Guns,guns, and more Guns

UKworkshop.co.uk

Help Support UKworkshop.co.uk:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
Official figures suggest that around 70% of guns seized by Mexican law enforcement originated in one of those 67,000 gun shops in the US…….
I think that fun fact requires further investigation.
Since it's now illegal for a FFl to export even inert lead projectiles without an end user certificate.

But if you are suggesting that the FFLs sold the guns legally and the purchaser took them to Mexico illegally, that's a whole different ballgame.

Bit like blaming the sports shop if someone got beat over the head with a cricket bat.
 
I live in the supposed wild west US,
I was a Canadian resident many moons ago and visited the US a number of times over the years.

First thing is you can't generalise about the USA, it's 50 different countries under one umbrella and each one of those states has various differences within it.

I know things have changed now, but when I rocked up to US Customs the guy said "Are you a Canadian resident?" and when I replied yes he waved me through, no more questions no papers check.

Last time I visited about 20 yrs ago I flew in from Ireland. Cleared customs before even boarding the plane, walked off in Boston no further questions.

I did a tour of the New England States and since I was, at that time, a competitive shooter I visited a number of gun stores.

For some one raised here it was mind boggling, At closing time the guy walked out with me and locked up, the entire shop full of all kinds of guns had less security than the local Mace. (7-11 for transatlantic readers)
 
This issue of crime can only get worse, when you think that discipline has been removed from education and the kids know it then to them anything goes and so given the state of modern society and what can only be described as a hard bleak future where you will be expected to work, often in low paid jobs until you drop because the government cannot afford pensions then you can see why some get so desperate and look at alternative ways of making money faster. My advice to youngsters has always been to get out of this sinking ship because it is only going one way and opportunities can still be found elsewhere. America has a gun culture because unlike the UK which has always been occupied by a mix of English and others they had to steal it from the Indians and fight for every inch they wanted and so the gun just became part of them, now I doubt they could live without them but in the UK it is a very different culture, but this could change as we bring in more migrants from war torn countries because they have this gun culture from years of conflict.
 
There are a few, what I would regard as, "intuitive truths" for the UK:
  • the more guns, the more likely they will be used in self defence or the execution of crime.
  • more guns may reduce the incidence of other violence - eg: knife crime.
  • the police should have access to firearms to be deployed where required.
  • general police firearms issue risks greater mis-use vs those intensively trained.
  • whatever the laws, some will ignore them, mostly in support of criminal intent.
  • relaxing gun laws risks a police vs criminal "arms race".
  • guns and ammunition can be smuggled - it would be naïve to think otherwise.
  • they will be sold illegally to those who want them
  • maximising penalties for firearms offences deters, but does not eliminate, gun crime
Comparing countries (UK, US, Mexico, Switzerland, etc) to understand which model of gun control is best or worst is pointless - it is a product of history, culture, legal systems, economic stresses etc.

Question: do the rules we have work for the UK? IMHO mostly. There are no major changes that would materially improve the situation, and many that would probably make it materially worse.
 
It's been reported that US states with the least gun controls have the least crime.
That may well be true. However, according to my brief Google, they have the highest gun death rate.
I'm not entirely sure what this means. Maybe petty crimes against property are lower because the perps are scared of being shot?
 
That's never going happen or work.It's not comparable to tobacco, alcohol or marijuana in it's effects and damage to humans or it's addictiveness . Not only that but by dedemonizing it as you suggest would likely open it to more users which only goes one way in terms of the impact on general society, down down down. Extremely naive observation.
It's not comparable to tobacco, alcohol or marijuana in it's effects and damage to humans or it's addictiveness
My my, who's being naive now. Alcohol is very damaging to society, and marajuana has an addictive quality about it, and as for tobacco ?, tobacco is both addictive and damaging to the body..
 
This clearly isn't just about laws and the number of guns, either legally registered or otherwise. This is also a culture and mindset thing as much as anything.

The US has an average of 1.2 guns per person with the next in line (from a global perspective) being the Falkland Islands at an average of 0.62 guns per person. Deaths per 100,000 in the US equates to 4.4 whereas for the Falkland Islands its 0.

I would add that when Australia enforced their National Firearms Agreement in 1996 which banned several classes of firearms and brought in stricter control, gun deaths went down dramatically across the country, ergo some countries with gun crime that apply restrictions retroactively and for future implementation see the benefits of that in society. That will only work in some countries though. The US is never going to give them up, that second amendment bumpf about organising militia to call government to account will always be used as some sort of God given right. Kind of ironic really as in the actual scenario of civilians rising up against government in the US will essentially consist of hill billies with AR15's being attacked by Black Hawk's and F-117 Stealth attack fighters.
 
I'm probably making a big mistake in entering this arena because rational, reasoned, debate on this topic is next to impossible. What I find surreal is that America has the highest level of 'religiosity' of any developed nation, (love thy neighbour, do as you would be done by, etc), yet per capita it has the highest level of violent crime including homicides.

Guns and the culture that underpins them can't be ignored, but other countries which have high levels of gun ownership such as Canada and Finland - where civilian gun ownership is the highest of any European Country, at 32 per 100 people, yet per capita have far lower levels of violent crime, and far fewer homicides or of police officers shooting civilians.

It's an enigma to me who so many Americans seemingly hate each other so much? Canadians just over the border seem to rub along well enough together with violent crime and homicides at a level on a par with Britain and Oz. (Why so many multiple homicides too - often in schools in the US. What's that all about?). The total number of homicides in the US reported in 2020 was 21,570, which was almost 5,000 more than the previous year. That death toll equates to seven 9/11s in just one year.

As to US Police Officers who die in service, there's a website entitled 'Officer Down Memorial Page', which gives the cause of death. In all, 479 officers are listed on the Memorial page who sadly died in service in 2021. Most officers weren't killed - they died. (Two thirds died from Covid19, 18 from heart attacks). 59 died from gunfire.

I wouldn't wish to disrespect, dishonour or devalue a single one of those, but to put things into perspective, in 2019 there were 906,037 full-time law enforcement employees and 94,275 part-time employees. State and local police employment, a total of 1,000,312 officers.

So 479 fatalities = 0.048% of Officers who died in service. Covid19 and heart attacks accounted for seven in ten of all deaths in service. Here's the Roll of Honour:

Total Line of Duty Deaths 2021: 479
Source: Law Enforcement Line of Duty Deaths in 2021 (odmp.org)

Sadly, the trend of fatal shootings BY Police Officers in the United States seems to only be increasing, with a total 830 civilians having been shot, 241 of whom were Black, as of November 2021. In 2020, there were 1,021 fatal police shootings, and in 2019 there were 999 fatal shootings. Additionally, the rate of fatal police shootings among Black Americans was much higher than that for any other ethnicity, standing at 37 fatal shootings per million of the population as of November 2021.

Source: People shot to death by U.S. police, by race 2021 | Statista

About 1,000 people a year are killed by police officers in the US, according to an independent project that tracks police violence. Most are shot dead. The majority of the world's police forces carry firearms, but no developed nation uses them against their citizens as often as officers in the US - and disproportionately against African-Americans, compared with the percentage of the population they represent.

Part of this is to do with gun culture - the US is home to around half of the world's civilian-held firearms. In 2020, fewer than 10% of people killed by police were recorded as unarmed.

Rashawn Ray, professor of sociology at the University of Maryland, says: "In most states people can carry guns either on their body or in their vehicles, so that escalates things for police - they instantly perceive that anyone can be a threat." (Why would they not do?).

So it's rather more complicated than to simplistically claim that the police are 'trigger-happy'.

There are around 18,000 police agencies in the US, but with no national standards on training, procedures and timescales vary across the country. On average, US officers spend around 21 weeks training before they are qualified to go on patrol. That is far less than in most other developed countries, according to a report by the Institute for Criminal Justice Training Reform (ICJTR).

The report looked at police training requirements in more than 100 countries and found that the US had among the lowest, in terms of average hours required. Also, many other countries require officers to have a university degree - or equivalent - before joining the police, but in the US most forces just require the equivalent of a high-school diploma.

In England and Wales, it has recently become mandatory for officers to have a University degree.

US police academies spend far more time on firearms training than on de-escalating a situation - 71 hours against 21, on average. Yes, just three working days of tuition on de-escalation - less than a third of the time spent in firearms training, then off out on patrol with a car, a badge and a gun, to put their own lives and everyone else's on the line. Heck, guys who mend washing machines get more training than that.

Maria Haberfeld, professor of police science at the John Jay College of Criminal Justice, says: "Some police forces in Europe have police university, where training lasts for three years - for me the standouts are Norway and Finland." Finland has one the highest gun-ownership rates in Europe, with around 32 civilian firearms per 100 people - but incidents of police shooting civilians are extremely rare.

I'm not taking sides, not denigrating the US, which I've only visited as a tourist for two weeks 28 years ago, and I'm not proffering solutions - just making observations. I don't think anything will change any time soon.

David.
 
Last edited:
the actual scenario of civilians rising up against government in the US will essentially consist of hill billies with AR15's being attacked by Black Hawk's and F-117 Stealth attack fighters.
Hillbillies holed up in the old homestead,barricaded in and firing from the windows, isn't really going to be much of a match against a battletank.
 
Government rising up against government is the problem - not hillbillies defending the homestead.

Had Trump allegedly encouraged a few thousand hillbillies equipped with AR15s or similar (rather than slogans and unkempt hair), the Capitol may have fallen. Democrat politicians killed etc.

Target cruise missiles on the Capitol - probably not. And what side would the military have taken - Trump or Biden?

Trump would of course deny he had any role in a sincere display of public anger at a corrupt election (his views not mine).
 
I think that fun fact requires further investigation.
Since it's now illegal for a FFl to export even inert lead projectiles without an end user certificate.

But if you are suggesting that the FFLs sold the guns legally and the purchaser took them to Mexico illegally, that's a whole different ballgame.

Bit like blaming the sports shop if someone got beat over the head with a cricket bat.

The figure came from an article in the LA Times, I’m not aware of how rigorous their editorial scrutiny is, hence the use of “suggest”…

Of course I wasn’t suggesting that gun dealers are directly supplying Mexico en masse, but it’s not beyond the realm of possibility that one or two people might be taking advantage of the fact that you can buy a gun in the US more easily than you can buy a car numberplate in the UK.….or a f******** lollipop for that matter, and then shipping them in to Mexico….

The irony may be lost on some people.
 
That may well be true. However, according to my brief Google, they have the highest gun death rate.
I'm not entirely sure what this means. Maybe petty crimes against property are lower because the perps are scared of being shot?

it makes petty criminals move their tent to states, where it is not legal to kill for taking tv.
 
It's been reported that US states with the least gun controls have the least crime.

I would like to see some evidence of that…..
It’s also a well known fact that Mexico has very stringent gun control in terms of legally held weapons.
I would also be interested in the figures for the US regarding crimes involving weapons which are legally registered, regardless of whether they were stolen before being used for the crime.
I believe, but do not have evidence to hand to prove it, that very few legally held guns are used criminally in the UK, mainly because of the strict security that comes with FAC entitlements
 
The figure came from an article in the LA Times, I’m not aware of how rigorous their editorial scrutiny is, hence the use of “suggest”…

Of course I wasn’t suggesting that gun dealers are directly supplying Mexico en masse, but it’s not beyond the realm of possibility that one or two people might be taking advantage of the fact that you can buy a gun in the US more easily than you can buy a car numberplate in the UK.….or a f******** lollipop for that matter, and then shipping them in to Mexico….

The irony may be lost on some people.
Well, it’s a common knowledge to some, that selling arms to Mexican cartel it’s a common practise by Democrats officials, for steady supply of heroine transported to Mexico from Afghanistan. All made under diplomatic cover.

these shouted loudest not to build wall to stop uncontrollable smuggling operations, including human trafficking and ammo. There are a common ways to undermine criminal organisations - it’s called profitability of enterprise.
 
There are a few, what I would regard as, "intuitive truths" for the UK:
  • the more guns, the more likely they will be used in self defence or the execution of crime.
  • more guns may reduce the incidence of other violence - eg: knife crime.
  • the police should have access to firearms to be deployed where required.
  • general police firearms issue risks greater mis-use vs those intensively trained.
  • whatever the laws, some will ignore them, mostly in support of criminal intent.
  • relaxing gun laws risks a police vs criminal "arms race".
  • guns and ammunition can be smuggled - it would be naïve to think otherwise.
  • they will be sold illegally to those who want them
  • maximising penalties for firearms offences deters, but does not eliminate, gun crime
Comparing countries (UK, US, Mexico, Switzerland, etc) to understand which model of gun control is best or worst is pointless - it is a product of history, culture, legal systems, economic stresses etc.

Question: do the rules we have work for the UK? IMHO mostly. There are no major changes that would materially improve the situation, and many that would probably make it materially worse.

I agree, as far as the UK goes, I think we have the balance about right.

As for comparing countries, I brought that up precisely to make the point that each one is different, but I maintain that the situation in the US has a direct impact on that in Mexico, something that I believe is sanctioned at a fairly high level….
 
My my, who's being naive now. Alcohol is very damaging to society, and marajuana has an addictive quality about it, and as for tobacco ?, tobacco is both addictive and damaging to the body..

It's clear you dont understand it. Of course alcohol and marijuana are both addictive and harmful for society however, in the case with both by and large people can control their intake and majority never become addicted. For hard drugs like heroine it's a different scenario.

I agree tobacco is both harmful and addictive but you can't put it in the same conversation as heroin, that's naive
 
"They knew their beat and the people, they would be in a position to curb criminal activity before it got big time"
The Krays et-al? It didn't seem to work for them. Awful people have been around for ever, be they gangland criminals, child-abusers, (now more openly discussed thankfully), burglars, etc. etc.
 
Several years ago, I recall reading what I believe to be credible figures that said following the UK ban on handgun ownership and confiscation of all such registered sporting arms, the number of guns in (predominantly) illegal owner ship was now three times greater than before the registered guns were removed.
Gun control in the UK has a history of politicians acting so that they can be seen to be doing something. It doesn't solve anything. It's purely gesture politics.

Is it gesture politics?

every country with strict gun controls has low gun violence.
 
Back
Top