Opposing view to unrestricted gun ownership...
In the UK, now, it's effectively illegal to have a personal gun. (basically: there are certain exemptions, for those with registered manual-load shotguns, or hunters on cull duty, that kind of thing. We do have armed military/police weapons (the latter in special circumstances only), but that's about it.
Else: why *do* you need an tool designed purely and only to kill?
Do you keep a stock of cyanide in your house in case you need to poison someone?
No? So.. detail exactly why you need an object expressly and solely designed to kill other humans...?
Self-defense? It's that dangerous where you live?
Oh, against burglars? So, you keep a loaded gun by your bedside and wake ready to shoot and kill anyone who interrupts your sleep? oops, sorry, son... you wanted a glass of water but you got a .45 magnum round in the stomach.
Ah. Self-defense, but unloaded and in a locked safe. yep, I'm convinced, that'll work. I'm sure they'll wait.
So, with 60 million people crammed into 1/2 the space of California, a shooting for us is still national news. Including accidental ones. Compare the UK homicide rate with most US cities.
If it's illegal to carry a gun, and it's a felony (1-3 years just for carrying) if you do... believe me, it's safer for everyone.
If you don't like this, check out the figures on gun-related crimes. And do check and verify that more children are killed in 'gun-related' accidents in the US each year than there are *total* gun-related deaths - criminal AND accident - in the entire UK... and here, you (I) can walk anywhere without fear of being shot.
Oh, and BTW, we've had our maniac killers recently. The first (1988?) got assault weapons banned to the public, the second (1996) got other guns removed from common ownership.
And it's now a national scandal that 8 men (all apparently involved in drug-dealing) have been shot and killed in London... over the last 3 years.
obviously just a coincidence. :-( |
