AMERICAN REACTS TO UK GUN LAWS! 😳 (DUNBLANE 💔)
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 8 сен 2024
- #Favour #ThatAmericanGirl #ThatAmericanGirlReacts
Thank you for watching!
Want your song or product promoted? ThatAmericanGirl9@gmail.com
» Instagram: @favour_abara
/ favour_abara
» Twitter: @favour_abara
/ favour_abara
» Tik Tok: @favour_Abara
Copyright Disclaimer: Under Section 107 of the Copyright Act 1976, allowance is made for "fair use" for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching, scholarship, and research. Fair use is a use permitted by copyright statute that might otherwise be infringing. Non-profit, educational or personal use tips the balance in favor of fair use.
![Run Away - Tzuyu(TWICE) ツウィ 쯔위 [Music Bank] | KBS WORLD TV 240906](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/KnHNNyAYiu0/mqdefault.jpg)
Like the vid! 👍🏾
I’m a nurse and trust me when your in a situation where u have to put emotions aside for your patient and do what you need to do, your nursing instinct will take over and you will go into nurse mode But it is really important that when the situation is over that you reflect on your experiences and over time it will become second nature. But you will find your way off doing things the more experience and knowledge you gain over time Hope this advice helps good luck xxx
Dunblane was in 1996.
With less guns in circulation it lowers the opportunity for the wrong people to gain access to them. America's approach to guns is remains in the 18th century with the same mindset as 1776. They were probably necessary in that era. Surely it is time to be a more mature, secure modern nation than one that constantly looks back to 1776. A more open debate without yelling would be a good start. IMO
Does anyone know who Andy Murray is ? The famous British tennis player. Well he was a student at Dunblane school and was there the day the Dunblane massacre took place and he rarely speaks about it which is understandable but when he does it’s terrifying.
Yes it was the man who pulled the trigger, but if he didn't have the gun in the first place he wouldn't have been able to pull the trigger.
Exactly! As far as I'm concerned, nobody outside a strictly limited group of occupations (e.g. army, police, hunters) need to have access to firearms.
@@ftumschk agreed
Are you that stupid? Criminals don’t obey the laws mate. If they want a gun in the US, illegal or not they will get one. What you suggest is to disarm the law abiding citizens while keeping the guns in the hands of criminals? Because you know they aren’t giving up their guns.
Exactly!
@Maldonado hammer, no hes not that stupid. The facts speak for themselves. US school shooting vs UK school shootings. There shouldn't be anything more to say. Most people aren't dickheads. If it's hard to get a gun and they have a grudge they just wont bother. Before you moan look at the US vs every other country in the world.
I think a really important distinction to consider is that between "freedom to" and "freedom from".
It's not like it's something we always talk about in the UK, but it's a part of the general cultural mindset. When we say things like "to each their own", "live and let live", "different strokes for different folks" etc etc we're thinking about this idea:
Your freedom to ends where my freedom from begins.
My freedom to ends where your freedom from begins.
It's the idea that everyone is free to believe, say and do whatever they want, and the only reason to curtail those "freedoms to" is where they reach a point where exercising them impacts the "freedom from" of other people.
The freedom to own a gun is outranked in this country by the freedom from being injured or killed by legally-owned firearms.
So firearms laws recognise a small number of circumstances in which gun ownership is relatively unlikely to violence, and anyone who wants to own a gun legally has to be able to prove that they have a reason to own the gun other than violent crime, they don't meet risk factors for violent crime (like a history of violence or mental illness), and they have safety measures in place to stop other people from accessing the gun.
One person's freedom to own a gun is only allowed to exist where it's deemed to not be a threat to everyone else's freedom from being shot.
The traditional American mindset seems (from the outside at least) to prioritise freedom to over freedom from, seeing the risk of being a victim of gun violence as a sad but necessary consequence of allowing widespread gun ownership.
As a Brit I cannot understand the acceptance of "needing" a gun, I find it hard to hear someone like yourself who is smart and looking to do something with your life like nursing, where you'll see first hand on a daily basis the pain and destruction caused by guns then saying you'll probably have a gun for protection. The US is practically the only country in the world that accepts this as normal and I don't understand why or how it is. Dunblane was different to many US school massacres as the children were much younger many only 6-7 years old and the massacre wasn't carried out by a student but an adult, so the circumstances in Dunblane really made a huge impact and so far we have been lucky that a tragedy like it has never happened again and hopefully never will.
they arent balming the gun they are blaming how easy it is to get the gun
It's is easy obusuly there's 3300 gunships in our country bro igot an ar a shotgun many more
What it boils down to is this, in the U.K. we value the lives of our children more than we value the right to own handguns, in the USA , it seems you value the right to own handguns more than you value the lives of your children. That’s the bottom line.
In the US they have developed and maintained a fear and mistrust of others and so the need to defend against that. In the UK, and most of the civilised western world, that is not the case.
@@porthmeor1 what kind of excuse is that? You are basically saying we can’t protect our kids because we are too paranoid. Wtf?
Simple and straight to the fact
I came here to stay that.
@@ElwoodShort I guess truth hurts
I watch you a lot, you're very intelligent for a young person, and your willingness to learn is commendable. But the American "way" is so ingrained in you (someone who understands and feels for the loss of young children) but you still say "who am I to tell others they can't own a gun?" It amazed me that an American can still see a tragedy like Dunblane and and even Columbine and still say you'll have one when you're older and own a house. You realise that if it's that easy to get a gun, the burglar can easily have one too? The proof is in the facts, Britain has almost zero gun crime compared to the US. If it's easy to get a gun then there's more chance of that gun falling into the hands of a crazy. I think your bill of rights and the first amendment or whatever you call it is very outdated. Keep up your good work though girl. Not a personal attack. It's what you've grown up in that is the problem.
your attitude about this is literally terrifying
As a Brit, I feel very privileged to be from a country that values the lives of it's people over a constitutional law. Considering your 2nd amendment was written in the 18th century, I'd say it's about time for a change
Your expression when you heard about the father who became an activist for his daughter reminds me of every time I hear about another school shooting in the US, it’s just a sting in my heart.
I understand the difference in perspective, but it means so much to see you open up to different perspectives and educating yourself.
You see shootings and massacres everywhere, but most places it’s rare and will cause changes to prevent it from happening again.
Here in Norway we recently went through the tenth anniversary of the most violent occurrence in the country since WWII were 77 people were killed. The whole country was in shook for weeks and I still remember the disbelief we all felt though I was just 12 years old and not directly affected. I have no idea how I’d cope with seeing it happen so often.
Our gun laws are already strict, but after 22.7.2011 the police response was put into question as the response time caused the tragedy to become even greater.
Greater*
@@fionagregory9376 fixed it, it will always be some spelling mistakes, autocorrect doesn’t really help eliminate them
@@henriettethoresenbreen4421 just have to proofread.
I wouldn't say change "started with" Dunblane. There were a lot of restrictions that came in after the Hungerford massacre August 19, 1987. Michael Ryan too had a collection of legal & licensed weapons and that was the one that led to banning semi-automatic rifles and shotguns with a capacity of more than 3 cartridges.
But why give the opportunity to people who are willing to use deadly weapons, to use deadly weapons? It’s not the guns fault, but it is the fault of the society of the time that guns were accessible. There’s a weird conception in America that reducing accessibility to guns wouldn’t affect gun crime, which is ludicrous. It’s an agenda purported by the NRA as to not affect their wealth. Replace guns with anything in that logic i.e. reducing accessibility to unhealthy food wouldn’t affect obesity.
Fully automatic weapons were banned in the UK in 1938 due to the government being afraid of the rise of fascism throughout Europe, including the UK.
Semi-automatic rifles and shotguns were outlawed in 1988 after the Hungerford massacre.
1997 saw the banning of semi-automatic cartridge pistols and revolvers after the massacre at Dunblane.
As of 2006 is is also an offence to import, manufacture, or sell realistic immitation firearms.
Semi-Automatic Shotguns are not banned. 3 capacity shotguns (Pump/Semi Auto) are covered under a Shotgun licence. >3 capacity shotguns are covered under a Firearms licence.
Dunblane changed everything for us. We decided we dont need guns as much as we need our kids.
Cant see yall agreeing to give up guns and change laws unfortunately
Actually it wasn't Dunblane that changed everything in the UK, it was the Hungerford massacre in 1987. This led to The Firearms (Amendment) Act 1988, which banned certain types of weapons and introduced stricter controls for others. Dunblane simply added impetus to the momentum of change from Hungerford...
I get the idea of the person pulling the trigger is the problem not the gun but think of this: if the person can't access the gun they can pull the trigger. For me it is better to prevent someone from being able to pull the trigger in the first place by preventing them getting hold of the gun.
Eventually people will not be happy with just shooting deer, the “fun” of the chase will die down and they will eventually need new “prey”. Living in the UK and never knowing a life with guns (I was born in 1987 and was 9 when the Dunblane shooting happened). I cannot know why you would ever need one.
@@mitchellbrough1615 Which is why farmers are allowed shotguns.
its a bit daft but a shotgun is not classed as a firearm you can get a shotgun on a shotgun certificate but to get a rifle or pistol it has to be a firearms certificate
@@geoffpriestley7001 It is weird, isn't it. The govt. website page for "shotgun and firearm certificates" says "You need a firearms certificate issued by the police to possess, buy or acquire a firearm or shotgun." but then goes on to differentiate between shotgun certificates and firearm certificates. I guess it's kind of like driving licences, where different licences enable you to drive different sets of vehicles, but they're all still driving licences.
Then, they're dangerous psychopaths who should be contained. No normal person has the urge to kill something for fun
I think one of the issues with guns is the fact it allows the perpetrator to put distance between themselves and their victim unlike many other weapons. The more distance between them and their victim means more power and less perceived threat when causing harm. It’s much different from a knife as the perpetrator has to face the reality of the crime they are committing. Similar to the reasons why online bullying is such a prevalent issue, being sat behind a keyboard not faced with any immediate consequence or harm gives people a lot more power than other means of attack.
I think the logic was that if we regard mentally ill people as being able to reach a point where they commit actions they would not normally want to (e.g. suicide) then providing them with a way to get a weapon to facilitate that is also enabling for shootings and reprehensible. It also prevents extreme sociopaths etc from having as easy access so its protectionist for society too
It is a lot easier from a societal perspective to limit/ban guns to control who has guns than to control the mindsets/mental health of people stop people from killing people.
If America can ban drugs, they can ban guns. In my country, guns are seen as weapons, and weapons are meant to kill lives, so the argument that "well you cannot tell me what to do" can be applied to you cannot kill other people and animals. Hunting should be made illegal, and the only weapons that should be allowed for protection are those which can only be used to hurt an animal enough to scare her off from you or a person to get him down until the cops come
Because banning drugs has been a huge sucess in America am I right?
You say it's your constitutional right,
It's only an amendment : it can be changed or repealed.
Something I never understood is the people saying 'you can't change the constitution'. What do they think an amendment is?!
The uk gun laws are really good I own several firearms and I'm actually glad it wasn't easy to do despite the fact it was anoying because I know the wrong people aren't able to get them
I gave mine up because i couldn't meet the standard of regular use i went 6 months with out going to the range. going twice a year is not what you can call regular
The safety of the many outweighs the selfishness of the few.
Most don't agree
You say that a gun can't pull it's own trigger but it's also true that when someone goes crazy they can't go shooting people if they can't get a gun no matter how crazy they get.
Gun crime still exists in the UK though. It's now confined to wars between criminals, mainly drug gangs, who seem to have no difficulty getting hold of hand guns.
Handguns are easily concealable so are therefore seen as just as dangerous as the more deadly weapons.
In 2019 there were nearly 15,000 homicides involving guns in the US and nearly 24,000 suicides or approx 60% of the total suicide figure by firearms . In the UK there were 33 homicides using firearms and around 100 suicides or 4% approx of the total suicide figure . Obviously suicide in the UK is a big concern from other methods . Crime figures involving knife crime have risen in the UK but the chances of being shot are miniscule in comparison to the US . Illegal guns are becoming a concern in the UK with a sharp rise but the consequences are usually centered on the criminal fraternity and not the general public . The population difference needs to be taken into account but even with this the statistics are quite stark . In law enforcement ..... in the US during 2019 police shootings accounted for nearly 1000 deaths whilst in the UK the figure was 3 .
Great vid, just shows big difference to Texan and UK mindset. Personal rights are not absolute. We agree to give up our right to drive past a school at 100mph, we give up our right not to build on a National Park. So why not give up the right to own or carry a gun?
Unfortunately I think many thousands of US parents will have to suffer as there is no way this would pass a vote in the Capitol, even if a President was behind it. Can imagine Tucker Carlson and co at Fox!
It seems people in US are genuinely distrustful and fearful of their government, whereas over in UK we just think the government is an incompetent irrelevance.
One of the things that's always left out of discussion about Dunblane is that Thomas Hamilton's licence was issued despite the police being aware of his mental state and recommending that his licence be revoked. As ever, no-one was held accountable for it.
We are British thank goodness.
I am so glad we don't have the right to bare arms in the UK, the amount of deaths in the USA is just so disgusting.
we just don't have the mentality as a nation to want to....we don't carry that daily fear and mistrust of our fellow citizens like the US does.
7:23 - I think the easy response to that point ( butI know you where playing devils advocate) , cars are not designed to kill, they are designed to be driven. Guns are made and designed to kill. ALSO Really enjoying your culture reaction videos :)
Yes, but it;s the person who driving the cars. If you have dangerous drivers; ie cause a crash, death etc.
@@RunrigFan yes, but the car is still not designed to kill someone. A gun is designed to shoot and kill.. nothing else.
I have been a paediatric trauma surgeon for over 45 yrs. If you think you need to become "desensitised" to human pain and suffering to become an effective medical profession, I'm sorry, but you need to look for a different job. One can't be effected, but one must always be aware that one's patient is a person in pain.
I'm afraid the thing that saddened me most about this video was the bagatellisation of mass school shootings - all the deaths of innocents, the grief, the trauma of the survivors and the families of the dead - by calling this slaughter "shooty shoots".
"shooty shoots"??? you make these horrific murders sound like a fun playground game.
7:55 - Almost no-one in the UK needs any form of gun.
The 2nd ammendment was written during a time where guns were slow, like muskets etc. It wasn't written with semi automatics and hand guns in mind
The 2nd amendment should never have been written at all.
That is the problem with a written constitution, it can't adapt to changing situations.
@@grahvis It can, though. That's why there are amendments.
It's just that the current population of the US have made the constitution into something it was never intended to be.
Trouble is, when the 2nd amendment was made... just look at the guns they had in that period. I don't think they could even begin to imagine the kind of weapons we have thesedays back then. It needs updating to be fit for the present. Sadly, a lot of Americans just don't want to listen.
The really odd side of that coin is their penal system. Execution and sentences like life plus 182 years (not sure how anybody ever serves all of that one) so much for the 'inalienable right' to life liberty and the pursuit of happiness.
Once you shot a musket your just left with a club . By the time you reload a musket some one would have probably over powered you
There is not a strong gun culture in the UK and so the difference is that we can name every mass shooting. In my lifetime (50 years) there have been just three. Hungerford (1987), Dunblane (1996) and Cumbria (2010). After Hungerford, automatic weapons were banned. After Dunblane, hand guns laws were changed and they are much harder to own. After Cumbria, shotgun laws were changed. Yes, criminals in the UK can still get guns, but there were 30 murders by shooting (out of 683 murders in total) in 2020. In the US there were over 19,000 gun-related homicides in 2020 (and 24,000 suicides by gun). I make no specific judgement on gun ownership as there are countries which have a high rate of ownership (like Switzerland) that do not have high gun crime rates.
There were no changes to firearms legislation following the 2010 shootings in Cumbria.
That’s literally what Americans say...their freedom is more important than another persons life to them aslong as they get to keep their AR-15 because it’s in the second ammenent, it’s the culture...that’s what every American says until it’s their daughter killed, their mother, their brother then they suddenly realise how you don’t need theses weapons...people want change to happen but aren’t willing to give anything up for change...just want things to change without anyone actually changing and that is why there is such controversy about guns in America, freedom is only your freedom until you start affecting someone else’s freedom...
If the man went into a school with a knife it wouldn’t have happened the way it did
So often it comes down to what the idea of Democracy is. To some it is all about freedom, to others it is a two sided coin, freedom with responsibility.
Shooty-shoots. So cute. Your language trivialises mass killings.
You can't just repeatedly say mass sh*oting on this platform. I'm not trivializing anything kid
British people can say what is allowed in Britain.
We've had people going mad in schools in the UK with machete but without guns we get non fatal injuries and PTSD instead of fatal injuries and funerals. However, I think the French style of gun laws are probably more compatible with US culture and also seem to reduce gun violence in most cases (you still get terrorists wielding guns in France)
If the US avoids calling it “Shootie Shoots” that’s a good way to start.
Right to bare arms is the US constitution BUT people only need one weapon to defend yourself not X-number.
Why the need to defend yourself...from what?...we don't have that need in the UK.
I was the same age as those wee babies and in the same school year as them at the time in Edinburgh, and I know our school closed early and I’m pretty sure a lot of schools that day closed early. I don’t remember alot as I was only 6 but I do remember all the parents crying while picking up their kids from school and obviously every year on the date our school held a moment of silence. I don’t know if schools still do that, but we did that all the way till secondary school.
I think this was brave of you to share, and yes continue with it.
Whilst I know gun ownership in America is a right, I disagree. It is not a right to own a lethal weapon, it is a privalige and it should be earnt .x
It only takes a bit of alcohol to turn some ordinary man into a murderer.
It takes that loathsome crap to draw out their selfishness out of a shell of cowardice?
My thing is that yes its the person pulling the trigger's actions but if they were illegal to begin with he would have had no option to do it in the first place
I agree with you.
The Hungerford massacre previously had banned a lot of guns, this brought in a hand gun ban. And you saying that you need a gun for safety. That is a social issue not a gun issue. Not feeling safe in your home is not something you think of in the UK. Maybe you get broken into but very rarely violently or even if you are at home. Most is opportunist coming in through an open window or taking car keys.
A quote for English people that is similar to your “guns, freedom and god” is “for queen and country” and although it’s not such a common phrase anymore, I still that that’s pretty much the British mindset. We do still try to think for the best of all the country rather than ourselves yknow
in the UK there's been 2 mass shootings since dunblane. neither were in a school. both were in the 2010s, as far as i know.
Small detail but 9:45 is Parliament but it's not the UK Parliament, it's the Debating Chamber (sort of like the House of Commons) of Holyrood, the Scottish Parliament.
Back in 2019, Holyrood also legislated to restrict airg*n ownership in Scotland, after an incident where a 10-year-auld boy was badly injured by one.
I am glad those in Dunblane protested.
Btw in the uk primary age is usually
6-11 years old
The "guns don't kill people, people kill people" argument is so faulty. Guns do kill people. If that person hadn't been able to access deadly weapons so easily, he never would have killed all those children. But because he had his hands on those weapons, he was able to. If I stood in front of someone who wanted to shoot me but didn't have a gun, that person wouldn't be able to shoot me. Give that same person a gun, and then he will be able to shoot me easily. The only difference between those two scenarios is the gun, not the person. The person wanted to shoot me in both scenarios, but could only do so in one.
Yes the gun didn't shoot itself but would he be able to do that without the gun? If you take away the thing that let him do the bad thing he probably wouldn't of done the bad thing
This article simply isn't true guns are not or ever have been banned in the UK after Dunblane black powder handguns didn't get affected at all as for revolvers and pistols the Law did change a little the government implemented a minimum size for a handgun so now all handguns have a slightly longer barrel and a metal rod poking out the bottom of the pistol grip this makes them impossible to conceal other than that they just the same shooting competitions adapted the the new spec and carried on as normal as for smaller handguns even these are accessible under a section 7 licence these guns must stay at the club and never be taken home I've been a sports shooter for decades and still love shooting but even as a shooter myself I would change it so all target guns are section 7 and have to stay at the clubs we simply don't need them at home if we ever had a house burglary using a gun on a burglar is going to get you life for murder unless the burglar also has a gun and that never happens criminals know if they carry a gun at best they will face decades of prison but more likely getting shot themselves by the armed police and thankfully the few UK police who carry a firearm are trained to the max unlike in the US
You don’t shoot deer with an assault rifle
I think the car analogy you use is interesting. Sure, you don’t blame the car for driving into someone, you blame the driver (most of the time anyway). But we also don’t just let everyone drive a car. You have to pass a test to get a licence. Just like you have to have a licence to own a firearm in the UK.
but I buy cars to drive from A to B...not as a means of killing someone.
Quote from British film Hot Fuzz:
"DS Andy Andy Wainwright: You do know there are more g*ns in the country than there are in the city?
DS Andy Cartwright: Everybody and their mums is packing 'round here
Nicholas Angel: Like who?
DS Andy Andy Wainwright: Farmers!
Nicholas Angel: Who elses?
DS Andy Cartwright: Farmer's mums!"
My dad has a few guns but he has a gun licence so he’s allowed them and he has to keep them in a gun safe. Those are the laws
If the second part is the one where they film the parents at the school asking if there children are alive you might want to watch it first.
Dunblane, five year old children massacred by a gunman plus the teacher.
As a side note; Pistols and hand guns are far easier to conceal on ones person, whether legally or not so.
Another thing back in the day, I'm not sure about now but I was about the same age as the kids caught up in this at the time. There's no school security. There were cameras and the receptionist at the main entrance but.... that was about it.
My secondary school was right next to my primary school, and I was often sent on note errands about the shared playing fields and sending them timetables to use the secondary school facilities. I legit could just walk straight into the building and see whoever I needed to see.
I think possibly this may have changed with the super-schools popping up around here.
The tennis players Andy Murray and Jamie Murray. Where at this school on the day the shooting happened.
*WERE, not where
Does anyone know who Andy Murray is ? The famous British tennis player. Well he was a student at Dunblane school and was there the day the Dunblane massacre took place and he rarely speaks about it which is understandable but when he does it’s terrifying.
if you have a petition of over 100000 signatures, it has the right to be debated and voted on in parliament.
Those guns made it a lot easier to commit carnage. Pistols are easily concealed and can carry from 6 to 14 rounds and can be reloaded quickly. If he couldn't have got hold of those, things would've been different. That rotten second amendment needs scrapping immediately
A hard but important vid, so was a kid during dumblane so I was remember the horror here.
Also as an ex nurse please know that you're ur compassion is strength that allows you to empathise even on your hardest days. From all I've seen you will do amazing as you are.
I think one of the worst things with Dunblane was that it was all 5 and 6 year olds which seems somehow more shocking. I know it’s awful when in it’s anyone, but they are so young and helpless.
Andy Murray the Tennis Player was a pupil at that school when that happened.
This situation was so much different that seeing a few people shot. This was 5 and 6 year old kids. 16 of them coming in with bullet wounds. I'd be more worried if that didn't damage a person mentally.
Age restrictions would be useful, as would much more stringent vetting for mental health issues (ie: psychological evaluation BEFORE being able to buy a weapon). That way your right to own a firearm still remains with the exception of felons, the underage and the mentally ill.
Oh and tennis champion Andy Murray was one of the kids in the school that day.
The UK does require vetting for mental health issues. If you want a gun in the UK you need character assessments from several people who know you and the police who regulate the licences will talk to the NHS to see if there is any history of mental illness in your medical records. Plus the police will do a home inspection to asses the security of the gun safe. I remember in the past the police would come round periodically to inspect my grandfathers gun safe for spot checks. You can learn a lot about a person from their living space if you come round unannounced. I don't know if the police still do spot checks; as I know the council no longer does spot hygiene checks in kitchens, you get a weeks advance notice now, which total defeats the purpose of a spot check!
When your toddler misbehaves, what do you do? Do you allow them to to continue, because they are showing their independence and Freedom?
NRA.... need to be held to account for the mass shootings. If they dont want to ban guns they need to come up with soloutions. If their actions dont reduce cases then NRA shouod be fined and have rules imposed.
The tightening of gun control probably started in 1987 after the Hungerford massacre where 16 people died and 15 injured at the hands of Michael Ryan. It was further reinforced after Dunblane. Further regulation took place after the Cumbria massacre where Derrick Byrd took the lives of 12 and injured 11. Hungerford while seeing the largest number of casualties was eclipsed by the atrocity at Dunblane due to it involving children. I still vividly remember that day. The difference between the States and the U.K. is that our government is not heavily influenced by a movement similar to the NRA and that most do not view firearms as weapons but as tools. The only exception would be Northern Ireland where we are allowed sidearms as personal protection but even then you need to prove to the PSNI that this is so and their intelligence supports this.
Hunters are still allowed licences for hunting. That's one of the few exceptions in the UK.
Do the 2nd amendment nut jobs stand for ALL AMENDMENTS
Blame the men who make it easy for others to buy guns, without questions asked. While you know that they might use it. If you know that someone likes irresponsable speeding , don't give that person a sports car.
I live about 15 minute drive from Dunblane and will never forget when it happened. You should react to the Dunblane documentary, it’s emotional but a great story.
700,000 signing the petition is even more impressive when you consider that it was physical signatures, it was pre internet which means hours upon hours of volunteering and canvasing,
The Dunblane massacre was entirely avoidable. The man had his firearms taken because he was unstable but he was given them back because he knew people in the local police. The UK rarely had any mass shootings or even serious gun crime before the ban, after the ban we saw a drop but that's arguably more down to the improving social conditions, now we are seeing gun crimes increase again because criminals don't obey gun laws. The reasoning behind the ban could easily apply to knives and fireworks because both can be used to kill a lot of people.
I think, it may well be up to the young generation of the USA , for things to change. 🇬🇧🇺🇸☮️
The video is incorrect. Private ownership of handguns and semi-automatic rifles are not banned but they are heavily restricted.
Semi auto rifles are limited to .22 calibre with bolt actions limited to .50.
Handguns with a barrel shorter than 30 cm (12 in) or a total length of less than 60 cm (24 in) are illegal which essentially means pistols. But you can have a handgun with an elongated barrel up to .22.
And this is only in Great Britain. In Northern Ireland conventional semi auto pistols are legal and can be openly carried in the street.
Dont forget cap and ball revolvers
It is illegal for any civilian to use, carry or possess a firearm or ammunition without a valid firearm certificate which correctly specifies the owner, the weapon, the ammunition and its maximum permitted quantity. Certificates are issued by a police Superintendent of the Garda for a maximum of three years. There are very few licences issued and tend to be for specific reasons.
Get away with the 'shoote shoots' haha
Unless things change, big time in the USA, it will always be thought of as - The Wild West, for obvious reasons, sadly. 🇬🇧🇺🇸☮️
It is not banned .just they check to see if you are barking bonkers ,or not ,then if you are judged to be a right ISH person .storage is checked.and will be inspected periodically mental health issues mean.your weapons are taken.away..
Knife crime is the main issue in Britain 4624 hospital administration 54 fatality in a pandemic 2020/292
50-55 seconds didn't age well 😭RIP the Plymouth victims 🇬🇧
Andy Murray the tennis player was at that school when it happened.
Your second amendment states that you have the right to bare arms, this is a link to the need for a militia at the beginning of the US, firstly your government could state that to own a firearm you must be a member of a militia and the Government would control those, secondly it’s does not say what type of arms you can bare, so if you want to keep firearms your Government could easily define what type of firearm can be made public and then control that, they could use a buy back period and give a time frame in which to give up any weapons you have that do not conform, after that period owning a weapon that does not comply would be a crime and could be either a prison sentence or fine depending on the type or number of weapons held.
thats how easily its done
In your future career you wil no doubt encounter the fall out from weapons bought for protection being used for aggression and it's not just guns. There's blades too. While gun violence is less common here in the UK it still exists although knife crime is a much bigger issue.
I remember seeing this on the news, I was about 9 at the time.
Why would anyone want to even hunt a deer? So bizarre to me.
The Differences in History, Geography, Wildlife, Government, Population density, social attitudes and Freedoms make any comparisson between the UK and US impossible. Of course those same differences also apply beteween many of the States which is why any long lasting solution to this issue will probably come by removing the right to bare arms from the US constitution and transferring it to the individual state constitutions within the union for them to agree and administer. Never happen though.
*BEAR arms
Different cultures. We don't have the same attitude to hunting as Americans do. We don't have the NRA ploughing money into political parties. We also don't have dangerous animals as you have in the USA. But you have to ask yourselves how many more deaths by shooting do you have to have before you restrict guns. Even if you ignore mass shootings you have many more deaths by shootings than anywhere else in the world. We have had three mass shootings in the past 20 years. Dunblane, Hungerford and in Northumberland. Your right in that people have to pull the trigger it's not guns themselves. However, if people didn't have access to guns then they can't shoot someone.
To stop the loonies in the US, strict psychological evaluation to be added to the background checks.
Let us scale the argument up to a rediculoul level. If you make it easy for a dictiator to get a hold of atomic weapons i becomes a lot easier for her to glass a city. She may not choose to do this but by negligence you have enable the possiblilty. If you let every dictator, elpresidente and Junta have nuclear arms it would be much more likely to see an atomic exchange and so the UN commits vast resources to provent this from happening.
It is the same principle on a smaller scale. By giving everyone access to rapid firepower you will see a small minoriy abuse that oportunity and thus there will be consequence. What have these been? I do not think I have to tell you or anyone what this has cost America.