Whenever a nation's ruling corrupt political class becomes so insulated from the real world where its subjects must live irrational laws and regulations like gun control and gun bans pop up like toad stools. “According to a new victimisation survey of industrialised nations, people in England and Wales are at greater risk than anywhere else of having a car stolen. And apart from Australia, people who live in England and Wales are at greater risk of being assaulted, robbed, sexually attacked and having their homes burgled than are people in any other rich country.” The Economist, A nation of criminals, Feb 22nd 2001. http://www.economist.com/printedition/displayStory.cfm?Story_ID=513031 When The Economist is compelled to point out that the UK has become "A nation of criminals" it is time to throw the political class back into the world it has created.
However, Emotional hyperbole aside, England is a Nation of Law Abiding Citizens, with a Minority of Criminals.
If you Quack like a Duck, etc.... Don't be surprised if you are accused of being a Duck whether or not you actually are a Duck.
Are you actually surprised that "a relatively small number" (to quote the article) of people still have guns? I hope not. You'd have be extremely naive to imagine any gun ban anywhere is 100% effective. And no. It's not a fact that "gun crime has soared in spite of the gun ban". "Admit the obvious"? LOL The Guardian's not in the business of "admitting" or "denying" anything. It's a newspaper. It reports the news - good and bad - at any given point in time. Perhaps if you read through the tens of thousands of articles published since the one you selected, written 16 years ago, you'll see that there are plenty of "denials" too. LOL. Ok, so an old, old article from 2000, focused on a particular group of people in a particular area of Britain proves what exactly? That way back in 2000 there was a problem with gun violence among a particular group of people in a particular area of Britain? Hardly evidence of the big picture as you see it, let alone the big picture today.
There are countless articles reporting soaring gun crime in the UK after the gun ban. Surely you know that. How can gun crime ever "soar" where guns are banned? Answer: gun bans encourage gun crime and crime generally. “London gun crime rises as shootings nearly double Teenage boys with cheap guns involved in 'respect shootings' to blame for increase, say experts”, Guardian, London gun crime rises as shootings nearly double”. Sandra Laville, Guardian, Last modified on Friday 8 January 201621.47(*)EST http://www.theguardian.com/uk/2009/nov/03/london-gun-crime-shootings-rise
Many UK crime stats, including gun crime stats, appeared to "soar" due new crime Counting Rules introduced in 1998 and 2002. Surely you know that. After all, official stats typically include an advisory to this effect, warning that as a result, data from before/after these years is not directly comparable. Firstly, see above. Secondly, how is it that overall UK crime has fallen since 1995 and is now lower than in 1981, while gun crime is lower than in 1990? Answer: gun bans obviously do not encourage gun crime and crime generally. Another old article relating to a specific area at a specific time? Any reason why you're not interested in the big picture - in long-term trends?
Interesting. The US homicide rate has been falling since the early 90s and is at it's lowest level since the 1950s.
In fact, gun crime in the UK has soared repeatedly since the gun ban. And this in spite of the concerted effort to cover up the extent of gun crime in the UK “Given the frequently noted reluctance (often underpinned by fear of reprisals) of many gun crime-affected communities to provide evidence to the police, and the strong ‘no grassing’ conventions in gang cultures, it is likely that much gun crime - especially incidents involving only intimidation, or firearms discharges resulting in either no injuries or only minor injuries - goes unreported.” - Most gun crimes go unreported in the UK: Study, 6/28/2008, 1:55:04 AM by ANI. http://www.thaindian.com/newsportal...s-go-unreported-in-the-uk-study_10065554.html “London, June 28 (ANI): Most gun crimes go unreported in the United Kingdom, according to a study of data on firearms-related offences by the Centre for Crime and Justice Studies (CCJS).
Many victims, the study said, are reluctant to alert the police, and crimes missing from the official statistics may even include incidents where guns were fired, but which did not lead to injuries.” - Most gun crimes go unreported in the UK: Study, 6/28/2008, 1:55:04 AM by ANI. http://www.thaindian.com/newsportal...s-go-unreported-in-the-uk-study_10065554.html
According to The Economist the UK became a "nation of criminals" after the gun ban. “According to a new victimisation survey of industrialised nations, people in England and Wales are at greater risk than anywhere else of having a car stolen. And apart from Australia, people who live in England and Wales are at greater risk of being assaulted, robbed, sexually attacked and having their homes burgled than are people in any other rich country.” The Economist, A nation of criminals, Feb 22nd 2001. http://www.economist.com/printedition/displayStory.cfm?Story_ID=513031
A small price to pay to ensure that Americans have no choice but to comply with the "Progressive Utopia" they demand they be allowed to mandate. The Supreme Court overturned the District of Columbia's handgun ban, along with their “safe storage requirement.” The ruling upheld an individual right to own a firearm for personal protection, unrelated to any militia service, recognizing an individual right to bear arms. Handgun bans are out of the question, the constitutionality of bans on assault weapons and large-capacity magazines remains open. It would seem that the prefatory phrasing of the second amendment would indicate that the right to keep and carry includes what would be common miltary issue. The justices Donald Trump appoints will play a decisive role in answering these questions. Donald Trump will not only appoint Scalia's replacement, but likely appoint replacements for Anthony Kennedy and Clarence Thomas. Kennedy is 80 years old and will probably choose to retire now that a Republican president will pick his replacement. Clarence Thomas is only 68, but reports indicate he is interested in retiring. Ruth Bader Ginsburg is 83, but she clearly wants a Democrat president to appoint her replacement. However, she may not be able to hold out for another four to eight years. Similarly, Stephen Breyer is 78 years old. Trump could very well replace at least one of these justices, especially if he wins a second term. Assuming Donald Trump makes conservative appointments, conservatives will have between a 5-4 and a 7-2 majority. In other words, a conservative Supreme Court will determine the scope of the Second Amendment. http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2016/11/whither_gun_control.html I'm not sure snotty condencesion is going to further the "progressive" agenda.
