Gunner Asch on Fri, 20 Jan 2012 12:05:57 -0800
typed in rec.crafts.metalworking the following:

So I say..about those gun deaths when firearms were readily available to
all Brits....1 in London for the entire year, when gentleman carried a
pistol and ladies had a pistol in their hand muffs... And now when they
are utterly banned...

There's absolutely no evidence at all that people carried guns as a
matter of routine when no licenses were carried, indeed there's some
evidence that nobody carried guns at all outside sportsmen carrying them
to and from getting them repaired..

Sounds likes someone cannot tell the difference between "None were
forbidden to carry" and "everybody was carrying". Damn one would
think the English would at least know how to use their language
properly.

Laugh laugh laugh...oh of course not.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tottenham_Outrage

"By this time, all those on foot had arrived at the scene where the
motor car had crashed, and Constable Bond borrowed a small revolver from
a member of the crowd " and so forth and so on....
'
http://www.davekopel.com/2a/lawrev/slipperyslope.htm

http://www.ncc-1776.org/tle2010/tle558-20100221-07.html

Poor Mr Luty.....

http://reason.com/archives/2002/11/0...ome/singlepage
--
pyotr
Go not to the Net for answers, for it will tell you Yes and no. And
you are a bloody fool, only an ignorant cretin would even ask the
question, forty two, 47, the second door, and how many blonde lawyers
does it take to change a lightbulb.

On Fri, 20 Jan 2012 15:34:19 -0800, pyotr filipivich
wrote:

Gunner Asch on Fri, 20 Jan 2012 12:05:57 -0800
typed in rec.crafts.metalworking the following:

So I say..about those gun deaths when firearms were readily available to
all Brits....1 in London for the entire year, when gentleman carried a
pistol and ladies had a pistol in their hand muffs... And now when they
are utterly banned...

There's absolutely no evidence at all that people carried guns as a
matter of routine when no licenses were carried, indeed there's some
evidence that nobody carried guns at all outside sportsmen carrying them
to and from getting them repaired..

Sounds likes someone cannot tell the difference between "None were
forbidden to carry" and "everybody was carrying". Damn one would
think the English would at least know how to use their language
properly.

Laugh laugh laugh...oh of course not.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tottenham_Outrage

"By this time, all those on foot had arrived at the scene where the
motor car had crashed, and Constable Bond borrowed a small revolver from
a member of the crowd " and so forth and so on....
'
http://www.davekopel.com/2a/lawrev/slipperyslope.htm

http://www.ncc-1776.org/tle2010/tle558-20100221-07.html

Poor Mr Luty.....

http://reason.com/archives/2002/11/0...ome/singlepage
--
pyotr
Go not to the Net for answers, for it will tell you Yes and no. And
you are a bloody fool, only an ignorant cretin would even ask the
question, forty two, 47, the second door, and how many blonde lawyers
does it take to change a lightbulb.

British Gun Crime up 242 Percent; Post Says 'Laws Seen As Curbing
Attacks'

By Ken Shepherd | April 24, 2007 | 12:06


This morning, NewsBusters contributing editor Dan Gainor brought this
Washington Post article to my attention:

"Britain's Gun Laws Seen as Curbing Attacks"

But the problem is that while anti-gun activists recited those talking
points in Post foreign service correspondent Mary Jordan's April 24
story, the empirical evidence shows otherwise.

The number of crimes in which a handgun was used in England and
Wales has risen from 299 in 1995 to 1,024 last year. Offenses committed
with all types of firearms, including air guns, have also increased.

That's an increase of 725 gun crimes in 11 years, a 242 percent
increase. Britain already had strict gun control before the 1996
Dunblane, Scotland, school shooting, and in 1997 both Conservative and
Labour governments pushed through fresh gun control legislation banning
small caliber handguns.

Jordan did note that gun fatalities are down at just 50 deaths in the
U.K. last year from 55 in 1995, yet Jordan carefully inserted a caveat
earlier in the same paragraph.

"According to government statistics, the number of people killed by guns
has essentially stayed the same, with dips and spikes, as before the
1997 gun control laws went into effect," she wrote.

"Dips and spikes?" Perhaps like the spike in total homicides in England
and Wales in the years following the 1997 gun laws? Homicides peaked at
over 1,000 in the 2002-3 survey period. The number has since fallen to
just above 1997-8 levels.

What about the oft-repeated meme that gun-free Britain is much less
violent than the United States? Jordan doesn't raise that meme per se,
but neither does she compare apples to apples. Has Britain historically
been less violent, more violent, or similarly violent per capita to the
United States? Jordan doesn't say.

The better comparison, in fact, is if Britain has become more or less
violent since the 1997 gun laws.

The notion that it's become less violent doesn't wash according to data
from the British government.

What about "possession of weapons." Surely arrests for illegal weapons
is on a downward trend, right?

Wrong.


One could not be a successful Leftwinger without realizing that,
in contrast to the popular conception supported by newspapers
and mothers of Leftwingers, a goodly number of Leftwingers are
not only narrow-minded and dull, but also just stupid.
Gunner Asch

pyotr filipivich wrote:

Sounds likes someone cannot tell the difference between "None were
forbidden to carry" and "everybody was carrying". Damn one would
think the English would at least know how to use their language
properly.


Not since they went Metric.


--
You can't have a sense of humor, if you have no sense.