| Submit your comments on this article |
| Britain |
| Think tank: If each of us carried a gun . . . |
| 2008-12-08 |
| Posted by:BrerRabbit |
| #7 Only 99 years ago in Merrie Old England: "n January 1909 two anarchists, lately come from an attempt to blow up the president of France, tried to commit a robbery in north London, armed with automatic pistols. Edwardian Londoners, however, shot back – and the anarchists were pursued through the streets by a spontaneous hue-and-cry. The police, who could not find the key to their own gun cupboard, borrowed at least four pistols from passers-by, while other citizens armed with revolvers and shotguns preferred to use their weapons themselves to bring the assailants down." |
| Posted by: Anguper Hupomosing9418 2008-12-08 17:33 |
| #6 Y'all seem to have missed the part about getting training at the closest Mil Base. I'm not forcing folks to use only a gun, the Knife expert can be issued a "Permit" to be "Unarmed" (So to speak)or just let him throw it in a drawer. I for one would rather whoever be armed with whatever they can use best Whatever it is, the pistol is meant as a minimum., you want to use a UZI? Qualify and all OK, no "Spray and Pray". |
| Posted by: Rednek Jim 2008-12-08 15:34 |
| #5 Rednek Jim: The Kennesaw model is a good one, but especially because there are no penalties for not carrying. The rationale is simple: while society should desire an armed citizenry, a goodly percentage of the citizenry know that they are unable to be armed, without being a danger to those around them. Call it an "incompetence exemption". This can be anything from arthritis to being a stumble bum, and knowing it. Then, of course, the odd exception, such as one guy I knew who abhorred guns because he was a master knife fighter. For him, guns were just a hunk of metal that got in the way. As far as England goes, they need a well funded and persistent pro-gun lobbying organization with a 20 year plan to restore gun rights incrementally. |
| Posted by: Anonymoose 2008-12-08 14:49 |
| #4 Spend a week in Hawaii, Jim, and you might change your mind about arming everyone. Just check out the way they drive and extrapolate to handling firearms. "Wa' fo "safety", Bro?" |
| Posted by: Hupuger Dingle5364 2008-12-08 13:51 |
| #3 I personaly think every able bodied person should be REQUIRED to carry, perhaps we could get the Army to issue a .45 and two loaded clips and require weapons training. (Best at a military base nearby) Shortly the thugs and dopers will all be dead, killed by their fellow thugs and dopers. Mind you this is a minimum, you can buy whatever you can handle. 12 gage pump comes to mind. Require records kept on who got what (Numbered) gun, with very severe penalties for having someone's issued gun but yours. Run out of ammo or your gun is stolen, report to your nearest Mil Base or police dept at once. they'll take your report, issue another and ammo. and woe be the person who commits a robbery with his or your gun, his gun, shoot on sight, your gun, hunt down and shoot on sight. The first few weks will be lively, especially in places like Chicago and DC, but it should die down (Pun intended) and the whole country will be safer. |
| Posted by: Rednek Jim 2008-12-08 12:10 |
| #2 Actually, for males between 18-45 I think, they're weapon is fully automatic. Women get the choice on keeping a semi-auto or automatic if they choose. |
| Posted by: Silentbrick 2008-12-08 11:46 |
| #1 Correctly me if I'm wrong, but the Swiss are required to maintain their 'militia' issued weapon [modern semi-automatic] and a basic load of ammunition in their abode. |
| Posted by: Procopius2k 2008-12-08 10:19 |