In response to:

NRA: School Security Only Possible With Armed Good Guys

Resist, We Much!!! Wrote: Dec 21, 2012 1:57 PM
"It is unacceptable that each day on average more than 26,000 people fall victim to crime and the police report stubbornly high levels of violence – on average 1,000 people are injured each day." - Home Secretary Theresa May I agree and that's why they should be able to defend themselves without the threat of a life sentence in prison, which is what happened to farmer, Tony Martin, when he shot one of two home invaders to death defending himself and his home. While self-defence was rejected by on appeal, the conviction was reduced later to manslaughter on the basis of psychological testimony that Mr Martin suffered from a "borderline personality disorder" that manifested itself in a "phobia about people breaking into his home."
Resist, We Much!!! Wrote: Dec 21, 2012 1:57 PM
His tariff was reduced from life to 5 years and he was released after serving 3 due to his good behaviour in prison.

There were 51 gun deaths in the UK in 2011 a decrease of 18%, but the year also marked a jump in the number of legally-held guns by 1.8 million so, obviously, more guns do not, necessarily, result in more gun deaths.

For some reason, gun control advocates like Piers Morgan, the "Do Somethings!" and the "Absolute Shalls" in the United States think that the fact that the UK has a lower rate of gun deaths is something to celebrate in and of itself. But, is it really? My questions to them are:

Does it really matter the manner of death is or what tool is used to kill?

If you are about to be raped, wouldn't you rather kill
Resist, We Much!!! Wrote: Dec 21, 2012 1:58 PM
the MoFo before he assaults you or, in the very least, scare him away?

Would you rather have the deaths, including those from self-defence, from guns rate increase or the violence rate skyrocket?

In other words, do you want to be the statistic or would you rather it be your would-be perpetrator?

Are not hammers, tyre irons, waffle irons, golf clubs, baseball bats and fists all possible "assault weapons"? What would you rather have in the middle of the night to defend your family against two home invaders: a gun or a Louisville Slugger, which - to the surprise of few, who know how the British governing class thinks - became the new "you don't need that!" item during the August 2011 riots?

During the riots, sales of aluminum truncheons
Resist, We Much!!! Wrote: Dec 21, 2012 1:59 PM
and baseball bats skyrocketed, with some items achieving sales 50,000% above normal. was doing unbelievable sales on these types of items because people wanted to be able to defend themselves, which became increasingly necessary as the Metropolitan police were told to stand down.

“This crosses the line when it involves weapons. That just encourages the sense of fear – we want to reduce tension and fear in the area. People with baseball bats roaming the streets is not helpful: don’t go on Amazon buying them.”

- Stella Creasy, Labour MP for Walthamstow

It's that kind of insensitive, living-in-the-bubble asininity that roils the blood of so many. People were not buying truncheons for sport so that they could go out and
Resist, We Much!!! Wrote: Dec 21, 2012 1:59 PM
take the heads off of some yobs. Most were inside their homes cowering or were scurrying from home to work or market with head and eyes facing downward, if they had to venture outside. There were business owners, too, that tried to protect their life's work. Despite the taunts of the feral children and the occasional Trustafarian tag-along looking for a good time, these business owners were not "fatcats" and "the evil rich." Most were working class immigrants, who were just trying to save their little plot of prosperity and, for that, the dolers believed they deserved to be destroyed and idiots like Stella Creasy thought that they should be defenceless. " Just give way, my good man. The dole is always here. No need for
Resist, We Much!!! Wrote: Dec 21, 2012 2:00 PM
self-sufficiency! How crass anyway!"

After the gun ban went into effect, the increase in knife crimes and stabbings soared galatically. In 1997, the year Labour came to power and the gun ban passed, there were 4,489 prosecutions in England for knife crimes. By 2006, that figure had jumped to 7,699.

There was a 48% increase in serious knife-related hospital admissions between 1997/98 and 2006/7 and between 2003 and 2007 knife-wound hospital admissions for under-16s increased by 62.7%. This led the Home Affairs Select Committee in its report on knife crime to speculate that the increase in serious knife wounds "may indicate that knives are being used to inflict more serious wounds." In other news, water is wet. Taking away guns does
Resist, We Much!!! Wrote: Dec 21, 2012 2:00 PM
not take away the desire to harm. People just find another way of inflicting the damage. I know. It is a novel theory.

In 2008, the Home Office released the statistics for knife crimes for the 12 months ending in March, 2008. To say that the figures were shocking would be an understatement. The annual crime statistics showed that there were 22,151 crimes committed involving knives in ENGLAND and WALES only. This figure did not include the estimated 250 fatal stabbings, which were recorded separately. The data further showed that 231 were related to attempted murders; 5,248 were cases of wounding with intent; 2,785 were related to grievous bodily harm; 2,359 were cases of robbery to business premises and 11,528 were related to the
Resist, We Much!!! Wrote: Dec 21, 2012 2:01 PM
robbery of personal property.

The number of knife homicides rose by 26.9% between 2005/06 and 2006/07. There were 270 knife homicides in 2007/08: the highest total since the Homicide Index was introduced in 1977.

According to the Crime Survey for England and Wales, there were a reported 29,613 knife crimes in the year ending in June 2012 with a 10% increase in knifing robberies alone, Before you ask, it is illegal to carry knives in the UK. I know. Why haven't people obeyed the law? 40% of all the murders of young people in the UK are committed with knives, but they are illegal. What's up with that? /

Now, if you are a "Do Something!" or an "Absolute Shall" that looks at UK knife crime and still thinks it looks good compared to
Resist, We Much!!! Wrote: Dec 21, 2012 2:02 PM
American gun crime, then just wait a few because a "knife crime" doesn't necessarily mean a stabbing. Under the Prevention of Crime Act of 1953, it became illegal to have an offencive weapon in a public place. This included ''any article made or adapted for use for causing injury to the person, or intended by the person having it with him for such use by him or by some other person." The Restriction of Offencive Weapons Act of 1959 banned the carrying, manufacture, sale, purchase, hire or lending of flick-knives and ''gravity knives." The Criminal Justice Act of 1988 contained a list of prohibited martial arts-style weapons and made it an offence to carry an article with a blade or sharp point in a public place. The Offencive Weapons
Resist, We Much!!! Wrote: Dec 21, 2012 2:02 PM
Act of 1996 made it illegal to sell knives to children under the age of 16. The Knives Act of 1997 prohibited the marketing of combat knives. The Violent Crime Reduction Act of 2005 banned the sale of knives to anyone under 18. So, the govvie pretty much covered all of the sharpies, but the definition of a "knife crime" has been far more elusive because, for example, a sword, axes, and razor sharp "cat skinners" -- all have been used -- aren't knives.

So, as bad as the increase in "knife" crimes was after the gun ban, it was nothing compared to what happened to the "stabbings" rate. In 2008, both the Government's Offending, Crime and Justice Survey and the bigger British Crime Survey estimated that there were nearly 60,000 stabbings in
Resist, We Much!!! Wrote: Dec 21, 2012 2:03 PM
England and Wales each year or a rate of 98.36 per 100,000 inhabitants.

How bad has the stabbing situation become in the UK AND, more importantly, the Nanny State need to micromanage safety? The "Do Something!" move is on to require pubs serve beverages in only non-shatterproof glass or plastic. Considering the fact that official figures show more than 5,500 people are attacked every year in pubs with glasses and bottles in England and Wales, will a ban on china and crockery follow when they become the chosen "weapons of war" by drunken brawlers?

Despite more laws banning more objects and sales to various people, the rate of knifings, knife-related crimes, and stabbings continued to increase. Paradoxically, the sheeple of Britain
Resist, We Much!!! Wrote: Dec 21, 2012 2:04 PM
demand more cowbell. Instead of demanding a right to defend themselves, more police on the street, and stiffer prison terms (for example, in 2010 only 19% of knife possession offences led to prison terms and the average tariff was 4.8 months), many continue to demand more laws that criminals aren’t going to obey anyway. So, now, while it is quite conceivable that a woman can be detained or even arrested for carrying a plastic knife back to the office (don’t laugh - more than a few have been convicted for carrying a plastic knife in public even when they had no illicit intent), she cannot carry a gun to save her life or ward off a potential rapist.
Resist, We Much!!! Wrote: Dec 21, 2012 2:05 PM
"Gun crime would not be cracked until gangs were broken up and the streets reclaimed for the honest citizen by proper neighborhood policing" or so they thought. Gun crime increased by 89% between 1998 and 2009. There are areas of the UK where gun crime is five times higher than it was before the gun ban. Gun crime had doubled, at least, in nearly 20 police areas. The Metropolitan Police now has replaced some of the famously unarmed "Bobbies" with armed patrols on some streets and, in a historic first, officers armed with "sub-machine guns" have been integrated into neighbourhood policing.

I will say it, again and again, I would rather live in a country where I am free and armed than to reside in a nation where, as Senator Dianne
Resist, We Much!!! Wrote: Dec 21, 2012 2:05 PM
Feinstein argues, guns are banned so that a faerie tale and false promise of security of a "fundamental right of all Americans to feel safe" is "addressed." As we have seen, the "fundamental right of Britons to feel safe" was not met when gun-grabbers left law-abiding citizens defenceless and subject to the whims and vagaries of those that are unswayed by the law. The Left tells us -- and, personally, I agree -- that the death penalty is not a deterrent. Well, neither are gun bans.

During their first press conference since the Sandy Hook Elementary School shooting last week in Newtown, Conn. leaders from the National Rifle Association offered the country a National School Shield Safety Program as an immediate way to protect children from violent killers during a press conference today in Washington D.C.

“While some have tried to exploit the tragedy for political gain, we have remained respectfully silent,” NRA Executive Vice President Wayne LaPierre said. “Nobody has addressed the most important pressing and immediate question...How do we protect our children today?”

LaPierre discussed in detail an...