|
Welcome to the International Skeptics Forum, where we discuss skepticism, critical thinking, the paranormal and science in a friendly but lively way. You are currently viewing the forum as a guest, which means you are missing out on discussing matters that are of interest to you. Please consider registering so you can gain full use of the forum features and interact with other Members. Registration is simple, fast and free! Click here to register today. |
3rd January 2013, 10:04 PM | #81 |
Philosopher
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Colorado
Posts: 6,248
|
|
4th January 2013, 02:30 AM | #82 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 10,215
|
|
4th January 2013, 05:34 AM | #83 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 15,720
|
UK statistics are also going to show more dramatic changes than ones from the USA because our instances of gun crime are so rare. For example in 2011-12 there were 1,151 instances of possessing a firearm with intent to commit a crime, down from 1,385 from the previous year. That is a drop of 17%. Meanwhile homicide was 550 in 2011-12 compared to the previous year at 638, a drop of 14%.
http://www.homeoffice.gov.uk/publica...12?view=Binary The article you linked to uses very out of date stats over a period of time that there was an increase, backed up by an article from the sensationalist UK newspaper the Daily Mail. It is reporting on firearms offences as a whole. That will include offences by lawful firearms holders who forget to renew their certificate on time and end up illegally possessing firearms. It also does not show how many offences are committed with replica firearms as the real ones are so hard to get hold of. This is the second time an examination of a claim by an American pro gun advocate has been found wanting as it is not comparing like to like. Here is the most reliable study in the UK, compiled by civil servants at the Home Office. http://www.homeoffice.gov.uk/publica...12?view=Binary Scroll down and look at the graph Figure 2.1 and see how use of a firearm offences have been falling. Use of a handgun offences alone have fallen by 44% 2003 to 2011. |
__________________
Audiophile/biker/sceptic |
|
4th January 2013, 07:04 AM | #84 |
No Ordinary Rabbit
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Wyoming, NY
Posts: 6,757
|
My next idea for the thread is to draft a list of penalties for those not in compliance with the current laws...meaning, how should those owning/carrying/using an illegally possessed firearm be punished? Also, for those selling to known criminals or "losing" guns.
I'll take some suggestions from the audience before I post an outline. |
__________________
-------------------------------------- Stop asking me about that stupid fruity cereal...that's the OTHER rabbit! |
|
4th January 2013, 07:26 AM | #85 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 15,720
|
Use of a firearm during a crime - 15 extra years in prison
Carrying a firearm during commission of a crime - 10 extra years in prison Illegally having a firearm - 10 years in prison Illegal dealing of firearms - 20 years in prison Losing or having a gun stolen and not reporting the theft or loss - from nothing through fines and up to 5 years in prison depending on the circumstances. |
__________________
Audiophile/biker/sceptic |
|
4th January 2013, 10:56 AM | #86 |
Thinker
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 161
|
Doesn't this make the comparative stats even more disturbing? If NYC's licencing laws don't work, why do London's?
Nessie suggests that, in London, although there is more violent crime, firearms are simply not used as frequently and therefore violence results in fewer deaths. If this is so, then NYC's licensing laws don't prevent the use of firearms in crime in the city, I think that raises the question - why? Is this something that can be solved by extending licensing laws over a larger area (so that, for e.g. NYC's laws aren't undermined by looser neigbhouring laws) or is it that licensing laws are generally ineffective? I don't think that mandatory minimums and the like are likely to be helpful. They don't work in drug enforcement, I don't see that they would work in firearms enforcement. I suppose it might make sense from a prevention point of view to prohibit those who "lose" guns from owning guns. But in that net you would catch at least some people who took all reasonable precautions but nevertheless had a gun stolen from them. |
4th January 2013, 11:46 AM | #87 |
No Ordinary Rabbit
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Wyoming, NY
Posts: 6,757
|
Alright, let's try this out....
ETA: I've added Article 6 & 7.
Originally Posted by Sabretooth's Penalties for Illegal Firearms (v1.1)
|
__________________
-------------------------------------- Stop asking me about that stupid fruity cereal...that's the OTHER rabbit! |
|
4th January 2013, 12:09 PM | #88 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 15,720
|
I am sure it down to availability. No matter what licensing laws are introduced, there are so many guns in the hands of criminals and criminals find them so easy to get hold of that the laws have no effect, as they obviously do not obey the law.
Quote:
|
__________________
Audiophile/biker/sceptic |
|
4th January 2013, 02:49 PM | #89 |
Banned
Join Date: Oct 2012
Posts: 4,628
|
Sorry, but no way you get those penalties that harsh for anything that doesn't involve a violent crime. It would never pass the muster of "cruel and unusual punishment" in the SCOTUS. Some of those possession penalties are harsher than aggravated assault and rape.
|
7th January 2013, 06:15 AM | #90 |
Thinker
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 161
|
I think you're probably right on availability, but proving that it is down to availability is a different matter.
Quote:
|
7th January 2013, 06:36 AM | #91 |
No Ordinary Rabbit
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Wyoming, NY
Posts: 6,757
|
I'm surprised more folks haven't rung in on the "penalty" ideas I laid out. Surely, someone other than StankApe has an opinion on this?
|
__________________
-------------------------------------- Stop asking me about that stupid fruity cereal...that's the OTHER rabbit! |
|
7th January 2013, 07:15 AM | #92 |
Philosopher
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Colorado
Posts: 6,248
|
|
7th January 2013, 04:00 PM | #93 |
Banned
Join Date: Oct 2012
Posts: 4,628
|
our possession laws aren't that punitive, it's our distribution laws that carry a punch. If his above list of penalties applied lower sentences for possession of an illegal firearm and bigger one's for intent to distribute an illegal firearm, maybe you'd have something.
|
8th January 2013, 08:19 AM | #94 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 10,215
|
This section strikes me as potentially problematic, what constitutes a crime in this context? Illegal Parking? I absolutely see what you are trying to do and agree with your intention, but so long as carrying a gun is legal there is the potential that a legal carrier with break a minor law, even unintentionally while carrying and fall foul of this.
|
8th January 2013, 01:57 PM | #95 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 15,720
|
|
__________________
Audiophile/biker/sceptic |
|
8th January 2013, 02:04 PM | #96 |
Banned
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 13,961
|
|
9th January 2013, 03:56 AM | #97 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 10,215
|
That's setting the bar a little higher than I would suggest, maybe establishment of criminal intent, I'd also include certain alcohol/drug related offences, drunk and disorderly for example. If you're going to drink enough that you're judgement is impaired you shouldn't be packing (or vice versa).
|
9th January 2013, 07:16 AM | #98 |
No Ordinary Rabbit
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Wyoming, NY
Posts: 6,757
|
You're right, I should have been a bit more specific. It's meant to come into play for felony charges, not misdemeanors. Burglary, Assault, etc...
Maybe even felony DWI? Might keep some gun-lovers from getting behind the wheel? (ETA: I see PJ mentioned something similar.) |
__________________
-------------------------------------- Stop asking me about that stupid fruity cereal...that's the OTHER rabbit! |
|
Thread Tools | |
|
|