Well, so much for "no gun violence in the UK."

[Mikey]

Labor Party MP Jo Cox shot AND stabbed Thursday.

[Teaos]

Wonder how much they will use this in the Brexut campaign.

Speaking if which.

What do our several British members think of the Brexit? At the moment it looks like your heading towards leaving.

[Graham Kennedy]

You put "no gun violence in the UK" in quotes, as if you were quoting somebody. Who would that be, exactly?

[IanKennedy]

According to Wiki (so take that how you wish). The rate of gun deaths in the UK is 0.23 per 100,000 head of population. With an estimated population of 64 million that comes to a total of 147.2 people a year.

The USA is rate is quoted at 10.54. With 318 million people => 33,517.2 people a year.

I'll grant you that the figures come from different years... but...

[McAvoy]

It's in quotes because anti gun lobbists use the UK as an example of what effective gun control looks like.

Of course, sensible people will point out that it isn't completely 100% effective but it is still very effective on cutting down overall violence and death.

[Graham Kennedy]

It's in quotes because anti gun lobbists use the UK as an example of what effective gun control looks like.

Do any of them claim it completely eliminates all gun violence?

Of course, sensible people will point out that it isn't completely 100% effective but it is still very effective on cutting down overall violence and death.

Indeed.

Not that I think it's anywhere near as simple as "you guys should adopt our laws, then you'll have the same outcome!"; you're dealing with a different culture, history and mindset. But the argument of "strict gun laws will stop all gun crime" is as dumb as "gun laws have no effect whatsoever on gun crime".

[Mikey]

Wow, defensive much? Instead of trying to defend against a nonexistent attack, how about just a little sympathy for Ms. Cox?

[Graham Kennedy]

I didn't see it as an attack. Merely an inaccuracy.

[IanKennedy]

Wow, defensive much? Instead of trying to defend against a nonexistent attack, how about just a little sympathy for Ms. Cox?

Do you think that will actually help her in some way?

I as disgusted by this as much as I am the Florida incident. I'm not sure that changes the situation that almost as many people die from gun crime in a single week in the US than in the UK in an entire year.

[Mikey]

Wow, defensive much? Instead of trying to defend against a nonexistent attack, how about just a little sympathy for Ms. Cox?

Do you think that will actually help her in some way?

I as disgusted by this as much as I am the Florida incident. I'm not sure that changes the situation that almost as many people die from gun crime in a single week in the US than in the UK in an entire year.

What has that to do with any of the incidences surrounding Ms. Cox' death? I might as well reply that before the adoption of the euro, lire were selling at about 1800 to the dollar.

BTW, it reads as if you just said sympathy for the deceased and their families is useless and to be discarded because dead people remain dead. That's pretty fucking cold, man.

[McAvoy]

Wow, defensive much? Instead of trying to defend against a nonexistent attack, how about just a little sympathy for Ms. Cox?

Do you think that will actually help her in some way?

I as disgusted by this as much as I am the Florida incident. I'm not sure that changes the situation that almost as many people die from gun crime in a single week in the US than in the UK in an entire year.

BTW, it reads as if you just said sympathy for the deceased and their families is useless and to be discarded because dead people remain dead. That's pretty fucking cold, man.

Well technically having sympathy for someone you will never ever meet is pretty useless. People say it and even feel it because they are empathic to others. But does it help anyone that you will never ever meet?

It helps with friends, family and people who you meet often because that is face to face.

My two cents.

[Graham Kennedy]

If the intention here was to express sympathy and support for a tragedy, rather than talking about the political and cultural implications of the event, then perhaps opening the thread with a title which seeks to make a political point was not the best way to go about it.

Having chosen to open the thread on that basis, you really don't get to respond to criticism of that point by claiming the thread is all about being sympathetic to the victim. If you'd made a thread with a title like "What a tragedy", and I'd jumped in talking about the politics of the situation, then you'd have a valid criticism there.

But you didn't, so you don't.

So, if we're going to talk about the politics of it... reports are currently stating that the firearm used looked antique, or possibly handmade, using a design purchased from the US. It was, apparently, a single shot weapon which he managed to reload twice during the attack - a process complicated by the fact that he had to defend himself with a knife whilst trying to reload.

So I ask, in all seriousness : how do people here think this would have panned out if this man had a semi-auto AR-15 and a few thirty round magazines in his pockets? Do you think it would have been worse, better, or just the same? One need not even look abroad for a guide, given how sensitive such comparisons can be. Once upon a time a man in the UK used a Beretta 92FS pistol, a Type 56 semi-auto rifle and an M1 carbine to kill sixteen people. Mr Mair had to make do with a gun cobbled together at home.

It seems to me that even in this absolute tragedy our gun laws served us pretty damn well, quite possibly saving many, many lives.

And once again, I repeat what I said earlier - I am NOT saying that "ours is better" and if you did the same, you'd have the same result. Laws and attitudes don't just transplant from any one culture to another. It's far, far more nuanced and complex than that. I merely point out that our way of approaching this seems to work well. We don't have police being regularly gunned down in the streets, we don't have armed criminals constantly victimising helpless unarmed people, and we do not have mass murder via gun as a frequent occurrence. Indeed, such massacres do not happen at all in modern Britain.

I like that. And I think not having the right to own an AR-15 or similar is a damn small loss to achieve it. Your mileage may vary.

[Mikey]

(blather, blather) ...But you didn't, so you don't.

Once again, "methinks the lady doth protest too much." Doesn't matter about what the OP was, my response to Ian's assertion that sympathy is useless and to be avoided still stands. Hopefully, for your sake, he has a bit more humanity toward his brother.

he had to defend himself with a knife whilst trying to reload.

Are you serious? This was an assassination, and you are painting him as someone who needed to defend himself? No, he needed to do nothing and let himself be injured or killed... or better yet, not try to attack anyone in the first place.

how do people here think this would have panned out if this man had a semi-auto AR-15 and a few thirty round magazines in his pockets?

Well, THAT'S a red herring. Of course it wouldn't have been different - this was a targeted attack on Ms. Cox. It wouldn't have mattered if he was using a flintlock Sea Service pistol, a hunting rifle, a modern handgun, a bow, or an M249. Your comparison of this assassination to the mass attack made with the Type 56 is like comparing apples to hacksaws.

Am I defending American gun laws? No, I think in some instances they are far too lax, in others they are far too draconian, and in general attempt to target the wrong things. Am I denigrating UKoGBaNI gun laws? No, first I don't even know if that's how regulations are applied over there - technically Scotland, England, Wales, and Northern Ireland are separate entities but part of the UK, so I don't know if each entity makes its own gun laws or if the UK applies them across the board. Either way, though, you guys seem to have found something that generally works for you. What I do NOT believe, and what my OP title was intended to convey, is the generally elitist attitude that many Brits express concerning their gun laws in relation to ours.

[Graham Kennedy]

(blather, blather) ...But you didn't, so you don't.

Once again, "methinks the lady doth protest too much."

Yeah. BS.

Are you serious? This was an assassination, and you are painting him as someone who needed to defend himself? No, he needed to do nothing and let himself be injured or killed... or better yet, not try to attack anyone in the first place.

What are you talking about? He was reloading to fire again whilst people were trying to bring him down. Had he had an automatic with a magazine in it, he would have been able to simply go on killing.

Well, THAT'S a red herring. Of course it wouldn't have been different - this was a targeted attack on Ms. Cox.

If you want to talk gun laws, no it isn't a red herring. It is exactly the point.

You seem to think his aim here was to kill Ms Cox and then give up quietly. In point of fact Mr "Death to Traitors" also stabbed Bernard Carter-Kenny, a 77 year old man who intervened to try and stop the attack. Mr Carter-Kenny was able to retreat from the scene and seek help. The killer then ran off. In a nearby street he was tackled by police and arrested.

If you are seriously going to argue that if he'd had a semi-auto handgun, let along something like an AR-15, he wouldn't have used it to fire on Mr Carter-Kenny, or on the police who arrested him, then I think you are (at best) being incredibly generous to him. If you are going to claim to know that he wouldn't have gone on a mass spree killing at a Mosque or something if he'd had the firepower to do so, I'd be intrigued to know on what basis you dismiss it.

As for America's gun laws, I haven't discussed them other than to say the situation isn't comparable. But I wonder if it's not you that is the one on the defensive, since you felt the need to open the thread the way you did.

Either way, though, you guys seem to have found something that generally works for you.

Indeed. Seems to have worked pretty well in this case.

What I do NOT believe, and what my OP title was intended to convey, is the generally elitist attitude that many Brits express concerning their gun laws in relation to ours.

Since you chose to engage in a falsehood to describe that alleged attitude, forgive me if I think you got off to a bad start in criticising it. And given that our gun laws apparently made this incident a good deal less fatal than it could have been, I don't really see any basis to criticise our laws or our attitudes about them here.

[IanKennedy]

how about just a little sympathy for Ms. Cox?

One could ask the same of you, after all you ambushed the news of her death to start this little political jab at UK gun laws. Very sympathetic of you I must say.