• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

But England banned all handguns, semi auto rifles etc

jet57 said:
The subject is gun deaths. Trying to conflate those with anything else is patently lying in order to try and shift the subject into numbers that do not matter.
Click to expand...

Is the concern about gun deaths a public safety issue?
 
jet57 said:
The subject is gun deaths. Trying to conflate those with anything else is patently lying in order to try and shift the subject into numbers that do not matter.
Click to expand...

Says the dishonest one who includes suicides in order to justify attacking the rights of free citizens.
 
jet57 said:
It really is no such thing.
Click to expand...

WHY DO YOU NOT TELL THE TRUTH?


PREAMBLE TO THE BILL OF RIGHTS

Congress of the United States
begun and held at the City of New-York, on
Wednesday the fourth of March, one thousand seven hundred and eighty nine.

THE Conventions of a number of the States, having at the time of their adopting the Constitution, expressed a desire, in order to prevent misconstruction or abuse of its [*federal ] powers, that further declaratory and restrictive clauses should be added: And as extending the ground of public confidence in the Government, will best ensure the beneficent ends of its institution.

*added
 
Crimefree said:
What is known and cannot be denied is all crime in UK increased after the gun ban to the extent that with the exception of rape and murder all exceeded the US rate. That is what gun control cost the UK a 300% increase of crime. Million impacted by loss, trauma, misery and expense in keeping criminals out.

Click to expand...

Nonsense. the numbers are incompatible in both collectionamd interpretation. You are not cmparing like with like. By and large, people neither wanted nor needed handguns. It was no loss. Mass shootings are unheard of since Andy Murray was a terrified survivor of the Dunblane massacre, and the law came in..
 
Manc Skipper said:
Nonsense. the numbers are incompatible in both collectionamd interpretation. You are not cmparing like with like. By and large, people neither wanted nor needed handguns. It was no loss. Mass shootings are unheard of since Andy Murray was a terrified survivor of the Dunblane massacre, and the law came in..
Click to expand...

Heard of Cumbria?
 
Spartacus FPV said:
Says the dishonest one who includes suicides in order to justify attacking the rights of free citizens.
Click to expand...

Uh, is suicide a gun death, or is it jumping off a building?

Which one.
 
Master PO said:
WHY DO YOU NOT TELL THE TRUTH?


PREAMBLE TO THE BILL OF RIGHTS

Congress of the United States
begun and held at the City of New-York, on
Wednesday the fourth of March, one thousand seven hundred and eighty nine.

THE Conventions of a number of the States, having at the time of their adopting the Constitution, expressed a desire, in order to prevent misconstruction or abuse of its [*federal ] powers, that further declaratory and restrictive clauses should be added: And as extending the ground of public confidence in the Government, will best ensure the beneficent ends of its institution.

*added
Click to expand...

Why do you insist on getting into subjects you know nothing about?
 
jet57 said:
Why do you insist on getting into subjects you know nothing about?
Click to expand...

but i do and you don't, because you continue to post information which is incorrect, and flat out don't tell the truth,

so many times you have been shown that the bill of rights are restrictions on the power of the federal government concerning the right to bear firearms, but you continue to act like you don't see it and and make statements of denial

what does it say about a person who is presented with proof and yet will not accept it?
 
HonestJoe said:
"Lies, damn lies and statistics"

This tabloid trash (that the BBC should be above) deliberately takes two single points of comparison for a particular crime classification to present a negative image. The reality is that it is the rate in 15-16 being competitively low that actually creates this large percentage. Over the longer term, the rate for this crime hasn't massively shifted either way.

The UK has never had a significant gun culture, so we've always had low gun ownership and most of those are professional rather than personal. The big shift in our gun laws after the Dumblane massacre didn't actually have much practical impact in any way and there has never been any direct correlation demonstrated between crime statistics and that law change (or any of the others people continently ignore).

Now please stop misrepresenting our country to promote your personal domestic political opinion. :cool:
Click to expand...

when the BM stops using England as an argument why we should have a collective bedwetting as England did after Dunblane, I will
 
jet57 said:
Why do you insist on getting into subjects you know nothing about?
Click to expand...

like you on guns and gun laws?

remember-according to Jet, any magazine that holds ten or more rounds is for WARFARE ONLY
 
jet57 said:
Both are tied together, so whadd'ya you think?
Click to expand...

I think you don't care about any other threats to public safety. You aren't even concerned if gun laws increase public safety. You just want more gun laws.
 
TurtleDude said:
like you on guns and gun laws?

remember-according to Jet, any magazine that holds ten or more rounds is for WARFARE ONLY
Click to expand...

I have some warfare on Sunday, then.
 
natsb said:
You said the statistics can be skewed to deliver any message. I don't have any problem with that as I see it happen all the time. Why were these particular years picked? Was there any event that caused the selection of the beginning year? It was certainly not selected to show the UK in its worst light, because as you pointed out, they could have used 2013 to 2016 to accomplish that task.
Click to expand...
As far as the actual report goes, it's a general media issue. They want headlines to grab attention and thus get readers/viewers/hits (even the BBC needs that). In this case their source information was the general crime statistics released by the Metropolitan Police (the force covering London). All police forces are required to release these figures in a standardised manner. Those statistics were published with the previous year's figures for comparison so getting any wider context would require further (e.g. any) effort.

The "journalists" who wrote the article will have scanned the published crime figures to see what (if anything) would make the "best" headline message and it happened that the gun (and to a extent knife) crime figures did that for them. If the gun crime difference hadn't been as high but the overall violent crime one was, they would have led with that instead. If none of the figures should a significant shift (or if the shifts had been down), they probably wouldn't have written anything about them at all. So, this article doesn't really tell us anything about the wider pattern of crime in London and certainly doesn't tell us anything about gun crime specifically but then it was never intended to.

Clearly the OP has a narrative to sell and this headline appeared to support it hence the thread, which is to an extent the false impression the article was designed to sell, albeit more in a self interest than actual harmful intent. The BBC didn't really want this kind of response but they're not going to complain as long as it gets them page views and none of the negativity splashes back at them. :(
 
Rucker61 said:
I think you don't care about any other threats to public safety. You aren't even concerned if gun laws increase public safety. You just want more gun laws.
Click to expand...

All you're trying to do is avoid the gun subject adn deflect the topic again: that's your MO and I ain't playin.

The subject is guns.
 
jet57 said:
All you're trying to do is avoid the gun subject adn deflect the topic again: that's your MO and I ain't playin.

The subject is guns.
Click to expand...

I already know more about guns than you ever will. You also demonstrate a lack of understanding around gun laws, Constitutional protections and statistical analysis.
 
UK-Firearm-Homicide-Rate.png


It went down at first, but then it went up again (early 2000), peaked in early 2002, and then fell dramatically between 2003 and 2009. Can't find any data between 2009 and now.

It does however begin to rise again in 2011:

homicides_committed_firearms_england_wales-450x353.jpg

Screen+Shot+2012-12-22+at++Saturday,+December+22,+9.26+PM.png
 
Rucker61 said:
Absolutely untrue. Additionally, the purpose isn't to compare rates between two countries, but to compare changes in rates in the same country before and after changes in gun control laws.
Click to expand...

You're right. I still had "assault rifles" on my mind from another discussion I am having.
 
TurtleDude said:
well gun crime was rather low before the bannerrhoid disease hit England. But we do know freedom took a major hit. I think its funny that British olympic pistol shooters couldn't train in England. that does a lot to decrease crime
Click to expand...

In britain even target and competition shooting with a handgun is next to impossible, except for blackpowder. Many other european ountries have similiar handgun laws, which is why blackpowder revolvers are very popular in europe, as it is the only way for some countries to shoot.

However except for say blackpowder shooting competitions, people who wish to practice there are screwed, as a blackpowder pistol or revolver requires a mountain of paperwork and laws to file, having a modern handgun is practically impossible, and rifles tend to fall under the category of bp handguns, extremely difficult to legally obtain there, and extremely limited in how and where they can use and store them.
 
TurtleDude said:
from what I recall their crime rates have gradually increased over time-before and after the gun ban and that is violent crime
Click to expand...

I'm curious as to gun crime, though. Statistics I've seen are either inconclusive or incomplete. Thought you might have better access to information.
 
CaptainCourtesy said:
I'm curious as to gun crime, though. Statistics I've seen are either inconclusive or incomplete. Thought you might have better access to information.
Click to expand...

Gun crime is an excellent way of falsely skewing the data. It is cherry picking. I have no idea why people find gun control propaganda inventions so interesting. That they cannot see the deliberate attempt to remove data to increase the focus on what has no causal relationship to crime.

The question is of what interest is an instrument of crime and why is it only important if it is guns?
 
TurtleDude said:
from what I recall their crime rates have gradually increased over time-before and after the gun ban and that is violent crime
Click to expand...

There is a huge spike about 300% almost immediately after the ban which decreases taking 12 years to reduce. Gun control now claims that as a success....... They figure nobody knows it took 12 years 20,000 more cops and +3000 more anti-crime laws as well as the Home Office "reclassification" of violent crimes.

No conviction, no violent crime recorded
12 people killed in one incident = one incident.

* reclassification = massage the statistics until they are acceptable
 
Last edited:
Abbazorkzog said:
It went down at first, but then it went up again (early 2000), peaked in early 2002, and then fell dramatically between 2003 and 2009. Can't find any data between 2009 and now.

It does however begin to rise again in 2011:
Click to expand...

You should note that these are UK official figures which suffer from interference by the Home Office on how crimes are recorded in order to reduce the counts. Nobody actually knows what the real figures are but they are considerably higher.
 
Crimefree said:
You should note that these are UK official figures which suffer from interference by the Home Office on how crimes are recorded in order to reduce the counts. Nobody actually knows what the real figures are but they are considerably higher.
Click to expand...

You would think they would be more transparent about these sorts of things since it involves... oh, I dunno, maybe... people dying.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom