Within A Decade Of The UK Banning And Confiscating Handguns, Crimes Involving Handguns Doubled… Will stricter control of firearms make America safer?
In 1987, Michael Ryan went on a shooting spree in his small town of Hungerford, England, killing 16 people (including his mother) and wounding another 14 before shooting himself. Since the public was unarmed—as were the police—Ryan wandered the streets for eight hours with two semiautomatic rifles and a handgun before anyone with a firearm was able to come to the rescue.
Nine years later, in March 1996, Thomas Hamilton, a man known to be mentally unstable, walked into a primary school in the Scottish town of Dunblane and shot 16 young children and their teacher. He wounded 10 other children and three other teachers before taking his own life.
After Hungerford, the British government banned semiautomatic rifles and brought shotguns—the last type of firearm that could be purchased with a simple show of fitness—under controls similar to those in place for pistols and rifles. Magazines were limited to two shells with a third in the chamber.
Dunblane had a more dramatic impact. Hamilton had a firearm certificate, although according to the rules he should not have been granted one. A media frenzy coupled with an emotional campaign by parents of Dunblane resulted in the Firearms Act of 1998, which instituted a nearly complete ban on handguns. Owners of pistols were required to turn them in. The penalty for illegal possession of a pistol is up to 10 years in prison.
The results have not been what proponents of the act wanted.Within a decade of the handgun ban and the confiscation of handguns from registered owners, crime with handguns had doubled according to British government crime reports. Gun crime, not a serious problem in the past, now is. Armed street gangs have some British police carrying guns for the first time. Moreover, another massacre occurred in June 2010. Derrick Bird, a taxi driver in Cumbria, shot his brother and a colleague then drove off through rural villages killing 12 people and injuring 11 more before killing himself.





















Since the gun crime rates have been falling was that because they then laxed the laws? You can't have your logic both ways.
In 2011 England, Wales and N.Ireland (Scotland had none) had 11 homocides by gun though the US for the same year had 8,583 which is 0.002 of the population total while the UK had 0.00001, quite a difference and the truth.
UK is violent crime capital of Europe
The United Kingdom is the violent crime capital of Europe and has one of the highest rates of violence in the world, worse even than America, according to new research.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/ne...
The UK forces strangely count all crimes whereas in the US the FBI doesn't even include many unless they are serious crimes. In the UK even reported crimes are counted as are threats, grabbing, forcing and violent intent, for example the US only count aggravated assault and forcible rape, whereas the UK count an assault as unlawfully touching or pushing someone. A sexual crime can be just grabbing a woman in the UK which inflates the figures overall..
Gun crimes in the UK can be someone just waving a gun as a threat without actually injuring someone or even firing it, in fact only a small percentage are even fired (roughly only 20%) because it's seen as much more serious and being illegal and also more expensive they won't take the risk of losing it.
They also include air guns, crossbows and other weapons which aren't considered at all by the FBI, in fact there are crimes which the FBI never get to hear about as the various police departments don't even report many minor crimes which the UK do.
If we removed those minor crimes as in the US the gap widens further but there is one advantage to a gun culture, minor crimes like stealing a ...
The UK forces strangely count all crimes whereas in the US the FBI doesn't even include many unless they are serious crimes. In the UK even reported crimes are counted as are threats, grabbing, forcing and violent intent, for example the US only count aggravated assault and forcible rape, whereas the UK count an assault as unlawfully touching or pushing someone. A sexual crime can be just grabbing a woman in the UK which inflates the figures overall..
Gun crimes in the UK can be someone just waving a gun as a threat without actually injuring someone or even firing it, in fact only a small percentage are even fired (roughly only 20%) because it's seen as much more serious and being illegal and also more expensive they won't take the risk of losing it.
They also include air guns, crossbows and other weapons which aren't considered at all by the FBI, in fact there are crimes which the FBI never get to hear about as the various police departments don't even report many minor crimes which the UK do.
If we removed those minor crimes as in the US the gap widens further but there is one advantage to a gun culture, minor crimes like stealing a bike or burglary in general etc are more likely to happen since they're not expecting the owner to shoot them. That much is true but it has to be said if a burglar is startled he is far more likely to run rather than risk hand to hand combat and more likely to be caught whereas in the US the owner has the possibility of a shoot out in his own home.
The chances of someone in the UK having to fight for his life in his own home is rare and the type that would attack instead of fleeing would no doubt be far quicker to pull a trigger anyway if they had one on them at the time.
I will pose this question to you as I see the opportunity. How can you be such a strong supporter of the second amendment yet also a strong supporter of the war on pot? How is it that a product manufactured to kill and hurt ppl is an acceptable risk in the name of freedom, but a product that can't kill ppl, affects only the user, and is not proven to be any more addictive than ice cream cannot be allowed in our society????? Explain to me how letting ppl have assault weapons is less of a risk than letting them get hungry, happy, and sleepy by use of a plant?????
So what do you want to do, Mr. NRA? More guns isn't a solution. That's like saying to control auto deaths we need more cars on the road. It doesn't make sense.
Do you want our educational system to look like a prison? That isn't conducive to learning. Oh - wait! You Right Wingnuts would love to destroy the educational system even further. I'm sick of your ignorance.
Oh and another point - Why are all you Right Wingnuts so afraid of your country? What's it like to live in fear every day of people?
Dave, why do you feel that you have to call people, that you don't agree with, names? You sound so angry.
You don't get it - you are the one that is afraid because you believe guns are an answer. The fact that you are willing to allow guns into all aspects of your life or your childrens speaks volumes. You Right Wingnuts cry about a police state and you don't even realize that you are developing it yourselves. lol
You refuse to do anything to improve the situation - just accept it and stock pile guns as an answer. "No child left behind" isn't a "Liberal's" program.
And what - is Right Wingnut a bad name? Embrace it. You are willing to force me to live in a country that you want - not a country that we both could live in. That is what I call fascism and you Right Wingnuts are responsible for it - though you have no idea what you are doing. That is nutty. I'm not angry - but I sure am not going to walk away from any of you Right Wingnuts. Oohh - gee! And I don't have a gun either!
Dave you have no idea if I stock pile guns or if I even have a gun in my house. What I'm afraid is of people like you, who have no respect for our constitution. People like you, who can't see that their freedoms are being taken away from them, or maybe don't care. And no one is forcing you to live here, which is another wonderful thing about this country. Maybe you should move to France, or the UK, or maybe China, you might then appreciate our country a little more, and quit trying to change it.
No child left behind was developed by President Bush and Ted Kennedy. Conservatives considered it a Liberal program.
There are a lot of names I could call people like you Dave, but I choose not to. Mama always said when you start calling people names, you've lost the debate.
What scares me most are people like you that are out to destroy the educational system. You want schools to be like prisons. I don't give a s*** who developed "No Child Left Behind" - it's a failure and since Reagan the educational system in the USA has been a dismal mess.
Your mama was an idiot. Let loose - you haven't a clue - but keep collecting those checks.
http://www.nbcchicago.com/blo...
Does having ARMED guards make Obama safer when outside of the white-house?
C'mon lieberals! Wake up and use the brain God gave you! You are in danger every day from SOMETHING. (Government comes to mind quite readily)