Why does anyone NEED an assault rifle?

[phrodeau]

Since the Second Amendment gives violent criminals the right to defend themselves with military weapons, maybe we should start by changing it.

 

[ThatsTheGuy]

Since the Second Amendment gives violent criminals the right to defend themselves with military weapons, maybe we should start by changing it.

We're working on it. Thus far, the only thing focused on is stripping legal gun owners of their rights and privileges. If I were criminal in the black market, I'd be happier than a pig in mud.

 

[oggbashan]

My I - in your post above you are stating as current UK law some things that are only PROPOSED so far, not reality.

The increase in knife crime comes after a drop. The reasons for that increase and the solutions to it are both complex.

 

[Blue]

My I - in your post above you are stating as current UK law some things that are only PROPOSED so far, not reality.

The increase in knife crime comes after a drop. The reasons for that increase and the solutions to it are both complex.

Obviously the solution to knife crime is to give everybody guns instead!
Nobody brings a knife to a gunfight!

 

[My I]

My I - in your post above you are stating as current UK law some things that are only PROPOSED so far, not reality.

The increase in knife crime comes after a drop. The reasons for that increase and the solutions to it are both complex.

Laws in UK on fixed blade and folding knives are already in effect as is the age restriction and delivery to residential addresses. The only part that is still proposed is banning pointed kitchen knives.

As for the rest of you, your childish twisted logic gets you nowhere. The 2nd amendment does NOT protect criminals.

 

[Blue]

Laws in UK on fixed blade and folding knives are already in effect as is the age restriction and delivery to residential addresses. The only part that is still proposed is banning pointed kitchen knives.

As for the rest of you, your childish twisted logic gets you nowhere. The 2nd amendment does NOT protect criminals.

Actually, yeah it does.
If a US citizens mows down 20 people with a modified AR and goes to prison for fifty years, then immediately begins stockpiling weapons upon release, there are I think only 3 states where the police are legally allowed to confiscate weapons from criminals or suspected criminals. You don't even have a nation wide ban on people listed on the federal terrorist watch-list or with histories of violent crime from buying and owning guns.

Although I guess you are technically right in that it's not the 2nd itself which allows for arming convicted or suspected criminals, it's the culture in much of the US which points to the 2nd as an excuse for not enacting stronger gun regulation.

 

[My I]

Actually, yeah it does.
If a US citizens mows down 20 people with a modified AR and goes to prison for fifty years, then immediately begins stockpiling weapons upon release, there are I think only 3 states where the police are legally allowed to confiscate weapons from criminals or suspected criminals. You don't even have a nation wide ban on people listed on the federal terrorist watch-list or with histories of violent crime from buying and owning guns.

Although I guess you are technically right in that it's not the 2nd itself which allows for arming convicted or suspected criminals, it's the culture in much of the US which points to the 2nd as an excuse for not enacting stronger gun regulation.

You really need to go back and read through all of this again.

It is illegal for a person with a criminal record to possess a firearm. of ANY kind including muzzle loaders. If a criminal is in possession of a firearm then he is breaking a federal law and can be arrested immediately and weapons confiscated. Where does the 2nd amendment protect him? It DOESN'T. He's a fucking criminal.

Do YOU understand the difference between criminal and law abiding? Do you understand the difference between guilty and innocent?

 

[oggbashan]

UK government advice on knives

https://www.gov.uk/buying-carrying-knives

 

[Blue]

You really need to go back and read through all of this again.

It is illegal for a person with a criminal record to possess a firearm. of ANY kind including muzzle loaders. If a criminal is in possession of a firearm then he is breaking a federal law and can be arrested immediately and weapons confiscated. Where does the 2nd amendment protect him? It DOESN'T. He's a fucking criminal.

Do YOU understand the difference between criminal and law abiding? Do you understand the difference between guilty and innocent?

There's a number of loopholes in the law that allow guns to be traded between private parties without being subject to federal regulations or registered, assuming the area they live even has registries. The gun show loophole (AKA total legislative anarchy regarding sales done at gun shows) comes to mind.

 

[phrodeau]

There's a number of loopholes in the law that allow guns to be traded between private parties without being subject to federal regulations or registered, assuming the area they live even has registries. The gun show loophole (AKA total legislative anarchy regarding sales done at gun shows) comes to mind.

Exactly. Law-abiding citizens can sell weapons to anyone without checking if they’re criminals or not.

 

[My I]

There's a number of loopholes in the law that allow guns to be traded between private parties without being subject to federal regulations or registered, assuming the area they live even has registries. The gun show loophole (AKA total legislative anarchy regarding sales done at gun shows) comes to mind.

Again, you are way wrong. Private sales still, LEGALLY, need to be transferred through an FFL. Gun shows? You go to a gunshow and try to buy a gun from a dealer there without filling out the proper forms. Won't happen. If that dealer gets caught he not only loses his FFL, he loses his business, a LOT of money in fines and about 10 years in prison. There is no gun show loophole. That is just another liberal lie.

 

[KimGordon67]

Laws in UK on fixed blade and folding knives are already in effect as is the age restriction and delivery to residential addresses. The only part that is still proposed is banning pointed kitchen knives.

As for the rest of you, your childish twisted logic gets you nowhere. The 2nd amendment does NOT protect criminals.

It really doesn't matter whether it does or not. The 2nd Amendment, along with a few other things, has created a situation in which large-scale gun ownership has become the norm. This makes it much much easier for those who are criminals, or who have criminal intent to access a gun (and also much much easier for angry spouses, small children, the mentally ill, etc etc to access a gun). Once you give the criminals easy access to guns, sensible 'law-abiding' citizens feels an increased need to be armed themselves, as self defence, justified by this 'inalienable right'.

From my perspective, the law is largely irrelevant. It's the normalisation of it all that's the problem.

 

[KimGordon67]

Kitchen Knife wielding attacker in UK

There is an initiative being discussed in UK right now to ban kitchen knives with sharp points because of growing violent crime using kitchen knives as weapons.

The UK has comprehensive gun control laws. When guns were banned violent crime remained relatively the same. What changed was the weapons used for crime. Knives took over where guns once ruled. So UK banned fixed blade knives and folding knives with blades longer than 3.5 inches. Also to purchase a large kitchen knife in the UK you must show photo ID and proof of age. (over 18) Online purchases cannot be delivered to a residential address. Violent crime rates did not significantly change.

You can keep banning, "evil" weapons and everything that gets used as weapons and pretty soon you are going to be watching Pro Wiffle Ball while eating your dinner with blunt plastic tableware.

The weapons are not the problem. The problem is people with violent criminal tendencies. Deal with THAT problem first and you will find that the other measures are unnecessary.

Because the only difference between the UK and the US is gun control laws?
Because the solution to a problem that involves the use of weapons is to increase people's access to weapons?

 

[Blue]

Because the only difference between the UK and the US is gun control laws?
Because the solution to a problem that involves the use of weapons is to increase people's access to weapons?

Kim, listen here, it is perfectly reasonable for any Tom, Dick and Harry to be able to own a weapon with which they could single handedly and with great ease wipe out the entire amassed Legions of Rome.

Obviously.

 

[KimGordon67]

Kim, listen here, it is perfectly reasonable for any Tom, Dick and Harry to be able to own a weapon with which they could single handedly and with great ease wipe out the entire amassed Legions of Rome.

Obviously.

Of course ... sorry. Silly me. I stand corrected.

 

[Hypoxia]

The 2nd Amendment, along with a few other things, has created a situation in which large-scale gun ownership has become the norm. This makes it much much easier for those who are criminals, or who have criminal intent to access a gun (and also much much easier for angry spouses, small children, the mentally ill, etc etc to access a gun). Once you give the criminals easy access to guns, sensible 'law-abiding' citizens feels an increased need to be armed themselves, as self defence, justified by this 'inalienable right'.

Can we say "arms race" or "death spiral"? With widespread weaponry, police and civilians must assume that all around them are not only potentially but ACTUALLY armed and hostile. If someone seems to move sneakily, better shoot them first. It's only prudent.

You have a right to kill or be killed. No other rights exist. That's reality.

...it is perfectly reasonable for any Tom, Dick and Harry to be able to own a weapon with which they could single handedly and with great ease wipe out the entire amassed Legions of Rome.

What would they run out of first, bullets or legionaries?

 

[oggbashan]

Because the only difference between the UK and the US is gun control laws?
Because the solution to a problem that involves the use of weapons is to increase people's access to weapons?

The UK is proposing further laws to restrict access to knives and corrosive substances as PART of a whole series of actions to try to address the problem of violent attacks.

The US?

You know the answer.

 

[Blue]

Can we say "arms race" or "death spiral"? With widespread weaponry, police and civilians must assume that all around them are not only potentially but ACTUALLY armed and hostile. If someone seems to move sneakily, better shoot them first. It's only prudent.

You have a right to kill or be killed. No other rights exist. That's reality.

What would they run out of first, bullets or legionaries?

Supposing the person was from Texas: Legionaries.

 

[Hypoxia]

Supposing the person was from Texas: Legionaries.

Texas is only silty effluvium washed down from the New Mexico mountains. Flood all of Texas and it'll be back within the aeon, alas. The Texas Foreign Legion will be based in Arkansas FTW. Plenty of kin to marry.

 

[coachdb18]

Again, you are way wrong. Private sales still, LEGALLY, need to be transferred through an FFL. Gun shows? You go to a gunshow and try to buy a gun from a dealer there without filling out the proper forms. Won't happen. If that dealer gets caught he not only loses his FFL, he loses his business, a LOT of money in fines and about 10 years in prison. There is no gun show loophole. That is just another liberal lie.

What many liberals see, is a transaction taking place where the buyer possesses a conceal carry permit. Once you've gone through that process, you've already been background checked, so you don't have to get a permit for every successive purchase. Show the dealer the CCW, and they do the 4417... and you walk out with your purchase maybe 10 minutes tops. What they perceive is their 'gun show loophole'

 

[coachdb18]

The UK is proposing further laws to restrict access to knives and corrosive substances as PART of a whole series of actions to try to address the problem of violent attacks.

The US?

You know the answer.

Why? There seem to be a bunch on here that insist the UK is crime free! Are you now saying there's a problem in the UK with violent attacks?

 

[oggbashan]

Why? There seem to be a bunch on here that insist the UK is crime free! Are you now saying there's a problem in the UK with violent attacks?

The UK does not have the significant problem with gun deaths that the US has. The US is almost unique among Western nations for number of deaths by gun for comparable population statistics.

Recently the UK has had an increase in deaths from the use of knives and acid used as part of gang warfare and street thefts.

The level of violent crime worries communities and UK politicians so both are trying to work out solutions. Too many incidents are 'revenge' for previous attacks so are self-perpetuating. Bystanders are getting hurt or killed too.

The number of arrests for use of knives is significant. But that isn't the answer. We need to stop the casual use of knives for minor irritations or 'disrespect'. That needs more than police work.

 

[BotanyBoy]

Ima go shewt some gunz today!!!!

I got a semi-automatic MILITARY ASSAULT WEAPON OF WAR I've been waiting to play with....
http://www.oldsouthfirearms.com/images/products/detail/FR18582.1.jpg

 

[coachdb18]

The UK does not have the significant problem with gun deaths that the US has. The US is almost unique among Western nations for number of deaths by gun for comparable population statistics.

Recently the UK has had an increase in deaths from the use of knives and acid used as part of gang warfare and street thefts.

The level of violent crime worries communities and UK politicians so both are trying to work out solutions. Too many incidents are 'revenge' for previous attacks so are self-perpetuating. Bystanders are getting hurt or killed too.

The number of arrests for use of knives is significant. But that isn't the answer. We need to stop the casual use of knives for minor irritations or 'disrespect'. That needs more than police work.

I guess you haven't noticed that if someone pulls a knife, and you pulla gun, they pull a fast exit? Shame you haven't noticed...

But you're on the road to banning EVERYTHING that can hurt you as YOUR solution (good luck with that approach LOL)

 

[KimGordon67]

I guess you haven't noticed that if someone pulls a knife, and you pulla gun, they pull a fast exit? Shame you haven't noticed...

But you're on the road to banning EVERYTHING that can hurt you as YOUR solution (good luck with that approach LOL)

... but if guns are freely available, everyone pulls a gun. It's clearly easier to kill someone with a gun. This is part of the reason US homicide rates are so high in the US compared to other OECD states.
No one said there is 'no crime' in the UK - that would be ridiculous. But homicide rates are demonstrably lower.

Gun ownership and homicide correlations are here.