U.K. Article: Can the US live in peace with its guns?

Zappa

Road Warrior
NES Member
Joined
May 14, 2008
Messages
62,762
Likes
50,401
Location
Living Free In The 603
Feedback: 28 / 0 / 0
Note: This article is written by a guy who admits that he can't trust himself with a gun, but the article isn't totally anti-gun because he interviews some pro-gun people.


Can the US live in peace with its guns?

LA Notebook: Seven gunmen have killed 50 people in the past month
Chris Ayres

The day that my US Green Card arrived in the post, I remember thinking to myself: “Oh cool, now I can go out and buy a high-powered semi-automatic assault weapon.”

Approximately two millionths of a second later, I had another thought - actually it's probably best if I don't go out and buy a high-powered semi-automatic assault weapon, or any other kind of weapon for that matter.

Knowing me, I would almost certainly shoot myself in the groin while loading it. Or my two-year-old son would get hold of it and execute his play date.

Or someone would break into our house and I would scramble for the gun. but hesitate before pulling the trigger and then the intruder, being more experienced in such matters, would grab it off me. And by that time he'd be angry.
Or I'd kill the intruder and then a blood spatter expert would declare at my trial that I'd shot him as he was turned away from me and I'd spend the rest of my life on Death Row.

The truth is that, when you get down to the boring, un-Rambo-ish details, it's hard to envisage a scenario in which the benefits of owning a gun for the sake of self-defence outnumber the pitfalls.

Take the issue of storage: most gunowners I know keep their firearms and clips locked up in separate places, for safety. But you can't very well say to the bloke in the ski mask who has just burst into your bedroom wielding an industrial meat cleaver: “Oh hang on a minute, old chap, while I remember the key-code to my gun box - and if you can just bear with me for a few moments longer, I need to go down to the shed to fetch my bullets.”

I mention all this because in the past four weeks a total of seven gunmen have killed 50 people in mass shootings across the US, which has inevitably provoked another debate over Americans' (and, by extension, Green Card holders') right to bear arms.
Some argue that such things would never happen if guns were banned; others say that such things would never happen if everyone from grannies to toddlers were packing heat.

While the latter argument is terrifying - who on earth would want to live in such a country? - I can understand why the Second Amendment (which protects the right to bear arms) is considered so politically untouchable. After all, it serves broadly the same purpose as Britain's constitutional monarchy, ie, to keep the elected government's ego in check.

But, of course, there's a crucial difference - a lone psychopath can buy a gun and shoot 13 people as they take an immigration exam in Binghamton, New York; that same lunatic would have a harder time trying to kidnap the Queen and use her to start a war with France.

Still, it took us a thousand years to reach such a benign relationship with our royals. We can only hope that it doesn't take so long for the Americans to reach a similarly tenable state of affairs when it comes to their firearms.

If anything, the recent shootings have inspired more Americans to buy guns, recession or no recession.

In fact, all over the country they are stocking up on as many pistols, rifles, and shotguns as possible before the Obama Administration bans or taxes them.

According to the National Shooting Sports Foundation, the FBI carried out more than 4.2 million background checks on behalf of gundealers from November to January (a check is required with every sale), up 31 per cent on the same period in the previous year.

Interestingly, however, violent crime rates have at the same time been falling in Los Angeles, New York and other big American cities The experts are at loss as to explain why this should be happening.

I have my own theory: people are buying so many guns that the criminals are simply running out of bullets. Or as one firing instructor explained to the Columbus Dispatch newspaper: “The ammo is being snapped up as soon as it comes in. People are in a frenzy. It's kind of like that run on Elmo dolls.”
Speaking of Elmo dolls, a good number of the people arming themselves these days are young mothers.

If you don't believe me, visit BabyCenter.com, where a discussion forum was opened recently under the headline: “Do you think that every mother should own a gun?” One reader responded: “I keep a loaded 9mm in my diaper bag.”

Another wrote: “I carry a Keltec 380 [a small pistol] on my hip every day. I can clip it on my belt with the pistol between my undies and my jeans. I consider myself an easy target, a young mother who is juggling two rowdy toddlers, so I can't explain enough how glad I am that we have the right to bear arms.”

Ah yes, toddlers and deadly weapons - that famously reassuring combination.
 
No firearm for mom+toddlers+Ag Felon is a worse combination.

The beauty of the U.S. system as it should be is that we have the OPTION to arm ourselves if we want to.
 
Who are the "experts" unable to explain why violent crime is dropping with more and more guns in the hands of licensed gun owners?
 
It amazes me how many men have been turned by society into just males. Biologically men but psycologically children.
 
The experts are at loss as to explain why this should be happening.

At a loss? I can explain it. Bad economy=increased rate of crime in any form. knife, gun, fights, drunk driving, etc.
 
doobie.....his comment was violent crime is going down while gun sales going up.

I like the comment that it is do to less ammo being available to bad guys to rob. Or maybe the bad guys are getting scared about who is carrying.

What I can't understand is his own thoughts about gun handling. GET F'ng training then!!! I hate those uneducated comments. It's the same thing with any tool. If you don't know how to use it then find someone to teach you. First time a kid grabs a hammer you think he can hit a nail? Hell no.......Same goes with a firearm.
 
Note: This article is written by a guy who admits that he can't trust himself with a gun, but the article isn't totally anti-gun because he interviews some pro-gun people.

Dude, this guy is a f'n moron. This is just rambling gibberish where completely unrelated events and thoughts are linked and made fact. The gang bangers are not killing people because they ran out of bullets???? WTF!
 
"I would scramble for the gun. but hesitate before pulling the trigger and then the intruder, being more experienced in such matters, would grab it off me. And by that time he'd be angry."

I get this dumb argument against owning a gun and concealed everyday from people. I explain that this is not a movie and criminals are cowards who don't have enough balls to make a hard honest living so they suck of of everybody else. They sit there and live in fear of "what if" all there life.
 
Last edited:
get the f*** back on a plane and go home you spineless wimp.

If you dont have the balls and ability to defend yourself/family from an attacker, then i pray for him.
 
"I would scramble for the gun. but hesitate before pulling the trigger and then the intruder, being more experienced in such matters, would grab it off me. And by that time he'd be angry."

I get this dumb argument against owning a gun and concealed everyday from people. I explain that this is not a movie and criminals are cowards who don't have enough balls to make a hard honest living so they suck of of everybody else. They sit there and live in fear of "what if" all there life.
I answer that idiotic comment slightly different.

I simply tell whoever offers me that sheep prattle that when my pistol comes out of the holster it is to begin firing immediately.

One the gun comes out, there will be no warnings, no threats, no demands of compliance, no "get on the ground", nothing but gunshots.

I tell them I am not a cop. I am not carrying a gun to protect society, just myself and my family. And that once the threshold for the use of deadly force in self defense has been reached, such deadly force will be applied ruthlessly until the threat has been stopped.

I usually get no more questions after that.
 
Approximately two millionths of a second later, I had another thought - actually it's probably best if I don't go out and buy a high-powered semi-automatic assault weapon, or any other kind of weapon for that matter.

Knowing me, I would almost certainly shoot myself in the groin while loading it....

Darwin in action... dumbass
 
The truth is that, when you get down to the boring, un-Rambo-ish details, it's hard to envisage a scenario in which the benefits of owning a gun for the sake of self-defence outnumber the pitfalls.

Oh I know, because I'd much rather be raped, savagely beaten, murdered in front of my family or whatever else the convicted felons in my neighborhood can think up than stand up for myself. In life and death situations, life and death decisions need to be made.

I made my decision, they're chambered in .357 and imported from Austria, and that's just until I get the safe open.

Whats interesting to me is he understands the uselessness of keeping ammunition seperate from the tool.

No kidding. Most gun owners I know have their guns locked up and unloaded too, but for the most part that's because it's more of a toy than a tool.

The beauty of the U.S. system as it should be is that we have the OPTION to arm ourselves if we want to.

Exactly. Every wrongdoing criminal already has that option, and everyone else should too.
 
I only wish the author used more debunked firearm myths in his article. [rolleyes]

I wish Mr. Ayres luck. He lives in a lost cause of a country that surrendered a long time ago. He lives in chains; A world where the government watches you with their millions of public cameras -- Every moment of his life is probably captured on government film. And the pound-sterling in his wallet makes the US dollar look like gold bullion. He can't defend himself or his family against armed thugs on the street because they're the ones with the guns, despite his government's best efforts to ban 'em all.

Go back to your freedom-hating country. And take your snake oil with you.
 
Well, I'm not sure this guy is so far off... (oh boy... I can just see the tomatoes flying my way - wish this wasn't my first post in a while).

1) He did recognize the choice to keep arms as a right which he in no way suggested should be limited. If he doesn't chose to exercise the right himself -- hey not everyone drives (I didn't when I was living in New York City).

2) (I think I'm most impressed with this) he entertained the idea of gun ownership -- however briefly doesn't really matter -- that suggests that he's got something between his ears rather than just reciting the preachings of the anti-gun fundamentalists.

3) I'd give him a little credit over his kid. I don't have a kid, yet ever since I left New York City, I had a similar problem -- keep the gun accessible or go one step further to protect my community against a criminal who might rob my place when I'm not around. I still haven't found the perfect solution. For a person who is not familiar with guns to have to start thinking about both defensive applications and retention issues without someone with a little experience to pat him on the back and at least offer some encouragement could be a big step.

Now that being said, I miss the point of this guy writing the article in the first place.

1) He certainly didn't think things through very well -- would he rather go through the humiliation and grave danger of someone robbing his house, holding him at gun point, possibly causing harm to him or his family than simply get a license and a gun... maybe go down to the range every once in a while? Can he really be serious that he doesn't think he could learn to handle a gun without shooting himself? Sure, that was clearly intended as a joke, but he certainly found an odd context of putting it into.

2) Claiming that most people keep their mags separate from their guns seems rather naive. True that may be the case for most folks for most of their guns. But it seems that very few people have one gun. Of course its easier to keep the range queens, wall hangers, and hunting guns in a safe or separate from the ammo. And yeah, that means that 7 out of 8 or 9 guns are stored in a manner that would not permit them to be accessed without asking the perp to "hold please"... but what about those other guns?

Moreover, that argument takes no account of individual threat levels and the possibility that they may change. If crime were to increase in his area or in the neighborhoods where his gun toting buddies live, he may have a very different impression about whether or not most guns would be useless in a robbery.

3) The author took no consideration of shooting as a sport or hobby. He looked exclusively at the defensive applications of a gun in the house, based all his assumptions on the practices of someone who has like a .22 rifle that sees the range once every few months, and didn't even tip his hat to the folks that enjoy hunting, skeet, trap, 3-gun, etc.

4) I don't know if his choice of formulating the article, at least its title and introduction, in the context of America is a little offensive? Seems borderline to me. What about the poor chap who was robbed several times in the UK, and finally got his sporting rifle? shotgun? (can't remember which it was) and shot the perp. Now he's in prison. So why are Americans so bad because we insist on our right to keep and bear arms?

Seems the issue is popping up in this guys homeland too... Why not call the article "Can the UK live in peace without its guns". The author's arguments could be made to support the position that its OK to take away the Brits' liberties.

So while the article didn't sound malicious in tone, I'm always a little suspicious when a foreigner starts singling the US out to argue about something that isn't geographically specific. It just seems kindda... you know -- arrogant, maybe? And btw, I'm a first generation immigrant myself, so I'm in no way picking on foreigners -- just them having a beef with the US after having themselves taken advantage of the liberties available here.
 
Back
Top Bottom