[Mika]

I recall that this topic has been popping up here several times before, each time after some school shooting.

What I first want to hear from UK people is that has the removal of firearms reduced violence levels, or has the change been upwards? If violence has increased, is it with firearms or knives?

[The E]

Misleading implied connection between firearms availability and violence is misleading.

[Flipside]

In many cases, anything can be a weapon, be it a knife, a gun or a garden-hose, it really seems to be down to the mentality of the people themselves.

I seem to recall that a recent survey found that a knife-wound is every bit as dangerous, if not more so, than a bullet wound. I've always personally felt that the existence of firearms is not so much the problem as the availability of them. You'll always get tragic incidents where an argument leads to a utensil being used as a weapon, but the difference with guns is that they are designed with one specific purpose in mind, and that is to kill things (there is shooting for sport, but it doesn't really change the idea that a gun is to kill stuff).

When I was younger I used to be a keen archer, another device with a single purpose, and I literally just had to walk into a shop, sign a form, and I could buy a bow and a set of arrows that could conceivably lead to someone's death.

My own feeling is that someone who wants to kill will find a way to do so, damage limitation would be better achieved by far more investigation into why someone would want a firearm and the safety of allowing that person to obtain it than by prohibition as a blanket solution.

[StarSlayer]

If I'm not mistaken isn't Canada guns akimbo but with less violent crime then most other places?

[The E]

Indeed it is.

[Mika]

Misleading implied connection between firearms availability and violence is misleading.

I specifically asked of people from UK and get a first response from a German? That's the internet then I guess. I wanted to see the UK violent crime statistics after the ban was instated and nothing else. Logic dictates that someone must have been doing this since that is the only way to see if the ban had any effect on anything.

I'm personally of the opinion that the easy availability of guns leads to violent crime much easier in some countries and doesn't make any iota of difference in some at the moment we are living now. This all depends on the culture, and the current societal level. I do have a theory of this, but let's see what others have to say about this first.

[Luis Dias]

Logic dictates...

[headdie]

I suppose part of the issue here is that the Dunblane shooting which was the incident that propelled gun control into the mass media and into politics as a matter of wide spread public interest was in 1996, I was 11/12 at the time so have little knowledge of the politics of the time, just outrage at what had happened.  Since then it has only been the last what 7 years? where gun crime has become an issue, but this is a problem with illegally held weapons so a problem with preventing the movement of weapon and prior detection of carriers rather than with gun controls themselves.  Another problem is the lack of news coverage and often when there is news coverage of a shooting it is done in a routine way so the public outcry is muted.

I certainly believe that the problem would be worse with looser gun controls because more people would be willing to own/carry a gun so when heated arguments or gang violence erupt the chances of fire-arms being involved will likewise rise.  If the gun isn't there it cant be used.

[Mika]

Gun control laws are in place to prevent normal people from doing stupid stuff towards each other. This hasn't stopped criminality in UK, so would a better measure be then armed assault or armed robberies? Does anyone have a link to that statistic?

[StarSlayer]

After much statistical analysis based entirely on using Guy Ritchie Films for data points, it's safe to say armed assault is bloody well common in the UK.

[karajorma]

The lack of availability of guns does make enforcement of gun controls easier. If no one has guns legally anyone with a gun has it illegally.

[Flipside]

http://www.homeoffice.gov.uk/publications/science-research-statistics/research-statistics/crime-research/hosb1011/hosb1011?view=Binary

This might be of use if you can open it from outside the UK.

[NGTM-1R]

and the current societal level.

Dangerous generalizations and/or bad science incoming.

[MP-Ryan]

A fair number of publications show that violence levels have more to do with culture than availability of weapons.  You cannot discuss firearms policy in correlation with violence beyond national borders; each country is a fairly unique case (and by way of citation, I point at the violent crime and gun ownership rates of the United States and Canada).  Was going to leave it at this, but...

The lack of availability of guns does make enforcement of gun controls easier. If no one has guns legally anyone with a gun has it illegally.

You'd THINK that would be the case, but whenever you outlaw something completely, you inevitably create a large, vibrant black market for it if there is demand.  And there simply aren't the policing resources to perform adequate enforcement (aside from this is the fact that in many places there are several very legitimate reasons to own a firearm).  Though it's interesting you bring this up, because I've heard similar sentiments expressed by my wife's family (who are English) and who were astounded to discover that all police in Canada are armed... which led to a very lively discussion where I attempted to explain to them how NOT arming the police here in Canada would be insane, but I can see it working in the UK.

Which just adds to my point - comparing firearms/anti-violence policy across national borders is like comparing apples to mushrooms (you're not even in the same kingdom).

[headdie]

A fair number of publications show that violence levels have more to do with culture than availability of weapons.  You cannot discuss firearms policy in correlation with violence beyond national borders; each country is a fairly unique case (and by way of citation, I point at the violent crime and gun ownership rates of the United States and Canada).  Was going to leave it at this, but...

The lack of availability of guns does make enforcement of gun controls easier. If no one has guns legally anyone with a gun has it illegally.

You'd THINK that would be the case, but whenever you outlaw something completely, you inevitably create a large, vibrant black market for it if there is demand.  And there simply aren't the policing resources to perform adequate enforcement (aside from this is the fact that in many places there are several very legitimate reasons to own a firearm).  Though it's interesting you bring this up, because I've heard similar sentiments expressed by my wife's family (who are English) and who were astounded to discover that all police in Canada are armed... which led to a very lively discussion where I attempted to explain to them how NOT arming the police here in Canada would be insane, but I can see it working in the UK.

Which just adds to my point - comparing firearms/anti-violence policy across national borders is like comparing apples to mushrooms (you're not even in the same kingdom).

The point of culture/society is a good one (and one I am often guilty of overlooking) because like you point out black market supply does and indeed have formed in the UK due to some cultural/social groups believing in the ownership and carrying of weapons being a powerful status symbol which creates demand.  The problem of course is that using the law on it's own wont fix this problem as in some groups the very fact that it is illegal is what gives firearms the power as a status and is a aspect that the government needs to deal with, problem is I think the solution is too subtle for the politicians to grasp because it lacks the big obvious impact they crave to gain votes.

[Redstreblo]

Humans have been killing each other for all time. We have killed our fellow humans with big sticks and stones and when we got smarter we made bows and arrows, swords and all sorts of weapons to make killing our fellow humans easier. Guns are just that, a more efficient way of killing people. Blaming the gun for the actions of the person behind it and saying that if we ban all guns violence will decrease drastically is just trying to find something to blame for the violence. Humans have always killed, they are killing and they will always kill. No  way around it. It is what it is. GET OVER IT.

[Droid803]

Guns don't kill people.
People kill people.

Thus,

Ban people.

Problem solved.

[Redstreblo]

Guns don't kill people.
People kill people.

Thus,

Ban people.

Problem solved.

This will solve global warming too! Can anybody else think of any other problems with the world that would be solved with the eradication of all humans?

[Dragon]

The lack of availability of guns does make enforcement of gun controls easier. If no one has guns legally anyone with a gun has it illegally.

Well, if you outlaw guns completely, you'd scare away civilian security companies, sport shooters, hunters, gunsmiths and other people who, for one reason or another, need to have weapons. Criminals have their own ways to get guns (in order to buy a gun in most places, you need a background check anyway). In fact, I think that the exact opposite should be done: increase gun availability and teach people how to handle them safely and properly. After all, some criminals would think twice before robbing a place full of armed people, those who won't would get their (well deserved) Darwin Award. Also, sport shooting is a great way to spread patriotism among people, considering that it's a "paramilitary" sport (I ended up on that paramilitary camp this way, I first heard of it on the range where I'm training). In case of war, some sporting marksmen and especially hunters would make good snipers, and even people not training reguralry won't be clueless when handed a gun. Considering how many people were on that island in Norway when shooting happened, it's possible that if 10% of them had guns (even pistols) and some basic training with them, the shooting would be over very quickly, with far less victims.

[Bob-san]

I'm for gun control. I want to keep guns out of the hands of bureaucrats.