More Brit BS: Licence to kill - life under the gun in the US - Page 2

Site Notices

[ARCHIVED THREAD] - More Brit BS: Licence to kill - life under the gun in the US (Page 2 of 3)

Posted: 3/3/2006 6:29:23 AM EDT

[#1]

The Brits are all but slaves under their Government. They lost what little freedom they had over the last 10 to 20 years. Once they got rid of or controled most of their guns the Brit Gov went buck wild taking their rights away and taxing them to death. There citizens let them install cameras on every corner, track their cars and gave up their right all in the name of crime or terrorism.(These same things are starting to happen here by the way.

) They are a lost cause in my eyes.

If they want to live under a Big Brother Nanny State then more power to them, but don't bitch and moan about the USA. We are the last stand in what little freedom is left in the world today and a big part of that is because we are a armed society. Once are guns are gone so will our freedom we can see that from what happened to our friends in England.

Posted: 3/3/2006 6:45:35 AM EDT

[#2]

Quoted:
Quoted:
Care to quote me when it was illegal to own guns in Ireland? Actually all the British did was ban the import of rifles after both sides (Protestants & Catholics) started arming their volunteers.

Ranting on about articles in overseas papers is a handy susbstiute for dealing with the efforts of their own gun grabbers

Well, the first one under what comes to known as the Penal Laws is in 1695. Of course the English had at time banned native Irish from carrying weapons at many times previously. For example, being Irish and carrying arms during the time of Cromwell was one way to get you sent to Barbados (amongst other things).

The first known case of somebody from what becomes the UK being pissed about armed Irish would be Gerald of Wales, working for King Henry II after his little expadition, bitching in the late 1100's about how the Irish liked to carry large axes like walking sticks.

7 Will III c.5 (1695):
An Act for the better securing the government, by disarming papists
Sec. 1. All papists within this kingdom of Ireland shall before the 1st day of March, 1696, deliver up to some justice of the peace or corporation officer where such papist shall dwell, all their arms and ammunition, notwithstanding any licence for keeping the same heretofore granted. Justices of the peace, mayors, sheriffs, and chief officers of cities and towns and persons under their warrants, may search and seize all arms and ammunition of papists, or in the hands of any persons in trust for them, wherever they shall suspect they may be concealed. And such arms shall be preserved for the use of his Majesty.

3.15
13 Geo II c.6 (1739):
An Act to explain, amend , and make more effectual an Act ... disarming Papists.
Sec. 13 Papists are also forbidden to keep or sell war-like stores, sword blades, barrels, locks, or stocks of guns, on penalty of 20 pounds and imprisonment for one year and until he or she shall have paid the forfeiture; the money so recovered shall go to the person who shall sue for the same.

And yeah, I know about the laws in Northern Ireland. Perfect example of why registration is bad. If you were from, oh, certain parts of Derry you'd have no chance of getting a firearm. However IIRC, a UDA major managed to get two light machine guns registered for controlling the beaver population on his estate. The registration scheme there just goes to show how it can be manipulated to make sure certain people are legally allowed to be armed, and certain aren't.

We wouldn't rant if
a)they didn't write them
b)Liberals didn't then point at articles like this for their arguments

We deal with our gun grabbers quite well here, thank you. The VCDL is doing a much better job than any European group is. I guess our main problem with articles like this would be "if you don't like it, GO HOME." Most people in this country left Europe because, well, it sucked. If you're going to come here, well, please don't infect us with your bullshit.

And vito, if you're trying to draw me into some English vs Irish argument here (which is what it looks like. "Oh, England had laws but so did the South!"), ain't gonna happen. My family is from Ireland, we still have songs, dances, traditions, etc. that carried over. But you'll notice that us Americans haven't exactly moved back. The Irish, bless 'em, are still Europeans in general.

Originally posted by Tomislave]

You're aware the Jews fought a small terrorist action against the British mandate area in Palestine, and is part of the reason the whole thing got handed to the UN? I won't comment on the US part because you should know that already.

I wonder if being that PWONED hurts?

Posted: 3/3/2006 6:46:38 AM EDT

[#3]

I always find it funny that no matter how hard they try and despite the fact we speak the same language; most Brits will never understand our country.

Not an original thought on my part, but:

"We are two cultures separated by a common language."

Posted: 3/3/2006 6:46:55 AM EDT

[#4]

Actually militias typically don't militarily defeat organized armies.

At least not in a knock-down, drag out fight. Probably the most important role of the militia in our secession from GB was Nat Greene's drawing the Brits out in the south, forcing them to eventually withdraw to Yorktown where they got trapped by the Continental Army on one side and the French Navy on the other.

Crucial to the entire war was the fact the militia existed. If there had been no militia there wouldn't have been an army and the war would have been lost. Washington kept the rebellion alive simply by keeping an army in the field.

The vietnamese militia won the vietnam war for the same reason, I think. Even though we kept stomping them militarily, they kept fighting. Their will outlasted ours.

Posted: 3/3/2006 7:00:28 AM EDT

[#5]

Quoted:
You're aware the Jews fought a small terrorist action against the British mandate area in Palestine, and is part of the reason the whole thing got handed to the UN?...

Terrorist action being key here. The Israelis didn't annoy the Brits into leaving with masses of well-disciplined and well-trained riflemen; it was bombings left and right that did it.

Posted: 3/3/2006 7:16:30 AM EDT

[#6]

Quoted:
Quoted:
You're aware the Jews fought a small terrorist action against the British mandate area in Palestine, and is part of the reason the whole thing got handed to the UN?...

Terrorist action being key here. The Israelis didn't annoy the Brits into leaving with masses of well-disciplined and well-trained riflemen; it was bombings left and right that did it.

The Haganah militiamen were VERY well trained commandos. By a Brit, btw... Orde Wingate.

Posted: 3/3/2006 7:34:24 AM EDT

[#7]

Quoted:
Actually militias typically don't militarily defeat organized armies.

At least not in a knock-down, drag out fight. Probably the most important role of the militia in our secession from GB was Nat Greene's drawing the Brits out in the south, forcing them to eventually withdraw to Yorktown where they got trapped by the Continental Army on one side and the French Navy on the other.

Crucial to the entire war was the fact the militia existed. If there had been no militia there wouldn't have been an army and the war would have been lost. Washington kept the rebellion alive simply by keeping an army in the field.

The vietnamese militia won the vietnam war for the same reason, I think. Even though we kept stomping them militarily, they kept fighting. Their will outlasted ours.

Actually, there are a lot more examples, but they are often not called militias even though they are functionally the equivalent. The Ancient Greeks were essentially citizen-soldiers up until the time of Alexander, although the Persians were not exactly professionals. The Roman Legionaries were also militia for a good part of the time up until Augustus, and won the Punic wars over Carthage's paid mercenaries. In more modern history, there is the Battle of New Orleans in the War of 1812, where the vast bulk of the American forces were militia.

Posted: 3/3/2006 7:42:10 AM EDT

[#8]

Quoted:
if you dont like "living under the gun in the US" there is a VERY simple solution:

GET THE FUCK OUT OF MY COUNTRY AND GO BACK TO YOURS!

Ditto!!!

Fuck a REDCOAT

Posted: 3/3/2006 9:26:02 AM EDT

[#9]

Quoted:
Quoted:

And yeah, I know about the laws in Northern Ireland. Perfect example of why registration is bad. If you were from, oh, certain parts of Derry you'd have no chance of getting a firearm. However IIRC, a UDA major managed to get two light machine guns registered for controlling the beaver population on his estate. The registration scheme there just goes to show how it can be manipulated to make sure certain people are legally allowed to be armed, and certain aren't.

I've already shown you only have a very superficial and innacurate understanding

We wouldn't rant if
a)they didn't write them
b)Liberals didn't then point at articles like this for their arguments

Interesting... so why not rant at him? All I see here is you guys ranting to each other.

Ditto; if these articles offend Americans so much, why do Americans actively search them out from British websites and post them here?

And vito, if you're trying to draw me into some English vs Irish argument here (which is what it looks like. "Oh, England had laws but so did the South!"), ain't gonna happen. My family is from Ireland, we still have songs, dances, traditions, etc. that carried over. But you'll notice that us Americans haven't exactly moved back. The Irish, bless 'em, are still Europeans in general.

Your family is from Ireland... fine. My family IS IN IRELAND... and I'm actually Irish as in born in Ireland. I learnt about Ireland by living there, not reading about it in 'an phoblacht'

Posted: 3/3/2006 9:28:10 AM EDT

[#10]

Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:

I wonder if being that PWONED hurts?

Yeah right...POWNED by someone quoting ancient history and current inaccuracy…

Posted: 3/3/2006 9:32:15 AM EDT

[#11]

Quoted:
Ditto; if these articles offend Americans so much, why do Americans actively serch them out from British websites and post them here?

I like to call it the "culture of outrage." I think it has dual roots in the 24/7 newschannels that generate outrage and sensationalism to keep ratings up and the traditional American lack of understanding of history.

People may not have a right not to be offended, but it certainly seems like they have a right to be outraged and exercise it frequently.

To see other examples of this please reference any cop, union, Bush, or "bad customer service" thread.

Posted: 3/3/2006 9:40:28 AM EDT

[#12]

Quoted:
Actually militias typically don't militarily defeat organized armies.

At least not in a knock-down, drag out fight. Probably the most important role of the militia in our secession from GB was Nat Greene's drawing the Brits out in the south, forcing them to eventually withdraw to Yorktown where they got trapped by the Continental Army on one side and the French Navy on the other.

Crucial to the entire war was the fact the militia existed. If there had been no militia there wouldn't have been an army and the war would have been lost. Washington kept the rebellion alive simply by keeping an army in the field.

The vietnamese militia won the vietnam war for the same reason, I think. Even though we kept stomping them militarily, they kept fighting. Their will outlasted ours.

Yup.

Clausewitz said, "War is the continuation of politics by other means."

What this means is military victories that are not connected to political victories are virtually meaningless.
This is why militas can lose every battle and still win wars.

This is why a free people must never give up nor ever give in.

Posted: 3/3/2006 9:42:33 AM EDT

[#13]

Quoted:
Quoted:
Ditto; if these articles offend Americans so much, why do Americans actively serch them out from British websites and post them here?

I like to call it the "culture of outrage." I think it has dual roots in the 24/7 newschannels that generate outrage and sensationalism to keep ratings up and the traditional American lack of understanding of history.

People may not have a right not to be offended, but it certainly seems like they have a right to be outraged and exercise it frequently.

To see other examples of this please reference any cop, union, Bush, or "bad customer service" thread.

I googled on "assault weapons ban" and found the article FWIW. I'm interested in the politics of banning assault weapons.

Posted: 3/3/2006 9:43:33 AM EDT

[#14]

Quoted:
Last year when the ten-year ban on the sale of assault rifles was quietly allowed to expire, you could hear the gun manufacturers licking their lips.

I couldn't, thank you so much CA.

ETA: 16000 murders per year is <1% of the population.

Posted: 3/3/2006 9:43:51 AM EDT

[#15]

Quoted:
Quoted:

Snipers don't defeat a modern army and didn't prevent Nelson winning at Trafalgar.

Kicked your limey ass out of most of Ireland didn't it? (and lightly armed guys brought you to the bargaining table in the rest.)

Actually no it didn't, bombs and a lack of political will did that....

The British gave up 'most of Ireland,' as Spade said, with partition 1921, retreating into the most heavily industrialized part of the country. The bombing I believe you're referring didn't begin until the late 1960s / early 1970s.

Posted: 3/3/2006 9:45:23 AM EDT

[#16]

Quoted:
Quoted:
I wish we could invade and occupy the UK for a while, and install a Texas style government in place of the socialist crap they have now. Serves them right.

How about we invade California first? Then New York, then New Jersey......

Lets get our own house in perfect Constitutional order before we start lecturing Europe.

I'll act as a scout and a "5th columnist"!!! I know where all the libtards hang out (gay bar across the street) And after we put them on a Drumhead trial (it will be quick as thier guilt is self evident) we'll force the libtards in submission, something they like anyway. uuuurraaaaaaahhhhh!

Posted: 3/3/2006 9:46:53 AM EDT

[#17]

If God put the British on an island, ther may be a good reason!
OK, I posted my joke and now I'll edit. I tell this joke to my mother in law who is British.
The "Brits" remain loyal allies and always come to our party when in need. They are good people - period; and, as in the USA, there are "Brits" who have diverging opinions. When bashed by Europeans about guns, I point out that "Europe" is about the size of the USA, and within Europe there has been ethnic cleansing and all sorts of horrible things that we do not experience in the USA - try Northern Ireland, Corsica, the Basque issue, ex- Yougoslavia etc... the world is not that cut and dry, so look in your backyard as well before being overly critical of your friends backyard.

Posted: 3/3/2006 9:50:59 AM EDT

[#18]

Quoted:
Quoted:
Ditto; if these articles offend Americans so much, why do Americans actively serch them out from British websites and post them here?

I like to call it the "culture of outrage." I think it has dual roots in the 24/7 newschannels that generate outrage and sensationalism to keep ratings up and the traditional American lack of understanding of history.

People may not have a right not to be offended, but it certainly seems like they have a right to be outraged and exercise it frequently.

To see other examples of this please reference any cop, union, Bush, or "bad customer service" thread.

Interestingly, there are some here who were outraged at the RoP® response to the Mohammed Cartoons.

And there was me thinking that the USA was the great bastion of 'freedom speech'...

What is pretty sad really is that no one here actually has a clue about Jarek Garlisnksi and his family history....

If they did, it really might surprise them

ANdy

Posted: 3/3/2006 9:51:33 AM EDT

[#19]

Okay, I spent 3 years in England, I guess that gives me some liscense to critisize.

GO THE FUCK BACK TO ENGLAND IF YOU DON'T LIKE IT HERE.

AS MUCH AS I WANTED TO, I DIDN'T SPEND THE THREE YEARS I WAS IN YOUR COUNTRY OPENLY CRITISIZING YOUR SOCIALIST SOCIETY SO DON'T CRITISIZE MINE.

I did enjoy my 3 years in England but I can't tell you how many people I met there that would lay into me for 5 minutes about how violent and uncultured we were and then add that they were going there in the next few months for their Nth visit. Silly Brits.

Posted: 3/3/2006 9:55:21 AM EDT

[#20]

Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:

Actually no it didn't, bombs and a lack of political will did that....

The British gave up 'most of Ireland,' as Spade said, with partition 1921, retreating into the most heavily industrialized part of the country. The bombing I believe you're referring didn't begin until the late 1960s / early 1970s.

No, i'm referring to the bombings prior to partition, the bombings my Grandfather got himself arrested for...

And on the subject of shootings, the most effective operations were the targeted assasinations almost invariavble with a handgun at point blank. 'Sniping' was not a big part of the war.

ANdy

Posted: 3/3/2006 10:02:33 AM EDT

[#21]

Quoted:
There's a reason they banned everybody but themselves from carrying weapons in Ireland for a long time. And it sure wasn't because they wanted to protect the citizenry from crime.

"You banned my ancestors from carrying arms, and then took their homes. Now that we've found a new home, I'll be god damned if anybody takes my arms from me again."

Fuck that. My family danced to that tune before.

Shit.

Reading that, the very first thing to pop into my mind is the recent amount of eminent domain cases I've been hearing about... Just look at all this! Like the nice little diner in Commiefornia they want to bulldoze, so that the Mercedes car dealership next door can have a bigger parking lot.

They are taking our homes already. And our businesses. And our guns are an easy target, what happens once we lose them?

Posted: 3/3/2006 10:03:13 AM EDT

[#22]

Quoted:

There must be a middle ground between craven political correctness and a gun in every cupboard.

Yes there is, it's called the Atlantic Ocean

Wait, everyone has a gun in every cupboard? Damn. I'm behind!!

Posted: 3/3/2006 10:07:59 AM EDT

[#23]

Quoted:
And there was me thinking that the USA was the great bastion of 'freedom speech'...

What is pretty sad really is that no one here actually has a clue about Jarek Garlisnksi and his family history....

If they did, it really might surprise them
ANdy

What does that have to do with that hatchett job of an article against gun rights that he wrote. Again, seems to me to be just another fag euroweenie socialist who hates guns, and doesn't like the fact that guns are a fact of life in this country.

Posted: 3/3/2006 10:11:52 AM EDT

[#24]

Quoted:
I wish we could invade and occupy the UK for a while, and install a Texas style government in place of the socialist crap they have now. Serves them right.

Screw the occupation of the UK come to NY. We're behind enemy lines already.

Posted: 3/3/2006 10:16:53 AM EDT

[#25]

Quoted:
Quoted:
And there was me thinking that the USA was the great bastion of 'freedom speech'...

What is pretty sad really is that no one here actually has a clue about Jarek Garlisnksi and his family history....

If they did, it really might surprise them
ANdy

What does that have to do with that hatchett job of an article against gun rights that he wrote. Again, seems to me to be just another fag euroweenie socialist who hates guns, and doesn't like the fact that guns are a fact of life in this country.

I'm straining to see how I should be interested in his family background either. Don't like it here... great!!! Stay there. Feel better there.... fantastic!!!! Stay there.

Posted: 3/3/2006 10:23:02 AM EDT

[#26]

Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Ditto; if these articles offend Americans so much, why do Americans actively serch them out from British websites and post them here?

I like to call it the "culture of outrage." I think it has dual roots in the 24/7 newschannels that generate outrage and sensationalism to keep ratings up and the traditional American lack of understanding of history.

People may not have a right not to be offended, but it certainly seems like they have a right to be outraged and exercise it frequently.

To see other examples of this please reference any cop, union, Bush, or "bad customer service" thread.

Interestingly, there are some here who were outraged at the RoP® response to the Mohammed Cartoons.

And there was me thinking that the USA was the great bastion of 'freedom speech'...

What is pretty sad really is that no one here actually has a clue about Jarek Garlisnksi and his family history....

If they did, it really might surprise them

ANdy

WTF? Are we rioting and killing and demanding changes in laws to prevent people from speaking freely? Freedom of speech doesn't mean you have to like what other folks say.

Posted: 3/3/2006 10:25:04 AM EDT

[#27]

Quoted:
Quoted:
I wish we could invade and occupy the UK for a while, and install a Texas style government in place of the socialist crap they have now. Serves them right.

Screw the occupation of the UK come to NY. We're behind enemy lines already.

If you do come to NY to liberate us, I'm going to throw you a fucking parade.

Posted: 3/3/2006 10:30:38 AM EDT

[#28]

Quoted:
Licence to kill - life under the gun in the US
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/global/main.jhtml?xml=/global/2006/03/01/expat0301.xml&sSheet=/portal/2006/03/03/ixportal.html
By Jarek Garlinski
(Filed: 01/03/2006) thats 3/1/06 for us Yanks

...............................In Houston British expatriates still speak of the drunken Scotsman coming back late one night over ten years ago in one of the smarter parts of town. When he knocked on some stranger's door at 3am, the homeowner shot and killed him believing his life to be in danger. The homeowner was within his legal rights and thus was not prosecuted.........................

If the most recent case is 10 years old, I guess that solved the problem of drunken Scots in Houston.

Posted: 3/3/2006 10:32:22 AM EDT

[#29]

Quoted:
Ditto!!!

Fuck a REDCOAT

Well if that red coat happens to be on Elizabeth Hurley......I might consider it.

Posted: 3/3/2006 10:32:51 AM EDT

[#30]

Quoted:
The argument then shifts to the rather more sophisticated political point that a well-armed citizenry is a final bulwark against military dictatorship or invasion. This is illustrated by the thought that if more Europeans had had firearms in the 1930s, the Nazis would have been stopped in their tracks.

Unfortunately, the argument underestimates Nazi ruthlessness, and it is hard to imagine an armed citizenry in, for instance, Holland, Poland or the Ukraine, repulsing the Wehrmacht, backed up as it was by the SS and the Luftwaffe. Snipers don't defeat a modern army and didn't prevent Nelson winning at Trafalgar.

i believe ETH has a collection of quotes from both german and russian writers about how they felt about being unarmed when the knock came.

if he would be so kind as to grace us with those, perhaps we could forward them to this writer, who is of considerably less merit.

Posted: 3/3/2006 10:35:48 AM EDT

[#31]

Take a bath Limey and go see a dentist while you are it.You eel eating bastard !

Posted: 3/3/2006 10:48:05 AM EDT

[#32]

Quoted:
Quoted:
The argument then shifts to the rather more sophisticated political point that a well-armed citizenry is a final bulwark against military dictatorship or invasion. This is illustrated by the thought that if more Europeans had had firearms in the 1930s, the Nazis would have been stopped in their tracks.

Unfortunately, the argument underestimates Nazi ruthlessness, and it is hard to imagine an armed citizenry in, for instance, Holland, Poland or the Ukraine, repulsing the Wehrmacht, backed up as it was by the SS and the Luftwaffe. Snipers don't defeat a modern army and didn't prevent Nelson winning at Trafalgar.

i believe ETH has a collection of quotes from both german and russian writers about how they felt about being unarmed when the knock came.

if he would be so kind as to grace us with those, perhaps we could forward them to this writer, who is of considerably less merit.

On the contrary, he is very well aquainted with the realities of WWII in Europe...

Posted: 3/3/2006 11:05:58 AM EDT

[#33]

Here is my feeling.
The Second Amendment is an inalienable right.
No restrictions (except the usual, no mental patients, no felons)
That's just the way it is.

Posted: 3/3/2006 11:16:21 AM EDT

[#34]

Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
The argument then shifts to the rather more sophisticated political point that a well-armed citizenry is a final bulwark against military dictatorship or invasion. This is illustrated by the thought that if more Europeans had had firearms in the 1930s, the Nazis would have been stopped in their tracks.

Unfortunately, the argument underestimates Nazi ruthlessness, and it is hard to imagine an armed citizenry in, for instance, Holland, Poland or the Ukraine, repulsing the Wehrmacht, backed up as it was by the SS and the Luftwaffe. Snipers don't defeat a modern army and didn't prevent Nelson winning at Trafalgar.

i believe ETH has a collection of quotes from both german and russian writers about how they felt about being unarmed when the knock came.

if he would be so kind as to grace us with those, perhaps we could forward them to this writer, who is of considerably less merit.

On the contrary, he is very well aquainted with the realities of WWII in Europe...

Well. Then it's setteled now. Who are we to argue with "The Superior". He must then be right... and we should all nod at his thoughtful insights.

Posted: 3/3/2006 11:20:32 AM EDT

[#35]

Quoted:

On the contrary, he is very well aquainted with the realities of WWII in Europe...

He may or may not be acquianted with the realities of WWII, but he certainly has not learned any of the correct lessons.

Posted: 3/3/2006 11:34:40 AM EDT

[#36]

Quoted:
Quoted:

On the contrary, he is very well aquainted with the realities of WWII in Europe...

He may or may not be acquianted with the realities of WWII, but he certainly has not learned any of the correct lessons.

+1... Warsaw ghetto uprising...

Posted: 3/3/2006 11:45:18 AM EDT

[#37]

Quoted:
ANdy (actually born in Ireland, not just 'read about it')

Oh snapppp.

Posted: 3/3/2006 11:57:26 AM EDT

[#38]

Quoted:
Quoted:

Snipers don't defeat a modern army and didn't prevent Nelson winning at Trafalgar.

Kicked your limey ass out of most of Ireland didn't it? (and lightly armed guys brought you to the bargaining table in the rest.)

Actually no it didn't, bombs and a lack of political will did that....

Quoted:
Quite frankly, I never trust a Brit when they talk about gun control. There's a reason they banned everybody but themselves from carrying weapons in Ireland for a long time. And it sure wasn't because they wanted to protect the citizenry from crime.

Care to quote me when it was illegal to own guns in Ireland? Actually all the British did was ban the import of rifles after both sides (Protestants & Catholics) started arming their volunteers.

Well actually the only time high powered rifle and handgun ownership was 'banned' in Ireland was between 1972 and 2004 in the Republic of Ireland, that's the 'Independent' part BTW. Gun ownership has always been legal in Ireland.

You can even get a CCW permit in Northern Ireland and own a machine gun for self defence with a PDW permit.

ANdy (actually born in Ireland, not just 'read about it')

Damn ANdy, an MG! My ass needs to get to Ireland ASAP!

Posted: 3/3/2006 12:09:41 PM EDT

[#39]

Quoted:
Licence to kill - life under the gun in the US
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/global/main.jhtml?xml=/global/2006/03/01/expat0301.xml&sSheet=/portal/2006/03/03/ixportal.html
By Jarek Garlinski
(Filed: 01/03/2006) thats 3/1/06 for us Yanks

For instance I have been treated to a lecture on how crime has risen in England as a result of the Government's "gun confiscation" programmes by a gentleman who has never been there, and who expressed incredulity that I had no idea what he was talking about.

That's funny; my wife is from England, and she knows EXACTLY what he was talking about.

To be sure, the NRA's loud support for firearms in a country whose murder rate, which, although dropping, is extremely high (16,503 murders in 2003, of which 67 per cent were committed with guns) seems somewhat out of place.

LOL... that's not a "rate," mate; it's merely a number. Rhetorically speaking, I wonder what the murder RATE is in the UK.

There must be a middle ground between craven political correctness and a gun in every cupboard.

Like AssaultRifler said early on: There is. It's called the Atlantic Ocean.

Posted: 3/3/2006 12:15:33 PM EDT

[#40]

In Houston British expatriates still speak of the drunken Scotsman coming back late one night over ten years ago in one of the smarter parts of town. When he knocked on some stranger's door at 3am, the homeowner shot and killed him believing his life to be in danger. The homeowner was within his legal rights and thus was not prosecuted.

It's been over 10 years since anyone plugged a drunken Scot in Houston? WTF is up with that? It's like they're not even trying anymore.

Posted: 3/3/2006 12:16:49 PM EDT

[#41]

If God put the British on an island, ther may be a good reason!
OK, I posted my joke and now I'll edit. I tell this joke to my mother in law who is British.
The "Brits" remain loyal allies and always come to our party when in need. They are good people - period; and, as in the USA, there are "Brits" who have diverging opinions. When bashed by Europeans about guns, I point out that "Europe" is about the size of the USA, and within Europe there has been ethnic cleansing and all sorts of horrible things that we do not experience in the USA - try Northern Ireland, Corsica, the Basque issue, ex- Yougoslavia etc... the world is not that cut and dry, so look in your backyard as well before being overly critical of your friends backyard.
Come on folks, the "Brits" are our true friends, and we have few left.

Posted: 3/3/2006 12:17:15 PM EDT

[#42]

Quoted:
Quoted:
To be sure, the NRA's loud support for firearms in a country whose murder rate, which, although dropping, is extremely high (16,503 murders in 2003, of which 67 per cent were committed with guns) seems somewhat out of place.

LOL... that's not a "rate," mate; it's merely a number. Rhetorically speaking, I wonder what the murder RATE is in the UK.

UK (Pop 59 Million) 2003-2004: 853 homocides, 83 of which were commited with firearms.

Posted: 3/3/2006 12:20:50 PM EDT

[#43]

Last year when the ten-year ban on the sale of assault rifles was quietly allowed to expire, you could hear the gun manufacturers licking their lips.

I did not realize there was a ban on the sale of assault rifles.

Posted: 3/3/2006 12:24:00 PM EDT

[#44]

Thanks, Vito. That's not very high at all. Probably mostly Yardies, at that.

Posted: 3/3/2006 12:27:37 PM EDT

[#45]

Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
To be sure, the NRA's loud support for firearms in a country whose murder rate, which, although dropping, is extremely high (16,503 murders in 2003, of which 67 per cent were committed with guns) seems somewhat out of place.

LOL... that's not a "rate," mate; it's merely a number. Rhetorically speaking, I wonder what the murder RATE is in the UK.

UK (Pop 59 Million) 2003-2004: 853 homocides, 83 of which were commited with firearms.

UK= 853 homocides 83 with firearms= 10%
for a pop of 59m that means that 14.45 homocides per million

US (given what was in the article is true) 16,503 homocides 67% with firearms
for a pop of 300m that means that 55.01 homocides per million

Posted: 3/3/2006 12:32:36 PM EDT

[#46]

Quoted:
Thanks, Vito. That's not very high at all. Probably mostly Yardies, at that.

In London, Nottingham, Birmingham and Manchester @ 80% of shootings are Black on Black, but 'PC 'rules do not allow that to be reported as such.

ANdy

Posted: 3/3/2006 1:04:44 PM EDT

[#47]

Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
To be sure, the NRA's loud support for firearms in a country whose murder rate, which, although dropping, is extremely high (16,503 murders in 2003, of which 67 per cent were committed with guns) seems somewhat out of place.

LOL... that's not a "rate," mate; it's merely a number. Rhetorically speaking, I wonder what the murder RATE is in the UK.

UK (Pop 59 Million) 2003-2004: 853 homocides, 83 of which were commited with firearms.

According to a report by the UK Home Office (on page 3):

For the period 1998 to 2000, the average rate (the number of homicides per 100,000 population) was 1.7 in EU Member States with the highest rates in Northern Ireland (3.1), Spain (2.8) Finland (2.6), Scotland (2.2) and Sweden (2.1). The rate in England & Wales (1.5) was below the average. For the other countries, the highest rates were found in South Africa (54.3), Estonia (11.4), Lithuania (8.9), Latvia (6.5) and the USA (5.9).

Here's another interesting factoid on murder rates (homocides per 100K population) for a few major cities (page 4):

Tokyo: 1.22
Geneva: 1.73
London: 2.38
Amsterdam: 4.09
Belfast: 5.85
New York: 8.77
Moscow: 18.20
Pretoria: 41.12
Washington DC: 45.79

And another interesting factiod from their table on crime victimization (page 17):
"Contact crime" (robbery, assaults with force, sexual assault against a woman) victimization rate (percent of population victimized at least one time in 1999):

Australia: 4.1
England and Wales: 3.6
Scotland: 3.4
Canada: 3.4
Northern Ireland: 2.4
USA: 1.9

Yup. You're twice as likely to be a victim of violent crime in the UK than in the US.

Posted: 3/3/2006 4:21:55 PM EDT

[#48]

Jarek Garlinski is a Pole with an Irish mother, so calling him a 'limey' is rather amusing. He's lived in the US for 10 years working as Principle in a number of schools..

You will find his family history here..www.telegraph.co.uk/core/Content/displayPrintable.jhtml?xml=/news/2005/12/01/db0101.xml&site=5

Posted: 3/3/2006 4:39:12 PM EDT

[#49]

Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:

Australia: 4.1
England and Wales: 3.6
Scotland: 3.4
Canada: 3.4
Northern Ireland: 2.4
USA: 1.9

Yup. You're twice as likely to be a victim of violent crime in the UK than in the US.

You need to take account of the different population densities.

Englands Ave population density 383 per Km2

US Ave population density 30 Km2

Higher population densities = higher crime. That even holds true in the US.

Posted: 3/3/2006 4:49:58 PM EDT

[#50]

Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:

Australia: 4.1
England and Wales: 3.6
Scotland: 3.4
Canada: 3.4
Northern Ireland: 2.4
USA: 1.9

Yup. You're twice as likely to be a victim of violent crime in the UK than in the US.

You need to take account of the different population densities.

Englands Ave population density 383 per Km2

US Ave population density 30 Km2

Higher population densities = higher crime. That even holds true in the US.

You need to take into account that the US has lots and lots of mostly empty space. There are only about four people in the whole state of North Dakota (which is about the size of England and Scotland combined), but there are better than eight million in New York City. The vast majority of the poeple live in places with population densities far higher than the national average.

ETA: And what's Australia's excuse? They've got a mere 2 people per km2, gun control out he wazoo, and more than double the US violent crime rate. And Canada only has 3 per km2, but still has a far higher rate of violent crime victimization than the US. What's up with that?

[ARCHIVED THREAD] - More Brit BS: Licence to kill - life under the gun in the US (Page 2 of 3)

General » General Discussion

Warning

Confirm Action

About AR15.COM

Stay Connected

Newsletter

Contact Us