Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: Sherman Logan
Just read your post 19. I can't remember ever having encountered before an honest acknowledgement of this 'elephant in the room' point from (presumably - excuse me if I'm mistaken!) an American conservative. It was refreshing to find that there are those who do see at least some shades of grey in this issue, rather than the absolute black-and-white which is the more usual viewpoint.

Apologies for being boorishly pedantic after that compliment, but I can't resist pointing out that your statement 'it is true that in the UK only criminals have guns' (often repeated here) is incorrect. There are many thousands of legally owned guns, since the types of guns which were always the most widely-owned in Britain (shotguns and sporting rifles) have never been banned. It would, however, be true to say that most handguns in circulation are criminally owned.

54 posted on 12/17/2012 3:57:13 AM PST by Winniesboy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies ]


To: Winniesboy

You are most welcome. I think conservatives find if difficult to admit these facts because they feel (accurately) that liberals want to take away their gun rights. When you feel existentially threatened it is difficult to admit the other side has any reasonable arguments at all.

Liberals of course do much the same by refusing to recognize the benefits of widespread gun ownership.

It seems obvious to me it’s a cost/benefit ratio issue, with perfectly reasonable arguments on both sides.

I am indeed an American conservative, and I believe strongly in the 2nd Amendment, but I hope I’m still honest enough to admit there are costs to this freedom. One of them is greater likelihood of something like the Newtown massacre happening than in say, UK, where weapons of the type used are much more rare and difficult for nutjobs to get their hands on. OTOH, a much larger death toll occurred recently in Norway, which I assume (with little knowledge) has more strict regulation than most US states.

For me perhaps the greatest frustration with regard to the discussion after something like this is that both sides propose “solutions” that wouldn’t have prevented the shooting anyway. How can that be considered a solution? The solutions are often just an excuse to implement your desired policy.

I guess nobody really wants to recognize that there just isn’t much we can do to prevent these atrocities. We might be able to cut down on them, but we certainly can’t stop them.


55 posted on 12/17/2012 6:37:00 AM PST by Sherman Logan (Brought to you by one of the pale penis people.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 54 | View Replies ]

To: Winniesboy

The “gun debate” in the US is primarily about handguns, since long guns are only rarely used by criminals. And also about the infamous “assault weapons,” which are also only rarely used but make great scary images.

I am assuming that most gun crime in UK is by handguns, despite their illegality, and that “assault weapons” are also illegal.

For most US gun rights people, the UK registration and licensing requirements are very nearly equivalent to confiscation.


56 posted on 12/17/2012 6:40:42 AM PST by Sherman Logan (Brought to you by one of the pale penis people.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 54 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson