UK gun control failed, wants a knife ban

I gave you the facts repeatedly. The UK only counts convictions as gun homicides. You keep whining about things that have nothing to do with my comment. You know throwing rocks at the sun on a hot day really doesn't help. You're welcome. Always glad to help.

 

"It has been suggested...". By whom? You also have the right to not pay your taxes in America. See how far that gets you...
Fact remains; we have seen a drastic reduction in gun-related crime including, crucially, murders, since our 'draconian' (sensible), gun laws were established. This is a good thing. I believe you had another, entirely predictable, mass shooting yesterday. How long must this continue while certain cohorts of Americans continue to bleat how necessary guns are to protect your 'freedom'?

 

Yes I do. Its called financial planning and keeping hard assets outside the banking system. It has done very well for me thanks. Please post what your rights (granted by your gov.)are and I will take a look. Is that why you are jealous, because our are granted by our Creator and cant be taken away from us the way yours can?

 

What "Creator"? If you're going to start bringing gods and superstition into the conversation then that's where fantasy begins, reality stops and I get off this bus...
Meanwhile: http://www.independent.co.uk/news/u...tle-against-inner-city-gun-crime-8463957.html

Oh, and by the way, your Constitution was written by men, not gods. I can post their names if you like...'Thor' isn't one of them.

 

Its your link. Didn't you read it? http://www.ucl.ac.uk/constitution-unit/whatis/uk-constitution

 

Not my words. "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"
Are you still mad because we shed the tyranny of your Queen? Get over it.

 

Men still wrote it, despite what they may have believed. And what the hell is 'Life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness'? I'd be embarrassed to write that down, frankly!

(By the way, it was a king, and our queen has no powers beyond the ceremonial displays put on for the benefit, largely, of tourists).

 

Where did you see that I said "men didn't write it" post # please.
"Life" is ones right to protect his family, himself, or any person not able to. (second amendment)
"Liberty" is freedom from government intrusion into our rights under the bill of rights.
"Pursuit of happiness" is to make decisions as to what you want and PURSUE it as long as it doesn't interfere with others rights to do the same. Happiness is not granted by the government. aka: welfare. If you want happiness you have the right to pursue it but don't have the right to have it handed to you at the expense and labor of others.
You're welcome. Always glad to help.

 

Well, seeing as it is suggested that, somehow, a 'Creator' was instrumental in framing the Constitution I'd say the answer is obvious.

 

So you are saying that our Declaration of Independence was just a "suggestion". I see. Please allow me to quote you here. " I'd be embarrassed to write that down, frankly!"

 

I do care, that is why I often say we need to go after those that commit the majority of gun violence and why I say we need a better mental healthcare system in this country to address those that go OFF and kill others in the process of committing their own suicide. Banning guns will not work here, for one simple reason if no other, the horse left the barn many many years ago closing the barn door would accomplish nothing and the American People would Never all the government to confiscate the guns they own now. Reality is what it is. As I said, it is not your issue, so my suggestion would be for you to worry about your issues and we will do the same on ours. Thanks for the input, maybe next time you can leave the snarky remarks at the door when we disagree on a topic or do not expect a reply, thanks in advance.

 

You are the one making the claim so now many gun murders is it that you think we are hiding and why would our authorities do that ?

 

It is not me making the claim it is Chief Inspector Colin Greenwood.
http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm199900/cmselect/cmhaff/95/95ap25.htm

"It is a matter of policy. As Chief Inspector Colin Greenwood points out here, the Home Office believes it unfair to brand a man a murderer until he has been tried, convicted, and exhausted his appeals.

As a result, murders that have not been solved are not included. If indications in the Telegraph are correct, that would substantially reduce the homicide rate in itself. Murders that have resulted in an arrest but no conviction are not counted. Convictions that have not been appealed are apparently not counted. And the number of minorities reported as murder victims is far below either the demographics or of reason.

If the media reports of a total of 4,760 “violent fatalities of interest to the police” from 1 January 2011 to 30 November 2012 are correct, the murder rate is 4.7 per 100,000 population, the same as our much more inclusive homicide rate, and substantially higher than the United States murder rate.

 

Good grief guy how desperate are you ? Your murder rates overall are close to 5 times ours 70% of which were committed using a firearm as has been linked on this thread multiple times already. Our already very low gun crime has fallen because of our stricter gun laws. Just accept the math !

 

Are you saying that the words drafted by the Committee of Five was in reality the work of "God"?

 

Once supernatural deities start getting invoked you know you've won the argument

 

You do understand that the info I am providing to you comes from your own Parliament's website right? You really need to read the posts first before you so quickly start pounding your little digits on your keyboard trying to respond to. You might save yourself some embarrassment.

"
Home
Parliamentary business
MPs, Lords & offices
About Parliament
Get involved
Visiting
Education

House of Commons
House of Lords
What's on
Bills & legislation
Committees
Publications & records
Parliament TV
News
Topics

You are here: Parliament home page > Parliamentary business > Publications and Records > Committee Publications > All Select Committee Publications > Commons Select Committees > Home Affairs > Home Affairs


Select Committee on Home Affairs Appendices to the Minutes of Evidence




--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


APPENDIX 8




Memorandum by Mr Colin Greenwood




FIREARM CONTROLS IN BRITAIN PART I THE HISTORY OF FIREARMS CONTROLS IN GREAT BRITAIN

EARLY LEGISLATION

1. Early English legislation relating to firearms was concerned only with the duty of the citizen to arm himself for the defence of the realm and for the maintenance of order. Restrictions on the use of firearms were concerned only with the maintenance of compulsory practice with the longbow or with the preservation of game. There was a clear and recognised right, as well as a duty for the subject to have arms for his own protection and to discharge his duty to the state, though those arms would not necessarily have been firearms.


2. The Bill of Rights of 1688 made it clear that Parliament considered that there was a right for citizens to have arms and by the mid 18th century the Common Law was very clear in recognising a constitutional right to have arms which Parliament had no authority to breach in general terms. In the early 19th century, perceived dangers of major disorder resulted in the "Six Acts" amongst which was the Seizure of Arms Act 1820 which appeared to abrogate the right to keep arms. Debates in Parliament made it clear that the Government accepted that there was indeed a right to keep arms but their view was that the Constitution allowed for qualification of that right for a limited period and in specific areas. The Seizure of Arms Act automatically lapsed after two years and was applied only to specified areas of the country. Until the start of the 20th century, therefore, the right to keep arms was vigorously upheld by Parliament and all attempts at legislation to restrict arms generally or firearms in particular failed completely........"
http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm199900/cmselect/cmhaff/95/95ap25.htm

"

 

Actually no but that was the tactic that flogger was trying to use to accuse me. It was just his way of trying to change boats in mid stream. I have given him all the info from his own House of Commons and he still doesn't believe it.
Got to wonder who ties this guys shoes in the morning for him.
You know what they say about leading a horse to water.

 

Yes Sweetie, you won. You have completely shredded Chief Inspector Colin Greenwood's testimony before YOUR Parliament. Im sure everyone understands that you are far more qualified to determine how your crime stats are created than he is.

http://www.publications.parliament.u.../95/95ap25.htm

 

So are they the ones somehow falsifying our figures to make them look better then ? This extremism is becoming quite hilarious now

 

56 men signed it Jefferson wrote it. You're welcome.

"Although we know Thomas Jefferson as the true author, the Second Continental Congress initially appointed five people to draw up a declaration. The committee included Benjamin Franklin, John Adams, Roger Sherman, Robert Livingston and Thomas Jefferson. Jefferson was then given the task of writing a draft for the Declaration of Independence, which from June 11 to June 28 he worked on. Before he presented the Declaration to the Continental Congress, he showed it to John Adams and Benjamin Franklin; they made revisions. He presented the draft to Congress on July 1, 1776 and more revisions were made. On the fourth of July the delegates met in what we know today as Independence Hall, but back then was known as the Pennsylvania State House, and approved the Declaration. John Hancock, the President of the Continental Congress signed the declaration along with Charles Thomson and it was sent to John Dunlap’s print shop for printing."

 

Yes it is. You seem to have been left to your own reading skills and are failing.
Again from Chief Inspector Colin Greenwood this is how it works. Read it slower this time and maybe the 3rd time is a charm.
""It is a matter of policy. As Chief Inspector Colin Greenwood points out here, the Home Office believes it unfair to brand a man a murderer until he has been tried, convicted, and exhausted his appeals.

As a result, murders that have not been solved are not included. If indications in the Telegraph are correct, that would substantially reduce the homicide rate in itself. Murders that have resulted in an arrest but no conviction are not counted. Convictions that have not been appealed are apparently not counted. And the number of minorities reported as murder victims is far below either the demographics or of reason."

 

Uh huh . So that may (or may not) push our figures for gun homicide up from 0.04 per 100,000 to perhaps 0.05 or (shock horror) 0.06. Clear evidence of failure of our gun laws then. UK gun homicides 2001 =96 2011= 39 I seriously doubt that we have dozens of shooters waiting on their appeals to clear !
Unbelievable desperation !

 

I wish the adult you had reading to you would come back again since I already gave you those adjusted figures. Why do you need things repeated to you 3-4 times? Have you found this to be a problem your whole life?
""As an aside, homicides in England and Wales are not counted the same as in other countries. Their homicide numbers “exclude any cases which do not result in conviction, or where the person is not prosecuted on grounds of self defense or otherwise” (Report to Parliament). The problem isn’t just that it reduces the recorded homicide rate in England and Wales, but what would a similar reduction mean for the US.

If taken literally, a simple comparison can be made. In 2012, the US murder rate was 4.7 per 100,000, a total of 14,827. Arrests amounted to only 7,133. Using only people who were arrested (not just convicted) would lower the US murder rate to 2.26 per 100,000. More information on the adjustment for England and Wales is available here and it suggests that while many homicides are excluded it isn’t as large as it would appear (in 1997, the downward adjustment would be about 12 percent). "

http://crimepreventionresearchcente...and-homicide-rates-before-and-after-gun-bans/