Gun control reduces violence?
by The Panda Man · 03/09/2006 5:13 pmOur friends across the pond in England have enacted fairly strict gun control measures in recent years in response to rising violent crime rates, and have an extensive network of cameras to keep a governmental eye on the populace. In fact, things are so peaceful in this now gun-free utopia that schoolchildren are sent to class in body armor to protect against being stabbed.
A 16-year-old London youth, fearing for his safety after a fight over a girl, has been given permission to wear body armor to class. The boy was allowed to wear a stab-proof vest under his uniform after the school and teachers reviewed the "exceptional circumstances" of the situation, the London Mirror said.
"I had a conflict over a girl and threats were made against me," the boy said. "Two guys I know have been stabbed — one ended up in intensive care. I don’t want that to happen to me."
Apparently replacing morality with gun control fails to curb the violent instincts of some members of “civilized” society. Meanwhile, those who would protect themselves with firearms from the depredations of the violent are disarmed by the government they entrust to protect them. Notes Thomas Sowell:
While England has not yet reached the American level of murders, it has already surpassed the United States in rates of robbery and burglary. Moreover, in recent years the murder rate in England has been going up under still more severe gun control laws, while the murder rate in the United States has been going down as more and more states have allowed private citizens to carry concealed weapons — and have begun locking up more criminals.
In America we have the Second Amendment to our Constitution which guarantees the right to keep and bear arms. Unfortunately that does not always matter to those in authority. Ask citizens of Washington D.C. or other gun-ban municipalities if their rights are intact or their violent crime rates low. In New Orleans, an NRA lawsuit has been filed because officials confiscated legally owned firearms in the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina. Honest citizens, victims of the storm and the criminal among them, were thus deprived by their government of the means to defend their lives and property when they most needed it.
Further, American concealed carry laws have not resulted in a “bloodbath in the streets,” and the expiration of the so-called “assault weapons ban” has not brought full-scale military operations to our front yards as claimed by inflammatory anti-gun rhetoric. Instead violent crime rates have generally declined even as gun freedom has increased. More and more the ammunition in favor of gun control proves to be blank.
LST Flashback: British knife control.
E-mail the author or leave a comment below.
Filed Under Uncategorized · · · · 
Print This Post
··
Comments
22 Responses to “Gun control reduces violence?”Search
Our Sponsors
Poll
Loading ...
I don’t see what the problem is here. Good gun contol does reduce violence. One shoot, one kill, case closed.
Ain’t it funny how the airheads think that removing firearms reduces crime/violence. Myself, personnaly, if given a choice I’d rather be shot than cut or bludgeoned to death.
Actually in those places where guns have been banned, violent crime has gone up and in those places where concealed carry is allowed, the violent crime rate has gone down. Are they linked? Can’t prove it but it certainly seems that way. Do the gun grabbers notice? NOOOOO. Now the UK is talking about banning sharp KNIVES. Given the tough crappy meat they serve, how in hell do they plan on eating thier STEAK? For that matter, how will they BUTCHER IT?
#2 Rorschach –
They’re want to ban sharp knives? I would love to see a link to a reliable source on that one. That falls into the category of “it would be funny if it weren’t so sad”.
My idea of gun control: Being able to hit your target.
– Ken
“Gun control” increases crime. Look at Austrailia. Pretty low crime rate, but once they outlowed guns, crime rate increased! I’ll try to find a link.
#3
Ken I just put up the link to the knife ban story. See above.
Gun Control !? It simply means holding you gun steady, on target, to hit the bull’s eye or the dirtbag who is threatening your life or the life of a family member !
The Brits are appealing to the typical E.U. liberalism and they are paying a price for being liberal wimps.
Even though staunch allies in war, they still do not trust their own law abiding citizens to own firearms. There is not a grass roots outcry over there on the issue,if there is it has been kept quiet from the international media. The Brits seem to be laying down and taking it! Where are the mass demonstrations, letter writings, emails and eliminating some of these libs at the polls ?
Maybe radical Islam will change the minds of the lib politicians !
Thank God for the NRA in the USA !
I am a proud NRA member, but I wish they would stop sending me so much crap! I am not a gun guy per say. After I saw what happened in New Orleans during Katrina and I saw a lot of people coming our way AND after I went to our local grocery store and
saw people camping out in the parking lot, I decided it was time to bear arms as is my right.
I’m one click away from getting my concealed weapons license. I own guns to protect my family.
My family will be protected.
I recently went to a concealed handgun class ($99) and applied for my license through the state ($140). It is worth the money to know that I am at least going to have a means of protecting myself when the times comes.
I look at a concealed handgun license as an insurance policy — hoping never to have to use it, but knowing that it is there.
#8
I dont see where the 2nd amendment says you have to get permission to protect yourself and your family??
My friend was arrested for having a pistol in his car and not having a CCL. They dropped the charges when he asked for a trial. Why?
Read Locked and Loaded!
My friends attorney did!
#8
Although I do agree a gun safety and usage class is a must.
#3 Ken Kelly
Hereyago
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/health/4581871.stm
http://news.scotsman.com/index.cfm?id=579102005
http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/medicalnews.php?newsid=25277
SNIP
“The present-day UK Government should also legislate to combat injuries from knives, argue the authors. Banning the sale of long pointed knives would be a key step in the fight against violent crime.”
What do you call people who are prohibited from possessing firearms? PRISONERS !
#9, DanielJames, the Texas Legislature last session passed a law clarifying the definition of the “travelling” provision in Texas to mean anyone in thier car, regardless of the distance travelled or the purpose of the trip. They did not change the underlying law, they merely clarified a law that was previously vague. Chuck Rosenthal has instructed HPD and Harris County Sherriffs and Constables to disregard that clarification and to arrest people with guns in thier car anyway. The reason the case was dropped when he requested a jury trial is that the DA KNEW it would not stick. Your friend probably has a case for wrongful arrest and imprisonment. Not to mention the seizure of his weapon. He should contact the NRA about filing a civil suit to force an injunction. We need just such a test case in order to do so.
I was reading posts about a year ago or so on a Brit police website. The officers were debating carrying firearms themselves after an officer was shot to death. It was amazing the mindset of the law enforcement. An overwhelming ammount of them actually thought that by them arming themselves, the crooks would escalate the violence. HOW? Get nukes??? Buy surplus Soviet armoured vehicles???
Brits don’t even believe in defending themselves in their own homes. So much for “We will fight them on the beaches….”
The use of lethal force prevents recidvism!!!!
Guns don’t kill people, CHUCK NORRIS KILLS PEOPLE!
http://www.chucknorrisfacts.com/
#9, by the way I’d be happy to try to put him in touch with someone in the NRA who might be able to help.
The British burglars know they are SAFE from law-abiding citizens. Gun ownership is permitted, but you have to be a member of a hunting club and keep the weapons locked up at the club, not in your house. Not only is the burglary rate very high, but 1/3 of burglaries are what American law-enforcement call “hot”: they occur when the homeowners are HOME. When I lived there, we were told by the police never to leave a purse, cell phone, or wallet within sight of a downstairs window at night: this was viewed as an invitation to a burglary and got you no sympathy from the cops.
British law does not allow a homeowner to defend himself from a burglar. If the person in your home is there to commit murder, you are allowed to fight back only if they strike first - and you are confined to PROPORTIONAL FORCE. This means that if the perp has a 6-inch knife, and you get a 12 inch knife from the kitchen knife block to defend yourself, you’ll be the one going to jail!!!! It also leads to ridiculous legal farce; the court may have to decide if it was fair for the homeowner to use a cricket bat to defend himself against the burglar’s 6 inch knife (the bat has a longer reach, you know).
Thank God for the 2nd amendment - I’m glad to be home!
I believe the reason that the English have so readily accepted the gun bans in that they have this long standing notion of a Noble Class and a Common Class. The gun ban effects the poorer, or common, people the most. The rich have gated communities, expensive security systems, etc. The members of the government even have security details to protect them from the criminal element. This feeds into their idea that somehow there lives are more valuable than their subjects.
That is the same mentality the gun banners have in this country. I wonder how much money anti gun people like Rosie O’Donnell or George Soros spends each year on their security systems and armed bodyguards.
“The difference between a subject and a citizen is that the citizen has rights, such as the right to defend one’s self and family.
BTW all, NRA-ILA linked to this article.
Democracy is 2 wolves and a sheep voting on what to have for lunch…. Liberty is a well armed sheep contesting the vote !!
#19: Durnik is exactly on point.
The U.S is one of only two nations left on earth where you can legally own and a firearm(Switzerland is the other; ever notice nobody, even the Nazi’s, messes with them?)
The Brithish people are not citizens, but rather, ‘Subjects of the Crown’. I don’t know about the rest of you, but I’m not subject to anything at all.
Politicians, lawyers, socialists, and their enablers in the Marxist media, dispise ‘we, the people owning firearms; I’m sure they would much prefer ignorant, apathetic, unarmed peasants to govern.
They already have, for the most part, the first two. The troubling thing is they are resorting to lawyer tricks and word games to do the later. They know they could not achieve it any other way.
** Excellent Item, Especially For Britons ***
Dave Kopel’s article, “Lost Battles,
Lost Rights” is available on-line from NRA-ILA.
Intro at:
http://nraila.org/Issues/factsheets/read.aspx?ID=28
“American gun owners know their fears about licensing and registration are hardly unfounded, because they are familiar with the sorry story of gun control in Great Britain. This story is concisely told in the monograph, “Lost Battles, Lost Rights,” written by David B. Kopel, adjunct professor of law at New York University Law School.”
Article coverpage, and link to the rest of
the article, at:
http://www.nraila.org/Issues/Articles/Read.aspx?ID=58
** An excellent and compelling resource,
especially for readers in Britain. **