3 ms·

I'm from the UK, and citizens can only own shotguns or sporting rifles, and the checks and character references are very strict. Pretty much no one owns a gun o

by uhtred 9y ago

I'm from the UK, and citizens can only own shotguns or sporting rifles, and the checks and character references are very strict. Pretty much no one owns a gun other than farmers. Read this to see how strict the checks and rules are:https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Firearms_policy_in_the_United_Kingdom https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Firearms_policy_in_the_Unite... The police even have to get involved. More to the point, no one in UK wants to own a gun. They feel safe without them. America's obsession with guns and the delusion of thinking they are safer because of them, is insane.

kbenson 9y ago
> I'm from the UK, and citizens can only own shotguns or sporting rifles, and the checks and character references are very strict. So? If the only purpose of a gun is to kill people, why are you okay with any guns at all? Would you be okay with private citizens having access to small amounts of sarin gas? That is something which serves only the purpose of killing people, and it's rightly regulated away from private citizens completely. > The police even have to get involved. More to the point, no one in UK wants to own a gun. They feel safe without them. America's obsession with guns and the delusion of thinking they are safer because of them, is insane. That's entirely irrelevant to the discussion. You either believe the sole purpose of a gun is to kill someone, as your earlier statements implied, or you don't. If you do believe that, why are you using your own government's stance where items whose only purpose is to kill someone are allowed in the possession of private citizens, even after stringent checks? If you don't believe that, why make the statement at all? My whole point is that it's inflammatory and easily disproved, so if you don't believe it you are either being disingenuous or so loose with your assertions as to be actively disruptive to any greater discussion.

by uhtred 9y ago

kbenson 9y ago

> I'm from the UK, and citizens can only own shotguns or sporting rifles, and the checks and character references are very strict. So? If the only purpose of a gun is to kill people, why are you okay with any guns at all? Would you be okay with private citizens having access to small amounts of sarin gas? That is something which serves only the purpose of killing people, and it's rightly regulated away from private citizens completely. > The police even have to get involved. More to the point, no one in UK wants to own a gun. They feel safe without them. America's obsession with guns and the delusion of thinking they are safer because of them, is insane. That's entirely irrelevant to the discussion. You either believe the sole purpose of a gun is to kill someone, as your earlier statements implied, or you don't. If you do believe that, why are you using your own government's stance where items whose only purpose is to kill someone are allowed in the possession of private citizens, even after stringent checks? If you don't believe that, why make the statement at all? My whole point is that it's inflammatory and easily disproved, so if you don't believe it you are either being disingenuous or so loose with your assertions as to be actively disruptive to any greater discussion.