BamaD
Posts: 20687
Joined: 2/27/2005
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: crazyml
quote:
ORIGINAL: BamaD
quote:
ORIGINAL: crazyml
quote:
ORIGINAL: jlf1961
Well, they already made it damn near impossible to own a gun, so it seems to be a going thing to remove the rights of the people. There are a few historic examples of countries who took away the right to own firearms and limit the rights that I mentioned. Seems to go hand in hand, historically speaking.
It is very very easy to own a gun legally. So no - it is not "damn near impossible" It is not easy to own a pistol, but a simple police check, and a valid reason (typically permission to shoot on someone's land) and hey presto you can have a shotgun or a rifle.
You seem to be desperately confused about democracy... No "country" took away the right of people in the UK to carry pistols, it was the democratically elected government that expressed the overwhelming will of the people to restrict the availability of firearms.
It's one of the considerable blessings of living in a democracy where we can change our laws.
It's worth noting that next to no-one rocked up to demonstrate against the gun restrictions, while nearly 100,000 marched in opposition to the ban on hunting foxes with hounds.
Here's the really fucking amazing thing about the democratic process... if enough people wanted to relax the laws, they could get themselves elected and change the law. Whew!
But owning a hand gun is damed near impossible, and self defence, a basic right that even animals have, is not, according to other Englishmen on here, recognized. Bit no there is no real restrictions there. Would you like some oacean front property in Arizona that I can get for you cheap.
You're confused. We have a long established right to self defence, it's vested both in our common law and statute.
We democratically, and with the overwhelming approval of the population, passed a law making it damned near impossible to own a handgun. If it were a concern to enough british citizens, we could change our law. That'll be on account of our living in a functioning democracy where we are not subject to the whims and beliefs of a group of middle aged white dudes from the 1700's.
I know this will be very hard for some people to understand, but.... that's how the will of the people is expressed in a functioning democracy.
That said, the situations of the two countries are completely different - There is very little in the way of gun culture (for good or ill) in the UK, hunting (given our distinct lack of real wilderness) isn't part of our culture either - certainly not in the way it is in the states.
If the likelihood of criminals carrying and using guns were to rise significantly, we may choose - through that wonderful process of democracy - to relax our laws on hand gun ownership.
So the will of the people in the UK is sacrosanct. On the other hand the will of the people in the US must be changed, and failing that ignored. If you like your laws, keep your laws, we will do the same.
_____________________________
Government ranges from a necessary evil to an intolerable one. Thomas Paine
People don't believe they can defend themselves because they have guns, they have guns because they believe they can defend themselves.
|
RE: The Best Historic Argument in Keeping Guns. - 
Profile
New Messages
No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages
Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages
Locked w/o New Messages
Post New Thread