As you will all know, the UK has some of the most hardcore anti-gun legislation in the world. You will probably also note that every time a nutter goes around shooting random people, the BBC rushes to highlight the fact that its a good thing our gun legislation is so harsh, and then goes on (usually) to suggest that more control is needed.
This BBC article which talks about the reasons as to why we don't have armed police after the shooting of two female officers goes on to trip itself up with the following graph:
Since the start of this graph in 1969, there have been a number of ammendments to firearm laws, all of which further restrict the ability for the general public to purchase and own firearms, and what has happened is the opposite of the desired effect.
Surely all the anti-gun laws are a crock of shit if the criminals are still managing to obtain firearms (notably, most firearm offences include pistols which have been illegal to own privately since the fifties.)
The following figures are copied and pasted from the 'UK Gun Politics' wikipedia page:
In the year Apr 2010 to Mar 2011 there were 11,227 recorded offences involving firearms, broken down as follows.
By weapon type:
- Long-barrelled shotgun = 406
- Sawn-off shotgun = 202
- Handgun = 3,105
- Rifle = 74
- Imitation firearm = 1,610
- Unidentified firearm = 957
- Other firearm = 670
- Air weapons = 4,203
If we ignore kids running around shooting at the neighbours cat with an air rifle, and the 'other' and 'unidentified' firearms (seeing as this will no doubt mainly be cases of women using mace spray which is deemed a firearm in the UK. Derp,) we are left with over 75% handgun offences. Seeing as you cannot legally obtain a pistol in the UK, this must mean that criminals are bringing them in, and in actual fact - is arguably putting the rest of the law-abiding public in more danger.
So what is the real reason for the prevention of firearms for the general public? I suspect now, given the general inability for British people to use commonsense and or possess some form of responsibility for ones own actions, a complete blanket 'right to bear arms' would be a complete mess and end up in anarchy. This is however only because the Governments 'Nanny State' rules supreme, where these days a decent everyday bloke can't even take a shit without being asked to fill in some form of licence or risk assessment.
If over the coming years we were to reduce Government control in our lives back to those 1950's (good ol' days) standards, we could perhaps get to a situation where the average adult was responsible enough to own a gun without any form licence. This is but a dream however as it is quite evident that the state has apsolutely no desire to lax any of its accumulated power. Its sole purpose for the past two or three decades has been to utterly lay waste to any previously held ideas of community, responsibility or self-sustainability. In short, we have been turned into brainless, feckless zombies who feel we must ask permission of the Government to do anything these days. Well not everyone.
The ability to own guns are but a relatively small part of living in a free society, but unfortunately, when all other means to live in a free society have been taken away through stealth, guns could have been the one thing which brought them back. The ultra-liberal idiots who have been sucked into the 'big-state' ideas of the globalists and Fabian Socialists deserve all they get when those who have been engineering this police-state show all their cards. Times are getting worse, I only hope people stop buying shit they don't need and take notice of the state of their country before its too late.