No guns = Better world ?

Originally posted by snoochyboochies
You americans are obviously in favour of guns as would I if I lived in a country where they are so easily accessable. If you own a gun in your home for protection, you're probably doing it to give yourself a chance against a would be burglar because you know how easy it is to get hold of guns(therefore Mr.burglar might well have one).

In the UK, you don't need one really and in any case you can't legally own one unless its a shotgun or an airgun(with a license) and you cant carry anything remotely like a gun in a public place. You can get locked up here for waving a BB gun around in public(and I mean that). Despite the fact that more guns are coming into the UK, only organised criminals/gangsters and armed robbers have real guns in this country and the gangsters just shoot eachother anyway (and who the f*ck cares about that).

In the UK, only the complete fools will open fire in public and hardly anyone is dumb enough to even hold a gun/imitation gun/water pistol at the Police (meaning that the Police can help you against a gunman -whether they are armed or not).

I guess what I am saying is that real, proper guns with real fire power should not be accessable to the public at all in any civilised country, only to the Governent. Of course some of you (from the US) will say that that takes away your freedom and the potential to fight back against your goverment (as if you would ever need to and as if you would stand a chance anyway).

Thats the way it is in the UK and i would venture to say that we live more freely than most.

The argument for civilians having guns to protect against the government is a pretty mute point, the likelihood of that happening is slim and none, in the past is was a very good reason in and also help to protect the US from invasion but nowadays it isn’t.

Originally posted by ThePittman
Well here is a situation that I wonder how the UK police would handle without a gun. You have a guy that has a bomb strapped to his chest and holding hostages who is mentally deranged and is not willing to talk, how do you solve it? Just curious.

The argument for civilians having guns to protect against the government is a pretty mute point, the likelihood of that happening is slim and none, in the past is was a very good reason in and also help to protect the US from invasion but nowadays it isn’t.

I wasn't saying anything about the average copper in the Uk being unarmed but to answer your question, they would call in an armed response team who would quite quickly turn up and slot the b*stard. Armed reponse coppers where I live in London are numerous and would get there just as quickly as the normal uniform patrol cars. You didn't honestly think that no cops at all in the UK had guns did you? It's not often that they need them but they are very used to facing threats without them. When I watch COPS, it seems that the US cops point guns at every one they stop in a vehicle(which again is understandable given how easy they are to access stateside) unlike the british old bill who only use an armed response car to stop the vehicle if there is any kind of intelligence suggesting that the occupants have access to have firearms, in which case they get stopped and dragged out by big-guys with big guns.
In my opinion, all the coppers here should be armed to protect themselves because they put themselves in harms way all the time. The raw courage it must take to go out there without a gun, especially in a town like London(where there are alot of illegal guns on the streets) is commendable IMO. As for those US cops, they are Lions for taking to those streets at all, but they do have adequate firepower to protect themselves and are backed up by the law to shoot people who don't even have guns themselves. In the UK, they are investigated for months while these bureaucratic idiots take ages to decide whether the cop was right even though he only had seconds to make the decision.