'If you carry fake guns - we will treat them as real'

[bigbaddaddyvader]

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Rodann @ Jan 14 2007, 04:09 AM) [snapback]1396859[/snapback]</div>

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(bigbaddaddyvader @ Jan 13 2007, 10:59 PM) [snapback]1396855[/snapback]

Guns are dangerous.People with guns more so.Best to take one out of the equation I feel.
[/b]

Leave the gun, take the cannoli. I love cannolis. They're creamy, and crunchy at the same time, and not too sweet. They're especially good with chocolate chips. But that's the Italian in me, I like baked goods.




In case you were wondering, I was trying to lighten the mood, before this thread becomes a US/UK political argument. Trying to understand each others' ONLY point of reference, or lack thereof, isn't likely to happen. I wasn't born in a "gun-less" society. Or aircraft carrier -less, for that matter. Smart move, there, I say.
[/b][/quote]

I must apologise for the derailment and it probably is an exercise in cultural differences.Just stating my opinion.

 

[Dinadin]

I have this question for the members in the UK. Here in the US it is illegal to have a fake gun which does not have an orange tip or brightly colored. This is so the police know that they are fake. Is that the case in the UK? When I was a kid the toy guns did not have to look fake and I have watched that change over time. I blamed it mostly on the anti-gun people, I also know there is a good reason behind it.

If those were real drugs that the police found, then they had a good reason for arresting them.

Also what we in the US have to remember after seeing those pictures, they look like terrorists. And the UK have been rather viligant about catching terrorists.

 

[Stampedemag]

I, for one, am not trying to start un arguement. Talking politics especially on the internet is a no-win situation that only leads to hard feelings.

I do know that one time I was watching my parent's house as they live next door to me. The first night I noticed that their front door was open. Knowing where my father kept a pistol I went for it and proceded to clear the house. Not knowing if I was going to find someone around every turn I can tell you that I know what it is like for Cops to clear a building. It is a horror house but real.

Long story short, I was VERY glad to have a firearm with me. Lord knows if there was someone there they probably would have had one with them. It is and would be the same there. Just because it is illegal for someone to break into someone's house doesn't stop them from doing it. Neither is having a gun.

I don't care what the sides are. I have kids. In my house we do not have guns because we don't want the kids getting hurt. The fact that we have the choice is great to me.

Nuff said.

 

[NEKROFANATIC]

uh...calling the cops is always the best thing you could do in this kinda situation. Scenarios abound and maybe a friend of the family came to visit, knocked on the door and it opened. They walk in calling out to see if anyone is home, dreading the worst when all of a sudden they turn a corner , see you holding a gun, you see them...Scenarios aren't always a good thing.


We could argue the fact that the UK has one of the lowest murder rates in the western world whilst the US one of the highest. There can never be a rational argument behind the ownership of automatic weapons, which are designed solely to kill another human being...

 

[aoifrost]

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Stampedemag @ Jan 13 2007, 10:01 PM) [snapback]1396919[/snapback]</div>

I, for one, am not trying to start un arguement. Talking politics especially on the internet is a no-win situation that only leads to hard feelings.

I do know that one time I was watching my parent's house as they live next door to me. The first night I noticed that their front door was open. Knowing where my father kept a pistol I went for it and proceded to clear the house. Not knowing if I was going to find someone around every turn I can tell you that I know what it is like for Cops to clear a building. It is a horror house but real.

Long story short, I was VERY glad to have a firearm with me. Lord knows if there was someone there they probably would have had one with them. It is and would be the same there. Just because it is illegal for someone to break into someone's house doesn't stop them from doing it. Neither is having a gun.

I don't care what the sides are. I have kids. In my house we do not have guns because we don't want the kids getting hurt. The fact that we have the choice is great to me.

Nuff said.
[/b]

Ditto.

A law making firearms are completely illegal does not stop law-breaking criminals from getting them. How many law-abiding criminals are there...?

 

[Uber Fett]

An armed society is a polite society. Manners are good when one may have to back up his acts with his life.
Robert A. Heinlein

People in this country have the God-given rights to protect themselves, moreover have a duty to do so. Mostly, the police are a reactionary organization. Frankly, if the courts would do their jobs, there would be less criminals out there to prey on society.

Here in the US it is illegal to have a fake gun which does not have an orange tip or brightly colored. This is so the police know that they are fake. [/b]

Let me quash this misconception right here and now. I couldn't care less if there was an orange or brightly colored tip. I'm treating the situation as if it were a real firearm. The officer would be a complete moron, and frankly derelict in not doing so. Any goof can put an orange or brightly colored tip on a firearm. You can now buy polymer frames in different colours (for our UK friends). May God help you if you point that at anyone. The point is, responsibility and common sense are the keys here and there is no amount of law that will ever protect the citizen...or subject from the lack there of.

Shawn

 

[voice in the crowd]

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(frost @ Jan 14 2007, 08:16 AM) [snapback]1396952[/snapback]</div>

A law making firearms are completely illegal does not stop law-breaking criminals from getting them. [/b]

True nothing will stop criminals getting firearms. In the UK firearms are completely illegal and it is really just to make the job of the police much easier. It pretty much says if you have a firearm in your hands out in the street then you are a gun wielding criminal and are fair game to be peppered by armed police. You really can't get mistaken for law abiding gun owner over here (unless as stated earlier you are Harry Stanley and have a table leg in a bag and speak with a Scottish accent (mistaken for Irish) then you are equally fair game to be gunned down).

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Uber Fett @ Jan 14 2007, 10:34 AM) [snapback]1396972[/snapback]</div>

People in this country have the God-given rights to protect themselves, moreover have a duty to do so.
[/b]

Are you talking about the UK or US Uber Fett as the topic is about the UK?

This thread is teetering on the edge of being political so just whilst we are all breaking the forum rules :angel I will have a side swipe at God who for the record doesn't exist....................

Well at least he doesn't exist in the UK anyway as we don't have any such God-given right to protect ourselves .

Seriously if a burglar broke into my property in the UK and I restrained him using force then called the police the burgular would probably probably try to get me charged for assault :unsure .

Cheers Chris.

P.S. Uptight religious people don't take offence at the God comments it's clearly tongue in cheek thats what the is for.

 

[aoifrost]

I have heard of a few cases in the United States where burglars won lawsuits against homeowners for "unsafe" homes (i.e. falling off ledges and injuring themselves WHILE attempting to burglarize the home).

Anyhow, onto the prop-side of this:

Has anybody had trouble with owning props of firearms, US or UK ?

 

[tommin]

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(bigbaddaddyvader @ Jan 13 2007, 09:59 PM) [snapback]1396855[/snapback]</div>

However it cannot be disputed that the more guns you hand people the greater the likelihood they will be used and misused.I would like to ask our members in the US one simple question to gauge genuine response:
Has the level of gun ownership and use in your country improved your life?
For myself I can just say that the only things that firearms have brought my country is heartache and loss.I welcome all firearms regulations that make it more difficult for them to be in private possession.Let's not disguise this one iota.Guns are dangerous.People with guns more so.Best to take one out of the equation I feel.[/b]

The same could be said about the driver's license in my country.

 

[bigbaddaddyvader]

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(tommin @ Jan 14 2007, 12:39 PM) [snapback]1396999[/snapback]</div>

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(bigbaddaddyvader @ Jan 13 2007, 09:59 PM) [snapback]1396855[/snapback]

However it cannot be disputed that the more guns you hand people the greater the likelihood they will be used and misused.I would like to ask our members in the US one simple question to gauge genuine response:
Has the level of gun ownership and use in your country improved your life?
For myself I can just say that the only things that firearms have brought my country is heartache and loss.I welcome all firearms regulations that make it more difficult for them to be in private possession.Let's not disguise this one iota.Guns are dangerous.People with guns more so.Best to take one out of the equation I feel.[/b]

The same could be said about the driver's license in my country.
[/b][/quote]


:lol
Or ANY country for that matter.That may well be universal. :lol

 

[Blad]

The original post was talking about Cheshire Police raiding a house where they suspected unlicensed/illegal automatic weapons were present.

www.crimeinfo.org.uk
In 1997, following the murders of 16 school children and a teacher in a primary school in Dunblaine Scotland, the government introduced two Firearms Amendment Acts. These acts banned almost all handguns across Britain. More than 162,000 handguns were handed in to local police following an amnesty. Shotguns and rifles are still allowed for hunting and sports target practice but require strict licences and must be kept in safes. Assault rifles are totally banned.

How much gun crime is there?

Gun crime makes up less than 1% of all crime, amounting to 9,900 offences for the previous year. However there has been a rise in gun crime every year for the past four years. ThereÂ’s been a particular increase in the use of handguns, near to 50%, but mainly with the gun used as a threat and not fired.

In 2001/2002, 97 people were killed as a result of gun crime and 558 were seriously injured, including 10 police officers.[/b]

Gun Deaths - International Comparisons

Gun deaths per 100,000 population (for the year indicated):

Homicide Suicide Unintentional

USA 4.08 (1999) 6.08 (1999) 0.42 (1999)
Canada 0.54 (1999) 2.65 (1997) 0.15 (1997)
Switzerland 0.50 (1999) 5.78 (1998) -
Scotland 0.12 (1999) 0.27 (1999) -
England/Wales 0.12 (1999/00) 0.22 (1999) 0.01 (1999)
Japan 0.04* (1998) 0.04 (1995) <0.01 (1997)


If you equate gun deaths with gun ownership then unfortunately the figures don't work. Clearly the US has high gun ownership and a high rate of gun deaths, the UK has very low ownership and very low death rate, but that doesn't explain Canada which has similar gun ownership to the US or Switzerland which has equally high gun ownership.

However, wandering the streets with a replica handgun or assault rifle in any country is likely to get you police interest.

I for one cannot see why a civillian should be allowed to own an assault rifle. Shotgun I can understand, hunting rifle, even a pistol, but an assault rifle?


The arguement that if you ban guns 'Only criminals will own guns' is fine with me. Makes it far easier for the police to spot a criminal if he's carrying an AK47 or a minigun in public doesn't it?

 

[Star Wars Helmets]

IMO unfortunately, due to the constitutional right to bear arms, the US is now in a position where it quite simply cannot ban firearms. As others have quite rightly said, it would merely be depriving the law abiding citizens of a way of defending themselves.

Thankfully the UK never reached anything like the same gun-ownership proliferation as with our US cousins, hence the ban after the Dunblane massacre over 10 years ago was a more achievable objective.

As far as whether the US proliferation of firearms is responsible for a murder rate 3-4 times higher than the UK itÂ’s clearly impossible to say. However it would be a brave man to say it hasnÂ’t contributed to the problem. UK deaths due to firearms are one twenty-seventh of the US so maybe we in the UK have to rely on less efficient ways of killing each other.

Police on either side of the Atlantic most certainly WILL overact if they are faced by a situation which they believe could leave the public or themselves in danger. Occasionally, the security forces will do really dumb things without prompting. Basically anyone dumb enough to brandish a replica firearm in public without taking proper precaution is asking for trouble.

Cheers

Jez

 

[Soundwave]

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Stampedemag @ Jan 14 2007, 06:01 AM) [snapback]1396919[/snapback]</div>

I, for one, am not trying to start un arguement. Talking politics especially on the internet is a no-win situation that only leads to hard feelings.

I do know that one time I was watching my parent's house as they live next door to me. The first night I noticed that their front door was open. Knowing where my father kept a pistol I went for it and proceded to clear the house. Not knowing if I was going to find someone around every turn I can tell you that I know what it is like for Cops to clear a building. It is a horror house but real.

Long story short, I was VERY glad to have a firearm with me. Lord knows if there was someone there they probably would have had one with them. It is and would be the same there. Just because it is illegal for someone to break into someone's house doesn't stop them from doing it. Neither is having a gun.

I don't care what the sides are. I have kids. In my house we do not have guns because we don't want the kids getting hurt. The fact that we have the choice is great to me.

Nuff said.
[/b]

Just say someone spooked you (the owner was in there/a cop came knocking at the door or some kids were messing around inside) and you accidentally shot them, I'm sure you'd be happy then. Not saying that you would do, but the same situation can happen with gun owners who are less experienced or jumpier than you and people can get killed by accident. Where as if I was in the same situation, living in the UK, I can be relatively safe to know that not any old punk can buy a gun...and my baseball bat will suffice if someone does attack me. I dunno, I don't feel that any of my freedoms have been taken away by us Brits not owning guns. And I must admit it made me uneasy when I visited America, knowing that any stranger could be brandishing a gun.

I guess it comes down that I feel safer knowing the majority donÂ’t feel the need to own guns, while you feel safer with one.

 

[dr_slurpee]

I've never understood how the argument that banning guns would be depriving the law abiding citizens of a way of defending themselves...when does pulling out a gun (even in defense) ever make the situation any better? If you have some guy wanting to steal from you or kill you who has a gun pointed at you (and most likely is a little on edge), how likely is it that he'll be more eager to shoot if you pull out a weapon?

Anyway, as for why Canada has less gun related deaths compared to gun ownership is probably quite simple. We don't have "the right" to bear arms, so people can't carry around guns "legally", also I'd suspect that here in Canada there is a much higher percentage of hunting weapons out of all the guns owned. Lets face it, if you want to rob a store, a hunting rifle isn't really going to be your choice weapon.

 

[tommin]

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(BingoBongo275 @ Jan 14 2007, 08:15 AM) [snapback]1397017[/snapback]</div>

Thankfully the UK never reached anything like the same gun-ownership proliferation as with our US cousins, hence the ban after the Dunblane massacre over 10 years ago was a more achievable objective...[/b]

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(bigbaddaddyvader @ Jan 13 2007, 09:59 PM) [snapback]1396855[/snapback]</div>

Has the level of gun ownership and use in your country improved your life?[/b]

"WHEN in the Course of human Events,

it becomes necessary for one People to dissolve the Political Bands which have connected them with another, and to assume among the Powers of the Earth, the separate and equal Station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature's God entitle them, a decent Respect to the Opinions of Mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the Separation.

WE hold these Truths to be self-evident, that all Men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness -- That to secure these Rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just Powers from the Consent of the Governed, that whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these Ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its Foundation on such Principles, and organizing its Powers in such Form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness..."

I'm just stirring the pot here. Sorry, I'll stop now before I get kicked out of here.

 

[bigbaddaddyvader]

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(tommin @ Jan 14 2007, 03:10 PM) [snapback]1397032[/snapback]</div>

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(BingoBongo275 @ Jan 14 2007, 08:15 AM) [snapback]1397017[/snapback]

Thankfully the UK never reached anything like the same gun-ownership proliferation as with our US cousins, hence the ban after the Dunblane massacre over 10 years ago was a more achievable objective...[/b]

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(bigbaddaddyvader @ Jan 13 2007, 09:59 PM) [snapback]1396855[/snapback]</div>

Has the level of gun ownership and use in your country improved your life?[/b]

"WHEN in the Course of human Events,

it becomes necessary for one People to dissolve the Political Bands which have connected them with another, and to assume among the Powers of the Earth, the separate and equal Station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature's God entitle them, a decent Respect to the Opinions of Mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the Separation.

WE hold these Truths to be self-evident, that all Men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness -- That to secure these Rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just Powers from the Consent of the Governed, that whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these Ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its Foundation on such Principles, and organizing its Powers in such Form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness..."

I'm just stirring the pot here. Sorry, I'll stop now before I get kicked out of here.
[/b][/quote]

I had intended to leave this alone as it is getting too political and there are clearly cultural differences which will not be resolved but oh good grief.I may not be from the US but even I am aware of how little there is left in the US constitution after the endless amendments tacked onto it that it doesn't really resemble what it's original intentions were.Also I feel that there is one very simple point that a lot of people in the US seem to miss:just because you have the RIGHT to do something doesn't mean you SHOULD.
It may just seem this way to those of us outside the US but the culture there seems to be terribly paranoid and driven by media-induced fear.Perhaps this is the wrong impression and if it is i apologise for gross oversimplification.However it does appear that way and a country that driven by paranoia should not be armed to the teeth. :lol
I mean,seriously,people REALLY got upset in the US that they have to wait a whole five days for a gun?The definition of firearms has changed so much since the inception of the US constitution that any resemblance to the "arms" stated in it is now completely obsolete.

 

[Sidewinder]

Y'know this right to bare arms - are you sure they didn't just mean that wearing a t-shirt would be acceptable?

SAS

 

[Rodann]

There can never be a rational argument behind the ownership of automatic weapons, which are designed solely to kill another human being...[/b]

There ISN'T, actually. Automatic weapons are illegal for civilian use, period. They're ONLY legal for military, to clarify a misconception. If you mean semi-automatic, that's just "double action", essentially. IMO, it shouldn't be called "semi-auto"- it's caused more trouble for gun owners than anything else. And "assault weapon" is a bad label, too. A hunting rifle is just fine, but that EXACT same rifle with a polymer stock, heat shroud, and pistol grip..........all uselessly AESTHETIC changes..........can make it an "assault weapon". The gun ban included guns just like that. I'm just trying to clarify. A friend of mine has a 1982 Ford Bronco. Because of its construction, and the ignorance of labelling back in the '80s, it's classified as a "two ton truck" rather than an SUV. That causes problems all the time. It's just idiotic, like some of the gun mess.



<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(BingoBongo275 @ Jan 14 2007, 09:15 AM) [snapback]1397017[/snapback]</div>

IMO unfortunately, due to the constitutional right to bear arms, the US is now in a position where it quite simply cannot ban firearms. As others have quite rightly said, it would merely be depriving the law abiding citizens of a way of defending themselves.

Thankfully the UK never reached anything like the same gun-ownership proliferation as with our US cousins, hence the ban after the Dunblane massacre over 10 years ago was a more achievable objective.

[/b]

Not trying to stir the pot, here, but has anyone stopped to realize that one big honking reason we even HAVE those "lax gun laws" over here that someone mentioned...............is BECAUSE of the "great British Empire"? "Minute Men" ring a bell? Just trying to point out that we don't both have the same history, therefore not the same common ground, therefore not the same rationalizations. :unsure

Thanks for that picture, Tommin. Freedom from tyrrany, like the Virginia emblem says.

 

[tommin]

I'll play 'devil's advocate' when reviewing the original article. Suppose it was simply pictures of a small airsoft or paintball organization that was taken indoors that triggered the search and seizure. The police could have found ONLY privately owned & legal replicas turning the attention back toward the police. In order to save face, a noticable amount of drugs could be conveniently (FOUND), therefore, justifying what I see as a possible knee jerk reaction. The probable opportunity is there unless I've missed something.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(bigbaddaddyvader @ Jan 14 2007, 09:22 AM) [snapback]1397038[/snapback]</div>

The definition of firearms has changed so much since the inception of the US constitution that any resemblance to the "arms" stated in it is now completely obsolete.[/b]

This maybe true. Dunno.

 

[tripoli]

If you read the federalist papers, the debate between the first continental congress and state reps on the constitution, there is ABSOLUTELY no doubt as to why the right to bear arms was made, where it was placed in the constitution and what that entailed. It was to keep the people safe from each other and more importantly, from the government.
In the US, politicians have used common law to circumvent the constitution for convenience. People have been willing or blind to giving up rights to make things run more smoothly at the potential cost of loosing their own constitutional rights. More over politicians have morphed here into power grubbing parties that put power and self interest before the people's. The system here has corrupted, which is the exact reason the second admendment was written as it was in original context.