It's official, british Govt. bans knives !

[EnderJE]

can't believe the stupidity of this thread. "Well you already have guns so why not let everyone have guns!" Dumb fucking argument

I know what you mean.

"Only the criminals have weapons."

"Oh, I know. We'll make them illegal!"

"Wait, but the criminals don't follow the laws."

"Never mind, it would make good press."

Dumb fucking argument.

At least I now know where to go on a crime spree.

 

[EnderJE]

I mean really, how are you going to butter your toast or cut the steak anymore?

 

[manny78]

I mean really, how are you going to butter your toast or cut the steak anymore?

Butter is not good, will make you fat. Butter will be banned so its not an issue anymore comrade.

 

[pintoca]

 

[redguru]

Gun related deaths in 2002 - UK: 81, Canada: 816, US: 30,242

In 2002 Canada still had 10x more gun related deaths than the UK whereas the US had a stagering 373x more deaths. The UK has approximately twice the population of Canada so would it be fair to say (based solely on those statistics) that allowing people to own guns increases the chances of gun related deaths by at least twenty fold? Vice versa could it also be said that not allowing people to own firearms would save lives?

If true then broadly speaking one might reason that restricting the availability of a certain weapon has a direct effect on the number of deaths caused by that weapon.

You might consider that gay but in my eyes it makes perfect sense.

In 2002, there were 14,000 homicides in the US. Only 71% of them were commited with a gun.

 

[GoldenDelicious]

careful with those statistics. gun crimes under newly revised laws often mean having an unsecured round outside of your safe. what you need are numbers of VIOLENT gun crimes.

there is far too much lobbying and spin with this argument.

 

[pintoca]

In 2002, there were 14,000 homicides in the US. Only 71% of them were commited with a gun.

lmao @ "only"

 

[redguru]

lmao @ "only"

The point is, of those 71% that used guns, how many of them would have happened without a gun? I say a vast majority would still have occured.

 

[GoldenDelicious]

The point is, of those 71% that used guns, how many of them would have happened without a gun? I say a vast majority would still have occured.

what makes you say that? escalation without a gun usually leads to a broken head, not a corpse. guns reduce the killing theshold, simple as that

 

[Hiatussin]

they didn´t ban them. learn to read.