BMEWS
 

HOW FREE IS ANY SOCIETY THAT MUST LIVE WITH THIS?  MY GUESS IS NOT MUCH.

 
 


Posted by Drew458    United Kingdom   on 09/21/2008 at 03:01 AM   
 
  1. The old saying that when you ban guns only the criminals will have them is so obviously true in Britain that it isn’t funny. The handgun ban came in with Tony Bliar and his socialist scum. Though it was on the cards under the previous Conservative administration.
    However unlike ZaNuLabour they did not envisage a total ban. The galling part is what led up to the ban. The wacko Hamilton who shot all those children and teachers in Dunblane should never have been permitted to own a gun in the first place. Had the police done their job he would not have had access to a gun. The case stinks and for some unexplained reason the files on the case have been sealed for I believe a hundred years. Hence the speculation that Hamilton had been procuring children for a paedophile ring that encompassed judges and senior policeman.

    As for the increase in knife crime in the UK. I link it to the huge numbers of people from the third world thanks to Britain’s open door immigration policy.

    Posted by LyndonB    Canada   09/21/2008  at  04:27 AM  

  2. Lyndon, I’ve always meant to ask: what’s with this ”NuLabour” spelling bullshit? Has the English school system begun to implement Nuspeak? Thank God you’re in Canada, eh.
    Peiper: the words of Robert A. Heinlein come to mind..."An Armed Society is a POLITE Society.”

    Posted by Macker    United States   09/21/2008  at  08:19 AM  

  3. A piece of sidewalk and a butter knife make for a sharp pointy object. It is pure idiocy to think a law against ANYTHING is going to make it impossible for people who don’t obey laws to get anything they want. For being the “intelligent” people elected to keep the land in order, they are incredibly stupid.

    Posted by cmblake6    United States   09/21/2008  at  08:33 AM  

  4. If the yobs didn’t have knives or guns they’d find some other item to use to wreak their mayhem on all and sundry.  I have to agree with Lyndon, it’s the fraken open door immigration policy that’s to blame.  After all, we civilized folk are supposed to be concerned with the “culture” the new arrivals imported along with their sorry butts.

    The fact that those records were sealed for a hundred years shows there’s some pretty damning evidence in there that’s too risky for the public to know about.  Kinda like what happened back in the days of “Jack the Ripper” with the purported tie to the Royal family.  That’s still a hush-hush thing that can get you in huge trouble in Britain.

    Posted by Valgerd Gydhja    United States   09/21/2008  at  10:07 AM  

  5. Macker the ZaNu bit is merely a link to ZaNu PF the communist party of our friend in Rhodesia, err Zimbabwe Uncle Bob Mugabe. Labour “reinvented” itself under Bliar and Brown and they called it New Labour to differentiate themselves from the marxist unelectable “Old” Labour. The trouble is the majority of the Labour party is still Old Labour and now the cracks are starting to show. What worries me is Labour will try and steal the next election the way Mugabe did. They have already foisted postal voting onto some constituencies which has been outrageously fraudulent. Gordon Brown is desperate to cling to power and the way that the UK has gone to rat faeces in the past few years it worries me they could use the financial crisis to stage a coup.

    Oh and as for implementing Nuspeak in schools. I fear that has been happening ever since they took office. I tell you I watch the news from Canada in horror at times as Britain flushes itself down the pan. I am grateful every day that they allowed me to come here. It aint perfect here either. For example the Liberals are talikng about (or is that aboot?) banning handgun ownership and other nonsense, but it beats the UK hands down.

    Posted by LyndonB    Canada   09/21/2008  at  10:46 AM  

  6. Calling Dr. Ripper.
    Calling Dr, Ripper.

    What concerns me is that knife crime was inaccurately reported for so long. That smacks of a government conspiracy, a hide your head in the sand approach to public safety. But from a political standpoint, it makes perfect sense. Now while the knifing incidents go through the roof, the politicians and LE executives can say that since the reporting standards are different, you cannot compare the number of knife crimes from previous years to the current levels. *POOF* the problem disappears - or rather the accountability does. But it seems that the accountability train left the station a long time ago in Merry Old.

    Posted by sig94    United States   09/21/2008  at  01:07 PM  

  7. I give them 3 or 4 years until they start reporting on the “rock crime crisis”. Because knives will be banned in another year or 2 at most.

    Posted by Drew458    United States   09/21/2008  at  05:46 PM  

  8. Or glass, or plexiglas, or… They simply need to regrow the set they once had. rolleyes  blank stare

    Posted by cmblake6    United States   09/21/2008  at  06:34 PM  

  9. Dominic Grieve, the shadow home secretary, said it was alarming that the Government was underestimating the scale of knife crime.

    He said: “Knife crime is a scourge that is harming and all too often destroying young lives up and down the country. You cannot begin to combat a problem if you cannot even measure it accurately.”

    This guy is clueless.

    It’s unimportant to count the precise number of these crimes.  What is important is that the number of crimes is radically increasing under any counting system.  What is important is that the more the British authorities restricted guns, are currently restricting knives and will probably restrict them even more in the future, the more crime has increased.  What is important is that British citizens can be jailed for fighting off an assailant.  What is most important of all is that the politicians and other “social” leaders in Britain do not realize that their attempts to make society safer have caused and increased the wave of violence.  They’d rather talk about and measure a problem than take responsibility and fix it.  They just don’t understand that restricting weapons hasn’t made society safer, isn’t making society safe and won’t make society safer in the future.

    Here’s a plan:  British citizens and residents have to file and pay taxes annually.  As each citizen files, issue each of them a 38 revolver and a box of ammo.  Yes, you’ll be issuing guns to bad guys too, but considering that there are more good guys than bad guys, how long do you think the bad guys would last?  You’d have a problem with changing the attitude of the average British citizen and definitely would have to have weapons training, but those would at least be positive steps.

    Last item.  Macker, you couldn’t be more correct.  I’ve been to numerous gun shows and I have always seen excellent manners displayed by one and all.  I have seen better manners displayed at gun shows than I have seen at the UCLA Faculty Club (I have connections there).  Go figure.

    Posted by Dr. Jeff    United States   09/22/2008  at  05:22 AM  

  10. Peiper, I stand corrected.

    What I said was based on the fact that the murders from Jack were stopped while a certain member of royalty was incarcerated in their equivilent of an insane asylum.  The attacks started up again when said member was released.  When the guy was incarcerated for a second time - no more attacks.  Granted, this is all circumstantial and probably wouldn’t stand up in a court of law.  The timing is very interesting, however.

    However, you living in Britain are much more up on what is and isn’t allowed over there.  My apologies if you were upset.

    Posted by Valgerd Gydhja    United States   09/22/2008  at  05:44 AM  

  11. I think the telling factor is the presence or absence of accountability, in whatever form.

    Potential targets may be armed, criminals are too likely to be held immediately accountable to the extent of their very lives, crime goes down. Laws are tough, criminals are too likely to be held accountable by the law, crime goes down.
    Potential targets are *known to be disarmed*, criminals consider themselves unlikely to be held accountable by the victim, crime goes up. Laws are weak, criminals are unlikely to be held accountable by the government, crime goes up.
    They both work in parallel, they work equally well regardless of the native culture of the criminal or the victim. Neither of them alone, nor both together, give PERFECT results, but then nothing does. The UK is suffering especially because their government has insisted on having NEITHER at their disposal.
    I’m not a sociologist, I don’t work at a university somewhere, I don’t have access to the hard data or an Al Gore rhythm to generate hockey-stick graphs for me. I’d love to see the results of a *genuinely, transparently done* study to see whether or not the above hypothesis is borne out by the data. I strongly suspect it would be.

    Posted by GrumpyOldFart    United States   09/22/2008  at  07:44 AM  

Commenting is not available in this weblog entry.

Next entry: CARBON CREDIT SCAM and OUR WEEKLY LOOK AT ENVIRO-WACKOS & FIBS

Previous entry: R U L E ... BRIT-TANN-IA, BRI-TANNIA RULES THE WAVES ....

<< BMEWS Main Page >>