>I'm American

>I think guns prevent crime

>>443312
>Firearms ban

You mean firearms regulation.

>>443312
You do realise that if this was America the criminal would have shot the shopkeeper?

The only reason things went without injury is because there WEREN'T any guns.

>I'm American

>I think bussinessman cares for me and the government doesn't.

>>443312
>mfw in the US it would be perfectly acceptable if the shopkeeper used a gun to defend himself
>mfw britfags have to use knives and brooms to defend themselves

>>443328
>You do realise that if this was America the criminal would have shot the shopkeeper?

Criminals are always able to get guns, despite the regulations or bans.

>>443336
>Criminals are always able to get guns

You do realise you're commenting on an event where the criminal had no gun, right?

>>443312
>>443336

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_firearm-related_death_rate

Pretty good. So in the U.K. no one died here where if this was the U.S. their might have been 2 deaths? I don't understand how this is a good thing.

>>443319

If Firearms don't serve a purpose why our military and police need them?

If violence doesn't solve anything, why does my government use violence to solve everything?

If an armed man came to your house and demanded all your items for personal defense, would you consent to that?

Why should a police officer be allowed to defend his own life with the most effective self defense tools available, but the people he polices should not?

Anders set the record in a gun free zone.

>>443329

False logic.

A businessman has MORE REASON to care because his livelihood is directly at stake if he doesn't care enough to do a good job. A person doesn't have to actually care about another person in order to have a reason to do a good job for them.

BTW I'm not American.

>>443312

>How's that firearms ban going for ya UK?
Quite well actually. Have some tea and crumpets. learn some manners.

I don't understand. Why hasn't the shopkeeper been arrested for assault, as per normal UK "standards"?

>>443363
A bussinessman sole purpose is to make profit for himself.
Thinking that benefits society is retarded.

>>443367

Indeed.Why so celery americans?

>>443361
Most police in the UK aren't armed. Most riot cops have truncheons and tasers. Some very few police have the qualifications for using firearms. Seems to work pretty well.

>>443375

Thinking that you can profit without providing what people want is more retarded.

>>443328
>>The only reason things went without injury is because there WEREN'T any guns.

I'm confused. Why would we want this to end without injury? An attack on another person's life and/or property instantly renders you a subhuman to be dispatched in whatever way is most convenient at the moment.

And these are awfully damn convenient.

>USA
>Living like in a Wild Wild West
>thinking having arms making them safer then other countries

Its like telling someone from peaceful land how you are safer from him since you have a tank, while being in the middle of the warzone.

>>443382
>>seems to work pretty well

You must live in a county that's still actually white.

>>443382
>seems to work pretty well

HAHA OH WOW

UK - the only country where even the police can't defend themselves against criminals.

>http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2011/nov/19/police-officers-stabbed-london-disturbance

I sure do enjoy not being shot by rednecks.

>>443374
Because the judiciary in the UK is more sensible than people try to paint it? The few times when people have been brought to court for self defence related things, the force has been deemed disproportionate, like scaring a burglar off then chasing him down the street and beating the shit out of him. Even then they aren't always convicted...

>>443393
What major corporations profit is far more than what they provide. And it will always be more, with different magnitudes according how is it regulated.

>>443402
>Four police officers have been injured, including three thought to have suffered stab wounds, after being attacked by a man in a disturbance in London.
>one man
>4 injured officers
>all alive and well
>meanwhile in the US, the police would shoot the criminal, ending his life

No thanks Yankee.

>>443402

As much as the Americans are all elephants this guy has a point.

If someone broke into a British home, you can't legally defend yourself.

However at the same time, Americans think the average Englishman follows the law.

>>443411

You seriously believe it's acceptable for four police officers to get stabbed just to issue an arrest as long as they 'survive' being stabbed?

You europoors are twisted motherfuckers.

>>443411
>meanwhile in the US, the police would shoot the criminal, ending his life
>>No thanks Yankee.
And this is the difference between UK and USA. Americans like me think that would be a good thing.

I might be a poorfag when it comes to guns, but I'm so glad I'm an amerifat <3

When shit hits the fan, europoors gon' die

>>443352
>>So in the U.K. no one died here where if this was the U.S. their might have been 2 deaths?

Problem 1) The chances of there having been TWO deaths is pretty damn low. Not *impossible*, but generally speaking, mutually-assured-destruction-via-gun only happens on bad TV shows. Either the shopkeeper or the criminal would have won.

2) If they were both at each others' throats with sharp knives, death is just as much a possibility.

>>I don't understand how this is a good thing.

Human life is not inherently sacred. And it's almost inherently worthless the moment you become a violent criminal. Seeing the perpetrator lying dead on the floor of the shop in a pool of his own blood would make me feel nothing but happiness that he could never attack another innocent person.

>>443411
>all alive and well
>well

>The first had stomach wounds, the second had head injuries and a slash to the arm, the third had stab wounds to a leg and the fourth had slash wounds on a hand as well as a broken hand. Police forensic experts continued to inspect the crime scene.

>>443424
>>443427

We don't like the Law in the UK

>>443417

If the average Euro ignores the law, it implies that the law does not represent the average Euro.

In the US, we have more prisoners than any other nation on earth, this also suggests our laws don't represent us.

We're all fucked.

>>443442

>If the average Euro ignores the law, it implies that the law does not represent the average Euro.

EUREKA!

>>443442
>In the US, we have more prisoners than any other nation on earth
>not taking into account the overall population of the US

>>443417

This is a Daily Fail myth. Yes you can. If you kill someone in self defense you almost always don't get charged. You get arrested but that's only right so that the incident can be investigated properly. Someone's died in your house and the police only have your word that they were an intruder.

>>443411
>>Four police officers have been injured, including three thought to have suffered stab wounds, after being attacked by a man in a disturbance in London.
>one man
>4 injured officers
>all alive and well
>meanwhile in the US, the police would shoot the criminal, ending his life
>No thanks Yankee.

You have to be trolling. PLEASE tell me you're trolling. British thought processes cannot possibly be this far warped from reality, can they?

>>443447
Protip: try looking up the statistic per head of population.

>>443352
Did you know that UK has more car related deaths than Ethiopia? Why are Europeans so batshit retarded when it comes to statistics? Do you know of the suicides or the deaths of violent criminals? Meanwhile, crime is up in England.

>>443454
I have had Euros tell me it is wrong to kill a robber stealing your things. No joke

>>443442
>>If the average Euro ignores the law, it implies that the law does not represent the average Euro.

Uh...kind of a stretch, but at least in the realm of possibility. But...

>In the US, we have more prisoners than any other nation on earth, this also suggests our laws don't represent us.

...this is just batshit. Occam's Razor says it suggests we have a lot of criminals removed from the streets.

>>443442
>If the average Euro ignores the law, it implies that the law does not represent the average Euro.

If you don't like the EU law so much why the fuck are you even accepting it then?

Sounds like bullshit to me.

also
>average Euro

how the fuck do you knwo?

>>443437

>revolver with an awl taped to it
Bwahahahahahahahahaha!
Nigga, you serious?

>>443461

Huh huh...head ...

>>443437
>revolver with a bayonet
nice

>>443447
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_incarceration_rate

enjoy ur prison state

>>443472

>If you don't like the EU law so much why the fuck are you even accepting it then?

I want you to think about the answer yourself.

It's a very simple answer and it will take you to the next level of understanding of Europe.

If you don't know fine, I will give you the answer.

But please try and get it yourself.

>>443482
that has nothing to do with self-defense, faggot.

nice strawman tho. emjoy taking it up the ass from a nigger coming to your house

>>443466
>>I have had Euros tell me it is wrong to kill a robber stealing your things. No joke

Goddamn. It's amazing what state-controlled education can accomplish when it comes to brainwashing.

>>443397

Pic related. It's a typical American small-town war zone.

>>443475
I had to make a /k/ humor pic somehow.

>>443466
>I have had Euros tell me it is wrong to kill a robber stealing your things. No joke

this is because we think that the punishment should fit the crime

stealing someones ps3 should not equal the death penalty

>>443403

It's generally not the rednecks you have to worry about. Most are actually pretty cool guys. A little huntin', a little fishin', a little bullshitting over beers, some muddin' in a big truck or ATV, hooking up hot redneck chick who isn't afraid to get dirty... Good times, good times.

>>443490
>hands cut off in middle eastern countries for stealing
BARBARIC
>death penalty without trial for anyone suspected to be stealing by a shopkeeper
FREEDUM

Oh you Americans. always talking about Liberty but somehow you think you have the right to kill other people.

>>443502
>meanwhile in the UK
>http://www.prweek.com/uk/news/910843/Home-Office-calls-Kindred-knife-crime-effort

>>443519
Right to self-defense =/= right to kill people at random

notsureiftrollingorjustretarded.jpg

>>443521
...that's a campaign to cut down on the amount of people carrying and using knives...
So what?

>>443511
>>stealing someones ps3 should not equal the death penalty

You break into my home, I have every right to presume you intend to attempt physical violence on me and respond accordingly.

Castle Doctrine FTW.

>>443519

> rights exist and none of them include self-defense

Confirmed for primitivist neckbeard.

>>443511
The point isn't the item the thief is taking, it is that the man is in your home taking your property. That robber could be there for anything, I have no idea if he will try to kill me to cover up his crime or what, It is better to put two in his thieving chest than it is to risk him killing me. In addition killing him shows I have resolve, which will deter future criminals.

>>443516
>>hands cut off in middle eastern countries for stealing
>BARBARIC

>implying we'd have a problem with that

>>443521

Obligatory

Why are all you faggots so afraid of pain?

I miss when I thought America was the Wild West.

>>443511

I can't afford another PS3. You take mine, I won't get another one until the PS4 is out.

You try to ruin my life for your own gain? Why shouldn't I take yours?

>>443567
you can't be serious

>>443312
I'd rather take on someone who came into my house in the knowledge it's unlikely either of us have a gun than the other way round. Armed robberies (with firearms) are very rare in the U.K.

>>443576
Some jobsworth at M&S errs on the safe side to avoid prosecution under a new law without court precedent. Yeah, that's the wrong call. Selling that to an under 18 wouldn't be illegal. It's someone looking to protect their company from prosecution under a new and untested law, and being a bit paranoid about it.

>>443576

It's real. The UK is fucked.

I don't think anyone here has killed someone. It's only teenagers or idiot who believe it would be better to kill someone than loose some of your stuff.

>>443574
>have no PS3
>my life is ruined
>americans

>>443589
>>I'd rather take on someone who came into my house in the knowledge it's unlikely either of us have a gun than the other way round.

>I'd rather engage in hand-to-hand combat with a hardened criminal in my own home

>>443574

>>443611

Yeah. It's unlikely they'd kill me even if I lost. Guns would just up the stakes.

>>443611
>I'd rather engage in a gun fight with a hardened criminal than a brawl
wat

>>443589

Man, you have serious-ass hoplophobia problems.

See this? It's a tool. It's an object. It's no more inherently dangerous than a lint roller ... unless *you* decide to treat it like its a live cobra.

Pick up, aim, pull trigger, put down. Problem solved.

>>443627

>>443452
>If you kill someone in self defense you almost always don't get charged. You get arrested but that's only right so that the incident can be investigated properly.
>don't get charged. You get arrested

So let me get this straight. In Britain the cops can arrest you without any charges? They can lock you up in jail without charging you with any crime? And you are actually proud of this?

In America the investigation comes before the arrest, not after. That's because Americans are innocent until proven guilty. In Britain it sounds like the complete opposite. You British subjects are guilty until proven innocent. I wouldn't be bragging about anything if I was you.

>>443630
Columbine with lint rollers. That's something I'd like to see!

>>443646
>gives one example of firearms going in the wrong hands
>meanwhile, the UK has the highest knife crime rate in Europe

stay classy faggot

>>443312
>>443553
You look soo cool and edgy
>http://finance.moneyandmarkets.com/reports/SMR/4597/vsp-smr2-1-w.php?s=NMAX&e=4582115
just imagine riots like those in London but now in american soil ... now give weapons to almost every rioter.
looks like a show to me, good luck for you americans I will be here in my third world shithole eating popcorn and watching the whole show you guys will give to the world...

>>443627

Our violent leftists are too scared of guns to use them.

>>443447

We have the most prisoners in the world by:

1. SHEER NUMBER (yes we have more than China)
2. RATIO (obvious, since we have more than China in sheer number, and yet our population is a fraction of theirs).

You seriously believed this was the land of the free?

Try "the most imprisoned population on planet earth."

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

I assume this is what you mean by "take the US population into account"

> The United States has the highest documented incarceration rate in the world. At year-end 2009 it was 743 adults incarcerated per 100,000 population.[2][3][4][5][6]

First thing addressed in the wiki article, lol.

We have the highest SHEER NUMBER of prisoners AND the highest ratio of prisoners to free people in our country and the world.

5% of the world population. 25% of the world prison population.

66% of prisoners go back to prison within 3 years of being released.

It's hilarious to see the eunuch Britfags who think it's better to be at the mercy of criminals than to harm a (worthless) human being. You people are fucked, your culture is fucked. Not saying we're perfect, but that's just idiocy.

>>443664
>due process

>>443641

>Police walk into a house they've been called to
>you're standing over a dead body
>They say we pretty much believe you but we have to arrest you (which doesn't always mean you have to go to a jail it's more of a legal status)
>If they do hold you they can do so for a maximum of 48 hours at which point they either have to charge you or let you go
>it's only in serious crimes like murder (which you might have committed in this instance) that this occurs.


Oh yeah and it's pretty much the same process in the U.S.

>>443627
>>You look soo cool an edgy

>Express opinion held by vast majority of average Americans.
>be accused of being a poseur by a fey European
>mfw

>just imagine riots like those in London in american soil ... now give weapons to almost every rioter.

Well, you've certainly confirmed you don't know shit about America.

1) Read up on the LA riots from 1991 or 92, whenever it was. Total days-long chimpout, really nasty. Who was the only group in the area that suffered practically no property damage at all?Korean shopkeepers, because they were armed to the teeth and had no problems guarding their property 24/7 with massive displays of their weaponry. Rioters are inherently pussies.

2) Any violent rioters stupid enough to try to take their little party outside of their own liberal utopia "gun free zone" would be shot on sight by local residents, who would probably outnumber them 3 to 1 and unquestionably outarm them by at least 10 to 1.

This is precisely why riots simply don't happen outside of Democrat-controlled inner cities.

>>443677
>>Oh yeah and it's pretty much the same process in the U.S.

No, it is not.

>>443656
>>443656

You've got it spot on, man.

>>443664
>>443664
>>443312
protip:the true reason for weapon ban is for avoid the imminent civil war to became trully bloody like the one will happen in USA

>>443677
Not quite. If the situation looks suspicious (you're standing over your dead wife insisting she broke in) this could happen, but as I understand the law typically the police here only arrest you if they have reason to believe it was murder, not to hold you while they collect evidence to prove it.

>>443663

China just executes everyone that embarrasses the glorious state. Hence the lack of a prison population. As for Europe, revolving door jails.

>>443686
>Korean shopkeepers, because they were armed to the teeth and had no problems guarding their property 24/7

I'M A KOREAN
SON OF A BITCH RIOTER
RIOTER IS PIG
DO YOU WANT A CASH REGISTER?
DO YOU WANT A TV?
RIOTER IS PIG DISGUSTING
L.A.P.D. IS A MURDERER
FUCKING CALIFORNIA

>>443686
keep saying it to yourself maybe it will someway became reality, I am talking about the day almost evey american people will became a potential rioter including you with your lolweapuns

>>443735

>>443743

You ever notice that people who want everyone disarmed, are often the same people who wonder why the police don't do anything but sit and watch in enjoyment as riots happen?

>>443677
>Oh yeah and it's pretty much the same process in the U.S.

Absolutely wrong. There is no fucking way a cop can arrest you without charging you with a crime. The only thing a cop can do is detain you at the scene and only if you consent to being detained.

"Remember that detentions are voluntary unless you verbally ask to leave. Any time police detain you, it's a good idea to ask if you're free to go. If the officer says you may leave, it's up to you to leave the scene of the encounter. If you choose to stay, the detention is automatically legal."
http://flexyourrights.org/faq/how_long_detained_without_arrest

I'm an American.

I don't like guns, but I can see the place in society for some of them. Hunting is a cultural touchstone for a lot of communities, and while I don't enjoy it myself, I don't think we need to confiscate all those weapons, which really don't pose a practical threat to the community anyhow. A standard handgun (nothing fancy) has its place in the homes of the properly trained and registered, and can be useful in terms of self-defense, even if they open a can of worms on the criminal side. I can't say I approve of assault rifles in anyone's hands.

I don't think it's right to kill people, even if they have invaded your house. Killing someone because they might potentially do you harm seems like punishment before the crime, and ought to be avoided as a general rule.

>>443834
I would happily break bread with you.

As a UKfag we also have hunting with guns and whatnot, but it's a bit different and involves toffs and horses. Gun ownership here is legal, just regulated.

>>443851
Exactly. There's a pleasant middle ground where the good and sensible facets of firearm ownership and use are preserved without indulging in the worst, most vicious tendencies.

>>443743
>I am talking about the day almost evey american people will became a potential rioter including you with your lolweapuns

If every American is rioting in the streets, that means that the government has failed. As Americans it is not only our right, but our duty, to abolish the old government and institute a new one. That is what separates an American citizen from a British subject.

"That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government,"
Declaration of Independence.

>>443834
>I can't say I approve of assault rifles in anyone's hands.

Define "assault rifle."

>>443998
RATATATATATATATATATATATATATA

>>443834
>>443834
>assault rifles in the hands of the people
But in the hands of paramilitary police goons, its just fine right?

Pick up that can, citizen.

>>444007

That's a sound effect, not a definition.

>>443998
Well, that's a tricky prospect, because a lot of firearms straddle different categories (almost as though manufacturers were intentionally trying to skirt regulations, sometimes), and because, as I said, I'm no huge fan of guns and therefore haven't immersed myself in the minutiae. I generally defer to more knowledgeable opinions.

However, Wikipedia lists some basic criteria for Assault Weapons (which would probably have been a better choice of words in the original post which you cite).

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Assault_rifle

That isn't a perfect definition to me, but it gets at the spirit of the matter as far as I'm concerned.

So far in my life, I've generally used a common sense definition of "Any gun that seems to be unnecessarily powerful with regards to reasonable civilian use." I know that's broad and not legally sound, but I'm not trying to legislate it here on 4chan, so I think it's alright as is.

>>444007
i lol'd

>>444042
I don't know what to tell you, except that the police are by and large decent folks, as prone to error as any of us, but genuinely interested in serving their community. I don't expect perfection, and I haven't received it from them.

However, if those guns have to be in the equation, I'd like to at least minimize their presence.

>>444112
>So far in my life, I've generally used a common sense definition of "Any gun that seems to be unnecessarily powerful with regards to reasonable civilian use."

That is the second worst definition I have ever seen. "Common sense" my ass. That is only beaten by the Brady Campaign's definition.

Assault weapon - Any weapon that makes the bitch Sarah Brady piss her pantsuit.

>>444042
Why do they have to be in the hands of the police?

>>444112

And what of the meaning and intent behind the Second Amendment?

>>444230
Well, I was hoping that when you (inevitably) called my definition dumb, you'd be able to provide some kind of basis for that judgement. I have some time, and I'd be happy to hear your side of the argument, if you'd be willing to articulate it clearly, and with respect for my side of things.

>>444247
I really don't put much store in it, personally. I think it's inclusion was wise at the time, but it doesn't strike me as more than symbolically relevant nowadays, for a lot of reasons we really don't need to get into here.

Certainly, I don't think it needs to be slavishly followed, else we end up defeating the purpose of having a nation of our own in the first place.

Please keep in mind here, guys, I'm not trying to take away all your guns. The above is just a personal take on a complex issue.

>>444264

Historyfag here.

"Dat weapon is too POWERFUL" isn't a valid argument against civilian ownership under the Constitution. Really, it's not. In the time of the founders, private individuals could and did own field artillery and small warships. Both more powerful than any "assault rifle" TODAY.

During the U.S. Civil War people didn't just show up for duty with rifles. They showed up with their family howitzer or gatling gun (earliest "machine gun"). In the South, private citizens privately comissioned and crewed early (and crude) attack submarines in attacks against union blockades.

And you think, "I don't like that rifle, it looks funny and shoots too much" is a valid excuse to ban private ownership of it? Bitch, please.

>>443437
>when shit hits the fan
>hits the fan

You keep on waiting for that day fellow. My granddaddy, daddy, uncles, and mah'self have been waiting for that day too, guns loaded for decades

>>444358

Yup. And to prove just how made-up-on-the-fly Democrat "assault weapons bans" are, THIS is still legal to own, simply because no liberal politician has ever seen one in action.

>>444393
Are those dragon dildos glued to the sides?

>>444393

A shame those are so expensive. Many of them cost more than a house.

>>444399

Actually this appears to be some sort of bizarre wooden replica of a Gatling gun ... Someone's idea of "art" perhaps? I just thought it looked cooler than the other photos.

>>444358
You know what? I don't care what kind of gun a private citizen could and did purchase for shits and giggles in 1803. That wouldn't make those purchases right, or smart, or good for the community, especially when you change the context to a modern day urban landscape.

I don't care, I really could not give fewer fucks, whether or not Ye Olde Tymes were filled fit to burst with bad ideas and lousy practices. They've been wrong about other things, and we don't have to keep making their mistakes.

Please, for the love of god, don't talk to me like some gibbering child. I'm here, willing to have a civil discussion on a touchy subject. Don't throw words in my mouth, and don't try to simplify my arguments for the sake of your own ego.

>>444420

Oh god, here we go, a half-step from reactionary "living Constitution" nonsense.

>>444444
As opposed to a dead one?

(By the way, nice get)

>>444444

>dem dub dub dubs

The great thing about gatling and other crank operated weapons...the federal government considers them all semi-automatic weapons and regulates them exactly the same as any other semi-automatic rifle. Namely...they don't.

UKFag and gun owner.

My position is that if you invade my property I will shoot to kill. Better judged by twelve then carried by six.

>>444264

Assault rifles are automatic. Pulling the trigger fires multiple bullets. That is the definition.

Unfortunately anti-gun activists like Sarah Brady call any weapon used by criminals to assault people, "assault weapons". This is completely wrong.

That is why I hate the term "assault weapon". "Assault" is a politically loaded word. I don't define machines by the crime criminals commit with them. I define machines by their operation.

Automatic - Pulling the trigger fires multiple bullets.

Semi-automatic - Pulling the trigger fires one bullet.

Manual - Pulling the trigger fires one bullet, after which you have to manually load the next bullet.

Calling any weapon and "assault weapon" is like calling a penis a "rape organ" or a computer a "child porn viewer". It is political correctness anti-gun activists use to demonize guns. When hippies rage against "assault weapons", I tell them I only have self defense weapons.

>>444448

Holy fuck, I didn't even notice I got that.

>444444 MUTHAFUCKUHS DO YOU SPEAK IT

>>444444

>oh boy here we go

>>444486

That is why I also hate Sarah Brady as a human being.

Leave it to a woman to manage to turn one of RONALD REAGAN'S most trusted friends into one of the most hated people in conservatism.

>>444444
>>444500

Lol

>>444527

Sarah Brady is a cunt.

>>444539

Fucking Brady.