APP - can we disarm the police

ib1yysguy said:
STY is trolling as well. You can't really think his question about disarming the police and replacing them with vigilantes with guns was serious.
Click to expand...

He's probably half serious. I think he should pack is .22 and head to Mogadishu, try it out.
 
What's really pathetic/scary is not that some twit would pen this drivel, but that others would actually buy into yet another NRA paranoid fantasy to the point of posting it.
 
Damocles said:
Boy that makes it better, the people in the UK were more willing to give up their guns so that means that the US should too...

Ugh..

The gun ban wasn't a big deal... eh?

YouTube - England Gun Ban Update
Click to expand...

No, the "gun ban" wasn't a big deal. It was and continues to be supported overwhelmingly by the population.

Those people on that march there were part of the "Countryside Alliance", not exclusively, but mainly marching under the banner of opposition to the Labour government's proposed ban on the hunting of foxes with hounds. The vast majority of people on those marches were certainly not there to demand a right to be armed. Most were involved directly in fox hunting and many others were there to protest the Labour government's urban centric approach to government services.

(the legislation was passed but the practice of fox hunting has pretty much carried on as before and the police have much better things to do with their time than wander around the countryside chasing after chaps on horses chasing beagles chasing foxes)

I got up to "for the first time bobbies are carrying firearms" before stopping. Seeing as this thing was made post-1997 i do sort of wonder if my memories of armed response units flying round city centres chasing IRA bombers in the 1980's and "blaggers wiv shooters" in the 1970's was all in my imagination.

I do keep on saying the UK is an incredibly bad example to use in comparison to the USA when discussing gun control, whichever side you're arguing for.
 
charver said:
No, the "gun ban" wasn't a big deal. It was and continues to be supported overwhelmingly by the population.

Those people on that march there were part of the "Countryside Alliance", not exclusively, but mainly marching under the banner of opposition to the Labour government's proposed ban on the hunting of foxes with hounds. The vast majority of people on those marches were certainly not there to demand a right to be armed. Most were involved directly in fox hunting and many others were there to protest the Labour government's urban centric approach to government services.

(the legislation was passed but the practice of fox hunting has pretty much carried on as before and the police have much better things to do with their time than wander around the countryside chasing after chaps on horses chasing beagles chasing foxes)

I got up to "for the first time bobbies are carrying firearms" before stopping. Seeing as this thing was made post-1997 i do sort of wonder if my memories of armed response units flying round city centres chasing IRA bombers in the 1980's and "blaggers wiv shooters" in the 1970's was all in my imagination.

I do keep on saying the UK is an incredibly bad example to use in comparison to the USA when discussing gun control, whichever side you're arguing for.
Click to expand...

How so? Is it cultural?
 
Darla said:
How so? Is it cultural?
Click to expand...

Yes.

We are poles apart on how we view weapons. I appreciate that not all Americans all gun crazy but there is a definite divide between those who see the right to bear arms as a cherished right and the advocates of gun control. We've never had anything like that polarisation here, so when reference is made to the banning of guns in the UK it is from a position of overwhelming public support.

Maybe it's the legacy of the 'frontier society' or maybe some Americans just really like guns. I don't know. However, the policies adopted here, amid little fuss, would be totally unthinkable over there. Moreover the sheer number of weapons floating round America creates all kinds of practical problems which, thankfully, we never faced.

So when US pro-gun types point at crime rates rising and attribute it to the UK being "disarmed" or when gun control types point to us and say "look they managed to get rid of guns easily", suffice to say they are both being rather simplistic.
 
charver said:
Yes.

We are poles apart on how we view weapons. I appreciate that not all Americans all gun crazy but there is a definite divide between those who see the right to bear arms as a cherished right and the advocates of gun control. We've never had anything like that polarisation here, so when reference is made to the banning of guns in the UK it is from a position of overwhelming public support.

Maybe it's the legacy of the 'frontier society' or maybe some Americans just really like guns. I don't know. However, the policies adopted here, amid little fuss, would be totally unthinkable over there. Moreover the sheer number of weapons floating round America creates all kinds of practical problems which, thankfully, we never faced.

So when US pro-gun types point at crime rates rising and attribute it to the UK being "disarmed" or when gun control types point to us and say "look they managed to get rid of guns easily", suffice to say they are both being rather simplistic.
Click to expand...


Interesting, and this has been my impression. I don't have any idea why we are like this either.
 
There are some serious cultural differences, and I think they account for much of the difference.

Also, the time when guns provided food for the table is only a generation or two out here, whereas it has been far more in the UK. And only in the last 150 years has the government been able to make any serious inroads towards protecting the population, but it was far mre able to do so in the UK.


So the time when guns were vital assets to the majority of the population would have been within our grandparent's lives.
 
charver said:
No, the "gun ban" wasn't a big deal. It was and continues to be supported overwhelmingly by the population.

Those people on that march there were part of the "Countryside Alliance", not exclusively, but mainly marching under the banner of opposition to the Labour government's proposed ban on the hunting of foxes with hounds. The vast majority of people on those marches were certainly not there to demand a right to be armed. Most were involved directly in fox hunting and many others were there to protest the Labour government's urban centric approach to government services.

(the legislation was passed but the practice of fox hunting has pretty much carried on as before and the police have much better things to do with their time than wander around the countryside chasing after chaps on horses chasing beagles chasing foxes)

I got up to "for the first time bobbies are carrying firearms" before stopping. Seeing as this thing was made post-1997 i do sort of wonder if my memories of armed response units flying round city centres chasing IRA bombers in the 1980's and "blaggers wiv shooters" in the 1970's was all in my imagination.

I do keep on saying the UK is an incredibly bad example to use in comparison to the USA when discussing gun control, whichever side you're arguing for.
Click to expand...

Anyone who knows anything about the UK, knows that the protests were nothing to do with gun bans and everything to do with banning foxhunting. This is a prima facie example of how lies and spin take something and turn it on its head.
 
tom prendergast said:
Anyone who knows anything about the UK, knows that the protests were nothing to do with gun bans and everything to do with banning foxhunting. This is a prima facie example of how lies and spin take something and turn it on its head.
Click to expand...
Do they use guns in fox hunting? Do they have to have permits for them?

Seriously, I don't know where this line is drawn.
 
Damocles said:
Do they use guns in fox hunting? Do they have to have permits for them?

Seriously, I don't know where this line is drawn.
Click to expand...

Shotguns are used to dispatch the fox, saving it from being killed by the hounds supposedly. Shotguns are not banned although you do require a licence.
 
charver said:
Shotguns are used to dispatch the fox, saving it from being killed by the hounds supposedly. Shotguns are not banned although you do require a licence.
Click to expand...
So they ban the sport but you can still get a license for the shotgun?
 
Damocles said:
So they ban the sport but you can still get a license for the shotgun?
Click to expand...

They ban was solely concerned with "hunting with hounds" as this was viewed as "cruel" by some people.

Shotguns were never part of the fox-hunting ban.
 
ib1yysguy said:
STY is trolling as well. You can't really think his question about disarming the police and replacing them with vigilantes with guns was serious.
Click to expand...

I wasn't trolling. I'm deadly serious about disarming the police. I'm sure you're quite comfortable being abused by government agents though.

seriously, do you bother to keep tabs on police officers and the 'only ones' attitude? or is it just 'a few bad apples' type thing to you?
 
tom prendergast said:
Foxhunting is still going on all the time, the act had so many loopholes that it is impossible to police. Shotguns are used by farmers for many reasons including shooting foxes, rabbits, hares and badgers as well as sick and lame livestock.
Click to expand...

It's weird isn't it?

Before the ban - groups of red coated horsey types would follow a pack of hounds all over the countryside until the hounds caught up with the fox and killed it.

After the ban - groups of red coated horsey types follow a pack of hounds all over the countryside until the hounds catch up with the fox and a huntsman steps in and shoots it. If the hounds kill it you've broken the law.

That's progress. :D
 
charver said:
Yes.

We are poles apart on how we view weapons. I appreciate that not all Americans all gun crazy but there is a definite divide between those who see the right to bear arms as a cherished right and the advocates of gun control. We've never had anything like that polarisation here, so when reference is made to the banning of guns in the UK it is from a position of overwhelming public support.

Maybe it's the legacy of the 'frontier society' or maybe some Americans just really like guns. I don't know. However, the policies adopted here, amid little fuss, would be totally unthinkable over there. Moreover the sheer number of weapons floating round America creates all kinds of practical problems which, thankfully, we never faced.

So when US pro-gun types point at crime rates rising and attribute it to the UK being "disarmed" or when gun control types point to us and say "look they managed to get rid of guns easily", suffice to say they are both being rather simplistic.
Click to expand...

Maybe I'm not even really all that much of a gun control advocate. But when someone put "the right to bear arms" up there with freedom of speech without even blinking (or usually even above it) it definitely pisses me off to no end.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top