69% of the UK public support more gun regulations

[Phony Moderate]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

http://ukpollingreport.co.uk/blog/

[k-onmmunist]

Total ban would be the best idea.

[Phony Moderate]

I'd put my bottom dollar on the 4% who want "relaxed" gun laws being made up of UKIP supporters, Alex Jones sheep, and the ghost of Derrick Bird.

(Sorry for the possible bad taste) 

[Associate Justice PiT]

     Then they wonder why we don't take them that seriously.

[Franzl]

I love how the answer to every problem is always more laws.

[Tetro Kornbluth]

I love how the answer to every problem is always more laws.

You have an alternative solution? Let me hear it.

While I'm not really in favour of any new and restrictive law, I do admit it is probably the best option for the government to take with the hysteria, lack of rationality in public discourse (and in government), etc. I mean what are the alternatives? (First person to say "Had any of those victims had guns they wouldn't have been victims and crime would be averted" or something similiar and equally cliche... loses and has his/her clock set down to minus one million points).

[Joe Republic]

     Then they wonder why we don't take them that seriously.

Actually, with our firearm-related death rate being the fourth highest in the world, along with an all-powerful gun lobby, it's the rest of the world that doesn't take us seriously. 

[Lief 🗽]

Freedom Country.

[Associate Justice PiT]

I love how the answer to every problem is always more laws.

You have an alternative solution? Let me hear it.

While I'm not really in favour of any new and restrictive law, I do admit it is probably the best option for the government to take with the hysteria, lack of rationality in public discourse (and in government), etc. I mean what are the alternatives? (First person to say "Had any of those victims had guns they wouldn't have been victims and crime would be averted" or something similiar and equally cliche... loses and has his/her clock set down to minus one million points).

     It does seem that this the fault lies with the citizenry for pushing the government to act in an irrational manner. I suppose there's not much to do other than educate the citizenry about the fact that, while tragic, gun crime is simply not much of a threat. Take this from someone who has lived in an increasingly gang-ridden neighbourhood for years & can remember maybe one non-police-perpetrated shooting.

[Swedish Rainbow Capitalist Cheese]

Gun laws are mostly a non-issue to me, and I usually wouldn't care, but Britain's anti-gun laws are quite redicolous. Like what the heck is up with police not carrying guns? What they're gonna tell the bankrobbers? "Don't shoot, or I'll hit you with my baton."

69% of the UK supporting even more regulation than that is quite silly.

Total ban would be the best idea.

How were you ever a Libretarian?

[Vepres]

    Then they wonder why we don't take them that seriously.

Actually, with our firearm-related death rate being the fourth highest in the world, along with an all-powerful gun lobby, it's the rest of the world that doesn't take us seriously.  

I bet they'll take us seriously when we shove rifles in their mouths!

[Filuwaúrdjan]

The government would rather avoid changing the law, I think. Not out of a pro-gun stance or anything like that (such things do not exist here) but because further restrictions would be on shotguns and rifles and, as such, would piss off farmers and the 'country set' crowd. If forced into a corner by the media, they'll fold of course, but they'll be trying to avoid that situation.

(First person to say "Had any of those victims had guns they wouldn't have been victims and crime would be averted" or something similiar and equally cliche... loses and has his/her clock set down to minus one million points).

Just to add to that, West Cumberland has far higher rates of gun ownership than average. One of the victims was a farmer; chances of him not owning a gun is tiny.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

Like what the heck is up with police not carrying guns?

Common sense. Why on earth would you trust more than a handful of people in the police with guns? They're bad enough as it is.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Most robberies of that sort are over before the police get there. In any case, there are specialised armed units.

[Swedish Rainbow Capitalist Cheese]

Like what the heck is up with police not carrying guns?

Common sense. Why on earth would you trust more than a handful of people in the police with guns? They're bad enough as it is.

I'm going to disagree with you here Al. Although I believe that police weapons obviously should never be used except in cases when there is no other solution, not actually arming policemen is not in any way common snese, when the criminals they're suppouse to fight, gun laws or no gun laws, will be armed. Sometimes things happens in a few matters of minutes, or even seconds, to expect the police, and the criminals, to wait for backup in those situations from special weapon units is not sensible.   

I could understand though as to why you wouldn't entrust it to British police, as I understand your country doesn't have an actual police education in difference to Sweden and America where we have police acadamies (please correct me if I'm wrong), where the aspiering policemen are in fact thought how and when to use their guns.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Most robberies of that sort are over before the police get there. In any case, there are specialised armed units.
[/quote]

Obviously that is only an example, and as you pointed out maybe not the best one, but there are going to be situations when regular policemen are up against armed criminals, where they won't be able to wait for special units back-up, Cumbria being such an example.   

[Filuwaúrdjan]

I'm going to disagree with you here Al. Although I believe that police weapons obviously should never be used except in cases when there is no other solution, not actually arming policemen is not in any way common snese, when the criminals they're suppouse to fight, gun laws or no gun laws, will be armed. Sometimes things happens in a few matters of minutes, or even seconds, to expect the police, and the criminals, to wait for backup in those situations from special weapon units is not sensible.

If they have them, they'll use them. Besides, not only is this not an armed society (the worst an ordinary PC is likely to come across is a knife; and they already have stab-vests), this is a society in which the police have 'never' carried guns; if they started doing so, the cultural and psychological shock would be immense.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

I would not trust the police with guns even if they had training.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

The problem with what's just happened there isn't that the police didn't have guns; it's that there's not actually a lot the police (or anyone) can do if someone decides to drive around shooting people at random. Especially in a remote rural area, like West Cumberland.

[Earth]

I love how the answer to every problem is always more laws.

You have an alternative solution? Let me hear it.

While I'm not really in favour of any new and restrictive law, I do admit it is probably the best option for the government to take with the hysteria, lack of rationality in public discourse (and in government), etc. I mean what are the alternatives?

I would never offer the ability of people to decide for themselves whether they'd like a firearm on the altar of public opinion, nor in this case, public hysteria. It's dangerous to me. The lack, as you say, of rationality in discourse would make me think the ability (not right) to own a weapon is now even more crucial, because of whatever else could become a hot button issue down the road.

As an American, we have plenty of paranoia no doubt about it, but the UK has always had a special brand of it that interests me, like London, and the camera fetish, or the 'dangerous dogs' act. The only alternative solution is let the commotion die off, without further restricting the ability to own a weapon.

[John Dibble]

I would not trust the police with guns even if they had training.

Apparently though it's perfectly fine to trust them to have batons.

[Joe Republic]

I would not trust the police with guns even if they had training.

Apparently though it's perfectly fine to trust them to have batons.

Perfectly fine?  His point in posting that image was that they can barely be trusted with batons either.  I thought that was obvious...?

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

Not having the police armed would be cool really. Of course that would never happen here, considering the Minneapolis PD have to wear bulletproof vests when patrolling for traffic violations.

[cannonia]

Freedom Country.

Now that's ironic!

[Franzl]

I love how the answer to every problem is always more laws.

You have an alternative solution? Let me hear it.

Yes actually. Do nothing at all. How often does this kind of thing happen? Does it really require hysteria about making sure guns are tougher to get?

[Lief 🗽]

Freedom Country.

Now that's ironic!

Britons are free to live without the constant threat of being murdered by a gun, either by a criminal or a thuggish policeman.

[Franzl]

Freedom Country.

Now that's ironic!

Britons are free to live without the constant threat of being murdered by a gun, either by a criminal or a thuggish policeman.

Such as the people killed a few days ago by the taxi driver? Sure their murder rate is lower, but I'm not sold on the idea that guns/murder rate is the only relevant corelation.

[Lief 🗽]

Freedom Country.

Now that's ironic!

Britons are free to live without the constant threat of being murdered by a gun, either by a criminal or a thuggish policeman.

Such as the people killed a few days ago by the taxi driver? Sure their murder rate is lower, but I'm not sold on the idea that guns/murder rate is the only relevant corelation.

The difference is that in Britain the shooting is a noteworthy and unusual occurrence that's made the national news. People being killed in a drive by shooting is a normal happening in this country, grimly reported on the evening local news every few days and then quickly forgotten.

[Franzl]

Yes, that's true....but again, I don't believe that guns alone explain the differences.

But alright....considering it's such a seldom thing in Britain....as you said....doesn't that mean that even stricter gun laws would probably be an over-reaction?