frizoid Posted March 13, 2006 Share Posted March 13, 2006 http://www.crimelibrary.com/notorious_m ... index.html On 13 March we commemorate the tenth anniversary of the Dunblane primary school shooting in Scotland , in which 16 small children and their teacher lost their lives. Two other teachers and 12 more children were wounded. The solitary assailant was armed with high-powered handguns that had been legally obtained. The public outrage, sorrow and anger resulting from the Dunblane massacre led to the UK banning the civilian ownership of handguns in 1997. Britain 's gun control organisation, the Gun Control Network, was at the forefront of the campaign to ban handguns. GCN is an active IANSA member and continues to campaign for reforms to prevent gun violence in the UK. The anniversary of Dunblane is a time to remember those who were lost in this, the most shocking civilian shooting in Britian's collective memory, to reevaluate how far we have come to building a safe and secure society, and to consolidate our energy for the battles we still have yet to fight, to ensure that this never happens again. 16 small lifes lost....too young to understand, I was only 10 years old when it happened but I remember it like it was yesterday, coming home and seeing it on the news...the paper filled with the childrens faces the next day...horrible. Say a prayer for them tonight. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Harrington Posted March 13, 2006 Share Posted March 13, 2006 I remember this well. Dunblane is only a 20 minute drive from where I live... You should see what they've done to the schools around here since. Every primiary and secondary school has had huge fences errected around them (as if that's gonna stop a gun totting maniac like Hamilton), and to be honest, they all look like prisons now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anesthesia Posted March 13, 2006 Share Posted March 13, 2006 It was a terrible thing to happen, possibly the worst crime to happen during my life. However, banning the use of handguns just takes them out of the hands of legitimate users - criminals will still get hold of them just as easily, it's not as though they applied for firearms licenses in the first place. Some people are changed by being a moderator. I wouldn't be. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phil Posted March 13, 2006 Share Posted March 13, 2006 I remember this well. Dunblane is only a 20 minute drive from where I live... Same here, ~20 mins away. Don't think I'll ever forget it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stevester77 Posted March 13, 2006 Share Posted March 13, 2006 However, banning the use of handguns just takes them out of the hands of legitimate users - criminals will still get hold of them just as easily, it's not as though they applied for firearms licenses in the first place. What he said ^. Im sure the event was a tragedy for the country, but banning handguns all together was a bit extreme. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr_Putter Posted March 13, 2006 Share Posted March 13, 2006 However, banning the use of handguns just takes them out of the hands of legitimate users - criminals will still get hold of them just as easily, it's not as though they applied for firearms licenses in the first place. What he said ^.Of course they will, but this guy got his guns legally. It would at least slow down potential criminals and dangerous people... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bubsa Posted March 13, 2006 Share Posted March 13, 2006 However, banning the use of handguns just takes them out of the hands of legitimate users - criminals will still get hold of them just as easily, it's not as though they applied for firearms licenses in the first place. What he said ^.Of course they will, but this guy got his guns legally. It would at least slow down potential criminals and dangerous people... Exactly, it can't do anything but help, even if it is a little. This is how much you all raised for charity. Thank you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anesthesia Posted March 13, 2006 Share Posted March 13, 2006 In that case why not ban all cars? They cause a lot more deaths than handguns. Just because it can help reduce deaths doesn't mean there aren't legitimate uses too, and it is the legitimate users that pay - not the criminals. Some people are changed by being a moderator. I wouldn't be. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bubsa Posted March 13, 2006 Share Posted March 13, 2006 In that case why not ban all cars? They cause a lot more deaths than handguns. I'd like to see you drive a car into an assembly hall. This is how much you all raised for charity. Thank you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anesthesia Posted March 13, 2006 Share Posted March 13, 2006 What has an assembly hall got to do with anything? Hundreds if not thousands of children are killed each year -without the perpetrators even WANTING to do it- by cars, how is the place it happens relevant? They still die regardless of where. My point is not that banning cars would be a good idea, but that they are both bad ideas. Some people are changed by being a moderator. I wouldn't be. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
frizoid Posted March 13, 2006 Author Share Posted March 13, 2006 However, banning the use of handguns just takes them out of the hands of legitimate users - criminals will still get hold of them just as easily, it's not as though they applied for firearms licenses in the first place. What he said ^. Im sure the event was a tragedy for the country, but banning handguns all together was a bit extreme. Yeah but you come from America, gun crimes there are a daily occurance, they barely hit the news most of the time, don't you think thats wrong? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bubsa Posted March 13, 2006 Share Posted March 13, 2006 Hundreds if not thousands of children are killed each year -without the perpetrators even WANTING to do it- by cars, how is the place it happens relevant? They still die regardless of where. Come on, you know there's a difference. People buy cars as a mode of transport among other things, but there's only one reason for having a gun and that's to hurt and/or kill someone. Just because it can help reduce deaths doesn't mean there aren't legitimate uses too, and it is the legitimate users that pay - not the criminals. Sorry to go back to what you said before, but I can't see one legitimate use of a handgun. I appreciate, however, this is just my quite liberal view on the matter, but I'll argue strongly against any legitimate reason for owning a gun. It would be foolish for me to assume that banning guns would significantly reduce gun crime and I accept that. However, in the same way that Class-A drugs are illegal to protect people, so should, in my view, be guns. Plus, a gun is going to kill you a lot quicker than drugs. Again though, I know availability of guns (and equally these drugs) isn't exactly plummetting, but I believe an example should be set for future generations. It is in my opinion by legalising weapons, and that's all they are; weapons to hurt people, set's the completely wrong example. This is how much you all raised for charity. Thank you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anesthesia Posted March 13, 2006 Share Posted March 13, 2006 Come on, you know there's a difference. People buy cars as a mode of transport among other things, but there's only one reason for having a gun and that's to hurt and/or kill someone. The majority of legit handguns were used for sport, target shooting in particular. Football is also a sport. A sport I find pointless but it exists nonetheless and there is huge amounts of violence associated with it, on a much larger scale than shootings. As for the only reason for having one being to kill someone - that's complete tripe. The vast majority of legit rifles and shotguns in the UK now are used for hunting game or clay pigeon shooting. Sorry to go back to what you said before, but I can't see one legitimate use of a handgun. That's because you can't have looked very hard, the use is for sport. Class-A drugs are illegal to protect people, so should, in my view, be guns. Plus, a gun is going to kill you a lot quicker than drugs. A gun will (except in a tiny TINY fraction of times) only kill you if there's someone on the other end of it who wants you dead. That malice must be there (again with the tiny exception of accidents compared to malicious deaths), and if it isn't a gun they have to kill you with then they'll use a knife. Or there's folks like the guy who tried to play russian roulette with a magazine loaded pistol - but that's just natural selection. Drugs can kill you accidentally through overdosing, them being cut with something you didn't expect or something that's toxic, or a multitude of other ways. Drugs alter your judgement and some could make you think you can fly so you jump out a window. They can kill you without someone TRYING to make you die. I'm not saying we should be like America, but if you can prove you have a good reason for owning ONE gun and follow all the required security measures then I think you should be able to have one. If a criminal wants a gun he's gonna get one anyway, why stop the legitimate users. As for the Dunblane guy being a 'legitimate' gun owner, with the amount of premeditation it took for him to get to and go into the school he must have been pretty determined to do it - I don't think you can really say he wouldn't have done it had he not been able to get a gun legally. Some people are changed by being a moderator. I wouldn't be. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bubsa Posted March 13, 2006 Share Posted March 13, 2006 A gun will (except in a tiny TINY fraction of times) only kill you if there's someone on the other end of it who wants you dead. That malice must be there (again with the tiny exception of accidents compared to malicious deaths), and if it isn't a gun they have to kill you with then they'll use a knife. True, but would you not say that pointing and shooting a gun can be done in the heat of the moment? If anger takes over and someone picks up a gun, then pulls the trigger before actually stopping to think about what they're doing, it's more often than not too late. I'm not saying we should be like America, but if you can prove you have a good reason for owning ONE gun and follow all the required security measures then I think you should be able to have one. If a criminal wants a gun he's gonna get one anyway, why stop the legitimate users. As for the Dunblane guy being a 'legitimate' gun owner, with the amount of premeditation it took for him to get to and go into the school he must have been pretty determined to do it - I don't think you can really say he wouldn't have done it had he not been able to get a gun legally. Gah, I think you're right. I think I just don't want to believe it when you read and hear about things like Dunblane. Pretty foolish, I know. I guess you can say as well that if someone has a gun for sport then the majority are not going to be the irresponsible type to use it to shoot people. In any case, my hopes are with family, friends and survivors of the event. This is how much you all raised for charity. Thank you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now