US Gun laws are "License to murder"

 Written by: FireTom


I agree, very well written....

Hence I cannot agree. May I turn your attention to

 Written by: NYT

Carey Haughwout, the public defender who represents Mr. Smiley, conceded that no knife was found. “However,” Ms. Haughwout said, “there is evidence to support that the victim came at Smiley after Smiley fired two warning shots, and that he did have something in his hand.”

Two warning shots in front of the feet... thing is that we do not have a timeframe... could also have been three shots fired, one after the other. He had something in his hands... could have been his doorkey... couldcouldcould...

 Written by:

Nearly five centuries of growing civility ended in 1954. Violent crime has been climbing ever since. Last December, London’s Evening Standard reported that armed crime, with banned handguns the weapon of choice, was "rocketing." In the two years following the 1997 handgun ban, the use of handguns in crime rose by 40 percent, and the upward trend has continued. From April to November 2001, the number of people robbed at gunpoint in London rose 53 percent.
Gun crime is just part of an increasingly lawless environment. From 1991 to 1995, crimes against the person in England’s inner cities increased 91 percent. And in the four years from 1997 to 2001, the rate of violent crime more than doubled. Your chances of being mugged in London are now six times greater than in New York. England’s rates of assault, robbery, and burglary are far higher than America’s, and 53 percent of English burglaries occur while occupants are at home, compared with 13 percent in the U.S., where burglars admit to fearing armed homeowners more than the police. In a United Nations study of crime in 18 developed nations published in July, England and Wales led the Western world’s crime league, with nearly 55 crimes per 100 people.
. . .

A sampling of cases [relating to laws restricting the right of self defense]:

• In 1973 a young man running on a road at night was stopped by the police and found to be carrying a length of steel, a cycle chain, and a metal clock weight. He explained that a gang of youths had been after him. At his hearing it was found he had been threatened and had previously notified the police. The justices agreed he had a valid reason to carry the weapons. Indeed, 16 days later he was attacked and beaten so badly he was hospitalized. But the prosecutor appealed the ruling, and the appellate judges insisted that carrying a weapon must be related to an imminent and immediate threat. They sent the case back to the lower court with directions to convict.

• In 1987 two men assaulted Eric Butler, a 56-year-old British Petroleum executive, in a London subway car, trying to strangle him and smashing his head against the door. No one came to his aid. He later testified, "My air supply was being cut off, my eyes became blurred, and I feared for my life." In desperation he unsheathed an ornamental sword blade in his walking stick and slashed at one of his attackers, stabbing the man in the stomach. The assailants were charged with wounding. Butler was tried and convicted of carrying an offensive weapon.

• In 1994 an English homeowner, armed with a toy gun, managed to detain two burglars who had broken into his house while he called the police. When the officers arrived, they arrested the homeowner for using an imitation gun to threaten or intimidate. In a similar incident the following year, when an elderly woman fired a toy cap pistol to drive off a group of youths who were threatening her, she was arrested for putting someone in fear. Now the police are pressing Parliament to make imitation guns illegal.

• In 1999 Tony Martin, a 55-year-old Norfolk farmer living alone in a shabby farmhouse, awakened to the sound of breaking glass as two burglars, both with long criminal records, burst into his home. He had been robbed six times before, and his village, like 70 percent of rural English communities, had no police presence. He sneaked downstairs with a shotgun and shot at the intruders. Martin received life in prison for killing one burglar, 10 years for wounding the second, and a year for having an unregistered shotgun. The wounded burglar, having served 18 months of a three-year sentence, is now free and has been granted £5,000 of legal assistance to sue Martin.

 Written by: Patriarch917


I am at a loss as to how to respond. You speak as if taking away the right and ability of citizens to self defense has somehow made countries like England and Australia safer, reduced their crime, or reduced the number of criminals with guns. Nothing could be further from the truth.

 Written by: firetom

IMHO one problem seems to be, that I don't regard some "US morals and standards" as positive and productive for the rest of the planet. I'd see much more progress if I wouldn't have to defend myself in the first place vs. I can legally shoot somebody.

 Written by: Mr Majestik

 Written by: Patriarch917


I am at a loss as to how to respond. You speak as if taking away the right and ability of citizens to self defense has somehow made countries like England and Australia safer, reduced their crime, or reduced the number of criminals with guns. Nothing could be further from the truth.

That article isn’t about Australia. Care to cite your evidence about us? (I really am curious about your claim)

 Written by: Patriarch917


I am at a loss as to how to respond. You speak as if taking away the right and ability of citizens to self defense has somehow made countries like England and Australia safer, reduced their crime, or reduced the number of criminals with guns. Nothing could be further from the truth.

 Written by:

America and Gun Violence
American children are more at risk from firearms than the children of any other industrialized nation. In one year, firearms killed no children in Japan, 19 in Great Britain, 57 in Germany, 109 in France, 153 in Canada, and 5,285 in the United States. (Centers for Disease Control)

 Written by: Source of patriachs article


The Mission of Freedom Alliance
is to advance the American heritage of freedom by honoring and encouraging military service, defending the sovereignty of the United States and promoting a strong national defense. american freedom alliance

not right wing at all are they? wouldnt have any vested interest in making tight gun control look bad would they?

and the article was written by "Jon E. Dougherty" its John Doe!

*sigh*

 Written by: article

In the Australian state of Victoria, gun homicides have climbed 300 percent

only a person who knows that everyone reading their article wont know about the melbourne gangwars would be so cheeky to use that as evidence.
for some time now there has been a running gang war where about 30 senior members of gangs have been shot dead, no civillians have been hurt, only hardcore criminals specifically targeting other hardcore criminals. yet they make it sound like there is utter chaos

 Written by: american right movement

The bans were not limited to so-called "assault" weapons or military-type firearms, but also to .22 rifles and shotguns. The effort cost the Australian government about $500 million, said association representative Keith Tidswell.

This is misleading, i know for a fact a friend that owns a .22 legally, so that simplification in the article is plain wrong. amd as for shotguns, pumpaction, handgun grip and automatics were banned. but shotguns that are not desigined for use against humans, such as single and double barrel, are still availible.

i'd like to take the time to point out that this and this are linked only two windows away from that article

now perhaps you would like to take a look at a Peace Movements views on the australian gun laws, and they even reference their facts! ! maybe i'll just point out a few that i found interesting.

keep in mind most references in the Peace Movements artilce were written in 1999, with the rightwing article was written only a year later in 2000.

 Written by: Peace movement

Homicide by Any Method

The overall rate of homicide in Australia has also dropped to its lowest point since 1989 (National Homicide Monitoring Program, 1997-98 data). It remains one-fourth the homicide rate in the USA.

The Institute of Criminology report Australian Crime - Facts and Figures 1999 includes 1998 homicide data showing "a 9% decrease from the rate in 1997." This is the period in which most of the country's new gun laws came into force.

 Written by: american right movement

Countrywide, homicides are up 3.2 percent

now i dont know about you, but i prefer the one that references the Australian Institute of Criminology

 Written by: Peace Movement

Assault and Robbery

Those who claim that Australia suffered a "crime wave" as a result of new gun laws often cite as evidence unrelated figures for common assault or sexual assault (no weapon) and armed robbery (any weapon). In fact less than one in five Australian armed robberies involve a firearm.

"Although armed robberies increased by nearly 20%, the number of armed robberies involving a firearm decreased to a six-year low."

-- Recorded Crime, Australia, 1998. Australian Bureau of Statistics, Jun 1999

 Written by: American Right Movement

Amazingly, armed robberies have climbed nearly 45 percent

Assaults are up 8.6 percent;

 Written by: Peace Movement

The Australian rate of gun death per 100,000 population remains one-fifth that of the United States.

 Written by: american right movement

The bans were not limited to so-called "assault" weapons or military-type firearms, but also to .22 rifles and shotguns. The effort cost the Australian government about $500 million, said association representative Keith Tidswell.

 Written by: The Mercury


Police are warning of the dangers of firearms after a Lindisfarne Great-great-grandfather accidentally shot himself in the face while hunting Kangaroos.
Noel Englefield Kingston died on Tuesday night while spotlighting with a friend aged in his 40s on the younger mans property near Stonor, Oatlands.

......The LICENSED weapon-a .22 magnum-belonged to Mr Kingston. Police said the saftey catch was off at the time Mr Kingston was shot.

 Written by: stout


You can take a few shots at this one if you like

The banned .22s that were mentioned just might be assault style weapons or maybe even semi-automatics.

perhaps, but the article said that weapons that were NOT assult style were banned. semi automatic is imho assult style. if you're hunting you should only need one shot to take down an animal. i think i'll rebuke the article Coleman wrote about england showing some dodge writing first if you dont mind

it can be seen here.

 Written by: article

In a pattern that's repeated itself in Canada and Australia, violent crime has continued to go up in Great Britain despite a complete ban on handguns, most rifles and many shotguns. The broad ban that went into effect in 1997 was trumpeted by the British government as a cure for violent crime. The cure has proven to be much worse than the disease.

 Written by:

Crime rates in England have skyrocketed since the ban was enacted. According to economist John Lott of the American Enterprise Institute, the violent crime rate has risen 69 percent since 1996, with robbery rising 45 percent and murders rising 54 percent. This is even more alarming when you consider that from 1993 to 1997 armed robberies had fallen by 50 percent.

 Written by: article

Meanwhile the FBI reports that in 2003 the nation's violent crime rate declined for the 12th straight year to a 27-year low. The FBI's figures are based on crimes reported to police. By comparison, the U.S. Department of Justice reported in September that, according to its annual national crime victim survey, violent crime reached a 30-year low in 2003.

 Written by: article

Right-to-Carry states fared better than the rest of the country in 2003. On the whole, their total violent crime, murder and robbery rates were 6 percent, 2 percent and 23 percent lower respectively than the states and the District of Columbia where carrying a firearm for protection against criminals is prohibited or severely restricted. On average in Right-to-Carry states the total violent crime, murder, robbery and aggravated assault rates were lower by 27 percent, 32 percent, 45 percent and 20 percent respectively.

yes yes, but again they're only talking about Violent crimes, its possible that in states where right to carry laws are more resticted there is less gun related crimes.(although with the ease at which you can cross state boarders, probably with firearms, it seems limiting right to carry laws is like putting a band aid on a wound from a hollow point bullet)

on a side note, i love it how all the articles, posted seperately by Patriarch, Coleman and stout, all talk about TWO countries gun laws (england/us, australia/us, england/us, and Commonwealth countries/US). now is it just me or does it seem to be that the more different countries gun laws you talk about in the one article the more variables and innacuracise you can throw in because its likely the readers will not have intimate knowledge of gun laws and crime statistics for countries other than their own? Thus you can use propganda as fact and people who dont have time to do their own through research on other countries laws will simply have to believe or accept they cant have a valid opinion because they dont know enough. pretty sneaky aye?