3 ms·

There were recent examples of this in the US: armed confrontations with government in which the civilians were branded as unstable extremists. The stand-off led

There were recent examples of this in the US: armed confrontations with government in which the civilians were branded as unstable extremists. The stand-off led to a court case in which it turns out that yes, the government had been in the wrong the whole time. I think the gun control debate is interesting for a different reason than guns-preventing-tyranny, though: in the UK you see the police tweeting to brag about finding the kind of knives you eat with and still struggling with very high murder rates. In the US there are politicians who openly admit that their gun control proposal will do nothing and is largely symbolic, but they still think they're justified in simply banning the ownership of certain items with no compensation to their legal owners. Even if that's not getting rid of the means of opposing tyranny... isn't that already tyranny? There's a big difference between a blanket, retro-active ban and licensing / regulating / buying-back but that seems largely lost in the other ideological aspects of the debate.

pjc50 8y ago
I see nobody's willing to engage with the actual Armalite vs government shooting war that happened in the UK.
- TallGuyShort 8y ago
  Are you talking about the conflict over northern Ireland like in your other comments? If not I have no idea what shooting Aramlite was involved in or what conflict they had with the UK. If you're referring to northern Ireland, my point is not that we should get into a back-and-forth of cases where guns did and didn't prevent tyranny - my point is that the debate has seemingly skipped the "reasonable regulation" so many people were suggesting and is now basically a tug-of-war over blanket bans of property people currently own when the politicians will openly admit it will have no impact on violent crime and is intended to be symbolic. What I'm saying is that's already tyranny and is stupid.
  - foldr 8y ago
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Armalite_and_ballot_box_strategy https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Armalite_and_ballot_box_strate...
    - TallGuyShort 8y ago
      Okay. Again - I'm not saying you can chuck some guns at people and expect them to be free forever. Is there more I should engage on?
foldr 8y ago
> in the UK you see the police tweeting to brag about finding the kind of knives you eat with and still struggling with very high murder rates HN is not the place to spread simple misinformation. Homicide rates in the UK are lower than in the US, and are completely unremarkable internationally: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_intentional_homicide_rate https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_intention... The homicide rate in the UK has also been declining quite sharply for the past 20 years or so, as you can determine via a quick Google search.
- TallGuyShort 8y ago
  With homicide rates I'm referring to London. But you're right I should have been more specific - I too live in a place with a declining and exceptionally low homicide rate and have to put up with people who think confiscating property is a reasonable response to mass shootings elsewhere.
  - foldr 8y ago
    London doesn't have a high homicide rate either. Nor is its homicide rate increasing. See e.g. the following if you have (perhaps?) misinterpreted recent news stories that compared crime statistics for a single month between London and NYC: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-43628494 http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-43628494 Again, it's really simple to check these facts before spreading misinformation.
kybernetikos 8y ago
Not sure why you think the UK has a high murder rate, it's relatively low, better than average for Europe or the Euro area, and in the top 20% worldwide. At about 0.9 per 100,000 intentional homicides, it's quite a lot lower than the 4.9 per 100,000 intentional homicides in the USA, which is solidly mid-table. (I took the data from https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/VC.IHR.PSRC.P5 https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/VC.IHR.PSRC.P5 )

pjc50 8y ago

I see nobody's willing to engage with the actual Armalite vs government shooting war that happened in the UK.

TallGuyShort 8y ago
Are you talking about the conflict over northern Ireland like in your other comments? If not I have no idea what shooting Aramlite was involved in or what conflict they had with the UK. If you're referring to northern Ireland, my point is not that we should get into a back-and-forth of cases where guns did and didn't prevent tyranny - my point is that the debate has seemingly skipped the "reasonable regulation" so many people were suggesting and is now basically a tug-of-war over blanket bans of property people currently own when the politicians will openly admit it will have no impact on violent crime and is intended to be symbolic. What I'm saying is that's already tyranny and is stupid.
- foldr 8y ago
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Armalite_and_ballot_box_strategy https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Armalite_and_ballot_box_strate...
  - TallGuyShort 8y ago
    Okay. Again - I'm not saying you can chuck some guns at people and expect them to be free forever. Is there more I should engage on?

foldr 8y ago

> in the UK you see the police tweeting to brag about finding the kind of knives you eat with and still struggling with very high murder rates HN is not the place to spread simple misinformation. Homicide rates in the UK are lower than in the US, and are completely unremarkable internationally: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_intentional_homicide_rate https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_intention... The homicide rate in the UK has also been declining quite sharply for the past 20 years or so, as you can determine via a quick Google search.

TallGuyShort 8y ago
With homicide rates I'm referring to London. But you're right I should have been more specific - I too live in a place with a declining and exceptionally low homicide rate and have to put up with people who think confiscating property is a reasonable response to mass shootings elsewhere.
- foldr 8y ago
  London doesn't have a high homicide rate either. Nor is its homicide rate increasing. See e.g. the following if you have (perhaps?) misinterpreted recent news stories that compared crime statistics for a single month between London and NYC: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-43628494 http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-43628494 Again, it's really simple to check these facts before spreading misinformation.

kybernetikos 8y ago

Not sure why you think the UK has a high murder rate, it's relatively low, better than average for Europe or the Euro area, and in the top 20% worldwide. At about 0.9 per 100,000 intentional homicides, it's quite a lot lower than the 4.9 per 100,000 intentional homicides in the USA, which is solidly mid-table. (I took the data from https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/VC.IHR.PSRC.P5 https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/VC.IHR.PSRC.P5 )