London Police Looking to Ban Water Guns!

I know that the Brits are ban-happy; I know they like to pretend to themselves that out-of-control behavior problems in their population can be successfully addressed by banning items instead of teaching and insisting on proper behavior (DoubleThink?)

but, I don't see anything in those links about "banning water guns"...


-azurefly
 
The good side is that most Brits with spines play airsoft, and as a result of this are familiar with how government and media work together to demonize innocent things while quashing rights and accomplishing nothing. Many of them are going to wish to relocate to the US.
 
On the other hand...

If people were jumping out of vans with semi-realistic looking guns and running around like mad over here in the U.S., there's a pretty good chance of having the police called as well. I got the idea that people may get charged for being a nuciance rather than banning water pistols out of this article. That being said, I would LOVE to do something like this...Mmm, assasination games...maybe with some red food coloring in the water? Sounds like too much fun to me.
 
Fortunately concealed carry isn't an option in the UK, otherwise the dummies with real-looking water guns might get a surprise they don't care for.
 
The Brits have BEEN over the edge. The US helped arm them so they could protect themselves during WW1. When the war was over, their gov. didn't trust the people with guns, so they had gun control. Then came WW2 and the US helped arm them again. Now the Brits are disarmed again. It can only get worse until the people rebel. Fat chance of that.

badbob
 
Then again, we ARE talking about a country where children drawing on the street with chalk have been forced to stop by police, citing laws against "Anti-Social Behavior" (the Brit .gov's term, not mine).

Oh well. I guess it would kind of be stupid to take a realistic looking watergun on the subway.

Cheers,
Wolfe... (Who prefers his waterguns to be very bright/translucent (preferably mid-sized super-soakers) because those ones tend to be the most ranged/longest-lasting anyways.)
 
Just curious, do any of you even know any Brits? Oh well the Brits think we're just a bunch of wild eyed gun nuts with six-guns on our hips.

The US helped arm them so they could protect themselves during WW1. When the war was over, their gov. didn't trust the people with guns, so they had gun control. Then came WW2 and the US helped arm them again.
Click to expand...
You need to retake US history. Try and stay awake this time.
 
garyfdl, unlike some people I've been wrong before. Enlighten me. And, yes, I've known some Brits. Gun control seemed to be a touchy subject for them, so I didn't pursue it.

badbob
 
The good side is that most Brits with spines play airsoft, and as a result of this are familiar with how government and media work together to demonize innocent things while quashing rights and accomplishing nothing. Many of them are going to wish to relocate to the US.
Click to expand...


I would much prefer they eradicate the idiotic legal reality that pervades the U.K. and turn it into a place I'm willing to visit once again. :mad:

I am quite annoyed, since it's a place I like a lot, with a history and culture I find interesting, and I simply cannot go there because of how insane their laws are at this point. I'd be a criminal just for carrying a Spyderco Delica in my pocket over there?! I would be a criminal for having a Kubotan on my keychain?! :mad:

No, I would prefer the Brits stay over there to clean house. I don't mean to say that they're unwelcome here: if it's really time to give up the ship over there, then pro-gun Brits, head on over here! But please, if it's at all possible, work to save the U.K. from this ultra-leftist insanity.


-azurefly
 
garyfdl, while badbob may have phrased it inconveniently, what he said is essentially true.

The British in WWI were, indeed, unable to arm their troops without contracts with the United States for weapons. The Home Guard was forced to buy commercial weapons.

The British in WWII were again without sufficient stocks of weapons to supply their troops. Again, the United States made British pattern weapons for them. After Dunkirk, the US shipped literally tons of American arms to the British. In WWII, the Home Guard used weapons sent by American civilians until the British could replace them with military stores.

Both times, the British government had reduced the stocks of military amrs, and had reduced the availability of personally owned weapons, prior to the onset of hostilities.

Before you ask. Yes, I know quite a few British citizens. Many of them military, or retired military, including SAS and SBS.

Might I suggest that you research your facts prior to reminding anyone to pay attention in class?:) :)
 
Before long they will be talking about banning law enforcment in England and giving the inmates keys to the jails and prisons.
 
garyfdl, as a matter of fact I have several British friends and coworkers, all of whom are furious with their government for disarming them whilst doing bugger all about actual crime.

One of them - a young lady - was assaulted by a group of chavs who were wielding halfbricks. Shall we now require a builder's permit for possession of construction materials?
 
while badbob may have phrased it inconveniently
Click to expand...
Ya think?

The British in WWI were, indeed, unable to arm their troops without contracts with the United States for weapons.
Click to expand...

Note the word "contracts". They paid for the material.

After Dunkirk the US shipped literally tons of American arms to the British.
Click to expand...
Hundreds of tons, which they were paying for until March '41 when Lend Lease was signed into law.

Yes, we did "help" arm them. But it's like saying I "helped" you save your house from burning down because I sold you the water; at least until it looked like it was going to catch my house on fire. Then I gave you all the water I could for "free".

What do your SAS/SBS buddies have to say when you remind them of how, if it wasn't for us, they'd all be speaking German?

And I'm curious, what is the leap of logic that the outcome of WWI and II would have been different if the population had been better armed?

children drawing on the street with chalk have been forced to stop by police, citing laws against "Anti-Social Behavior"
Click to expand...

This forum "lights up" when the media "misrepresents" or only portrays part of our issues, but some, it seems, have no problem jumping on the band wagon when ever it suits. And then you don't get the facts right. It wasn't "the police", it was community support officers, about half a step above a police aid. There were complaints about excess chalk markings and anti-social behavior. They just didn't swoop in and tell a bunch of kids "cease and desist, and drop the chalk NOW!" Lets just suppose, for a moment, that some cranky old pensioner didn't like the sidewalk in front of his house covered w/ chalk or having obscenities written on his and other homes. He yells at the kids. The kids cuss him out. So he complains. The community support officer investigates. Some indignant parent, who's little Monte or Penny would NEVER do such a thing, calls the media. And of course anytime law enforcement anywhere is perceived as being "heavy handed" or wasting their time on frivolous matters, it's big news.

And then there are the comments about the British "quashing rights", being "over the edge", and having an "idiotic legal reality". All you have done is buy into a hype pushed by fanatical pro gun propagandists. You have absolutely no understanding or appreciation of British history, culture, ethics or law. You are totally clueless. Ask yourself, "why do we have the Second Amendment?" Now ask yourself "how many of these things applied to the British Commoner?" Bear in mind it was a society based on class, about one step above feudalism. There was no frontier and no game to hunt. There were no dangerous animals, no hostile natives or citizens from a foreign country. The last invasion of British soil occurred in Wales in 1797. Sponsored by the French, (who else?) and led by a septuagenarian Irish-American, (Colonel Tate, I think) it failed.

As far as my "bone fides" I had an English step-mom who survived, but whose mother was killed in the blitz. I heard from her and the surviving family the hell they went thru and the sacrifices they endured during the war. I have worked and done business w/ the British frequently and had a British boss for a while. One daughter married a Welshman, and is living in Cardiff. We visit and see them and his family regularly. There have been many an "interesting" discussion over a pint, many where I defend the Second Amendment (I usually tell them it's their fault).

Someone on these forms has in the signature line that we are ambassadors to the "non-gun" crowd. It's a good thing to remember. These are open forums, ANYONE from ANYWHERE can see what is being said. There are constant posts about "with Rights go responsibility" and "the responsibility of Freedom" Think about that when you start blasting another country because they don't do things the way we do.
 
Just curious, do any of you even know any Brits? Oh well the Brits think we're just a bunch of wild eyed gun nuts with six-guns on our hips.
Click to expand...
Well yes. Two of my favorite teachers, now long deceased, were expats from the UK. A third was from Spain and a fourth was from Czechoslovakia but had gone to school in the UK until they could get green cards and escape to the US. One of the two natives was a Scotsman and the other was born in Ireland but his family moved to London when he was an infant.

To a man they liked the freedoms the US provided and would never go back to the UK. I always thought it odd that the Czek was a Reagan Republican and the Spaniard was a Communist but they were close friends. The Scotsman had no comment about the English that wasn't obscene and the Londoner never talked about Britain at all. If you want to PM me I'll tell you what the Scot said.

I'd invite you to read Winston Groom's book about Andrew Jackson and the battle of New Orleans. He discusses the extent of rape, murder and pillaging which went on during the War of 1812 and the slick, sneaky, dishonest British rulers. From what I learned from my Scots teacher nothing has changed since then.
 
LOL probably about the same as the Welsh and Irish.:D

Don't misconstrue my remarks. I am not saying that their system is better. I am aware that we have a greater amount of Liberty than they do. But it is their system and as long as they are satisfied who are we to judge?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top