Guns used for lawful self defense

[JimC]

Wumbologist wrote:

...If Americans want guns (and our criminals most certainly do)...

This is the essence. Americans, criminal or otherwise, do indeed want guns, and, unlike BG, I see absolutely no chance of that changing. It is as American as apple pie...

Hence, my contentions in threads like this have nothing to do with suggesting you guys change tracks...

[Blind groper]

and, unlike BG, I see absolutely no chance of that changing...

I do not really see any chance of it changing any time soon. Insanity is insanity, and the looneys at least are all in the same asylum. I can avoid going there.

[mistermack]

The UK is the only place I've been mugged, on the Manchester tram from Victoria station to Altrincham. If they'd had guns I'd probably be dead. As it was I just ended up with a black eye and a few bruises, but hey, that's the price of public transport, eh? The rest of the passengers sat and watched from behind their newspapers. It's only an American and there's one of him and four of them. Best not to get involved, eh? I'd rather deal with rednecks, at least they understand that I might be carrying also.

Ahem.
Not sure what side of the argument you're on here. Would you prefer to be dead?

[MrJonno]

Got mugged and badly beaten up in Canada, if the criminals had had guns I would be dead but just as relevant if I had had a gun I would also have been dead as they would have just taken it from my prone body and used it

[laklak]

MM I'm actually on your side with regards to the UK. If weapons were made freely available in the UK I believe you'd see a blood bath. Imagine 2AM Saturday morning in Manchester with firearms. Bad enough with just fists and bottles.

[mistermack]

MM I'm actually on your side with regards to the UK. If weapons were made freely available in the UK I believe you'd see a blood bath. Imagine 2AM Saturday morning in Manchester with firearms. Bad enough with just fists and bottles.

It's bad enough now.
I think they could make the penalties for owning weapons a lot more severe. I honestly don't know what stops them.

And when I think of some of the wankers I know, and have known, I would hate the thought of them being able to buy and carry guns. And I know full well that they would be first in the queue.

[MrJonno]

MM I'm actually on your side with regards to the UK. If weapons were made freely available in the UK I believe you'd see a blood bath. Imagine 2AM Saturday morning in Manchester with firearms. Bad enough with just fists and bottles.

I think if we added freely avaliable firearms to the UK we could actually beat the US murder rates, a very high % of young people under 30 are out every weekend getting very drunk and I'm not talking about gang members, talking about lawyers, politicans, the police, nurses, doctors even future kings. It's certainly what I did until I got the cat and wife. Most drunk people of course are not violent but if a lot of people get drunk and only a couple of % are you will have carnage

[FBM]

Make a feasible plan to get rid of illegal gun ownership first, and I'll sign up on it. Then we can start talking about reducing legal ownership, if there's still a problem. Suggesting that we get rid of legal ownership first is not only political suicide, it's the equivalent of conspiracy to commit murder. The gun-owning criminals will have a field day. Ducks in a barrel.

[Wumbologist]

Wumbo

I have already admitted that the cure will take time. In the short term, you will be correct, and the law abiding citizens will no longer have hand guns, while many criminals will retain them. However, the number of murdered people will drop, in relation to a reduction in number of hand guns in circulation. For home defense, paranoid citizens can use rifles, which are actually better, since they are more accurate. The truth is, of course, that the number of ordinary citizens murdered in their homes by invading criminals is a very tiny number. Most murders are criminal killing criminal, or ordinary citizen killing someone he/she knows. The latter group will drop in number substantially, and very quickly, as ordinary citizens no longer have hand guns.

These numbers are not insignificant. In the USA, between 1500 and 2000 people are murdered by their spouse each year, and the dominant murder weapon is hand gun.

In the longer term, though, hand guns will become few and far between. There may be a few (but only a few) home made weapons around, but they are usually not as good, and prone to problems. Professionally made hand guns are more reliable, more accurate, and take more lives.

In time, even criminals will no longer have access to hand guns, and the murder rate will drop dramatically. But only if the government has the courage to do the right thing, which I seriously doubt. Politicians are known cowards, who will never do anything that may cost them votes.

I think you underestimate how long it would take for existing illegal arms to dry up. Even today, many of the guns used most commonly by criminals are from manufacturers that have been out of business since the late 90's. Add in whatever number of guns end up making their way underground in a post-ban US and you've got a lot of guns in criminal hands for a long time before anyone has to think about manufacturing new ones to meet demand. Oh, and on the topic of keeping rifles (and I assume shotguns) legal, another weapon commonly favored among criminals is a cut-down .22 caliber rifle that ends up being quite concealable. Or the perennial favorite sawed-off shotgun. Both of those will continue to exist without legal handguns. I think you'd be looking at 40-50 years before US criminals started to see gun supplies run short and had to start manufacturing their own. It's easy enough to manufacture one now, I'd bet with five decades of 3D printing advances it'll be child's play by that time to print out major components for a firearm. Say what you will about Americans but if there's one thing we've shown time and time again it's that we're exceptionally good at getting our hands on things the government tells us not to.

[MrJonno]

Whether guns can be removed from the US is good question what is shocking is so much that but that people are proud of the situation, thats gun= liberty bollocks

[Wumbologist]

Whether guns can be removed from the US is good question what is shocking is so much that but that people are proud of the situation, thats gun= liberty bollocks

Proud of the situation? No, guns in the hands of criminals is not something to be proud of, but trying to get guns out of the hands of American criminals would be like trying to put toothpaste back in the tube. Proud that responsible, law-abiding adults can own firearms, and use them for purposes such as hunting, sport shooting, and even protecting themselves against the aforementioned criminals? You bet.

[FBM]

Wait. Fish in a barrel.

[Sean Hayden]

I read that gun ownership in the US has been declining for years, as well as gun violence.

[laklak]

It would take a VERY long time for guns to disappear. They don't wear out very fast, after all. I still shoot a 1917 Austrian Styer cavalry carbine when I can afford the ammo. Works just fine.

[Wumbologist]

I read that gun ownership in the US has been declining for years, as well as gun violence.

Gun ownership has been increasing. Gun sales have reached record highs several times in the last few years. But gun violence has been going down.