v. intr.
To become full. Used of the moon.

n.
The maximum or complete size or amount: repaid in full.
The highest degree or state: living life to the full.
__

Doesn't look like full support to me.

---

Please could you give me one legitimate reason for a brit to own a gun?

Aceofbass is totaly correct.

80 odd firearm deaths is brilliantly low, proves the ban works. I still want to see statistics for non lethal firearm injuries in the US, I still believe it will be a massive amount. In the uK, it will be tiny.

The UK has roughly one fifth the population of the US.

79 murders is by far less than one fifth of 9,638.

Do the math.

The ban is an excellent idea and has proved itself to be very successful.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Kriz_4
I still want to see statistics for non lethal firearm injuries in the US, I still believe it will be a massive amount. In the uK, it will be tiny.

---

Here are the numbers I've found so far:

UK:
Homicide: 68
Attempted murder and other acts: 1,350
Other violence against the person: 6,434
Robbery: 4,117
Burglary: 533
homeoffice.gov.uk

Those numbers sound really high but here are the US numbers:

US (2003)
Murders with firearms: 11,041
Robberies with firearms: 172,802
Aggravated assaults firearms: 163,863
usdoj.gov

AceOfBase is right....even if you do the percents and basically make up for the US larger population....the UK stats are still lower.

I still don't think we should ban guns....but AceOfBase is right with the stats. The original stats that subz posted are wrong and inaccurate.