Do you have adblock enabled?
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(BBC)   Gangs didn't take part in gun amnesty   ( divider line
    More: Obvious  
•       •       •

6650 clicks; posted to Main » on 01 May 2003 at 12:05 AM (14 years ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»

101 Comments     (+0 »)

Oldest | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | » | Newest | Show all

2003-04-30 03:38:12 PM  
Porky do not even carry a weapon (firearm) do he?
UMmmmmmmmmnn!!! Kidney Pie
2003-04-30 03:46:07 PM  
Criminals weren't disarmed? How shocking!
2003-04-30 03:47:37 PM  
[image from too old to be available]
2003-04-30 03:50:10 PM  
While appreciating that getting 20,000 weapons off the street through the amnesty is a success for the police, he thinks the problem can only be tackled through education, both preventative and rehabilitation.

'Round these parts we call that brainwashing.
2003-04-30 03:53:32 PM  
Gee... now only the criminals have guns while the populous is left even more defenseless (or perhaps even defenceless). Now where have I heard that before?

Join the NRA already!
2003-04-30 04:09:29 PM  
Had they asked him, Mr Edwards would have told the police to set up the amnesty in a neutral venue.

"Somewhere people feel comfortable - social clubs or with their probation officers.

Probation officers?!!

PO: Have you been staying out of trouble?
Parolly: Of course. I'm on the straight and narrow. By the way. Here's a rocket launcher and a couple of sawed off shotguns. Have a nice Day.
PO: You too. And remember to stay out of trouble.
2003-04-30 08:49:12 PM  
[image from too old to be available] He could not be reached for comment...

/got nothin'
2003-04-30 11:52:43 PM  
Ah yes, gun amnesty incentives. Just another of many "feel good" programs that accomplish nothing.
2003-05-01 12:10:10 AM  
why those sneaky bassturds!
now what do we do!?

gun amnesty and laws are a joke
there should be more education and training, so kids stop shooting each other, but to think that outlawing guns disarms criminals is an utter joke.
2003-05-01 12:11:42 AM  
Of course the gun amnesty accomplishes something. It paves the way for the Free Speech Amnesty (available for a limited time only).
2003-05-01 12:11:50 AM  
Today's links did not take part in Fark front page symmetry.
2003-05-01 12:13:45 AM  
I say we make a curfew and kill anyone not inside past curfew. After a while there will be no crime.
2003-05-01 12:14:20 AM  
2003-05-01 12:14:26 AM  
Hrmph! Just stop persecuting people who defend themselves.

A government that wages war on its own citizens is doomed to failure.
2003-05-01 12:16:08 AM  
I say we make a curfew and kill anyone not inside past curfew. After a while there will be no crime.

/pushes Minasaglar outside and locks the door
2003-05-01 12:16:20 AM  
But then you'd have to kill the killers, because they were outside past the curfew. And then you'd have to kill the killers of the killers...wash-rinse-repeat
2003-05-01 12:16:32 AM  

"Of course the gun amnesty accomplishes something. It paves the way for the Free Speech Amnesty (available for a limited time only)."

How true. When the shrinking-violet liberals who alledgedly champion free speech realize this, maybe we'll get somewhere.
2003-05-01 12:17:26 AM  
Yeah Minasagler, doing away with civil liberties would totally solve the problem, 'cause I mean it's totally impossible to shoot someone in broad daylight and get away with it.
2003-05-01 12:17:46 AM  
"That's why people take things into their own hands"
-Mr. Edwards

"Everywher, Eeryone thinks the same thing - That someone should just go kill those motherf**kers, kill 'em all. Admit, even you've thought about it?
-Murphy McManus
2003-05-01 12:18:18 AM  
I wish I had a ma-duece. or a BMG.

Guns that fire slugs the size of a chapstick container make peace, as in "You'd best not argue with them!"

Gun laws make a nation weak, in case you are wondering.
2003-05-01 12:19:52 AM  
They need more threats.
[image from too old to be available]
Like tell them that if they don't turn in their guns that Michael Moore will personally come and eat their children, brothers, and sisters. Now THAT's gun control.
2003-05-01 12:24:17 AM  
Michael Moore. Now there's a guy who hasn't missed too many meals...
2003-05-01 12:25:44 AM  

I say we make a curfew and kill anyone not inside past curfew. After a while there will be no crime.

So off-shift workers get pwnt on their way home, pregnant women who have babies after curfew get fragged, OTR drivers become instant criminals, and the guy that runs the donut shop dodges fire on his way to work.

Sounds like a MadMax movie.
2003-05-01 12:27:50 AM  
Brits have street gangs? I thought we invented that.
2003-05-01 12:37:14 AM  
I get it! Because Micheal Moore is fat. AND fat people eat alot. PLUS he's fat and a liberal. SOOOOOOOO...he'll eat alot if they don't listen to his liberal agenda.

Michael Moore IS the weakest LINK!!! And THAT is my final answer!!!

2003-05-01 12:43:16 AM  
How about we just kill people who can't take a joke....?
2003-05-01 12:47:09 AM  
Sound like they need Lando Griffin to straighten them out.
2003-05-01 12:48:22 AM  
2003-05-01 12:49:11 AM  
Cockfaces won't take my image.
2003-05-01 12:51:34 AM  


Heheheh.... fat liberals.
2003-05-01 12:52:24 AM  
Uh, did anyone catch on that this is in England?

And just to twist some tails before I crawl off to bed. There are very few gun owners in Britain relative to the US. Obviously, though, British criminals can get guns. So why is it that the number of gun deaths in England is only a fraction of what we have here no matter how you slice it?

(IE Yes, I know they are a smaller country, so look at it per capita or compare pretty much any English city with a similarly sized US city.)
2003-05-01 12:55:32 AM  
Because British gun deaths were low before gun control became a bigger issue. Of course, gun crime in Britain has increased since laws were passed to disarm citizen's and make it much safer for the criminals.
2003-05-01 12:57:30 AM  
if you outlaw guns, only the outlaws have guns.

/or something

2003-05-01 12:59:37 AM  
Avery1415-"So why is it that the number of gun deaths in England is only a fraction of what we have here no matter how you slice it?"

A more homogenous culture and population as well as a greater emphasis on social issues?

Just my guess.
2003-05-01 01:00:54 AM  
sorry ole chap! mind the bullets. would you please hand over your wallets?
thank you so very much.
would you mind terribly if we sexually offended your lady friends? no? terrific!
2003-05-01 01:03:22 AM  
Before this becomes a flame war: Most police officers oppose gun amnesty/cash for guns programs, because those guns uasually get destroyed, preventing them from being used in prosicution of crimes commited by the gang members who turn them in. The gang members only use the money to buy other "clean" guns.
2003-05-01 01:07:27 AM  
but with pennies on the dollar being paid in such schemes doesn't it seem likely that eventually they'd pay off?

the streets will always, in the foreseeable future, have a gun culture aspect to them.

but ignoring the problem and not taking guns off the street would seem to be a type of surrender.

would you really want your local law enforcement agency to start surrendering to thugs?
2003-05-01 01:18:49 AM  
Criminals with guns? I'm shocked, simply shocked...
2003-05-01 01:22:13 AM  
What if the police are actual thugs themselves?
2003-05-01 01:27:05 AM  
nobody really.

but would you rather place your trust in the local police department or or in the local crack dealer.

common sense ain't all that common...but which side of the fence would you rather err?
2003-05-01 01:30:59 AM  
Sounds like the British cops need to get out and whoop some ass.

I mean seriously - it sounds like the cops know at least some of the gang members. They need to get out and be in their face, not sit back and watch the carnage. And they probably need laws to back them up for a change.
2003-05-01 01:34:10 AM  
i had an english girlfriend and spent a bit of time there. one of my buddies went over with me for a week or so once. he mentioned how wussified it was that cops there didn't carry guns and that firearms were only called up in the most extreme situations.

i mentioned 'well...what does it say about our society if your cops need to carry guns 24/7?'

think about it people.
2003-05-01 01:42:40 AM  
DerekSD, I'd rather not depend on *anyone*, instead rellying on my own abilities to secure my immediate safety from muggings, carjackings, and burglaries.

What does it mean of a populace depending entirely upon police protection for their safety? Without a cop on every street corner and in every home and establishment, I wouldn't find that at all reassuring.
2003-05-01 01:44:02 AM  
Gun control laws only apply to people who obey the law???
2003-05-01 01:54:03 AM  
i understand mcflizzy.
i wouldn't rely on our local police and emergency services to be the first line of defense. look at how long statistics tell us that it takes for a response.

but there is an amount of acceptable 'gunplay' that is acceptable in our culture that is considered barbaric elsewhere.

it's a chicken vs. egg argument when you get down to the nitty gritty. but elsewhere what may not work in one place may work in another. at least the police in other parts of the world are trying a method other than what has failed here.
2003-05-01 01:55:46 AM  
yes johnny_wadd, gun control laws only apply to those who obey gun control laws.

much as currently enforced laws apply to those who who obey currently enforced laws.
2003-05-01 01:58:15 AM  
You have more gun related deaths here, because you have these vast urban housing projects full of poor folks, who sell drugs to buy diapers, and shoot each other all the damn time. You make it to 35 in one of those places, and you are an old timer.

The majority of your gun related crime is in inner cities, and THIS is what skews the gun violence numbers. These skewed numbers are what the gun control advocates wave around, and say that the entire nation is awash with gun crazy lunatics. Ever read the NRA's hunting magazine or American Rifleman?

Each month, they devote an entire page, to law abiding gun owning citizens, that use there lawfully owned, registered firearms, to defend themselves, there businesses, and there families.

Guns aren't the problem, weak laws, and an inability to invoke an eye for an eye death penalty system, that revokes any rights to living among us, if they willingly and purposefully kill someone. Get rid of the killers, and you won't have any killing.

Stop parolling them, stop trying to re-habilitate them, stop sticking them in prison for life, and shoot them in the temple with a .357 Magnum.

I'll bet you'd see a lot less murdering after you got rid of all these homicidal sociopaths, the ones left behind, would think twice about ending there life by taking someone elses.
2003-05-01 02:00:34 AM  

it's weak enforcement of gun laws currently on the books.

how can you improve on something that hasn't already been tried and tested?
2003-05-01 02:07:27 AM  
I am an NRA life member. I own 30+ firearms. None have been used in a crime.
2003-05-01 02:11:59 AM  
but what about the one person who owns one illegally?
Displayed 50 of 101 comments

Oldest | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | » | Newest | Show all

This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking

On Twitter

Top Commented
Javascript is required to view headlines in widget.
  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.