Paris shootings prompt stricter uk gun laws on ammo

[ordnance]

Do you think that in that morning meeting when two men burst in with total surprise armed with self loading rifles the fact they are also armed is going to make one iota of difference to the outcome?

That's not the point, people should have the ability to defend themselves even if they don't get the opportunity. Police here carry firearms , and have being murdered in the past without getting a chance to use their firearms. But few would argue they should not carry firearms because they don't always get the chance to use them.

[Fedaykin]

Whenever I talk to fellow UK and European shooting sports participants I point out that we shouldn't criticise or judge the US when it comes to gun legislation, the 2nd Amendment, public opinion and the very wide ownership of guns places your country in a totally different universe practically and legislatively.

Unfortunately I would say the same thing to yourself Ordnance when you try understand the practical or legislative situation in European countries. (I realise you are in NI not American)

The fact is gun ownership both legal and illegal is tiny in most European nations including France. There are more privately owned handguns in the US then all guns owned not only by French civilians but their Police and Army combined! The likelihood of ever facing a gun in a violent situation in France is almost non existent. The average gun homicide rate in France per annum is 100 to 150 and that includes crimes of passion when it is a partner killing a relative or spouse.

There is virtually no political or public desire to introduce self defence laws allowing concealed carry of guns in a country like France. Just as it is unfair when people in Europe criticise the US for its permissive gun laws without understanding the very different cultural and practical situation it is the same for Americans to pass judgement back on a nation like France.

What happened in Paris is a terrible event but it is also rare, the last time something similar happened in France was in the 1960's.

I agree people have a right to self defence but I also believe it should be proportional, the reality this is a very unique scenario. In virtually everybody's day to day life in a European nation there is nearly zero chance of facing a gun in a violent situation. Arguing for concealed carry here or France is out of proportion to the potential threat. Unfortunately this magazine was at a heightened risk of attack and they had police protection due to that threat, sadly on the day it wasn't enough and a brave Policeman lost his life because of that. A very rare terrorist attack is not good enough reason to extend concealed carry rights to the wider population.

[Mr_Logic]

Don't agree. Concealed carry here and in France would be wonderful.

How many muggings would stop? How many other violent crimes like rape? Dealing with armed terrorists is sooo much easier when you're armed!

I read an article about the police here being overstretched and with limited firearms response which is being cut. I feel so safe given the law enforcement professionals don't have guns but terrorists do, not!

You're right to say there is no political will for it. But you know, back in the 40s it was illegal to be gay. Now they can marry. Times change, so shutting up because other people might disagree is a VERY bad thing. Say what you think. Stand by what you say. If everybody did, the world would be much better!

Me? I'm for concealed carry, if I got my wish then I might die trying but terrorists beware - I will have a damned good go.

[Sim G]

I agree people have a right to self defence

No you don't....

[Blackstuff]

TJC and Chuck lets just say for a moment that concealed carry was permitted in France, and lets say half the people in the morning meeting were concealed carry cleared and had their pistols on them. Do you think that in that morning meeting when two men burst in with total surprise armed with self loading rifles the fact they are also armed is going to make one iota of difference to the outcome?

Well they weren't holding the meeting in the reception area of the building were they so i very much doubt after hearing rapid gun fire outside the building they were carrying on with their meeting without a care in the world and would've been "surprised" by the shooters They would have had plenty of time to make their guns ready and prepare themselves. As it was they just had to stand/cower there and be shot.

[froggy]

The likelihood of ever facing a gun in a violent situation in France is almost non existent.

Yes & No . For most of the territory you are correct . There are actually a very large number of legal firearms in France. However, violent crime is not spread equally across the country . With the exception of Corsica, the increase of violent crime is exponentially correlated with the concentration of communities of maghrebin origin, of illegal weapons and of course the use of firearms illegally.

Marseille being a prime exemple of high north-african immigration turning France second largest city into the capital of violent gun crime where AK's have become the norm . Granted, most deaths are the result of turf war but weapons are now regulary used for more "common criminality".




Do you think that in that morning meeting when two men burst in with total surprise

You have a point but I also can not help thinking that if all those people who filmed the scene had a weapon instead of a phone, the outcome could have been different. That is the reason why the Israelis, more seasoned to that kind of problem, have armed some of their civilians and created the Mash'az.




What happened in Paris ... is also rare, the last time something similar happened in France was in the 1960's.

Of course muslim terrorism in Europe is a very recent thing. In the 60's, the make up of the population in Europe was completely different & we are witnessing what is probably only the opening shots of a new war. Merah did kill 7 peoples couple of years ago, anti-semitism has exploded and "lone wolf" attacks start taking place.

[Chuck]

TJC and Chuck lets just say for a moment that concealed carry was permitted in France, and lets say half the people in the morning meeting were concealed carry cleared and had their pistols on them. Do you think that in that morning meeting when two men burst in with total surprise armed with self loading rifles the fact they are also armed is going to make one iota of difference to the outcome?

We will never know because no one was armed, they were defenceless and slaughtered. If people want to be unarmed and defenceless that is THEIR choice, it is NOT the choice of many others! Just because an individual feels they are safe doesn't mean everyone is. Denial is always the biggest mistake. Those who feel they would be no better off are correct, they would be no better off because they are already defeated in their own mind, so why try and save themselves??- They have convinced themselves they have lost before the fight starts. They may feel it is better to give up and die than fight to protect the greatest thing they possess, their own life. If that is their choice then fine, just as long as they do not force other people to be in the same position...

The Publication became complacent and they got caught out - it could happen anywhere at any time. Looking at all that camera footage from the roofs: pity it wasn't through a scope!

Too many people feel "you only need a gun in case you are attacked by someone with a gun", all wrong!

[Fedaykin]

I agree people have a right to self defence

No you don't....

Really? This is why I am weary of talking about anything to do with 2A! A blunt reply which ignores my caveat.

You somehow better understand my own mind? You do understand what an "Opinion" is? I DO think that people have a RIGHT to self defence BUT as I stated in my caveat it should be proportional to the threat.

In a European country like the UK or France I don't think the level of threat warrants concealed carry of a pistol. I also feel that arguing for it is pointless when there is no public or political desire and only hands ammunition to the antis.

Also I disagree with the position that many of you have presented here about defending yourself with a pistol in such a situation.

Some people rock up to your office intent with murder armed with assault rifles and rocket propelled grenades wearing body armour and people think that a pistol is going to make any difference?! You have heard the term: Turning up to a gunfight with a knife...

Also the lone hero arguments of people watching nearby intervening if they were armed with concealed carry pistols is frankly and this is MY opinion TOTAL BOLLARDS! So Mr_Logic/SIM G/Blackstuff/froggy/chuck you are there watching with your camera phone and you see these two guys storming into the street with their assault rifles and rocket propelled grenades and you are going to go all hero with your concealed Glock 19? I don't think so. Anyhow we have plenty of evidence of what has happened to police around the world who try to do just that, they end up getting shot up.

Also I don't think that anybody in that situation is going to be in the right frame of mind whatever training they have had to intervene. Even fully trained infantry will freeze in the face of gunfire so the idea a civilian can be expected to leap into action is IMHO a joke and more to do with power fantasies then reality.

The threat of gun violence is VERY LOW in Europe certainly not high enough to warrant the escalation of concealed carry, it just isn't proportional. In the US that has 10000 gun related homicides a year and there is a very real risk that any violent situation could involve a pistol concealed carry makes complete sense.

People who call for it here harm our sport and are verging on being dangerous fantasists.

In my OPINION of course.

[ordnance]

Some people rock up to your office intent with murder armed with assault rifles and rocket propelled grenades wearing body armour and people think that a pistol is going to make any difference?! You have heard the term: Turning up to a gunfight with a knife...

There was a guy here that was ambushed by terrorists armed with AK/47s, he was armed with a handgun he shot one dead and the others ran. How do you think he managed that with a ( pistol ). ? If he listened to your advice he would not have being armed and dead.

Also I don't think that anybody in that situation is going to be in the right frame of mind whatever training they have had to intervene. Even fully trained infantry will freeze in the face of gunfire so the idea a civilian can be expected to leap into action is IMHO a joke and more to do with power fantasies then reality.

There are numerous cases where armed civilians have used firearms to defend themselves in America, how did they manage without freezing. ?

Even fully trained infantry will freeze in the face of gunfire so the idea a civilian can be expected to leap into action

Follow that logic and why arm the infantry if some will freeze.

[Fedaykin]

Yeah yeah there is always some story of some bloke

Again would you feel brave enough?

As far as I am concerned arguing for something that has no public or political support here only damages our sport and gives ammunition to the antis