Posted on 07/04/2015 8:28:15 AM PDT by rktman
Back when he was still on the air, I would often perform an act of charity in doubling Piers Morgan’s ratings by tuning in to his show. When the topic of gun control would come up, and it did often, there was one argument that Piers would often bring up: that America has lax gun laws and plenty of gun homicides, while England and Wales have strong gun control and very few gun homicides. The argument at face value appears to have some validity – the U.S. has around 8,000 gun-related homicides, while England and Wales have about 60 combined.
(Excerpt) Read more at americanthinker.com ...
It is so successful there that Muslims are forced to use machetes to hack their soldiers apart on the streets.
Hmmm. I thought they used meat cleavers. Sharp edged weapons have no place in civil society.
There are lies, damn lies, and statistics.
My understanding is the statistic includes police shootings, in Britain they disarmed the police in large part.
Technically, it was a meat cleaver in that instance but it was described in some reports as “machete”....nevertheless, you are correct...:0)
One thing Piers Morgan and his ilk fail to tell people about the United Kingdom’s experience with gun control is that it was not until about 1967 that a police permit was required to buy a standard shotgun. Before then, the laws pertaining to shotguns (and most other types of firearms) were very casual and crime (including homicide) was even lower than what it is today.
The police permit was introduced to divert public attention away from the British government’s abolition of the death penalty in 1965 followed by increased violence in Northern Ireland and a general upswing in violent crime overall.
I can remember reading in David Kopel’s book “The Samurai, The Mountie, and The Cowboy” him stating that the British government meted out the death penalty at a rate that would make Texas look soft on murderers right up until it was abolished.
I daresay it was, when Dr. Watson slipped his service revolver into his pocket and followed Holmes on a case.
“Bogus gun control successes”
I had nothing to do with them!
To be fair, there were few handguns in England prior to gun control being implemented.
What really matters is the number of homicides and violent crimes as a percentage of the total population. Different countries use different standards of classification for violent crimes. Also, if a violent crime is averted by the victim pulling his pistol and scaring away the criminal without firing a shot, that type of thing does not normally become part of the crime statistics.
Usually never reported and if it is, ignored. As the libs like to tell us, “There are NO defensive handgun/firearm uses ever in the entire country. EVER!” Yup. As we are all well aware now, people with guns just want to wave Johnny Reb flags and shoot black people. About the riots that DIDN’T happen in Charleston..............
Post-communist Russia enacted a total ban on privately owned or possessed handguns and practically all long guns with an exception for registered long guns used by licensed hunters during hunting season. However, a recent study by 2 Harvard professors of European gun laws and murder rates found that Russia's murder rate is now almost 4 times that of the US. And the majority of those murders are committed either by using bare hands or by using everyday tools and implements such as hammers, axes, knives, metal pipes, baseball bats, poison, wooden clubs, rope, etc.
The logical conclusion that an unbiased individual would make from those data would be that easy access to guns doesn't cause people to kill other people, but in fact guns deter more murders, assaults, thefts, and crime in general than any other factor. But when did a mind numbed gun-grabber ever come to a logical conclusion based on actual facts?
A great read on the cultural differences. I got a kick of one snippet about Japan's Sword and Samurai outlook. One of their gunsmiths won some international competition (I think) and the government awarded him with - a sword.
Yeah, but, if no firearm is involved, it’s not really a violent crime. At least that’s what it sounds like from the momunists.
Gun control in UK has been highly effective at reducing the number of firearms, and particularly handguns, in the country.
Saying that it is ineffective because they cannot stop ALL guns from entering is essentially the same argument as saying that we shouldn’t try to stop entry of illegal aliens because no conceivable policy would be 100% effective. Which is true.
If you reject the idea for immigration you are forced to recognize that the argument is not itself valid for guns, either.
There ARE weapons that fire 1000 rounds per second. For that matter, more than 1600 rounds per second.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d8hlj4EbdsE
But they’re not exactly hand carried.
Gun control in Britain has been highly effective at reducing the number of firearms owned by law-abiding Brits; not so effective at keeping guns out of the hands of criminals. As pointed out in the article by Matt Palumbo, gun control has had no effect on reducing the number of gun-related homicides in the UK, which is now essentially the same as it was before the gun-control laws were enacted in 1997.
Did you read the article by Palumbo?
The article shows a photo of a Czech-made Skorpion machine pistol which has a cyclic rate of fire of 850 - 900 rounds a minute, depending on the ammunition.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.