RE: Are the British more law abiding than Americans?

RE: Are the British more law abiding than Americans? (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion

Message

RapierFugue -> RE: Are the British more law abiding than Americans? (1/2/2011 7:00:41 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: PeonForHer RF, to be blunt, I don't think there's a cat's chance in hell of success for any but the most modest of measures to control gun ownership and use in the USA right now. I've been astonished at reading the (mainly American) debates on guns here at CM. Americans who I know to be lefties and liberals begin to sound to me like ultra-conservatives on this subject; right-wingers sound downright scary. The cultural difference re the matter of guns is a lot bigger than I once thought. You forget - I've lived in the US. I know exactly how irrational most Americans can be on the subject. But just because something is difficult does not mean it should not be attempted. Or, of course, people can just continue to put up with things they way they are, and accept the massive loss of life and huge cost to their country. Tinkering at the edges, social engineering, "improving the root* causes" and other terms for not grasping the nettle will just add cost, while achieving next to nothing. So long as I don't have to live under the same regime in my country, I think Americans are more than welcome to sort it out for themselves. Or not, of course. Whatever floats their collective boats. *what people seem to have difficulty understanding is that the root cause of being shot in the head is the other guy having the means to shoot one in the head. Although of course many, many people manage to shoot themselves in the head, and still many more manage to carry the gun to the event, only to have it removed and used against them ... to shoot them in the head. It matters little - the root cause is the gun; "guns don't kill people, people kill people" is the most fatuous pile of steaming doggy-doings ever foisted upon a supposedly educated populace.

DCWoody -> RE: Are the British more law abiding than Americans? (1/2/2011 7:16:42 PM)
I disagree, lots of americans don't get shot because guns are common in america, lots of americans get shot because america is full of idiots who shoot each other.There are other nations with similarly lax gun laws that don't suffer the same effect. Of course, removing guns would stop it, and may well be easier than changing the culture....but the difference is not inherent in guns, it's cultural.

pahunkboy -> RE: Are the British more law abiding than Americans? (1/2/2011 7:30:14 PM)
particularly when we want nothing but peace. ;-?

RapierFugue -> RE: Are the British more law abiding than Americans? (1/2/2011 7:50:25 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: DCWoody I disagree, lots of americans don't get shot because guns are common in america, lots of americans get shot because america is full of idiots who shoot each other.There are other nations with similarly lax gun laws that don't suffer the same effect. Now I'm intrigued; which other stable, developed nations have such readily available handguns in such huge numbers and don't suffer such drastic numbers of their own dead? BTW I'm not saying that "culture" doesn't play a part - of course it does. But until you reduce the frankly ludicrous numbers of guns, especially handguns (easily concealed in everyday carrying, unlike rifle and shotguns), you're not going to see much of a change. quote: ORIGINAL: DCWoody Of course, removing guns would stop it, and may well be easier than changing the culture....but the difference is not inherent in guns, it's cultural. To (re)state the bleeding obvious: no-one ever died from having a 9mm lump of "cultural" entering their bonce.

DCWoody -> RE: Are the British more law abiding than Americans? (1/2/2011 8:59:30 PM)
"Now I'm intrigued; which other stable, developed nations have such readily available handguns in such huge numbers and don't suffer such drastic numbers of their own dead?" Well that's a tricky question, for a large part of the 'in such huge numbers' thing is cultural, not legal. I was thinking of Canada mostly....although it's hard to generalise because of state by state differences, it is roughly as easy to get a gun (hand or otherwise) in Canada as the USA. Certainly there is no legal reason why handguns should not be as common in Canada as in the US. Perhaps I should have said 'because guns are legal' rather than 'common', and I'm surprised to find I didn't....I do agree that, fairly obviously.... generally, fewer guns=fewer people getting shot.....the point I was trying to make was that although banning (at least hand)guns would prevent (some of the) gun crime, their non-bannedness isn't the cause of said.....the usa has higher rates of violent crime in general, regardless of guns.

RapierFugue -> RE: Are the British more law abiding than Americans? (1/2/2011 9:07:06 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: DCWoody "Now I'm intrigued; which other stable, developed nations have such readily available handguns in such huge numbers and don't suffer such drastic numbers of their own dead?" Well that's a tricky question Indeed it is. Mostly because no such place exists ;) But please don't think I believe culture isn't relevant - I can see your point. I just think America will never get to grips with its gun problem until it gets to grips first with an outmoded, out-of-date section of that otherwise fine document, the Constitution.

ThatDamnedPanda -> RE: Are the British more law abiding than Americans? (1/2/2011 9:23:54 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: RapierFugue quote: ORIGINAL: DCWoody "Now I'm intrigued; which other stable, developed nations have such readily available handguns in such huge numbers and don't suffer such drastic numbers of their own dead?" Well that's a tricky question Indeed it is. Mostly because no such place exists ;) But please don't think I believe culture isn't relevant - I can see your point. I just think America will never get to grips with its gun problem until it gets to grips first with an outmoded, out-of-date section of that otherwise fine document, the Constitution. But what would you suggest? Nothing short of rewriting the Constitution? I'm just struggling to get a handle on where you and Peon are starting from, exactly what you would consider to be the practical solution, what "solved" would look like to you. I don't think I've got an accurate grasp of that at the moment.

Aynne88 -> RE: Are the British more law abiding than Americans? (1/2/2011 9:34:34 PM)
n/m

gungadin09 -> RE: Are the British more law abiding than Americans? (1/3/2011 2:24:02 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: RapierFugue quote: ORIGINAL: DCWoody "Now I'm intrigued; which other stable, developed nations have such readily available handguns in such huge numbers and don't suffer such drastic numbers of their own dead?" Well that's a tricky question Indeed it is. Mostly because no such place exists ;) But please don't think I believe culture isn't relevant - I can see your point. I just think America will never get to grips with its gun problem until it gets to grips first with an outmoded, out-of-date section of that otherwise fine document, the Constitution. No. The Supreme Court recently ruled that the 2nd Amendment refers individuals' right to own guns. (District of Colombia v. Heller, 2008; McDonald v. Chicago, 2010). In other words, it is not simply an outdated section of the Constitution that refers to arming the militia. The 2nd Amendment also only absolutely protects the rights of (qualified) citizens to own and operate guns in their own homes. Beyond that, it falls to state and local governments to determine what reasonable restrictions can be made to control the sale and possession of guns. pam

RapierFugue -> RE: Are the British more law abiding than Americans? (1/3/2011 2:32:12 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: ThatDamnedPanda quote: ORIGINAL: RapierFugue quote: ORIGINAL: DCWoody "Now I'm intrigued; which other stable, developed nations have such readily available handguns in such huge numbers and don't suffer such drastic numbers of their own dead?" Well that's a tricky question Indeed it is. Mostly because no such place exists ;) But please don't think I believe culture isn't relevant - I can see your point. I just think America will never get to grips with its gun problem until it gets to grips first with an outmoded, out-of-date section of that otherwise fine document, the Constitution. But what would you suggest? Nothing short of rewriting the Constitution? I'm just struggling to get a handle on where you and Peon are starting from, exactly what you would consider to be the practical solution, what "solved" would look like to you. I don't think I've got an accurate grasp of that at the moment. “If the law does not suit, then it is not fit, so change it until it is fit”. In other words, if your own laws are causing, or directly contributing to, the needless deaths of tens of thousands of your citizens every year, then the change has to start there. The Constitution's enactors weren't idiots (quite the reverse) - they made the Constitution as fit for purpose as they possibly could but, like all things rooted in a historical timeline, it was a product of its age. Now in some (indeed most, hence my general admiration for it as a document) respects what they created was a work of genius; as an example, they couldn't envisage or predict the rise of, say, the internet as a concept, but they could understand the need for personal privacy and security from government interference as a general requirement, so they enacted parts that protect the individual from such things as undue intrusion into their personal business, or search and seizure of their person or assets, etc. But the problem is (or rather was) that, having relatively recently (from their point of view) emerged from a colonial war, they saw good reasons to enshrine the “right” of an individual to bear arms; in and of its time this wasn’t an especially bad thing, but unfortunately it’s one of the few areas of the Constitution that suffers through historical context; in a modern society there is simply no reason whatsoever why a person needs, or indeed should be allowed, to carry a firearm for personal “protection”. None. Now of course you've ended up in a situation, courtesy of that Constitutional “right”, where the argument for the private ownership of firearms becomes a product of, and is enabled by, the fact that there are now so many of them in the “wrong” hands that citizens feel insecure enough to want and need to carry them in return, but that’s a fallacy of incorrect logic – one needs to start with the premise that people should not be permitted guns in a modern age and work back from that. Would it be easy? Of course not; it would take, I would think, at least 3 generations of hardship, in terms of changing the law, then removing personal protection firearms from the populace at large, making their possession a heinous crime, and slowly changing the culture of gun ownership, through enforcement and education, as well as addressing the insecurities and bravado connections of firearms possession, and subsequent lack of. Do I think it will ever happen? No actually, I don't. Guns are so historically, utterly and fundamentally hardwired into the American psyche that I don't think the nation will ever have the courage to confront the root cause of the problem. However, the fact that I don't think America is going to wake up to the problem doesn't mean that I can’t see what the problem is; all the other policies and methods for containment and improvement start with the erroneous assertion that it’s ok for private citizens to own and carry firearms, and therefore, being based on an incorrect logic, they (the policies and “solutions”) are doomed to failure.

RapierFugue -> RE: Are the British more law abiding than Americans? (1/3/2011 2:37:12 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: gungadin09 No. The Supreme Court recently ruled that the 2nd Amendment refers individuals' right to own guns. (District of Colombia v. Heller, 2008; McDonald v. Chicago, 2010). In other words, it is not simply an outdated section of the Constitution that refers to arming the militia. The 2nd Amendment also only absolutely protects the rights of (qualified) citizens to own and operate guns in their own homes. Beyond that, it falls to state and local governments to determine what reasonable restrictions can be made to control the sale and possession of guns. pam A very good point, if I understand it correctly. However, as the root "cause" (although that's too simplistic a term for it) of the problem, it needs to be amended in such a way that state and local authorities cannot work against the interest of the common good of the American people in order, in some cases, to allow private citizens to own and operate firearms, because any form of gun ownership that allows, as one example, citizens to own and carry firearms for “protection” purposes (even if said firearms are more often a problem in themselves than a solution) is working against the common good. As I say, I don't expect more than 5% of Americans would agree with me. But that doesn't make me wrong :)

gungadin09 -> RE: Are the British more law abiding than Americans? (1/3/2011 3:09:55 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: RapierFugue ...it needs to be amended in such a way that state and local authorities cannot work against the interest of the common good of the American people in order, in some cases, to allow private citizens to own and operate firearms, because any form of gun ownership that allows, as one example, citizens to own and carry firearms for “protection” purposes (even if said firearms are more often a problem in themselves than a solution) is working against the common good. As I say, I don't expect more than 5% of Americans would agree with me. But that doesn't make me wrong :) It's not a question of whether the state and local governments are working against the common good. It's a question of whether or not they are violating federal law. As long as they don't make any law that contradicts the 2nd Amendment they are acting legally, and their laws will be enforced. In other words: no local government can make a law that prohibits gun ownership (for qualified owners), possession, or use in the in the home. The local governments can limit gun possession and use in public in most any way that they see fit. So: beyond the simple right to possession in the home, whatever gun laws we have here are from state and local legislation. In other words, because of local politics. If You feel that the laws are too permissive- well, that has less to do with the 2nd Amendment, and more to do with the fact that people just like it that way. Democracy, majority rule, all that. My point is that it won't do a bit of good to repeal the 2nd Amendment. It would fail like Prohibition failed. It's not legislation but culture that keeps the U.S. armed. It is the fact that, while You are not wrong, only 5% of Americans agree with You. pam

RapierFugue -> RE: Are the British more law abiding than Americans? (1/3/2011 3:15:08 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: gungadin09 It's not a question of whether the state and local governments are working against the common good. I believe it is, at least in part. The variability in local laws is being used as a wedge to prevent progress being made on finding a solution. quote: ORIGINAL: gungadin09 It's not legislation but culture that keeps the U.S. armed. I disagree. I feel culture is a factor, for sure, but more as it pertains to the law and Constitution, than as an abstract, if that makes any sense. But I've said my peace, and various gun nuts will presumably be turning up shortly, so I'll most likely just leave it there. You make some fair points though, even if I don't agree with them.

Aneirin -> RE: Are the British more law abiding than Americans? (1/3/2011 3:26:35 AM)
I wonder how personal protection seeking gun owning Americans feel when they go abroad, or go to a place that carrying a firearm is against the law, say the UK for instance, with our high levels of crime ? What do they do, walk around with a clenched asshole nervous all the time, or simply not go abroad ? If they don't go abroard, or if they do and they are permanently nervous,m it could be said they are imprisoned by their guns.

RapierFugue -> RE: Are the British more law abiding than Americans? (1/3/2011 4:02:22 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Aneirin I wonder how personal protection seeking gun owning Americans feel when they go abroad, or go to a place that carrying a firearm is against the law, say the UK for instance, with our high levels of crime ? The thing is, the Americans I've known who have visited London have overwhelmingly said that they felt safer here than in most large American cities. Also, "high levels of crime" is a bit misleading from the UK POV; we do have a lot of petty thieving in cities, lots of it shoplifting, which doesn't cause people to feel nervous or be injured (doesn't make it right, of course, I'm just stating a fact). In addition, the violent crimes committed in the UK are, I would hazard a guess (from experience), mostly of the kind where young men go out on a Friday or Saturday night, looking for drink and trouble, and find both. In London, genuine cases of violent mugging, for example, outside a few dodgy areas (which no-one would want to visit anyway) are amazingly rare; I can think of maybe 2 incidents in decades (and I know a lot of people), and neither of those involved visitors. Of course, tourists do get mugged, I'm not saying that they don't, but it's not as prevalent as an outsider might think, and certainly it's very rare for it to happen at gunpoint. The only non-gang related “gun crime” I can think of here was on a night out to a fairly notorious nightclub in one of London’s seedier areas, where a mate (an ex amateur boxer of some talent) went to the bar to get another round of drinks in, some gobby little shit decided to push in, my mate started explaining the facts of life to him, whereupon the scumbag flicked open his shirt to reveal a small handgun tucked into his belt, and said something like “do you want a go then eh?”. My mate shook his head sadly, knocked him out with one punch, calmly took the gun and unloaded it, and passed the gun and bullets to the barman, who threw them into the bin and rolled his eyes with a “kids today eh?” look on his face, then motioned a couple of bouncers to show the young man to the street.

Aneirin -> RE: Are the British more law abiding than Americans? (1/3/2011 4:23:52 AM)
Yes, I agree with that, most of our issues are the drink related variety, myself having been a victim of such, so I am very aware of what booze does to people and with that drugs, the drinking sessions where lines of coke are used. I was being facetious when I said our high levels of crime, that based on earlier postings where some claimed the UK was worse than the US. But as to the drink related problem, I for one would welcome a return to the old licensing hours, as what we have now is clearly not working, and for me, the town at night is a no go area. The dickhead that changed the licensing hours believed he could stimulate a cafe culture in Britain, what a complete out of touch idiot he was, this is Britain, where we like our beer, and reason for the licensing hours in the first place. But as to robbery, here in my own city, because guns are not used that often, there are other tools of persuasion, and look at the bravodo ( or stupidity) of the robbers in this little episode, one of whom has now been caught; Who needs guns The Americans that you ave nown who have visited London and said how safe they feel says a lot about the US, so, it could be their gun society does not make them secure, in fact, it perhaps does the reverse, but gun ownership is necessary to feel safe, so the criminals get guns ad finitum, so the US problem might undoubtedly be the weapons they have access to, not the issue of crime, for crime will always exist, but better ways of dealing with it that does not involve killing has to be found. Now it is perhaps worth thinking, would a criminal break into a person's home if they were not armed with a gun.

Phoenixpower -> RE: Are the British more law abiding than Americans? (1/3/2011 4:30:52 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: RapierFugue In London, genuine cases of violent mugging, for example, outside a few dodgy areas (which no-one would want to visit anyway) are amazingly rare; I can think of maybe 2 incidents in decades (and I know a lot of people), and neither of those involved visitors. Oh really??? [8\|] I guess this 12 year old tourist would disagree with you when she would be asked about being safe in London as a visitor [8\|] http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/london/6724333.stm

RapierFugue -> RE: Are the British more law abiding than Americans? (1/3/2011 4:40:53 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Phoenixpower quote: ORIGINAL: RapierFugue In London, genuine cases of violent mugging, for example, outside a few dodgy areas (which no-one would want to visit anyway) are amazingly rare; I can think of maybe 2 incidents in decades (and I know a lot of people), and neither of those involved visitors. Oh really??? [8\|] I guess this 12 year old tourist would disagree with you when she would be asked about being safe in London as a visitor [8\|] http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/london/6724333.stm Dredging up individual, fairly rare cases is an idiotic way to progress an argument.

Phoenixpower -> RE: Are the British more law abiding than Americans? (1/3/2011 4:41:58 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: RapierFugue In other words, if your own laws are causing, or directly contributing to, the needless deaths of ... thousands of your citizens every year, then the change has to start there. That's what I would call a perfect slogan for an election campaign if one of the parties would awake about the state of the nhs [:D]

Phoenixpower -> RE: Are the British more law abiding than Americans? (1/3/2011 4:43:32 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: RapierFugue quote: ORIGINAL: Phoenixpower quote: ORIGINAL: RapierFugue In London, genuine cases of violent mugging, for example, outside a few dodgy areas (which no-one would want to visit anyway) are amazingly rare; I can think of maybe 2 incidents in decades (and I know a lot of people), and neither of those involved visitors. Oh really??? [8\|] I guess this 12 year old tourist would disagree with you when she would be asked about being safe in London as a visitor [8\|] http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/london/6724333.stm Dredging up individual, fairly rare cases is an idiotic way to progress an argument. Name it however you want, but don't expect me to sit back when you falsely claim about violent incidents which do happen, even to "visitors". [sm=Groaner.gif]

Page: << < prev 7 8 [9] 10 11 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.046875