Previous Post
Next Post

When gun grabbers play their mind games they use international gun crime stats as a trump card. For some reason, they consider Europe in general and the UK in particular a template for American gun control—despite the fact that U.S. citizens have a Constitutionally protected right to keep and bear arms no matter how many people die “as a result.” OMG! People die from guns in a country where people have the right to keep and bear arms? Who’d a thunk it? More importantly . . .

Why think about it?

When it comes to violent crime, objective statistical analysis is far less crucial than gun control advocates would have us believe. Whether or not a person is “likely” to be a victim of violent crime is less important than whether they are or aren’t.

Americans who choose to arm themselves against that possibility are doing so from a strictly binary perspective. More to the point, they’re tooling-up for their own benefit, not society’s. And why not?

Despite MikeB and others’ willful ignorance about the Bill of Rights, the right to keep and bear arms is an individual right. Americans exercise the right to protect themselves with firearms for their own personal good. 

And here’s the thing: in countries where society’s “needs” come first, where individuals do not have the right to keep and bear arms, people still get shot.

A man has been arrested on suspicion of murder, after a man was killed in a gun and grenade attack in Greater Manchester.

Click here for the BBC report. Note: if you see one-eyed suspect Dale Creighton [above] please contact the authorities. And run like hell.

Meanwhile, don’t tell me that this attack was an outlier. There are plenty of gun crimes—including horrific spree killings—in the UK, France, Germany, Norway and all the other pro-gun control countries on the other side of the pond.

Ah, but they’re relatively rare. Yes, but—

Analysis of figures from the European Commission showed a 77 per cent increase in murders, robberies, assaults and sexual offences in the UK since Labour came to power.

The total number of violent offences recorded compared to population is higher than any other country in Europe, as well as America, Canada, Australia and South Africa . . .

A breakdown of the statistics, which were compiled into league tables by the Conservatives, revealed that violent crime in the UK had increased from 652,974 offences in 1998 to more than 1.15 million crimes in 2007.

It means there are over 2,000 crimes recorded per 100,000 population in the UK, making it the most violent place in Europe.

Austria is second, with a rate of 1,677 per 100,000 people, followed by Sweden, Belgium, Finland and Holland.

By comparison, America has an estimated rate of 466 violent crimes per 100,000 population. [source:]

Re: firearms-related deaths remember that “gun deaths” (which includes suicides) in The Land of the Free and The Home of the Brave (that’s us) are a relatively insignificant cause of death—no matter how you analyze relative levels of guns violence between countries.

Anyway . . .

If private gun ownership makes Americans selfish so be it. Submitting to governmental authority, abandoning the ability to defend oneself by force of arms, means placing your fate in the hands of people who couldn’t give a damn whether you as  an individual live or die.

All humans are selfish. Personal and thus genetic survival is Job One. Always has been, always will be. By creating a society that maintains the right to keep and bear arms our forefathers aligned society’s interests with the individual’s.

Gun grabbers who fancy the European gun control model should seriously consider joining MikeB and moving abroad. Sorry, but you can’t have it both ways: personal freedom and gun control. Choose. We have.

Previous Post
Next Post


  1. That’s the problem with how too many people view the US. They view it as just another country that should take ideas from the failed Euro tyrannies that we established this country to escape.

    The US was created as a country that is not for the timid. It was created to allow the individual to charter his own destiny, and bear the brunt of his own failures and mistakes. It’s not for everyone. It guarantees everyone the “pursuit” of happiness, not happiness itself. You have the freedom to go after your dreams, but if you fail, that’s on you and you deal with it. But you fail a free man who can come back again if he has the fortitude to do so.

    In comfortable tyrannies and lands where people are subjects, they survive. In the US (or at least, what the US was supposed to be), people can thrive.

    Good take, RF. We should never apologize or even feel the need to apologize to subjects for our uncompromising stance on remaining citizens.

    • “The US was created as a country that is not for the timid. It was created to allow the individual to charter his own destiny, and bear the brunt of his own failures and mistakes. It’s not for everyone.”

      +1 – everyone is welcome to play by the rules, come, and succeed – if they can / want to.

  2. “but here’s some news: American gun owners don’t care. It’s all about them.”

    Of course American gun owners don’t care. They don’t care that the USA has a murder rate 4 times as high as Great Britain. As long as they aren’t being killed themselves, Americans don’t care how many people die. It’s a callous disregard for human life that separates the USA from civilized countries.

    • What is your point? For your information humans, by nature, are predators. Anyone can be a killer. I know the chances are small that I will find myself in a bad situation but I will not willing give up my right to self defense. I will not play the odds. This country is about choice and opportunity. Free until proven guilty and then punished. Unfortunately some will make bad choices and commit crimes. Why should millions of law abiding citizens give up something because a few thousand fail.

    • If “civilization” is defined as a nation where law demands only the crooks and agents of the state can defend themselves, I decree our American state of savagery to be more enlightened.

    • “As long as they aren’t being killed themselves, Americans don’t care how many people die. It’s a callous disregard for human life that separates the USA from civilized countries.”

      I’m sorry, I just had to use an entire box of tissues as I’m unbelievably allergic to bullshit. What kind of world do you think we live in man? This isn’t a sing-songy let’s all hold hands by the campfire and sing Kumbaya existence we live, and it never will be. I’m not against the idea of a world where nobody wants to kill or maim or deny anyone else the right to live the way they want. I’m just not a delusional nut who thinks it’s actually possible to legislate peace into fruition, because I don’t ignore my daily dose of stone cold reality. So in the meantime, I’ll focus on keeping myself, my loved ones, my friends, and my family safe by my own personal responsibility, and not rely on some incompetent government system to save me if and when trouble strikes.

      I bet if you brought men such as Frederick the Great, Queen Elizabeth, King Leonidas, and Napoleon back to life today they would look at the societal state of Europe and laugh. Such men and women lived in an age when you got tough or died. Today, that phrase might not apply as relevantly in a literal sense, but Europe is now is a pit of morally obsessed, overly philosophical, PC wimps who are afraid to do anything resembling an action in the interest and betterment of their own country because “we might hurt someone’s feelings” or “that’s no fair to (insert country here)” Oh boo-fvcking-hoo cry me a river. Self reliance, personal responsibility, and just a dash of selfishness are what keep successful nations prosperous, not some twisted ideology in which everyone has to be fair to everyone else like an elementary school playground.

      *Rant mode off.*

      • “men such as…Queen Elizabeth”? Sorry had to point that one out.

        Of course American gun owners care. It’s why they’re gun owners. They care enough to arm themselves in order to protect themselves and not become another statistic. Law abiding gun owners aren’t arming themselves so they can go out and kill people…

    • Yep and there are countries where private gun ownership is strictly prohibited have homicide rates eight times that of the United States. There are also countries where gun ownership is either mandatory or very common with homicide rates half that of the US. Go figure.

    • There’s also countries that banned private gun ownership where entire ethnic minorities were exterminated by the State. The second amendment is America’s bulwark against that, and if only for that reason, is worth any price in blood.

      Extremism in the defense of liberty is no vice, and moderation in the pursuit of justice is no virtue.

    • It’s a callous disregard for human life that separates the USA from civilized countries.

      Right, so I guess when the next end-of-times disaster strikes, we should just go play baseball or something. While we’re at it, we can stop being the most charitable country on the planet, and quit being the only real deterrent to dictatorial slaughter and oppression the world over.

      What color is the sky on your planet?

    • So you don’t care that the UK has a violent crime rate that is nearly three times greater than the US?

  3. “In comfortable tyrannies and lands where people are subjects, they survive. In the US (or at least, what the US was supposed to be), people can thrive.”

    There are plenty of countries where people thrive FLAME DELETED. In fact, there are other countries with more millionaires per capita than the USA.

    I’m guessing you’ve never even lived outside the United States. That is why you have this skewed view of the rest of the world. You probably get your “knowledge” from the American media.

    • “I’m guessing you’ve never even lived outside the United States.”

      To whom are you referring?

    • @ChrisC …and you obviously have no understanding of the principles and ideologies that underpin the intent of the Founders of the United States.
      If you are a U.S. Citizen, go read “The Federalist Papers”, John Locke’s “Two Treatises of Government” and Thomas Paine’s “Common Sense”. If you still don’t get it…move to the “Civilized Country” of your choice.
      If you are not a U.S. Citizen, then STFU and mind your own business because you are not capable of getting it.

    • “In comfortable tyrannies and lands where people are subjects, they survive.” They survive because they’re a bunch of F@@@@@G P@@@@@S who would rather live as slaves instead of fighting for their rights. I agree that these fools have the right to live as enslaved little bitches just to survive, and we have a right to our firearms.

    • I think he was referring to me. I’d fax him my resume including my years spent in France, the UK, and Canada over the past 20 years, but I doubt it’d make a difference. Mentalities such as his are a cruel joke upon the dignity of the human race.


    • ChrisC:

      “In fact, there are other countries with more millionaires per capita than the USA.”

      What does that have to do with what we are talking about here?

    • My guess would be that a good number of people spend their entire lives residing in the countries of their birth. Even more probably stay with a region. The fact is that most countries on this planet are rather small, so moving from one to another on the same continent or in the same general area isn’t extraordinary–see Europe or Africa as examples. The United States, Canada, Russia, and China all have large geographical areas. In the case of those four, staying within the country of one’s birth doesn’t mean the same thing as staying solely within Slovenia.

      In my own case, I’ve travelled some and have had friends from various parts of the world. I also grew up listening to a Hammerlund shortwave radio–complete with vacuum tubes and lots of dials. These days, the Internet offers access to the whole world.

    • OK, I’ll bite. Natural born Spanish citizen. Raised in France (10 years) and the Netherlands (8 years). Lived in the UK (Bristol) 1 year. Moved to the US first time in 94. Returned to Europe. Came back to the US in 99 thanks to generous scholarship. Wouldn’t go back to Europe save to visit family.

      Hope that is enough first hand knowledge for you.

      Anyway, the number of millionaires per capita is both inconsequential and a red herring, as it doesn’t have a bearing on the issue.

      Gun ownership in France and Spain are a pain, but perfectly doable (in fact, my father still has a 22lr semi-auto Gevelot that came standard with a silencer; no permits needed). Netherlands, good luck with that. UK needs no introduction, aside from being a rather brutish and violent bunch.

      The American perspective on freedoms and being subjects is not entirely wrong, though it is often exagerated. We (as American) live in a country where that which is not expressly forbidden is allowed. Under Napoleonic Code type thinking of most of Europe, that which is not expressly allowed and codified is forbidden.

      Finally, if American perspective is skewed due to being fed and informed by media, what do you think the odds would be that European perspectives are just as distorted? Heck, I have relatives that recoil at the idea of concealed carry, and think that we are gun slingers and still drink wiskey at the saloon. But then, old Dutch ladies also fantasized that Canary Islands men still wore Tarzan costumes, so…

  4. I certainly wouldn’t say statistical analysis is irrelevant. If we want to talk about a pragmatic approach to public policy, then it most certainly is relevant. And if we want something beyond pragmatic, a principled approach to public policy, then surely we would want to be cognizant of the premium we pay for those principles.

    The problem is not that statistical analysis is irrelevant to the gun control debate, it’s that it’s largely unenlightening. Gun control proponents compare the U.S. crime rates with those of the U.K. or Japan. Gun rights advocates compare the U.S. to Mexico, or the U.K. to Switzerland. If you’re willing to cherry pick your comparisons, you can make any point you want. When the US Center for Disease Control did an analysis of a wide variety of gun control measures and found no clear effect from any of them.

    • Umm.. yeah, but if you take the CRIME (not just gun crime rate) of the US and compare it to ANY of the other countries involved, it is better – with the exception of Switzerland and japan, yet on a per 100,000 basis, there is no significant difference (the Japanese are only 5% less likely than Americans to commit a crime – not surprising as Japanese culture has been one of submission to authority for hundreds of years – see EDO period, Imperial rule during WWII, etc.)

      That said statistics do not matter – the right to bear arms in America is a safeguard against being like Mexico, Nazi Germany, Maoist China, or Stalinist Russia (where guns were banned and then genocide was carried out) and things like the American Revolutionary War, where taxes ignited rebellion, and the first thing the British did was try to take the colonists guns. Just “because bad people kill others with guns” is insufficient in this context, as “power corrupts” and it is only a matter of time before ANY country and ANY society degrades to a point where ordinary citizens NEED to be armed in order to remain free:

      1. Freedom is obtained – people are free to live as they want, and in the case of America, make sure that the means to defend that freedom (in this case guns) is GUARANTEED so the same thing will not happen again.

      2. Several generations live without fear of tyrannical leaders

      3. Unknown to the public, the leadership becomes more and more corrupt – They get used to thinking of themselves as above the “ordinary” person (Shakespeare’s “Insolence of Office” or if you prefer “power corrupts”).

      4. Stricter and stricter laws are put in place on law abiding citizens (included in this is gun control, but not limited to) and the “bad” guys are either in government, or involved in multi-trillion dollar INTERNATIONAL corporations who don’t want trouble.

      5. The media lies, or distorts the truth, in order to convince citizens to give up their rights. They submit to unwarranted screenings at the airport, violation of privacy for phone calls or any other type of personal communication

      6. The government buys guns and ammo for ALL of its branches, including but not limited to DHS (sort of makes sense, but DHS has been proven to target citizens and not terrorists), the NATIONAL WEATHER SERVICE, and the SOCIAL SECURITY ADMINISTRATION, and more.

      7. The media and government lie about guns to the public, repeatedly and with varying severity. Fast and Furious was a failed attempt at gun control by giving CRIMINALS ILLEGAL WEAPONS – this was found out, and discarded. Sandy Hook and other shootings are popularized in the media instead, while ignoring cases where MORE THAN ONE LIFE was saved by a normal citizen possessing a gun.

      8. With the government and media controlling public opinion by shifting statistics and ignoring evidence that does not fit their agenda (gun control) public opinion is manipulated into cries for gun control, and people give up their guns.

      9. Even if the public does give up it’s guns – Criminals will still buy them, and the corrupt government will still have them. Who will make criminals stop buying and using guns? (Nobody) Who will clean up the corruption in the government? (Nobody) How long do you think it will take before our government ignores due process and kills citizens with impunity? Not very long – our president is already talking about a “kill list” for citizens who are “a danger to this country” and wants to be able to SKIP DUE PROCESS in determining guilt – This is the problem with gun control. Our government says “we want to kill some of you without a trial” and “by the way, give us your guns” – You’d have to be completely INSANE to think it was a good idea to let them do EITHER of these things.

  5. Um, when the murder rate of the USA is compared to the UK, is the population difference taken into account (according to wikipedia there are four times as many people in the US – assuming I did my math right). Just curious, as i don’t really follow murder rates and the stats involved.

    • That’s why it’s measured in Per 100k residents. If something is 400 in 100k, and the population of the place you are looking at is 5 million, you would multiply 400 by 50 and, if done properly, come up with the exact number of incidences.

  6. Umm….why do my comments keep getting deleted? I thought you right-wingers believed in freedom of speech.

  7. >>Um, when the murder rate of the USA is compared to the UK, is the population difference taken into account ”

    Of course it is. Murder rate is measured per capita. USA is around 5 murder per 100,000 per year. UK is around 1 murder per 100,000 per year.

  8. Think for a moment:with more armed civilians, police and criminals alike would have to be circumspect about their behavior. Violent crime would be low, average citizens could go about their days peacefully….

    ….and the governments’ need for a huge police and public safety budget are eliminated. That is bad news for the Prime Minister. Just how can he order an unjust tax hike, or force an unpopular law when the voters outgun the police said minister commands?

    AH! But there is a solution to the government man’s dilemma. Pass gun control laws slowly until one day holding a .22LR bullet is illegal, then when the crime rates go up you have your reasoning for expanding the budget-and the power attached accordingly. Violent crime is now higher, people have a greater chance of being killed-but the Prime Minister can do whatever he likes without worry of martial response.

    The reason foreigners don’t understand the US’s gun control laws, is because such subjects believe the lie that their governments give a damn about their safety.

  9. I’ve looked at the UK’s overall crimes IE… violent crimes that end in death or crippling and keeping in mind the only way to honestly com pair the UK’s crime to ours is in a percentages because we have a higher population the individual countries abroad. So, I was very patient as I researched to find as correct a # as possible. Also keep in mind that these %’s are based off of reported crimes of a violent nature ending in death or being crippled (which as far as I’m concerned is worst then death), so as in the USA we have a large # of crimes of this nature that do not get reported as do the countries of the UK:
    Most dangerous to least by population vs. Violent crime causing death/crippling.
    Montserrat (UK) @ 15.25%
    The UK it self @ 10.47%
    Germany @ 7.94%
    Canada @ 7.21%
    France @ 5.77%
    South Africa @ 5.31%
    United States @ 3.78%
    Italy @ 3.66%
    Japan @ 2.23%
    Russia @ 2.06%

    I hope that the apples to apples comparison Could help those that are reality challenged, I’m sure it won’t. Though I would rather own firearms and be the best pro-paired and not have to use them then die from a gun shoot wounds, being stabbed, beat to death w/ some object, or blown into atoms with a bomb… So, I wish with all of my heart and soul that those who are anti-gun/gun control will move to one of those other gun free countries… Oh, oddly enough from Germany down to Russia have some type of gun control but have not banned guns altogether for the exception of the RICH and those that are of some type of royal blood lines…
    Happy shooting/cleaning/caring of your guns…Keep safe and have fun…


  10. and again, who cares about the laws and stats from another country? i live in the usa. those other places only matter if i travel there, which i won’t i will instead spend my money here and do my part to help the american economy. the last time i left these shores my rich uncle was paying for the trip. i couldn’t wait to get back here.

    • Thank you Joseph for posting the numbers. Just because someone doesn’t get shot to death doesnt mean their isn’t crime. Criminals will simply use something else.
      If Brittan likes their gun ban than great! I lived abroad and have seen different environments. I prefer the option to be armed if I feel I want to.
      If you don’t want to own a gun or choose to not carry then fine, it is your freedom of choice. Unfortunately many of us are having that choice I fringed.

  11. Funny…if I remember correctly it was the Brits during WWII before Dunkirk asking Americans to send guns. Pistols, shotguns rifles whatever. Funny how some forget

    • My grandfather sent a rifle over with a promise that it would be returned after the war. Guess what,all the American donated guns were destroyed. Grandpa was pissed off about that till the day he passed. When he talked about WW2 he said France was a place good Americans went to die. I can only imagine what he would say about comparing us to Europe as a reason for gun control

    • The government has “forgotten” and the people have no say – there are many British people who disagree with Piers Morgan and his ilk.

  12. Europe provides a number of examples of different approaches to gun control. The U.K. is repressive, some others allow hunting guns and the like, while Switzerland arms and regulates its citizens, and the Czech Republic has laws that are much like ours. The curious fact (from the perspective of control freaks)? Homicide rates are about the same in all of those countries. South Africa, Puerto Rico, and Jamaica have strict gun laws and a homicide rate that is much higher than any of our states. Here in America, our rates are all over the map. But in all of this, we see that gun control is in no way correlated with rates of murder. Something else is at work.

    • “Something else is at work.”

      I agree. I think we have to look at the demographics of those countries. How large a proportion of the population is adolescent ,”underprivileged”, involved in drugs, poorly educated, low in intelligence, and indoctrinated with the idea that they have been “cheated” by those with more material success in life?

  13. I was fortunate enough to attend back in March a gun control seminar at Fordham University in NYC. It had several very good pro gun speakers. Two which may be of interest to the readers on this topic of European/World comparisons were Prof. Carlisle Moody and Don Kates. The following is a video of the conference. You can fast forward to 46:40 for this presentation.

    Here was the seminar description:

    • To chime in with you and Mr. Camp, here are some stats found on the internet in an easily digested format. All kinds of interesting things can be gathered, such as going south of the border in this hemisphere is really taking your life in your own hands–even in countries that ban or strictly regulated guns. And further, the numbers are all over the place, highest in Africa. Yes it is a Wiki source, but it depends on UN cited sources.

      The conclusion that I draw is that murder is a social problem, not a gun problem. Take a look at statistics in the u, broken down more than on a national basis. Where is the murder rate highest? The deep south and the big cities. Most of the small towns across America have a violent crime rate probably very similar to Canada or England. When we get into the inner cities of Chicago, Detroit, LA, NY, and so on, the homicide rate skyrockets. This fact alone suggests that it is not the guns that cause the problem, but city life and poverty. Solve those issues and the murder rate will take care of itself. In fact, it would probably be easier to reduce the violent crime rate just by castrating all males…..

      • No, because the poor whites in those areas do not have the same violent crime problem. Murder/violent crime is a black and latino issue. Where are there the most blacks and latinos? Big cities and the south. Where is there less violence? Cities with low minority population.

        If poverty was a causative factor for violent crime, West Virginia would be the most violent place in the US. But it’s not, is it? Nope.

        • As an ex pat from wva who still visits there i can tell you it’s just as violent and crime ridden as any other place. Meth is large there. But since cops are few and far between a lot of the stuff gets handled off the books . Been there, done that. prefer not to go back to it.

  14. its called empirical falsification:

    if a county bans all pistols, and ONE person is murdered in a homicide using a pistol, then gun control is not effective.


    • Actually in the context of this conversation, that would be a strawman, since no one is arguing that.

    • Perspectives based on absolutes have no place in a world of gray areas.Perhaps you should join Hezbollah with that zero-sum attitude of yours?

    • Neither “empirical falsification” or “confirmation bias” will serve one in an immediate, self-defense scenario. Nor will either serve to create a safe environment. Ipso facto bullshit is what remains after the dust settles.

      I do see a lot of Karl Popper reading in my future ;~) along with Thaddeus Golas. But I’m sure both will lead others to different conclusions.

  15. Why should I give a crap about Britain’s gun laws? I care about the guns laws here, and the Brits can go stuff themselves if that’s what makes them happy.

    BTW, if we’re so uncivlilized, why is half the world willing to do almost anything to come here? Hey, Anglophiles — go kcuf yourselves backwards. We fought two wars against England and three wars for England and I, personally, am done with England. I guess there will always be an England, but damned if I know why.

    • I expect that the Battle of Britain is about to begin. … if we fail, then the whole world, including the United States, including all that we have known and cared for, will sink into the abyss of a new Dark Age, made more sinister, and perhaps more protracted, by the lights of perverted science.

    • “Why should I give a crap about Britain’s gun laws?”

      Oh I don’t know Ralph, perhaps because intellectual curiosity is a good thing, which is encouraged in most civilized countries other than the US because it can lead to advances in understanding and finding a better way of doing things here? Ignorant, insular, ‘murrica is the best la la la views like yours are what’s killing this country. A typical boomer viewpoint though, sadly, because you grew up in an age where ‘murrica was actually the best and now can’t bear to face the reality that the world moved on and left you behind, particularly in social policy.

  16. “in countries where society’s “needs” come first, where individuals do not have the right to keep and bear arms, people still get shot”

    People also still find ways to commit suicide without a gun. Just ask the Japanese. Neighbors and other civilians within one’s own country can attempt genocides using clubs, machetes, and other tools. Just ask the Hutu and the Tutsi tribes.

  17. Those folks over on the other side of the pond can say all they want about guns in America. They use bombs which kills scores of people at one time. So they shouldn’t talk about us. Another reason Brits complain about Americans owning guns is The Revolutionary War. When a bunch of farmers beat the British Army. Talk about sore losers. To me the people of Europe are sheep, just letting their gov. run their lives. If the American Gov. wants my gun they and come and take it from my cold dead hand.

      • Vodka. BTW—firearms are more strictly controlled in Russia than the US. How do you explain that?

        • According to Russia’s gun laws, Russian citizens can buy smoothbore shotguns, such as, for example Saiga 12, gas pistols, or revolvers shooting rubber bullets. Safe use of one of the above weapons for five years allows purchase of a rifle or carbine.[32]
          In Moscow alone, some 400,000 people legally keep 470,000 weapons

  18. “Despite MikeB and others’ willful ignorance about the Bill of Rights” Could you please give a reference to where this statement comes from?

  19. Why don’t “progressives” understand that gun owners aren’t about to give up our gun rights. If you doubt that you are losing this battle, look around you. How many people are now concealed carrying, have recently bought a gun, recently joined a gun lobbying group?

    It doesn’t matter how hard you try, how much you wish, what arguments you make, or quite honestly what laws are made.

    If you you are truly worried about: deaths as a result of guns, just try taking them away.

  20. Favorite response to a European dogging on the US: Which part of Europe are you from? The part whose asses we saved or the part whose asses we kicked?

  21. I guess this site is getting more relevant judging from the increased attention from anti-gun flamers and trolls. Good for you, RF!
    My only complaint is that I have a thin skin and their callous idiocy chafes on me. But I guess, that’s what freedom is all about.

    • Just found the site today as it was slow with cancelled appointments. Also the range is closed today.

      I’m having a nice time reading the articles and comments. I will not promote my business on the site btw. I did mention my old local FFL “mentor” in a very old post about M4’s and a certain TV show though .. sorry about that to the moderator.

  22. Countries don’t have ideas. Individuals have ideas. The geographic location of those people is irreverent to the merits of the ideas.

    The question for me is not about the greatest good for the greatest number, a tragically subjective philosophical tradition that has led to the deaths of millions.

    My focus is, by what right do people who have tanks, aircraft carriers, and attack helicopters, claim that I shouldn’t have a handgun?

    What special moral property makes them immune for their own rules?

  23. Quite a few anti Brit comments here! Keep ’em coming, we’re quite thick skinned! Anyway, as a Brit living in the USA (and loving it), I want to point out that in the UK, there is a similar situation regarding the mainstream media that is seen here ie distorted reporting, cherry picking of the facts and the situation where a few high profile commentators (eg Piers Morgan) get a lot of air time. Therefore it’s easy to assume that everyone who actually lives in the UK shares those views. I can assure you all that not everyone does share those views, in fact before the firearm laws became repressive, the UK was a nation that had a great shooting heritage. One more thing, I personally feel a lot safer walking around the streets in the US (and I have spent a lot of time in places like Baltimore & DC) than the UK. The UK seems to be infested with feral packs of teens who don’t give a d*mn about anything, and they’re everywhere from small towns to large cities. Guess what? They carry knives! The average person carrying so much as a Swiss Army knife would end up in jail if caught.

    The UK & USA do have a great relationship and a long shared history, I hope we stay allies for a long long time.

  24. Robert: This is one of the best articles you’ve ever written.

    Brit in MI: You make a lot of good points. It’s hard to know what the “average Brit” thinks (particularly inasmuch as there really is no such thing, nor is there an ‘average American’ or ‘average Frenchman’ etc in terms of opinions. Each of us has his/her own opinion, based on our own outlook, experience, etc.) And BTW, I have heard other Brits make mention of what you did – i.e., roving bands of drunken ‘youts’ causing trouble in otherwise peaceful neighborhoods – something that I’ve never experienced (or even heard of) in the US.

    The thing about violence in America is that it tends to be localized and concentrated. Some communities are rife with violence, crime, and other social problems, and these account for the majority of violent crimes in America, while the vast majority of the rest of the country is, on the whole, more peaceful than many European countries.

    One reason random shootings (like the recent ones in Wisconsin and here in Colorado) are so disturbing is that they are rare examples of extreme violence affecting portions of American society that are unused to it.

  25. What is sad it that many of our sales are to law enforcement who spend what little they are being paid of their own money to protect others. Budgets do not allow the standard patrol officer who is the one on the scene first to be armed with more than his/her mandated sidearm option and shotgun. SWAT teams take time to deploy to a scene. By that time the shooting is usually over and it is a hostage or barricade situation.

    A good 20% of our recent “assault weapon” type sales have been to officers wanting something of their own their department can’t pay for.

    We try to offer as many discounts as we can to law enforcement on purchases and range time for practice.

  26. Remember all this is a site run and paid for by a person like any business. Don’t get mad if your comment/thread is deleted. From what I can see today the moderator is doing his/her best to be unbiased but clean up what is not really relevant to the topic or just inflammatory.

  27. In New York State, the police have no duty to provide police protection to any particular individual. The Courts in New York have held that “generally, a municipality may not be held liable for the failure to provide police protection because the duty to provide such protection is owed to the public at large, rather than to any particular individual” (Conde v. City of New York, 24 AD3d 595, 596 [2005]; see Cuffy v. City of New York, 69 NY2d 255, 260 [1987]).

    As the Chair of the Public Safety Committee of Manhattan Community Board 12. I will be holding a Public Hearing in September 2012 on NYS Senate Bill S1427 & S1863 with an emphasis on self-defense education & firearm training for women.

    Bill S1427 PURPOSE: This proposed constitutional amendment would provide within the New York State Constitution for a right of the people to keep and bear arms for traditionally recognized purposes

    Bill S1863 PURPOSE: This legislation would remove a gun licensing officer’s ability to deny or restrict the issuance of licenses to law abiding citizens who have successfully undergone the state’s strict application process and appropriate New York State and Federal Bureau of Investigations fingerprint background check required under law. In addition, this bill will conform New York State law to current ATF requirements regarding background checks for firearms transfers.

    September 12, 2012 at 6:30 PM at Isabella, 515 Audubon Avenue New York, NY 10040. If you live in New York State feel free to take a look at the information that I will be presenting as well as sign my on-line petition included at the link below. I hope that you will come out and support me as I support you. Fraternally.

Comments are closed.