UK Gun laws and the effect of the media... (rifle, best, range)

[Gungnir]

Several weeks ago, I mentioned in another thread about the effect of the media and how it was complicit if not a tool for the disarmament of the population of the UK.

Now I began researching this, since it's a pretty broad subject and I wanted to get something that was factual and traceable, and pretty concrete.

During the research I cam across the following essay, which if far more elegantly written than whatever I could pull together.

All the Way Down the Slippery Slope: Gun Prohibition in England and Some Lessons for Civil Liberties in America, by

So please read and discuss.

[nutnfancy]

Anyone with a brain knows that the so called common sense gun laws are just a step into banning all guns from private ownership.

[ace587]

Northern Ireland is holding up well!

[rifleman]

As sayeth the Borg: "Resistance is futile! You will be assimilated into The Collective! [aka: the liberal-Democrat party line)"

I'd say, to heck with that sentiment!

[Jaggy001]

The population of the UK was never armed and there has never been a gun culture in the sense that the USA has one.

The problem with the essay is that it examines UK gun laws from a US perspective. It would have been more interesting had it been written by UK based academics. In particular, this phrase at the end of the essay rather gives the game away:

"As with constitutional structure, the American system is considerably more sound than the British one."

Brits would almost certainly disagree with this statement.

I also thought the essay was intellectually dishonest in many ways. In reality, it is a pseudo-academic paper written with the purpose of justifying the right to bear arms in the USA. Its discussion of the UK lacks perspective, depth and a real understanding of British attitudes.

[Gungnir]

Originally Posted by Jaggy001

The population of the UK was never armed and there has never been a gun culture in the sense that the USA has one.

I actually disagree, in recent memory you are correct, however prior to WWI the UK had as much of a gun culture if not more than the US.

From the article...

Marquess of Salisbury, who in 1900 said he would "laud the day when there is a rifle in every cottage in England."

Well does that sound to you like gun culture of the US? It could easily be said by any contemporary US politician if you change cottage to home and England to America. Certainly it's not something that would spring to mind that UK politician might say ever.

As they say History is written by the victors, and the UK gun ownership history was written by the gun control lobby.

Originally Posted by Jaggy001

The problem with the essay is that it examines UK gun laws from a US perspective. It would have been more interesting had it been written by UK based academics. In particular, this phrase at the end of the essay rather gives the game away:

However how can it be written from the UK perspective, when the UK is not only disarmed, but in the majority happy they are. Drawing the line from where they were armed to happily unarmed would have difficulty being objectively written by a British academic, since much (like you) have no concept of the UK being a gun owning culture. Indeed I must admit when I did my initial research about England and gun ownership I was at first shocked that there was so much gun ownership, and then angry that it's never mentioned.

We all know that in "The Empire" everyone was gun owning, why would we assume that those who returned to Blighty would not also bring their weapons (and most did return and most did bring their weapons)? Sherlock Holmes (who is not in any way a police officer) was written to carry a gun as was Watson (which is interesting considering first publication was 1887, and by today's standards one would expect that a gun carrying detective to be American). These are some clues left of the British long standing tradition of being armed, which clearly dates to the English Bill of Civil rights. And of course Mary Shelley and Bram Stoker also wrote about people owning and using firearms, since art imitates life, is it not strange that the claim that the UK was never gun owning does not reflect the art of the time.

Another example is the Derbyshire riots of 1817, from B Coopers "Transformation of a Valley: The Derbyshire Derwent" about the March to Newark.

The plan was to assemble at ten o'clock on the 8th June, where Ludlam's pikes would be distributed and further weapons would be acquired by requisitioning a man and a gun from each house that they passed.

So from that we can see that at the time of the Derbyshire riots, it was the expectation there was a gun in a house.

Of course there's also the obvious and glaring fact that the US was primarily formed by the English (although rebels), and the laws they wrote reflected that people should be armed. If this was not from England, where was it from given the much US law is based on the English common law?

Originally Posted by Jaggy001

"As with constitutional structure, the American system is considerably more sound than the British one."

Brits would almost certainly disagree with this statement.

This Brit doesn't, this Brit left the UK primarily for political reasons that the country was turning into a police state, with no backstop to prevent it. That was in 2000, since I left it's only gotten worse.

Originally Posted by Jaggy001

I also thought the essay was intellectually dishonest in many ways. In reality, it is a pseudo-academic paper written with the purpose of justifying the right to bear arms in the USA. Its discussion of the UK lacks perspective, depth and a real understanding of British attitudes.

Yet it was presented here by me, who is British, does understand British attitudes, and does take into consideration that previous generations had a different perspective on gun ownership than current. Which is the entire point of presenting it. The incrementalism that happened in the UK happened because there was a deliberate and sustained assault on the countries self-defensive culture up to the current culture which is there is no self-defensive culture at all. Whether the essay is in support or not of the 2nd Amendment, the facts presented are indeed the facts.

We know the Cullen report from Dunblane did not recommend banning and confiscation of handguns, the Home Affairs Select Committee agreed, that's public record. So why was there a ban and confiscation? Normally if you employ an investigation, and committee the purpose is to help discover mechanisms to reduce risk, while maintaining minimal impact to peoples lives. In Dunblanes case the recommendation was completely ignored, in principal due to pressure brought by the media and Snowdrop Campaign during an election year.

We know that in 1900 there were no laws on the British books that dealt with firearms. Indeed buying one was easier in the UK than the US.

So in 94 years the UK went from having no gun control to complete prohibition of handgun ownership, and incredibly restricted ownership of rifles. So if two US lawyers and political scientists want to observe what happened in the UK with respect to the US, as long as the facts they're presenting are accurate (and in my opinion they are) the analysis of motivations and intentions, isn't up for debate, those are their analysis, and it's pretty much irrelevant whether the UK population allowed itself to be disarmed, had forced disarmament, or was persuaded by media pressure it was in its best interests, the facts remain, before 1903 the UK gun laws did not exist, and by 1997 they were "the gold standard" of many gun control lobbies.

[ram2]

Originally Posted by Jaggy001

The population of the UK was never armed and there has never been a gun culture in the sense that the USA has one.

Not true prior to the 1960s when gun control in the UK starting taking root. While deer hunting season may not have been a big event in the UK like it is in many US states, many UK residents did own rifles and handguns (but probably rarely ever shot them).

[Bulldogdad]

Exactly the same well traveled road European Socialists like Obama. Bloomberg and Soros want to take this country.

A disarmed society is a compliant society.

[War Beagle]

Originally Posted by Jaggy001

"As with constitutional structure, the American system is considerably more sound than the British one."

Brits would almost certainly disagree with this statement.

They might disagree, but they would be wrong. As much as the Brits say otherwise, they do not have a Constitution, at least not one that limits the power of the government. The British "unwritten Constitution" is no more than a collection of traditions that can, and have been changed, significantly throughout the course of British history.

Whereas the in the US the Constitution is the supreme law of the land (supposedly), the British Parliament is the supreme law of the land in the UK. There are very few structural checks and balances in the Parliamentary system. There is no distinction between the legislative and executive branches, let alone the ability for one branch to check the other. The historical checks that were built into the system (i.e. the House of Lords and the monarch) have been weakened to the point that they are more or less impotent now in terms of being able to check the government.

American gun-grabbers would love a Parliamentary form of government because (especially the British version) it is essentially a democratic dictatorship. Whichever party wins the election can do whatever they want for 5 years so long as they can keep the backbenchers in line. The structural incentive to maintain party discipline is so strong in the Parliamentary system that the liberties of the British people have been continually eroded to the point that now British subjects are constantly monitored by cameras, Health and Safety inspectors and human rights bureaucrats who can bring them up on charges for non-politically correct speech.

TL;DR: Because of the concept of "Parliamentary Supremacy" British Parliament can change its "Constitution" whenever it feels like it.

[Jaggy001]

Tell you what Gungnir, post the 'essay' in the UK forum and see what the Brits think of it.