• 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!

The difference between the UK and the US when it comes to the availability of guns

apdst said:
You mean the same Africa that sold the slaves to the Westerners? The one that still sells slave to Middle Eastern countries?...lol!

Slavery in contemporary Africa - Wikipedia
Click to expand...

You think slavery has been abolished in the US? I can do Wikipedia too.

Contemporary slavery in the United States - Wikipedia

apdst said:
The same Africa that gave us the RUF, Idi Amin and Robert Mugabe? :lamo

You got a long way to go before you can bash The United States.
Click to expand...

Not surprised you ignore American Cold War efforts in Africa that helped assassinate African leaders and put in people sympathetic and corrupt to the American effort. Equally, the Soviets played their part too but they didn't pretend to be a shining light of democracy and equal rights to the world.

Aberration said:
You do know it was Africans who captured and sold Africans as slaves? And they still do to this day.
Click to expand...

Never denied it

Aberration said:
The UK absolutely had a civil rights movement. You might want to study more.
Click to expand...

You might want to read what I actually said about the civil rights and the constitution....
 
Frigidweirdo said:
Well, seems like the only thing to do is to talk, and to then do nothing because you've explained that something is illegal, therefore nothing needs to be done, and if 100 kids die in a year because of such laziness, well, they deserved it, didn't they?
Click to expand...

Didn't that sound intellectually dishonest while you were typing it?

This thread is about the availability of guns, not necessarily about the rate of death brought about by said guns. A problem that persist even in states with the most strict of gun laws, and even in countries that don't allow their civilians to legally possess such things. You can't stop someone from killing someone else, if they really want that person dead and accidents will always find a way to happen.

When it comes to dealing with illegal weapons on the streets. I've always stated that I'd want such laws to clean them up, to actually be enforced. Nothing more.
Just pointing out how gun laws here affect the availability of firearms. Should not be misconstrued as me "thinking that children deserve to die" because of it.

Does that not seem reasonable?
 
bearpoker said:
In the states, he still would have had to obtain his gun illegally, but there are many more guns here, so his opportunities for success are much greater. Many of these weapons are not properly secured. A little breaking and entering and he has everything he needs.
Click to expand...

All of which is still illegal.
The notion one see's thrown around now a days, is that you can just step onto the street, and purchase a firearm with no real hassle. This coming along with the same gun show loophole myth.. which I really wish would just die already.
 
Oborosen said:
Didn't that sound intellectually dishonest while you were typing it?

This thread is about the availability of guns, not necessarily about the rate of death brought about by said guns. A problem that persist even in states with the most strict of gun laws, and even in countries that don't allow their civilians to legally possess such things. You can't stop someone from killing someone else, if they really want that person dead and accidents will always find a way to happen.

When it comes to dealing with illegal weapons on the streets. I've always stated that I'd want such laws to clean them up, to actually be enforced. Nothing more.
Just pointing out how gun laws here affect the availability of firearms. Should not be misconstrued as me "thinking that children deserve to die" because of it.

Does that not seem reasonable?
Click to expand...

The point being that certain groups of people who can get guns easily, because they're easily available, are more likely to use those guns to commit crimes.

You can't stop someone from killing another person. But we're not just talking about people hell bent on killing another person. Sometimes people kill in a rage, sometimes in a moment of madness, because they have a gun in their hand. Without a gun, would they do such a thing?

You want "intellectually dishonest" and then you make that statement. Hmmm.
 
RabidAlpaca said:
All of which have a dramatically lower death count, even adjusted per capita than the US. Comparing a few hundred other murders to tens of thousands of gun murders is ridiculous.
Click to expand...

I dunno, Tim McVay scored a pretty high death count with a fertilizer bomb. And the 9/11 attackers did a lot of damage with just airplanes. Let's not forget the Columbine shooters also had bombs. If there were NO guns, demented crazy people would turn to some other means; like bombs, poison gas, crashing airplanes, burning churches. Guns may be the weapon of choice, but they aren't the only weapon available.
 
Frigidweirdo said:
The point being that certain groups of people who can get guns easily, because they're easily available, are more likely to use those guns to commit crimes.

You can't stop someone from killing another person. But we're not just talking about people hell bent on killing another person. Sometimes people kill in a rage, sometimes in a moment of madness, because they have a gun in their hand. Without a gun, would they do such a thing?

You want "intellectually dishonest" and then you make that statement. Hmmm.
Click to expand...

I've seen patients kill one another with items ranging from pencils, to straws. One does not need a gun to kill someone else.

Those people who purchase illegal weapons are the same ones who should be arrested and prosecuted. The gun gotten off the street and removed, or even destroyed entirely. There is only so much about human nature that one can prepare for and prevent.
 
Infinite Chaos said:
Never denied it
Click to expand...

Never said you did. But you did use slavery as a means to criticize us now. Except your society suffered the same problems. So you lack a position to criticize from.

Infinite Chaos said:
You might want to read what I actually said about the civil rights and the constitution....
Click to expand...

I already had. My reply was not meant for this comments but specifically the comments I quoted.
 
Last edited:
Frigidweirdo said:
The point being that certain groups of people who can get guns easily, because they're easily available, are more likely to use those guns to commit crimes.

You can't stop someone from killing another person. But we're not just talking about people hell bent on killing another person. Sometimes people kill in a rage, sometimes in a moment of madness, because they have a gun in their hand. Without a gun, would they do such a thing?

You want "intellectually dishonest" and then you make that statement. Hmmm.
Click to expand...

None of that is argued. Maybe that’s what you don’t get? We accept this. For one reason I think a women having the best means to defend herself against a larger male intent on raping her is worth those costs.

Everything that allows a person to do those bad things also is what allows some do defend themselves.

It’s almost like the idea of assumed innocence. We are willing to accept that guilty people will go free so that innocent people are not convicted. Straying from that principe has similar negative consequences as straying from the right to self defense.
 
Waddy said:
I dunno, Tim McVay scored a pretty high death count with a fertilizer bomb. And the 9/11 attackers did a lot of damage with just airplanes. Let's not forget the Columbine shooters also had bombs. If there were NO guns, demented crazy people would turn to some other means; like bombs, poison gas, crashing airplanes, burning churches. Guns may be the weapon of choice, but they aren't the only weapon available.
Click to expand...

You're right, maybe we should attempt to avoid letting people get ahold of bombs as well. Excellent suggestion.
 
Bombs were illegal when McVey made used it...
 
Oborosen said:
I've seen patients kill one another with items ranging from pencils, to straws. One does not need a gun to kill someone else.

Those people who purchase illegal weapons are the same ones who should be arrested and prosecuted. The gun gotten off the street and removed, or even destroyed entirely. There is only so much about human nature that one can prepare for and prevent.
Click to expand...

No, they don't

Hardly the point here.

Again, most people who kill in the US probably wouldn't kill if they didn't have a gun.

You're not going to stop murder. But there's a different between the US murder rate and the UK murder rate.
 
Aberration said:
None of that is argued. Maybe that’s what you don’t get? We accept this. For one reason I think a women having the best means to defend herself against a larger male intent on raping her is worth those costs.

Everything that allows a person to do those bad things also is what allows some do defend themselves.

It’s almost like the idea of assumed innocence. We are willing to accept that guilty people will go free so that innocent people are not convicted. Straying from that principe has similar negative consequences as straying from the right to self defense.
Click to expand...

I love your rape argument. Makes sense, right?

Until you look at the rape statistics in the US and realize that MORE GUNS often means MORE RAPE.

The US average for rape is 41.7 per 100,000

Alaska has a rape rate of 116.7. This is massively higher than any other state. Lots of guns in Alaska. Then again Wyoming has the most registered guns, and a low rape rate.

The problem is, guns can be used to rape women.
 
Oborosen said:
It would still prove more that we need to enforce gun laws more, not simply create new, unnecessary ones.
Click to expand...

Yes, this is a standard gun nut hobby horse.

In a country with open borders between states, local gun control legislation has largely proven to be pointless.


But this is one of the pillars that the gun crowd leans on in order to argue against any effective regulation.
 
apdst said:
In my community, it's higher than that an everyone owns a gun.
Click to expand...

Why am I not surprised? There's the difference. Your society is awash with guns and the fear factor is high, because everyone is at risk.
Here guns are rare, and the people who do own them have good reason to have one. (personal protection not being a good reason) We're fine with that, because almost everyone will never even see a gun, let alone be attacked with one. There's no desire to have one, "bad people" don't need to get tooled up, and those that do want one find getting a gun more difficult because of their rarity. Black market prices are higher and sources are few.
Gun crime in Britain tended to be shotguns, (sawn off) in bank robberies and payroll heists, but they died out, in these days of electronic money and now robberies are done by computer geeks or guys in suits in offices.No guns necessary. Now criminals carry guns to defend themselves from other criminals, not the public
 
TomFitz said:
Yes, this is a standard gun nut hobby horse.

In a country with open borders between states, local gun control legislation has largely proven to be pointless.


But this is one of the pillars that the gun crowd leans on in order to argue against any effective regulation.
Click to expand...
yeah that pesky constitution is a bitch to the gun banning movement.

but let's stop the charade. We know that crime control is only a facade the hard core leftwing gun restrictionists on the left, adopt to serve as a pretense. It is all about passing laws that harass people who generally don't support the creeping crud of collectivism. When you all on the left come clean and admit that you use gun control as a weapon against people who don't support your agenda, we can have a better discussion on this issue. Right now, the arguments that restricting the rights of honest people is going to prevent violent criminals from getting guns , is so stupid that no real debate can take place
 
TomFitz said:
Yes, this is a standard gun nut hobby horse.

In a country with open borders between states, local gun control legislation has largely proven to be pointless.


But this is one of the pillars that the gun crowd leans on in order to argue against any effective regulation.
Click to expand...

Federal gun control is the only thing that will be effective
 
Frigidweirdo said:
You're not going to stop murder. But there's a different between the US murder rate and the UK murder rate.
Click to expand...

We don't want to compare the USA with the UK. We haven't wanted to be associated with them since 1776.
 
Manc Skipper said:
Why am I not surprised? There's the difference. Your society is awash with guns and the fear factor is high, because everyone is at risk.
Here guns are rare, and the people who do own them have good reason to have one. (personal protection not being a good reason) We're fine with that, because almost everyone will never even see a gun, let alone be attacked with one. There's no desire to have one, "bad people" don't need to get tooled up, and those that do want one find getting a gun more difficult because of their rarity. Black market prices are higher and sources are few.
Gun crime in Britain tended to be shotguns, (sawn off) in bank robberies and payroll heists, but they died out, in these days of electronic money and now robberies are done by computer geeks or guys in suits in offices.No guns necessary. Now criminals carry guns to defend themselves from other criminals, not the public
Click to expand...

Guns are rare and your murder rate is on the rise. Seeing how undisciplined your society is, maybe gun control is a good idea for you people; you government doesn't even trust you with a pair of pliers.

Here's What London Police Recovered In A 'Weapons Sweep': Scissors, Pliers, And Screwdrivers | Daily Wire
 
DebateChallenge said:
That's the UK, over there you're not a citizen you're a subject, you're subject to the government.
Click to expand...

Moronic insults don't change reality.

The USA is a dangerous place to be. So dangerous, some people need guns to shore up their spines.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom