69% of the UK public support more gun regulations

[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.

[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.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

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.

Quite so. Just imagine what would have happened during (for example) the Miners Strike if the police had guns. It was bad enough as it was, as that photo neatly shows...

Yeah, I don't trust the police.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

I'm quite annoyed at the idea of making the granting of rights subject to proving a "need" to have said rights.

But no one here thinks that owning a gun is a right or has anything to do with rights. As I've argued (endlessly, I'll admit) before, gun issues are cultural issues in the clearest way that anything can be a cultural issue.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

I'm quite annoyed at the idea of making the granting of rights subject to proving a "need" to have said rights.

But no one here thinks that owning a gun is a right or has anything to do with rights. As I've argued (endlessly, I'll admit) before, gun issues are cultural issues in the clearest way that anything can be a cultural issue.

Being a cultural issue doesn't exclude it from being considered a right, or that it shouldn't be legislated as such. Gay rights, for example.

I thought you disagreed with the entire concept of rights?

[Filuwaúrdjan]

I do, if we're talking about "natural", or inalienable rights. Legal rights are the ones we actually have.

Right. Thought so. Well, there is no right to own a gun in the UK and there is no cultural assertion (for want of a better phrase) that there is such a right either. I don't doubt that the concept (and language, and legal reality) of 'rights' comes into play wrt guns in the US, but it doesn't here.