Ohio Sniper On The Loose

**Billy_Dean** · 02-17-2004, 06:30 AM

j2, gun crime in Britain is increasing because of the Yardie Gangs. These criminals come from Jamaica originally, and still have ties there. The murder rate in Britain has increased dramatically over the last few years. The killers are mainly black, as are their victims. lt has become such a problem that a special squad has been set up to investigate black on black crime.

The main reasons for the comparitively low murder rate in Britain are the gun laws, which are very strict, and the severity of sentences if you are caught. You can expect 5 years for the possesion of an illegal handgun, and considerably more if you use it in a felony.

l'd like to see comparisons between the per capita gun ownership in the US and Britain, and the per capita murder rate.

It's interesting to note that more people were murdered in the US by handguns during the Vietnam War years than were killed in combat. 50,000+ ?

l wonder how many have been murdered since 9\11 ?

Maybe a "War on Guns" would make the US a safer place for it's citizens.

l'd like to ask all the Americans here a question, "Do you know anyone who has been shot?" Ask the same thing of Britons and see the difference.

**clocker** · 02-17-2004, 06:51 AM

J2, your fatalism is infectious.
Since an "enterprising criminal" can potentially circumvent any law, I guess we may as well bow to the inevitable and abolish them all.
What's the point?

BD, yes I have personally known 3 people who have been shot.
Two died.
America's love affair with weaponry, and the insistence on our "right" to own it, sickens me.

**j2k4** · 02-17-2004, 06:56 AM

I'll grant your point with regard to overall numbers of guns/shootings, etc., in the U.S. outstripping similar statistics elsewhere, Billy, but my point remains:

The criminals will always find a way to arm themselves.

In the U.S., too, though, we have the added problem of a wishy-washy judicial system that can't quite bring itself to punish criminals, with or without guns.

Yes, we do have a lot of people incarcerated, but they don't generally serve but a small percentage of the proper sentence, and hence haven't much fear of serving the time.

I also have a hard time trying to communicate to others what the U.S. culture is like, relative to the private, proper ownership of firearms.

I shall ponder that question; if something ever coalesces, I'll make a suitable post; i.e. the "why" of it.

**clocker** · 02-17-2004, 07:08 AM

Originally posted by j2k4@16 February 2004 - 22:56

I also have a hard time trying to communicate to others what the U.S. culture is like, relative to the private, proper ownership of firearms.

I shall ponder that question; if something ever coalesces, I'll make a suitable post; i.e. the "why" of it.

Please do.
I am an American and the rationalization escapes me.

While you're at it, perhaps you could go a bit further and explain how it is possible that you can "privately and properly" own a weapon and I can't "privately and properly" own marijuana...

**j2k4** · 02-17-2004, 07:09 AM

Originally posted by clocker@17 February 2004 - 02:51
J2, your fatalism is infectious.
Since an "enterprising criminal" can potentially circumvent any law, I guess we may as well bow to the inevitable and abolish them all.
What's the point?

BD, yes I have personally known 3 people who have been shot.
Two died.
America's love affair with weaponry, and the insistence on our "right" to own it, sickens me.

Clocker!

I have infected you?

Through cyberspace?

BTW-All I currently own is a "spud-gun" and a couple of jackknives.

Okay; pass a law tomorrow outlawing private ownership of guns-what happens first?

Do you think you can legislate cultural changes thus?

Such things don't happen overnight-

Can we somehow manage to close down the black market, too, in one fell swoop?

Spend a few moments pondering the logistics of accomplishing this, keeping in mind our activist courts would have already done it, except they would fear a round through the head, not from one of our mollycoddled criminals, mind you, but most probably a heretofore law-abider.

Sorry for the fatalism.

I myself have been shot-accidentally-small-caliber round in the ankle.

**j2k4** · 02-17-2004, 07:20 AM

Originally posted by clocker@17 February 2004 - 03:08

While you're at it, perhaps you could go a bit further and explain how it is possible that you can "privately and properly" own a weapon and I can't "privately and properly" own marijuana...

That, sir, is a tactic I would have thought beneath you.

Let me try it:

Tell me, in light of all the reasons you could spew in favor of abortion, most probably up to and including the partial-birth method, how you would make taboo the practice of infanticide?

Or wouldn't you?

I would have a bit of difficulty constructing an argument against marijuana, given the cultural acceptance of alcohol, which I regard as being more destructive, however I won't try to cloud the issue by using apples and oranges debate tactics.

Good night.

**Yogi** · 02-17-2004, 08:39 AM

Cloud all you want, cos to me it seems you do that allready by stating what is not

possible with regards to gunownership.

If you use the argument of "cultural change can't be done overnight".

Gunownership is so foolish, imho their are no arguments not to start today.

And though i know that would mean only rich people would have the "right" to kill

in your country; what's new???

Guncontrol sounds so conflicting in itselfes!!!

Something like "warcontrol"; duhuh..........

Like americans ever care!!!

YoPacifist

**iamtheoneandonlyone** · 02-17-2004, 09:01 AM

...have to set a trap for him. Undercover cops going along the freeway until the guy comes and then go after him.

**ilw** · 02-17-2004, 11:13 AM

Although the prospect of another debate on gun control and its merits/demerits sounds good, the inevitable war of statistics is less exciting.

Obviously we in Britain do have gun crime, guns circulate around as well as enter our country, however, new legislation is currently (afaik) making its way through parliament to ban replica guns which when converted make up a large % of the guns used by criminals. In America i thnk the major source of guns available to the criminal element are those stolen off the non-criminal element. As far as stopping guns from reaching criminals then theres almost no point in restricting their sale to upstanding citizens because if so many guns are available they're basically easy to get.

firearms offences rose a little last year in Britain after a rapid increase the year before. The number of firearm robberies, firearm homicides and crimes commited with a handgun fell (again from the high of the previous year). (source)

Edit: Got rid of something stupid