With respect to the terrorist's killings in London recently, I was pleased to read Trump's statement "Do you notice we are not having a gun debate right now?" "That's because they used knives and a truck."
Printable View
With respect to the terrorist's killings in London recently, I was pleased to read Trump's statement "Do you notice we are not having a gun debate right now?" "That's because they used knives and a truck."
Trucks and knives don't work for Anti's
... in the UK....
Save a life surrender your knife...
https://www.britishironworkcentre.co...nce-aggression
http://www.snopes.com/2015/06/22/sav...er-your-knife/
"So yes, those Brits are serious about knife control."
Really?
England doesn't have a gun debate.
More people will die today in the US via a gun then have even been killed in the UK via terrorist skum.
I like guns. I own guns. But the US's approach to guns is flawed.
Someone trying to turn a terrorist attack in one country into a gun debate in another is playing you for a fool. Dont help him.
There is a very heated debate about guns and hunting in the UK.Quote:
Originally Posted by kickingfrog
The Brits are completely brain dead when it comes to anti-firearms and anti hunting. They're too far gone down the leftist,Liberal's PC rabbit hole. President Trump's off-the-cuff remark may have been rather inarticulate and not politically correct,but,he was right on the money. Liberalist political correctness has gotten us to where now are as a society and it has to stop. Western society NEEDS Donald Trump and spades need to be called spades. Enough,already.
I wasn't very clear. I meant as compared to the US. The hunting thing I feared would take us farther from the point. Hunting is very much about class there, which to me is different from the US and Canada.
I can't wrap my head around the fact that most police officers are not armed, especially with what's been going on. Taking a stick to a gun or knife fight doesn't make much sense to me.....Quote:
Originally Posted by trimmer21
As any Brit would reply,.... drivel, utter drivel.Quote:
Originally Posted by trimmer21
To me either Rick, it's practically criminal. How can a cop protect themselves much less protect the PUBLIC? They should rename them safety monitors sort of like the current Life Lock TV Commercial. Hats off to the injured officer that intervened with only his baton. I believe that likely bought several potential victims a lifetime.Quote:
Originally Posted by rick_iles
Eight minutes armed response time is about 4-5 times longer than a usual city response. And sometimes a city response time of 2 minutes is a lifetime too long....literally.
However better than the Lee Rigby incident @ about 20 minutes.
See? I told you they were brain dead.Quote:
Originally Posted by fishermccann
Imagine what the crime rate is in England? Murder rate? Cop deaths? What with all those officers without guns. I bet it's downright embarrassing compared to the states.
Let me ask you a simple question.Quote:
Originally Posted by kickingfrog
You and your wife are at home watching the telly. ( that's what they call it in GB) some nut bar forces his way into your home and attacks your wife with a knife. Would you wish to god that you had a gun at that moment?
Answer truthfully?
I love that a lot of the comments here are from people that have zero self defence training and think that the only way to solve a problem with someone is to shoot and kill them. The reason why they don't need guns is because its difficult to get a gun in western europe. Do you truly believe that the terrorist laid out all their weapon options out between firearms/van/knife and thought" hmm, what would kill more people? the van and knife". It's a great thing they didnt have access to guns or more people would have died. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure out less guns = less gun violence. They believe in nonlethal actions "oh, you have a knife" "I have a taser"
I do have guns, but that's not the point, or the argument. But if we're going to spin...
Someone breaks into your house with a gun.... Don't you wish the didn't have one. Answer truthfully.
CEW's are no match for deadly force. You don't take a CEW to a knife fight!!Quote:
Originally Posted by Bonkers
The folks at Lawrence St Canadian Tire in Scar town did ok unarmed against a knife wielding, golf club swinging terrorist Saturday.
(in reference to Bonkers post)
That's rather odd. I didn't realize that criminals in Britain didn't have guns.Quote:
Originally Posted by Bonkers
Cheers
Still comes down to " people kill "
You are correct. With few exceptions they just stab or beat their victims to death. The violence offences people in the UK commit are the same as every where else. They just use different tools. The rate of violence is quite high in the UK.Quote:
Originally Posted by smitty55
Not in the quantities that American ones do.Quote:
Originally Posted by smitty55
Quote:
Originally Posted by rossh
https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/fastats/homicide.htm
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention site above lists that in 2014 (most recent statistical year posted) that 10945 (29 per day) Americans died in gun homicides. That's 3.4 per 100k. There were 15809 homicides in total in 2014.
UK was a little harder to find but one site listed the gun homicides in the UK as 23 in 2013, 12 in 2012, 38 in 2011. That's an average of 24.3 per year.
That's .04, .02 and .06 per 100K.
And total homicides in the UK were: 653 in 2012, 765 in 2011 and 712 in 2010.
(2012 was not listed)
This whole thing shouldn't be about US v UK and/or gun control (the stats really don't reflect well on the US btw and should make you wonder why this is the direction some want to take it). It should be about dealing with terrorists and terrorism. Politicians (and the rest of us in the peanut gallery) can disagree about how to deal with terrorism/terrorists, but using an attack to take shots at another politician/country/city (even if he didn't live in a glass house) and then to also make it about something it isn't really demonstrates everything that's wrong with the lack of leadership being exhibited.
Compared to where? Remember someone wanted to make this about gun control in the US.Quote:
Originally Posted by Snowwalker
If someone has some extra time to do the research,why not compare countries of almost equal population demographic instead of countries that have such a large disparity (UK-US). It may be far more interesting to compare Canada (pop:34M with 3% licensed ownership) and the UK (pop:33M with virtually 0% licensed ownership). I'll bet that will be an eye-opener.
Buy this guy a pint.
https://www.louderwithcrowder.com/sa...ndo-terrorism/
Population of UK in 2015 , was 65 million where did you get the 33 million from ?Quote:
Originally Posted by trimmer21
I don't understand this debate... Are Trump and those whom interpret his tweet as anti-gun gun control suggesting that if guns were more available in the UK there would have been fewer deaths and injuries as a result of the London Bridge attack?
Someone needs to explain that to me real slow.
Yep,I screwed that one up. My bad. It seems there's no way to draw an accurate comparison. Just an aside,though,the UK has a population double that of Canada jammed like sardines into an area less than the area the size of Ontario.Quote:
Originally Posted by fishermccann
Comparing one country's gun deaths to another country is missing the point - the main issue is the freedom and right to defend yourself - if we're really worried about how many people are killed then why stop with guns - how about cars, how about drugs, how about alcohol - how about smoking - etc.
If guns were the final solution to stopping the three scumbags in London why weren't guns the initial solution to PREVENTING or MINIMIZING the carnage?
Missing the point is right. Imagine living in a country where a chunk of the population didn't feel the need to have to arm themselves to protect themselves.
.Quote:
Originally Posted by kickingfrog
That will come !!!
"Feeling(s)" IS EXACTLY one of the world's problems. Feelings can be a poor decision making tool.Quote:
Originally Posted by kickingfrog
I agree it would be nice to live were there are no evil people, no crazy radicals, no mental illness or stupid hug a thug governments, but that only exists in the minds of those saddled with "feelings".
The ones with the "feelings" are the ones who belive that having a gun in everyone's hand would make you safer. That's a feeling.
My BIL lives in a suburban/rural neighborhood in western NY where it's the norm for homeowners to either open carry or have a shotgun or rifle ready for rapid deployment should the necessity arise. Believe me,of this I am very sure because I've seen it first hand and it's not just pro-gun empty rhetoric........an armed neighborhood is a damn safe and friendly neighborhood.Quote:
Originally Posted by kickingfrog
I live a safe and friendly on as well.
Must ex cops DO NOT condone nor support a gun in everyone's hand. However we do realize how unsafe you really are and how safe you think you are in many cases. Of course not every situation is the same which is why it should be a right to choose to bear arms or not, depending on things that have nothing to do with feelings.Quote:
Originally Posted by kickingfrog
What you are saying is so massively foolish and isn't backed with any concrete information there really is nothing to be said.
Ran out of liberal bs again?Quote:
Originally Posted by kickingfrog
Smart guy.Quote:
Originally Posted by JoePa
More people are Carring now then ever before.
Note that some people called the Sheriff's remarks "fearmongering" and "encouraging vigilantes". Of course,they would be those of a "liberal" bent.....you know,those that like to whine, dither,wringe their little handsies and pucker their anuses, totally incapable of taking swift,decisive action when it counts.
The reality of life is that times will come when nobody else can do it for you.
If you take all the guns off the streets wouldn't you will still continue to have crime? Yet if you take all the criminals off the street you cannot have a gun problem right?
See what can happen when good guys have guns - boy this two guys look like crooks - http://www.foxnews.com/us/2017/06/16...l-arrests.html
Fox was the only news source to print that. You won't hear it from the rest of the main stream media. It doesn't fit their "agenda".Quote:
Originally Posted by JoePa
I am currently in Commifonia and there is a "very" liberial radio station here( you have to be with 20 to 30 miles of the transmitter) and they reported on the two escaped convicts being caught.Quote:
Originally Posted by trimmer21
They said the two were arrested after police were able to rescue both men for a gun wheeling white male just before he shot and murdered them.
So yes the liberial media did report, but there is a little differant option as to the facts of the story..
Funny, I watched the Officer praise the bravery of the homeowner who along with his neighbor apprehended them at gunpoint while the murderous scum attempted to steal his vehicle and the homeowners held them until the cops got there.
Much of Cali is a sick, twisted liberal fantasy land. Look at what is really going in LA for example if you can get the truth from someone maybe via pics on facebook or twitter.
Just saying a liberial news report did cover the story. The facts....well lets just say if you did not already know the names of the town, state, and persons you would think it was some other convicts that got caught.Quote:
Originally Posted by skypilot
I agree with what you posted 100%. I was just attempting to highlight the usual MO of the lying liberal media's twist on written news. Far be it from the liberal media to put any good light on a gun story.Quote:
Originally Posted by Snowwalker
X2 and then some.Quote:
Originally Posted by skypilot
It always surprises me when people vehemetly insult a particular party. Lib vs Cons. Reb vs Dem. A while back a woman told me she was a Liberal, her parents were Liberals, and she would always be a Liberal. So basically, if a Liberal candidate was a complete azz then she would vote for him/her because he was a Liberal. I vote for who I think is the best candidate regardless of party affiliation. Am I out to lunch here?
Not out to lunch at all. However I personally vote for the party.Quote:
Originally Posted by Roper
Not entirely,but,I believe the candidate is the proverbial small frog in a big pond. I have always examined the party's policies on each issue and follow the local candidate that represents that party and vote for him/her. Rarely do I agree with every policy,but,my biggies are personal freedom and liberty.Quote:
Originally Posted by Roper
LOL. Thanks for that!Quote:
Originally Posted by skypilot