so much for banning guns, right UK?

WriterDom

Good to the last drop
Joined
Jun 25, 2000
Posts
20,077
Gun crimes soaring despite ban brought in following Dunblane
By David Bamber, Home Affairs Correspondent
(Filed: 15/07/2001)


THE controversial ban on the ownership of handguns which was introduced after the Dunblane massacre has failed to halt an increasing number of crimes involving firearms.

An independent report, Illegal Firearms in the UK, to be published by the Centre for Defence Studies at King's College in London tomorrow, says that handguns were used in 3,685 offences last year compared with 2,648 in 1997, an increase of 40 per cent.

The figures will renew the debate about the effectiveness of the gun ban, introduced by the last Conservative government and then extended to cover all pistols by Labour after winning the 1997 general election.

Legislation banning larger-calibre pistols was proposed by the previous Conservative government in response to the murder of 16 pupils and their teacher by Thomas Hamilton at Dunblane primary school in March 1996.

But Labour broadened the scope of the Act to cover smaller handguns as well, despite opposition from the sporting community. The law is now so restrictive that British Olympic shooting competitors go abroad to practise because their weapons are illegal in this country.

The new report, commissioned by the Countryside Alliance's Campaign for Shooting, was compiled by John Bryan, the former head of the firearms intelligence unit at New Scotland Yard.

Mr Bryan said that his report cast doubt on the wisdom of the ban. "The increase in the use of handguns by criminals since the implementation of the 1997 Act clearly raises important questions for policy-makers considering further controls on legally-held firearms."

David Bredin, the director of the Campaign for Shooting, said: "It is crystal clear from the research that the existing gun laws do not lead to crime reduction and a safer place.

"Policy-makers have targeted the legitimate sporting and farming communities with ever-tighter laws. The research clearly demonstrates that it is illegal guns which are the real threat to public safety."

The number of crimes involving handguns has increased, mostly due to a flood of illegally imported weapons and the use of those already in circulation before 1997.

The report also shows a dramatic rise in firearms incidents in general, from 4,904 recorded incidents in 1997 to 6,843 last year. It reveals an increase in crimes using shotguns, up from 580 in 1997 to 693 last year.

Offences involving air weapons show an even more startling rise, from 7,506 in 1997 to 10,103 last year. Mr Bryan compiled the statistics from Home Office figures and information obtained by analysing individual forces' crime totals.

A firearms amnesty at the time of the ban's introduction resulted in 160,000 handguns being surrendered to the police at a cost of £90 million to the taxpayer in compensation.

A Home Office spokesman said: "The Government did not believe that banning handguns by itself would eradicate gun crime. We recognise there is a continuing problem with the use of guns by criminals and that it has increased over recent years.

"We are taking further measures against criminals who use guns and we already have schemes in the pipeline to curtail illegal gun use. These include a national register of legal guns, an intensified effort against illegally smuggled weapons and a determination to punish criminals who use guns."
 
The old... "guns don't kill people, people kill people" theory

I've wracked my brain trying to think of a logical, economical solution to the violence. I got nuttin'.

What do you think would help? Obviously, banning guns isn't.
 
Don't know if it means anything,

but we have lots of guns here. Evryone is armed pretty much. We don't have a lot of stealing, or murders, or accidental deaths, or anything like that. The fact that the Sherriff is 30 minutes away means you have time to get the story straight, like they did in Skidmore, MO. Tends to make people behave.
 
Re: Don't know if it means anything,

Andra_Jenny said:
The fact that the Sherriff is 30 minutes away means you have time to get the story straight, like they did in Skidmore, MO. Tends to make people behave.

30 min away? That's a lot of greenhouse gases just to get there. I bet P P Man's law dude is a lot closer to him.
 
Come on, anyone who thought banning guns would make a
difference, must be an A1 Stupido. They'res always ways
and means to get hold of a deadly weapon whatever they ban.

Before Dunblaine came Hungerford and Micheal Rien in about 1990? But no one remembers that much. One of my step mothers friends was killed when he went postal, even then
I said banning guns would be make a difference...
Oddly enough I remember the day before he went postal,
I was in Hungerford buying...
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
bullets for a .22 rifle and 12 bore cartridges.

Just goes to show how weird the world is.


Cactiphile
 
WriterDom

Please stop confusing the issues with facts and logic.

Feelings are much more important.
 
What if we actually spent the time going after the criminals instead of the lawabider? I know its a novelle idea but who knows maybe it might do some good.
 
Re: buddi?

yayati said:
Hahahah Lies, lies sweetalking cunning lies. You Sweetalkers you guys have little knowledge of the UK.Heheheh Its prolly 99.99% safer than the US. Hehe According to your twisted view a whole society running around with guns is SAFE!?! I hope you all kill each other!!! Heeeeeeee heeeeeeeeeeee
heeeeeeeeee heeeeeeeeeeeeeee


Bloody hell! What was that?:)
 
My knowledge...

...of the UK.

I had to move here and live in an upper middle class neighborhood for my family to experience their first assaults. My step-daughter and son were assaulted by a known child-molester...nicked...my step son was assaulted and repeatedly head-butted by a drunk at 2.00pm on his way home from school...not nicked...my son was attacked by 12 girls while he walked through the park with his girlfriend...nicked and convicted and ordered to pay restitution (but only after I posted a £500 reward for information).

I'll quickly point out that this isn't typical of living here, but violence is everywhere in the world, it just isn't always mentioned. I'll also mention that while the US is absolutely anal about accumulating statistics to report crime rates the reporting here is a bit haphazard so a comparison isn't really fair. You're not likely to get shot here, but rape, child assaults, simple assaults, affray, robbery, and road rage are all too familiar--and common--and many go unreported for various reasons including a desire of the victims not to speak up. The parents of my son's girlfriend refused to pursue prosecution of her attackers (she was the most serioiusly injured) and were furious with me for posting a reward and making sure the story ran in the local paper. Both the PC and I were mighty pleased with the results.

Can't find a gun? Nail bombs will do.
 
Re: Re: buddi?

p_p_man said:



Bloody hell! What was that?:)

LOL... I could actually hear you saying that. funny.

I thought something similar when I read it.

Did anyone watch that special on Dateline the other night about the woman who wants to put guns into the places we're trying to keep them out of - like schools? Her theory is that if we had the principals and security guards walking around with guns, then it would deter those people who would choose to open fire in places like that in the beginning.

As much as I'm for gun control, she was starting to make sense to me the other night.
 
Bad guys have found a way to get gun's.......well there's a surprise.


































What do you want us to do hand them a gun as they leave prison and pat them on the head and promise to be good boy's and girl's.
 
There was very little controversy about the introduction of the handgun ban anyway. Because so few people legally owned one in the first place .
Before the ban, to get a licence for a handgun one had to belong to a licenced gun club ie firing at paper targets in controlled circumstances. Personal protection would never have been seen as a legitimate reason for an ordinary member of the public to own a handgun, by the licencing authorities, in the modern era in the UK. (or the EU for that matter.)
The controversy was over the ban on ban on guns which could fire multiple rounds, pump action shotguns, automatic rifles etc.
It's still possible to get firearms licence to own a double barrelled shotgun or single shot rifle if you can prove a need, ie sporting or pest control. And you can satisfy the Police of your mental health and fitness to carry a gun.
When not in use these guns must be stored in a steel cabinet bolted to the wall with dual locks. Ammunition can only be bought on producing your firearm certificate.
 
Last edited:
Unfortunately...

the UK has had three incidents of killings by gun in the last three weeks. That to us is an out of control epidemic.

The problem now on the desks of the authorities is what do they do about policemen who in 21 days, kill a mentally disturbed man who was waving a sword around, kill a second man who had a toy pistol in his hand and grieviously wounded a third man who was unarmed.

It's true the press has reported more stories of deaths by guns in recent years than they have ever done. We have just finished the trial of the man who shot dead Jill Dando, one of our popular television presenters.

And Dunblane is still a terrible memory in most people's minds.

These incidents however are still few and far between and still warrant large headline news in our national press.

What is more worrying is the very small coverage given to the activities of the Jamaican Yardies and the Russian Mafia both with large communities in the UK, especially in the London area, and both actively gun carriers and users.

But poll after poll here still show the population in favour of banning weapons. Like everyone else we've always had killings by criminals using guns but they are so infrequent that most of us can quote each incident going back years and even the names of the people involved. And I'm not talking about kigh profile cases only. The gun is just not as firmly entrenched in our national psyche as in America...yet.
 
Originally posted by Todd
What if we actually spent the time going after the criminals instead of the lawabider? I know its a novelle idea but who knows maybe it might do some good.
Granted your idea is so radical but the first one is so much easier to gain compliance. And we certainly wouldn't want to put out thse in law enforcement, now would we. Just think how they could become inconvenienced.
 
Re: Gun problems in America

yayati said:
Heheheh America has big gun problem. I believe you can educate the children out of the gun culture. However, it is difficult to educate children in such things if children are from broken home. Yes, it is a sad truth. America has 51% divorce rate. Divorce is because of several factors but I believe they can all be worked out. Some are even sex related problems. Yes, It boils down to sex. I believe it to be so. I know people here dont like the truth but the truth is that i have heard many times on mtv's loveline show that when man has small penis and woman has foul smelling genital i know that it will cause big problm for relatonship. so i say that if man has small penis he and his wife should try differnt sex position and if woman has foul smelling genital the man should tell her. i have heard many time on loveline. So the solution to America's gun problem is at hand.
Heeeeeee heeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee
heeeeeeeeee heeeeeeeee

Just what we need around here. Another retard.
 
Having divorced parents hardly removes anyone from personal responsibilty. In fact, it should heighten it.
 
Back
Top