Time to Take Action
Our Klamath Basin Water Crisis
Upholding rural Americans' rights to grow food,
own property, and caretake our wildlife and natural resources.

Scotland on Sunday Sun 18 Feb 2007

Crackdown fails to halt gun deaths

The latest murders saw a man killed in east...
The latest murders saw a man killed in east London with another three shot and wounded in two incidents in Manchester. Picture: PA

A FRESH wave of gun crime swept England yesterday as armed police took to the streets to clamp down on firearm-related killings.

The latest murders saw a man killed in east London with another three shot and wounded in two incidents in Manchester.

Yesterday's shootings follow a spate of killings in London, which have claimed the lives of three teenagers in a fortnight.

London's latest incident saw a man in his twenties killed in Hackney. Witnesses said three gunmen shot the man in his car shortly before 5.30am before blasting him again as he staggered down the road.

The gunmen were seen walking "confidently" away from their dying victim. He was pronounced dead on arrival at hospital. Witness Gabriel Ajayi, who saw the shooting unfold, said the victim was shot at close range.

Ajayi, 50, whose flat overlooks the scene, was woken by gunshots. He said: "I looked out my window and saw a man lying on the ground on the road and I saw three guys running away. All of a sudden, they came back and shot him twice again at close range. It was a cold-blooded murder."

Officers from the Metropolitan Police's Operation Trident unit, which deals with shootings among the black community, are investigating the incident.

In Manchester, meanwhile, three men are recovering in hospital after being shot in two attacks in the city. In the first incident, late on Friday night, an 18-year-old man was shot in the back in the Moss Side district, close to where Jessie James, 15, was murdered last September in an attack that traumatised the area.

Hours after the Moss Side shooting, two men, aged 19 and 27, were wounded when gunmen shot at the car they were in at a set of traffic lights in the Longsight district. Police have said the shootings were not thought to be linked.

Chief Superintendent Dave Keller, of Greater Manchester Police, said: "We have increased patrols in the area and we do now have some armed officers on patrol." But he added that overall levels of gun crime in the city had been falling, although there has been a rise in recent months.

"Clearly there are tensions in the area," he said. "This problem is only caused by a small number of individuals. We are actively targeting those individuals."

Related topic

  • Gun crime

This article: http://news.scotsman.com/index.cfm?id=262672007

Last updated: 18-Feb-07 00:05 GMT

Comments Add your comment

1. www.scottwebb.co.uk / 12:27am 18 Feb 2007
The problem lies firmly with the Cr@p we have for TV and the music and film industry who should be held accountable for their influence of young minds.....a few law suits should help amend things

Report as unsuitable

2. www.scottwebb.co.uk / 12:46am 18 Feb 2007
G Edward Griffin's Filmstrip from cira 1969 called Seduction of a generation.....warmed of this coming and the forces behind it http://video.google.co.uk/videoplay?docid=-53001424757232...

Report as unsuitable

3. www.scottwebb.co.uk / 1:19am 18 Feb 2007
Once you have watched the above, you will realise the real objectives of whats been happening over the last few years is to create such a problem that the only solution that is offered.......is a police state.
Switch the TV off and go educate yourselves, before it is too late :)

Report as unsuitable

4. George F, Michigan USA (Edinburgh Born & Bred) / 4:31am 18 Feb 2007
This just shows that even if you do ban handguns/pistols as they have in the UK it won't affect gun crime. The criminals will still get and use them despite any ban. Here in Michigan we have the shall issue law for civilians to carry concealed weapons. Shall issue means as long as you are a law abiding person the State/Counties will issue a permit. Since the law came in back in 2001 armed robberies (armed robbery doesn't just cover guns)against citizens has dropped big time because now they know the people may be carrying and will fight back. I know that the gun mentality thing here in the US is way different from the UK but despite a few sad cases of nutters going nuts in shooting malls etc the majority of gun holders in the US are law abiding people.

Report as unsuitable

5. George F, Michigan USA (Edinburgh Born & Bred) / 4:33am 18 Feb 2007
ooops that should read shopping malls and not shooting malls

Report as unsuitable

6. Guga, Rockall / 4:59am 18 Feb 2007
#4 George. I totally agree with you. People should have the right to defend themselves. The police seem to be incapable of doing the job, despite the fact that most of the killers are from a specific ethnic group and members of gangs called "Yardies".

Nor can you trust the police. Just think of the number of unarmed, innocent civilians that have been gunned down by the police; not that they are ever punished for it.

However, it is very unlikely that the government here would ever allow members of the public to carry guns. This goes back to the historical attitude of governments in this country whereby they are too scared that the people might rise up against them. Remember this is the same country where the Whig government sent (English) troops and tanks in against unarmed people in Scotland.

Report as unsuitable
7. Sinnerman, Another Planet / 5:30am 18 Feb 2007
George F

Unfortunately the recent spate of shootings in England have been largely confined to young blacks who look across the Pond for their role-models to black American gang culture. Many who have been arrested have stated in their defence the they carry a gun to gain "respect". we don't need a police state to control the problem, just allow the police to do their job without the fear of being accused of racism.

Report as unsuitable
8. George F, Michigan USA (Edinburgh Born & Bred) / 6:20am 18 Feb 2007
#7Sinnerman, yep, there lays the problem mate, if the Police shoot an armed person committing a crime and they just happen to be non white the Police are accused of racism and all the ethnic groups are on the case, it happens here as well mate. Last year we had a Black youth hold a gun to a Policewomans head and when he was shot and wounded out came the racist accusations and the ethnic groups. I'm not saying racism doesn't happen mate, unfortunately it does and that has to be stamped on big time. The Police here are actually in favour of the conceal carry laws because if a white person should shoot and kill a non white who is say, trying to mug them the ethnics groups seem to have nothing to say. The CCW law has just recently been changed here as well, before if a person was being robbed and they shot the mugger the family of the mugger could sue the victim. That law in Michigan has now been struck down, a person only need be in fear of their life if the mugger has a weapon, (gun, knife, baseball bat, anything that could kill you) to shoot a mugger. Also if someone kicks down my front door or breaks into my home, I can legally shoot them if they move at me or if I feel threatened. Here in Michigan gun crimes draw very long prison sentences and like their cousins in the UK the gangs carry guns for the respect thing, sorry that doesn't wash here, get caught committing a gun crime you go down for a long time in this State. Even having a unregistered gun will draw a hefty prison sentence and that's the way it should be as well.

#6 Guga We have a fair few blinkered politicians and groups here who want to take away the guns from the people mistakingly thinking it will help fight gun crime. As someone once said (don't know who) "politicians prefer unarmed peasants". Taking away the guns will not work, infact over here I think if they try taking away the guns there would another revolution.

Report as unsuitable
9. eric / 8:45am 18 Feb 2007
Black on Black ,But when police go in to do something about it ,They are accused as rascists,

Report as unsuitable

10. Comment Removed
This comment has been removed by a moderator.
11. Dadd's little Girl, Sunny & warm Island in the med / 9:37am 18 Feb 2007
6. Guga, Rockall

Keep your chin up Guga, we can't see yer uter feller

Report as unsuitable
12. McTaggert-Skye / 9:57am 18 Feb 2007
Must be another good reason for independence. Could not happen, thank God!

Report as unsuitable

13. McTaggert-Skye / 9:57am 18 Feb 2007
Must be another good reason for independence. Could not happen here thank God!

Report as unsuitable

14. Scott 1 / 10:03am 18 Feb 2007
While responsible law abiding citizens being allowed to carry guns for defence seems goood. The real problem would be the increased availability to criminals in obtaining them by stealing them. Or when could a law abiding citizen become a criminal? If they accidentally shoot the wrong person? Look at the times that highly trained police officers/soldiers get it wrong in the heat of the moment. One can only imagine how many times it would go wrong with you and me,who "fearing" for our life could pull the trigger. How many times would we read of a teenager getting hold of their parents gun and commiting murder?
Armed police on the street is a bit like closing the door after the horse has bolted. One solution would be a minumum tariff of 30 years for carrying a gun;commiting a crime with a gun and gun running/supply =life (natural regardless of age). Would this then lead to an increase in the already high level of knife crime? Again stiffer sentencing would reduce the willingness of people to carry them. There are of course everyday items that can be used as weapons should the desire be there. The proof of intent should be enough for harsh sentencing. Build more jails to accomodate violent offenders. This will not stop people who are really determined to carrying out crime from doing so but it will reduce the number of them floating around in public and therfore reduce crime in real terms.

Report as unsuitable

15. George F, Michigan USA (Edinburgh Born & Bred) / 10:06am 18 Feb 2007
#10 it has always been allan, you have some very valid points there mate, part of your comment was
"For ordinary citizens to carry pistols would be completely impractical without very specific and rigorous training, and in any case this country is far too small to have citizens blazing away". Don't think I can agree with you on that one mate, the State of Michigan is not much bigger than the UK, when our CCW law was sent to the Governor for signing she was having doubts about signing it as she had visions of armed citizens blazing away, however she did sign it and said she would review it in a years time. A year later she admitted her fears were unfounded, no citizens on the street blasting away, what it did do was actually cut crime. The scumbags don't like the playing fields leveled, As for firearms training here is the Minimum standards from the Michigan State Police website.
Firearms Program – Minimum Standards

The program must include instruction in, but not limited to, all of the following:

Safe storage, use and handling of a pistol including, but not limited to, safe storage, use and handling to protect a child
Ammunition knowledge, and the fundamentals of pistol shooting
Pistol shooting positions
Firearms and the law, including civil liability issues and the use of deadly force
Avoiding criminal attack and controlling a violent confrontation
All laws that apply to carrying a concealed pistol in this state
At least 8 hours instruction, including 3 hours of firing range time; which requires firing at least 30 rounds of ammunition.

Most CCW classes are 8 hours classroom time and over a 100 rounds fired on the range before they will issue a certificate after which you have to apply for the permit, have a criminal backround checks and appear before the Concealed Weapons Board.

Report as unsuitable
16. George F, Michigan USA (Edinburgh Born & Bred) / 10:20am 18 Feb 2007
Scott1,Hi mate, yep your right, criminals will steal guns, but even if the citizens are not armed the criminals will still get them. This story is proof of that, also you are correct when you say innocent people could get shot, but hand on heart here mate, here in Michigan that hasn't happen yet, and the reason it hasn't happened is because the scumbags know people are now able to defend themselves if it comes to it. Our gun crime has actually fallen. Your also correct when you say "How many times would we read of a teenager getting hold of their parents gun and commiting murder?" Hey it happens here, unfortunately that is down to parents not securing the gun properly which is a felony (criminal offence) here. I'm not saying this is a perfect solution, like all things nothings perfect but it does make the scumbags think twice

Report as unsuitable

17. BigStu, The range / 11:25am 18 Feb 2007
They will ban air guns & replicas off the back of this, just watch.

Report as unsuitable

18. Scott 1 / 11:44am 18 Feb 2007
George 16, while I would like to see justice on our side and give the scum some of thier own medicine. I think you would agree and are probably more knowledgeable than I on the matter, that culturally USA has a different view on guns. I am not anti gun but just feel that in Britain it would go horribly wrong and make things a lot worse. And yes regardless of laws criminals intent on getting a hold of weapons will do so and continue to blight peoples lifes unless they can't get at them in the first place

Report as unsuitable

19. ScotsLass58, Red Kens Toon / 12:09pm 18 Feb 2007
Good Morning George F, Michigan USA (Edinburgh Born & Bred).

A Gunless society is a Terrified society!!!

How I wish I could live in Michigan. There is nothing worse than living in a coutry run by a bunch of knee jerking, egotistical, self centered numpties. I believe in justice for all, and that starts with the right of a victim of crime, no matter whether it be a minor or major crime, to protect themselves at ALL times.What with police officers being shot and killed ( the last one to die was in 2006) and the public being put in danger by gun wielding yobs throughout the Britain ( not U.K., 'cause this country sure ain't united!) it is well past the time that our so called leaders were called to order. We, the law abiding silent majority of Britain, should DEMAND the right to defend ourselves!!! When are the numpties in Westminsterrood going to get a grip on reality and understand some simple basics. As soon as a perp commits a crime no matter what, he/she has in effect held up their hands and said " I have commited a crime, I don't give a damn about the victim and I therefore forego ALL my rights" except, 1) the right to a room with a bed. 2) the right to three square meals a day. 3) The right to rehabilitation. It is about time we, the law abinding populus of this country governed by 17th Century legal attitudes and laws, came together and kicked some political Ass! Lets start to get together once and for all and put the fear out of living in Britain; our law abiding citizens deserve it! I believe you have to fight fire with fire, not politics, so the day must come when law abiding citizens of Britain are allowed to carry concealed weapons akin to our fellow intelligent cousins in U.S.A. Then, and ONLY then, the perps may just think twice before pulling a gun.

Report as unsuitable
20. blair, east lothian / 12:24pm 18 Feb 2007
Singapore would seem to have the right solution. If you carry a gun and commit an offence its Life with hard labour (and they mean Life) If you fire the gun its execution.

Report as unsuitable

21. Buckskin, Texas, USA / 12:27pm 18 Feb 2007
So much for criminals obeying senseless laws that strip law abiding people of the common right to self protection. You may blame IANSA for every one of these deaths.

Report as unsuitable

22. blair, east lothian / 12:27pm 18 Feb 2007
#20 I forget to add that in the year following the introduction of the law there was only one case of a gun offence

Report as unsuitable

23. Dougie McGill, Murrayfield / 12:32pm 18 Feb 2007
So long as they're shooting each other, who cares?

Report as unsuitable

24. Schmuel, England / 1:10pm 18 Feb 2007
20. blair, east lothian / 12:24pm 18 Feb 2007.
22. blair, east lothian / 12:27pm 18 Feb 2007.

I take it your not Tony.

Your two posts sound, to me, to be the ideal solution - especially if you're not going to hang the ********!

The other good cure I heard of, don't know if it's still done, was that with a thief the Arabs used to chop off a hand.

If you are not going to make the sentence fit the crime then you have to do something to make them think twice.

SNAG! you need brains to think - somehting which seems to be in short supply these days.

Report as unsuitable
25. Schmuel, England / 1:11pm 18 Feb 2007
Mind! personally I'm all for 'topping' any murderer, why should I have to pay to keep scum like that alive?

Report as unsuitable

26. Sinnerman, Another Planet / 1:51pm 18 Feb 2007
#10. If you injure a mugger/burglar there is the possibility of being sued. If you kill the mugger/burglar in "self defence", the b@stard can't sue you.
Rule #1: "Leave no witnesses."

Report as unsuitable

27. Tom MacFarlane, Blackpool, UK / 2:21pm 18 Feb 2007
How the police tackle gun crime in London:

"Gun crime has become one of the biggest topical debates within black communities. For example, rumours and theories abound as to why the police failed to stop the brutal murder of young Jason Fearon outside Turnmills nightclub in London, including the dangerous notion that this was somehow part of a deliberate psycho political campaign against black people. The police, it would
appear, didn't act on the intelligence received via Crimestoppers from a member of the public who provided details, naming the target, venue, time, date, location, the motive and even the type of weapon likely to be used. The response from the police to deploy an empty marked vehicle outside the club was seen as a kick in the teeth, as though black lives were cheap."


Report as unsuitable
28. JWT, Kentucky USA Cupar Heritage / 2:22pm 18 Feb 2007
I agree with George F. and Scotslass.The right to protect yourself means nothing without the ability to do so.The recent wave of killings just show that gun control(in a legislative sense) is a farce.I do,however recomend a good firm and steady grip as you shoot your weapon of choice.

Report as unsuitable

29. elecosse / 2:25pm 18 Feb 2007
Sure send all those who want guns to Rockhall, give it Home rule and make Guga king.
Go pussycats kill kill!!

Report as unsuitable

30. www.scottwebb.co.uk / 2:51pm 18 Feb 2007
Heres another wee 5 minute vid for those that are starting to wake up :) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d8LzLRU35CY&mode=relat...=

Report as unsuitable

31. bobio, London, Canada / 2:53pm 18 Feb 2007
I find it offensive that some of you nut bars are on the police about shooting innocent people. Maybe if the Brits trained their police better regarding use of force and use of firearms instead of living in the dark ages with the good old Bobbie and his night stick mentality you'd be better off. Those talking about a police state, where are your heads!! Bunch of right wing, paranoid nutters.

Report as unsuitable

32. it has always been allan / 3:08pm 18 Feb 2007
28 kentucky

you don't seem to have ever fired a 44 magnum full house pistol or you wouldn't advocate a firm grip

Report as unsuitable
33. rab, glasgow / 3:15pm 18 Feb 2007
bobio, have a wee look at this ,police with guns are dangerous.http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/uk/article557419.ece

Report as unsuitable

34. Media 1, cape town / 3:17pm 18 Feb 2007
The three men involved shot their victim, fled the scene and then returned and shot him dead at close range.

IT IS TIME for the death penalty to be re-introduced and I think we are going to see a lot more people calling for it.

This sort of behaviour is unacceptable, it is barbaric and entirely de-humansisng. The perpertrators should be caught and hanged from the gallows.

Report as unsuitable
35. TAF, RI, US / 3:22pm 18 Feb 2007
"to clamp down on firearm-related killings"

So, if they beat you to death with a pipe, it's just fine with the government?

Until you folks get to the point where you actually put criminals in jail, and where a person who defends themself is applauded not prosecuted, your problems will only get worse.

Which means you're doomed, since you'll never be rid of Labour and it's philosophy.

Report as unsuitable
36. AtheT, North of Kelso / 3:52pm 18 Feb 2007
Let the punishment fit the crime. If someone does a cold blooded murder, let them die for it. A rapist needs to be executed. Impaleing would be appropriate.
Child molesters should to be drawn and quartered.
A person defending Family and property shouldnt be charged with anything.

Report as unsuitable

37. Rennie, Upstate NY / 3:53pm 18 Feb 2007
I don't understand. Murder is illegal, isn't it? And yet, people keep killing people. Must be those evil guns do the killing, make owning guns illegal. And then people who want to kill will never think of using a gun. Especially when you don't keep them in jail very long, provided they are ever caught or found guilty. Because after all it was the gun that made them do it. Here you can legally carry a gun and if someone wants to kill you it makes them think twice knowing they are apt to get not just possibly arrested and sent to a crowbar motel a few years, but injured or killed for their crime. Make the criminals pay, not law abiding citizens who have a right to defend themselves. Terribly barbaric, isn't it?

Report as unsuitable

38. Msgt G, Ft McCoy, WI / 3:54pm 18 Feb 2007
How many of you remember the German Govt advising their people to purchase National Rifle Association (NRA) hats several years ago before traveling to Florida?

When will the masses realize guns do not kill people, bad people kill people. I remember when violent crime went down in several states in the US when they passed concealed carry laws. The crime did not go down because armed citizens were carrying weapons; it was because criminals thought twice about it not knowing who might be armed around them.

When the violent crime rates went down in Florida after they passed the concealed carry law the criminals wised up and started targeting people landing at airports since they knew they would be unarmed coming off a plane and crime went up toward people in rental cars leaving the airports. That’s why Germany encouraged their people to start buying (NRA) hats after some of their citizens fell victim to the criminals new safer plan of attack

Report as unsuitable
39. Boppa, SW United States / 4:01pm 18 Feb 2007
Contrary to popular misconception this debate is not anti-gun versus pro-gun

It is pro-police state (only police, military and selected elite have guns) versus pro-self defense (whether against the thugs the government continually releases into the general population or against a criminal government, take your pick).

Therefore, on that basis in England, you are a police state!

Unfortunately, police can't be everywhere when crimes are underway AND NEVER WILL BE. Just look at the crime statistics in England on crimes the police actully interrupted. The number is statistically insignificant.

You want to win against government catch and release scumbags, you have to have the weapons to fight back!

Report as unsuitable
40. George F, Michigan USA (Edinburgh Born & Bred) / 4:31pm 18 Feb 2007
#18 Scott, Yes the culturally people in the US and UK are very different when it comes to a lot of things guns being one of them. Saying that though I don't see it going wrong as long as people have the right training. Remember, before Dunblane people in the UK did have access to handguns and the streets were'nt running red with blood, also remember the guy who committed the killings in Dunblane wasn't British, I think he was Eastern European. All I'm saying is that people should have the right to defend themselves and their families be it on the street or in the home.

#39 Boppa LOL, a pretty good arguement there mate. Nah I don't think the UK is a Police state, if anything the UK is a very liberal place with very liberal laws, laws that are so liberal that they favour the criminal over the victim. Commit murder in the UK and you get Life, unfortunately life there means around 20 years and if your a good boy and jump through all the hoops a murderer can be out in 15 years.

#34 Media1, time for the death penalty you said, Hmm don't mate, I think there would have to proof, (for me anyways) beyond all doubt. Don't know if you know it mate but it turned out that the last man hanged in the UK turned out to be innocent, the guy who actualy pulled the trigger on a policeman made a deathbed confession.

Report as unsuitable
41. Waspy100, Oxon / 4:33pm 18 Feb 2007
Boppa. You are a sick person. Stick your gun up your @rse and blow your brains out

Report as unsuitable

42. George F, Michigan USA (Edinburgh Born & Bred) / 4:36pm 18 Feb 2007
On a lighter note, for those among you who have teenage daughters about to go out on a date. There is nothing more convincing for a teenage boy than a father cleaning his 12 gauge shotgun whilst telling the teenage boy what time he wants his daughter home (untouched)

Report as unsuitable

43. George F, Michigan USA (Edinburgh Born & Bred) / 4:39pm 18 Feb 2007
#41 Waspy, like you mate, Boppa is entitled to his opinion, no need for insults pal.

Report as unsuitable

44. Media 1, cape town / 4:41pm 18 Feb 2007
#40 George F: We cannot hold all of society to ransom for the possible sacrifice of one innocent life. No system is full proof and there will be mistakes, but society as a whole can never be threatened for the sake of one.

Harsh? Yes indeed, but what the alternative?

Report as unsuitable
45. Goga, Rockall / 5:08pm 18 Feb 2007
11. Dadd's little Girl, Sunny & warm Island in the med / 9:37am 18 Feb 2007 6. Guga, Rockall

Keep your chin up Guga, we can't see yer uter feller

Thank you DLG,

I've tried tying wee rocks to the end of it and and holding him in warm water to no avail. I even tried the mail order garbage to pump him up but it only lasts a minute or two.


Report as unsuitable
46. missjam @ loosechat.net, manchester / 5:19pm 18 Feb 2007
we had 3 shootings yesterday here in manchester - all getting closer to home as the saying goes - its sad that this is becoming the norm now - it has almost lost its shock element which is scary in itself

Report as unsuitable

47. The Gorm, Cda / 5:27pm 18 Feb 2007
#4 George F
I find it interesting that you should compare a non handgun state with the US.How many shooting deaths were there in Detroit,Washington or Salt Lake City in the same time period?We also have the problem with illegal handguns( smuggled in from the US I might add) but the rate of handgun murder in all of Canada for 1 year is about the same as for Detroit in an average month.Check it out on Wiki.
Dont give us that crap about law abiding citizens being OK to licence handguns-if they are available they will be used.Stats -There are 2 and one half handguns for every person in the US.This Wild West mentality is perpetrated by people like yourself and the NRA-And you wonder why there is so many armed roberies and shootings in the Us . Give me gun control anyday even if it is not 100% effective.

Report as unsuitable

48. Sambo, The deep south / 5:35pm 18 Feb 2007
I agree with George F. The news report doesn't describe who the shooters are, but I'd bet that the majority are not UK born.
Each city has its share of gangsters and shooting deaths are generally confined to turf wars.
My friend in Scotland keeps a handgun in his home, I wonder how many other Scots do also.

Report as unsuitable

49. George F, Michigan USA (Edinburgh Born & Bred) / 5:36pm 18 Feb 2007
#44 Media1 I can't help wondering mate if you would still feel that way if they were putting a rope around your neck for a murder you know you didn't commit. All I'm saying is, if the state is going to execute someone there should be no doubt what so ever as to that persons guilt. Can you imagine executing someone then finding out later they are innocent, imagine the impact on the family. I don't mate it's a hard one, You say "No system is full proof and there will be mistakes, but society as a whole can never be threatened for the sake of one". Fine but everyone deserves justice mate and for me executing an innocent person is unjust, getting to the truth should benefit the society not threaten it.

Report as unsuitable

50. George F, Michigan USA (Edinburgh Born & Bred) / 5:40pm 18 Feb 2007
#48 Sambo, I hope your friend in Scotland is keeping that nice and quiet mate.

Report as unsuitable

51. The Gorm, Cda / 5:48pm 18 Feb 2007
NRA stats 28663 handgun deaths in the US in 2000. Lets hear it for the NRA !

Report as unsuitable

52. Arthur / 5:54pm 18 Feb 2007
34) Kindly remember that you and your ilk can shout as long and as loud as you like about the return of the death penalty, and totally ignore the valid and obvious points raised by decent reasoning people who find it
wholly repugnant in a supposed civilised society, but you cannot ignore the fact that no state which is a member state of the european union can be or remain so if it retains or re introduces the death penalty.
Bear this in mind when you make your feeble inaccurate knejerk reactionary support for this barbaric
inhumane practise which devalues the people of any country which still lives in the barbarism of other times.

Report as unsuitable

53. George F, Michigan USA (Edinburgh Born & Bred) / 6:01pm 18 Feb 2007
#51 The Gorm, good point, I wonder how many of those deaths were gang, crime related. Fact is mate you can disarm the honest citizens but the scumbags will always get their hands on guns. It would be nice if you had some breakdown figures on how these deaths occurred rather than a round figure. Remember guns don't kill people, people kill people, the gun is only a tool for doing it, same can be said for knifes, baseball bats, iron bars, heck even the car you drive if you have a mind.

Report as unsuitable

54. The Gorm, Cda / 6:01pm 18 Feb 2007
To further the arguement-there were 14860 homicides,57447 violence related gunshot injuries,23337 accidental shootings,and 16907 suicides in the US in 2004.
Compare these stats with those of any country let alone those with gun control.Lets hear it for the NRA and the right to bare arms-!

Report as unsuitable

55. George F, Michigan USA (Edinburgh Born & Bred) / 6:10pm 18 Feb 2007
#52 Arthur Message received and understood mate. Now you kindly remember that if you cannot debate without insults or name calling you have nothing to write that I want to read. If you are against capital punishment, fine, make your arguements and convince people but do it without the insults. It's not very civilized, hey your the one mentioned civilized societies

Report as unsuitable

56. nell from falkirk / 6:18pm 18 Feb 2007
How has it come to pass that a forum in the SCOTSMAN seems to be being hijacked by a bunch of gun totin' bampots from the good ol' US of A?

If there's one thing we DON'T need, it's America telling us how to make the UK more law-abiding - a bit like the Devil advising on airconditioning!

I cannot see that increasing the number of guns on the streets can do other than increase the amount of gun crime.
Certainly some criminals will always find guns - the trick is surely to make it as difficult as possible for them to do so, and to make the penalties for carrying/using a gun so severe that it's not worth their while, no matter what colour is the finger on the trigger.
#20 blair, interesting what you're saying about Singapore; if it's true, then wouldn't we be better following their lead?

Report as unsuitable
57. Msgt G, Ft McCoy, WI / 6:18pm 18 Feb 2007
54. The Gorm, Cda

I'll trust your numbers are correct. We all know when the other side argues this issue they will never break the numbers down. The accidental shooting numbers seems high and the question begs how many resulted in death? We know that a large % of those accidental shootings only required band-aids or same day surgeries. I'm sure several readers might see that number and assume those accidental shootings resulted in death.

I can only assume those accidental shooting numbers that resulted in death are low because more people die in car crashes just in the state of California than do all of the people in the entire United States of America from accidental shootings.

Accidental shootings are sad, as are any accidental death. People fall off the side the Grand Canyon. More children die from drowning each year than they do from gun shots in the US. With your logic we should run around locking up mothers who allow their children who go swimming as they might drown, and stop people from driving.

Report as unsuitable
58. George F, Michigan USA (Edinburgh Born & Bred) / 6:20pm 18 Feb 2007
#54 The Gorm, so the majority of the shootings, fatal and non fatal were criminal acts, as I have said criminals will always get guns even if you ban them, the story above proves that. 23337 accidental shootings, ok I accept that, careless gun handling, not identifying a target properly on a deer hunt, lots of causes for that and if investgation shows someone was negligent with a gun then they should lose the right to have a gun. As for the suicide figures, well if folks are that depressed with life even without guns they will find another way to kill themselves. All I'm saying is that taking away the guns won't make gun crime go away. Anyways gotta go out now, buying a new gun safe as the one I have is full and I need more room ;>)

Report as unsuitable

59. Sambo, The deep south / 6:22pm 18 Feb 2007
Yes he is, the gun never leaves the house but I pity anyone who broke in and was a threat to his family. The way justice is today in the UK he would probably be headed off to jail. One thing though the burglar would be headed off to the funeral home.

Report as unsuitable

60. Scott 1 / 6:25pm 18 Feb 2007
George 40. The guy responsible for the murder of children in Dunblane was Thomas Hamilton, a Scot, who incidentally held the guns he had legally. After the case it was reported that despite concerns from some police officers about Hamilton's suitablility to keep guns he was still allowed to keep the guns he then used on innocent children. Now no amount of legislation will stop nutters like Hamilton.

Sambo 48. While the majority of illegal guns may be held by gansters carrying out turf wars, they do so in public places which means you and I can get caught in the crossfire and how good is the concealed weapon then?

Report as unsuitable
61. The Gorm, Cda / 6:28pm 18 Feb 2007
Where are your Stats? Band Aids or day surgeries with gunshot wounds?You have got to be kidding!
Car crashes are not caused by Guns. What is the relationship between the two?
Drowning vs gunshot for kids? Try all drownings against all gun related casualties. My logic is fine thank you very much . Is yours?
Chech out Wikipedia Gun Violence in the US

Report as unsuitable

62. Bobh, Florida, USA / 6:35pm 18 Feb 2007
"The prospect of tyranny may not grab the headlines the way vivid stories of gun crime routinely do. But few saw the Third Reich coming until it was too late. The Second Amendment is a doomsday provision, one designed for those exceptionally rare circumstances where all other rights have failed—where the government refuses to stand for reelection and silences those who protest; where courts have lost the courage to oppose, or can find no one to enforce their decrees. However improbable these contingencies may seem today, facing them unprepared is a mistake a free people get to make only once."
Judge Alex Kozinsky

Report as unsuitable

63. nell from falkirk / 6:36pm 18 Feb 2007
#57 "I can only assume those accidental shooting numbers that resulted in death are low because more people die in car crashes just in the state of California than do all of the people in the entire United States of America from accidental shootings."

So what's your point? Are you suggesting they are correlated?

The point should be that accidental shootings are wholly avoidable : no guns, no shooting accidents.

23000+ accidents avoided in the USA alone, at no loss.

You would then be left with only such accidents as you cite, like people falling off the Grand Canyon(!) But at least it's unlikely that innocent bystanders are about to be involved in THAT accident.

Report as unsuitable
64. The Gorm, Cda / 6:49pm 18 Feb 2007
62 Bobh
With the amount of gun related violence in the US perhaps "doomsday" is nearer than you think.
You Da Judge--- The original reason for including the right of the citizen to carry arms was to provide for a volunteer militia not to allow gun nutters to run at large.

Report as unsuitable

65. Arthur / 7:12pm 18 Feb 2007
55) My remarks, not insults, were not directed at you.
If you feel insulted by any of my adjectives, be so good
as to inform me which you regard as insults, those are my genuinly held feelings, which I am entitled to express.
I have on many occassions, on this and other forums raised many good points against the death penalty, I am now fed up re iterating them, to have them ignored by the barbarian lobby, it is they who reject reasoned debate, not I.
Media 1 is well aware of my stance and is capable of answering for himself, he has chosen not to.

Report as unsuitable

66. Supe / 7:13pm 18 Feb 2007
Well, I suppose we can see how "gun control" really works;

if you outlaw guns, only outlaws will have guns.

Report as unsuitable
67. nell from falkirk / 7:16pm 18 Feb 2007
#66 yes...and your point is???

Report as unsuitable

68. The Gorm, Cda / 7:30pm 18 Feb 2007
To those in favour of the right to have handguns ,please consider. If a crime is to be committed against another person/household/property what would the criminal be expecting and be prepared for in a situation where he knows there would be a weapon at hand?
He would shoot first would he not.
If an handgun was not expected would here not be a much lesser chance of death by handguns?
Many deaths of crime victims by criminals are caused by the victims own guns--this includes police officer deaths.
Own a handgun -no thanks partner.
Up the NRA!

Report as unsuitable

69. it has always been allan / 7:34pm 18 Feb 2007
No's 15 & 26. you seemed to like my post @10 but obviously someone did not because it was removed by incognito censorship.

what price freedom of expression in the UK.
Not anymore in Scotland apparently.

Report as unsuitable
70. Supe / 7:35pm 18 Feb 2007
Nell, 67 That was a pretty short and to the point statement. I don't believe it can be spelled out any better.

Report as unsuitable

71. nell from falkirk / 7:40pm 18 Feb 2007
#70 short, yes - but trite and meaningless.

Report as unsuitable

72. The Gorm, Cda / 7:44pm 18 Feb 2007
53 George F It is not only people who kill people or guns that kill people it is people with guns who kill people as demonstrated by the stats . The old chestnut the NRA tosses out re people killing people fails to say that guns make it a hell of a lot easier.
Three for the Gun lobby and the NRA.

Report as unsuitable

73. Lord Lucan / 7:46pm 18 Feb 2007
#47 Yes, we need gun control, but arm the Police for God's sake. How many offciers have been killed in the line of duty by people who were armed? One case was where a copper was stabbed to death. Wouldn't happen in the US. Wouldn't have happened if the copper had been armed.

Report as unsuitable

74. Harry Carnie, British Columbia,Canada. / 7:47pm 18 Feb 2007
Unfortunately, we have a similar situation here in Canada.(more gun crime)
We do not recognize the FACT much of problem is with a few" bad apples" in our recent immigrations.
(IT is politically incorrect to mention their race)
If these individuals ARE arrested we do NOT deport them(where the opportunity exists) OR punish them appropriately for their criminal acts... IF THEY ARE FOUND GUILTY.
OUR "JUSTICE AUTHORITIES" spend more in time, and expense , in the concern of the "PERPS" rather than the rights of the victims.
There is also more concern of enforcing REGULATIONS among the (mostly)Law abiding citizens( ie someone with an unregisted rifle ..or smoking pot)
As a general rule WE ALLOW CRIMINALS OF ANY RACE (murderers, child molesters ) off with "a slap on the wrist". So at least we are consistant with our STUPIDITY, and do not discriminate

Report as unsuitable

75. Supe / 7:51pm 18 Feb 2007
#71 I fail to see how it can be trite, if you didn't understand the point.

Report as unsuitable

76. Harry Carnie, British Columbia,Canada. / 7:57pm 18 Feb 2007
#66 Supe....RIGHT!!

Report as unsuitable

77. Theo, Richmond, Va. USA / 8:00pm 18 Feb 2007
I am really confused by all the tired replies as to not carrying a weapon. The "maybe, what if, he/she just might shoot a innocent, Criminals will shoot firs, etc., etc., etc.".
be real and face some facts:
Many "Bag Guys (B.G.) belong to gangs and organizations that have little trouble getting firearms. Where do you guys think these guns are coming from? The candy shop at the end of the block? These groups can get anything they want and they have the finances to get them, build them, machine them? If a B.G. would shoot thinking you are carrying he would shoot you not carrying!! Most B.G. do not want a murder charge. The innocent guy would/should be exempt because of the ago old and accepted theory of "self defense"! People please, please wake up and realize it will only get worse. If the B.G.'s will shoot armed policemen why do you feel you are safe?

I challenge you to think about this.

Report as unsuitable
78. The Gorm, Cda / 8:09pm 18 Feb 2007
77 Theo
Thought about it-Its a lot of crap. We want to add to the problem by adding more firearms to the general public causing more deaths?
I think not.

Report as unsuitable

79. The Gorm, Cda / 8:35pm 18 Feb 2007
Just an aside-The article that this refers to tells of 4 murders and 6 wounded in a fortnight (2 weeks to our friends to the south). It is very doubtful that a similar incident would be mentioned on the first page of any major newspaper- if it was mentioned at all. It would not be news.
Cheers for the ban on handguns and up the NRA!

Report as unsuitable

80. George F, Michigan USA (Edinburgh Born & Bred) / 8:50pm 18 Feb 2007
#65 Arthur, you wrote "Bear this in mind when you make your (feeble inaccurate knejerk reactionary support) for this barbaric inhumane practise which devalues the people of any country which still lives in the barbarism of other times. feeble kneejerk? as you so pointed out in comment #65 " those are my genuinly held feelings, which I am entitled to express." Yes you are entitled to your opinions and feelings as I am mine, only I try do to it without insults and I consider YOU calling my opinions feeble and Kneejerk.

Report as unsuitable

81. George F, Michigan USA (Edinburgh Born & Bred) / 9:11pm 18 Feb 2007
#56 Nell from Falkirk. Hi Nell, I am neither a Bampot or American, I'm Scottish Born and Bred but I do live in the US.

#60 Scott, I stand corrected mate.

#68 Gorm, Ok I see your argument mate and it's a good one, but by the same reasoning if a criminal knows HE could get shot breaking into a house or mugging someone, well it has the advantage of making them think twice. Look this is a two way street, there are always reasons for and against everything. You have your beliefs I have mine, but let me tell you something mate, I am a law abiding person, I don't bother anybody and I don't try to take away what isn't mine, I will do whatever it takes to defend me and my family from the bad bastards out there and if that means using deadly force to protect my family so be it. It's not a perfect world pal I would love to live in a world were I don't have to worry about gun crime, but I don't, and until I do I refuse to be a victim to the scumbags out there. Such an action may cost me my life but at least I'll go down fighting. Enough of trash taking away what doesn't belong to them just because they can. Anybody wants to take my stuff or try to hurt my family they will have to go through me first.

Report as unsuitable
82. Boppa, SW United States / 9:21pm 18 Feb 2007
#51 The Gorm: NRA stats 28663 handgun deaths in the US in 2000. Lets hear it for the NRA !

That's the trouble with statistice, these include police shooting, gang members shooting gang members and self defense.

Report as unsuitable
83. The Gorm, Cda / 9:33pm 18 Feb 2007
81 George F
Appreciate your sentiments.Come on up to your northern neighbour where we have gun control and owning an unlicenced one is a criminal offense.Besides not having to be overly concerned about gun violence we like Scots no matter where they come from-For that matter we like Yanks too-We just can't understand the gun laws .Make handguns all illegal and posession prosecuted excepting police etc of course, if you want to put a dent in the statistics.This would never be allowed by the US gun manufacturers , the gun lobby or our friend the NRA. Why do sane people dance to their tune.Does NRA mean Not Fully Normal?

Report as unsuitable

84. Boppa, SW United States / 9:35pm 18 Feb 2007
41 Waspy100 Boppa. You are a sick person. Stick your gun up your @rse and blow your brains out

Not so clever comment. also, see you aren't clever enough to dispute my assessment

Report as unsuitable
85. The Gorm, Cda / 9:40pm 18 Feb 2007
82 Boppa
Only 28 thousand 6 hundred 63 hand gun deaths in the US in 2000!-What a relief ,Im sure you sleep well.I believe that year there were 63 in Canada.

Report as unsuitable

86. Boppa, SW United States / 9:55pm 18 Feb 2007
66. Supe Well, I suppose we can see how "gun control" really works;

if you outlaw guns, only outlaws will have guns.
nell from falkirk #66 yes...and your point is???
Nell, the point is, you and your country have arrived, or did you not read the newspaper article that started these comments.

Report as unsuitable
87. The Gorm, Cda / 9:58pm 18 Feb 2007
Please forgive me the number 63 was for Toronto (2000000 population)
The correct total for the whole country was 474 homicides (all causes) for the year 2000.
Check Wiki under Homicide Rates

Report as unsuitable

88. George F, Michigan USA (Edinburgh Born & Bred) / 10:02pm 18 Feb 2007
#83 The Gorm, I worked in Canada for 6 months, little place called Nordegg near Rocky Montain House AB. Beautiful place and wonderful people. I don't dance to the NRA's tune mate, not even a member, can't stand their politics, I own guns because I choose to and I enjoy competion shooting and hunting. Believe it or not, I hope I never get into a situation where I have to pull a gun, Anyway mate you have views and opinions which I do respect and I mean that, and I have mine, we could debate all week long and never agree so lets just agree to disagree. It was fun debating with you and I wish you and your family well.

PS Do you know how Canada got it's name? drop me an email if you want at georgef220@hotmail.com and I'll tell you eh.

Report as unsuitable
89. William L, Magalia, CA / 10:02pm 18 Feb 2007
Ah, yes! I wonder if we should return to the days pf Pericles when the helot of the warrior was required to carry armor and food and such, but was forbidden to carry the sword? For it has long been the premise of govrernments that an armed populace was more of a threat to their continued governance than any other foe. The arguments concerning B.G. vs innocent citizen are interesting but miss the fundamental point -- I think -- the disarmning of a populace is among first steps toward totalitarian dominance. The arguments we read above are pleasant for "them" to hear because they know "we" aren't thinking about the underlying motivation. This whole forum has been devoted to the emotional appeals (most quite valid) to the "good" and "bad" of gun control -- an immediate problem. The true, long-term consequence is ignored.

Shall we discuss the possibility that disarmament is another step along the path to realization of Rousseau's dream of the "Social Contract" in which there are two classes: the rulers and the ruled?

Just a question for thought.

Report as unsuitable
90. William L, Magalia, CA / 10:04pm 18 Feb 2007
Ah, yes! I wonder if we should return to the days pf Pericles when the helot of the warrior was required to carry armor and food and such, but was forbidden to carry the sword? For it has long been the premise of govrernments that an armed populace was more of a threat to their continued governance than any other foe. The arguments concerning B.G. vs innicent citizen are interesting but miss the fundamental point -- I think -- the disarmning of a populace is the first step toward totalitarian dominance and the arguments we read above are pleasant for "them" to hear because they know "we" aren't thinking about the underlying motivation. This whole forrum has been devoted to the emotional appeals (most quite valid) to the "good" and "bad" of gun control that is an immediate problem; while the true, long-term consequence is ignored.

Shall we discuss the possibility that disarmament is another step along the path to realization of Rousseau's dream of the "Social Contract" in which there are two classes: the rulers and the ruled?

Just a question for thought.

Home Contact


              Page Updated: Thursday May 07, 2009 09:14 AM  Pacific

             Copyright © klamathbasincrisis.org, 2007, All Rights Reserved