Kuro5hin.org: technology and culture, from the trenches
create account | help/FAQ | contact | links | search | IRC | site news
[ Everything | Diaries | Technology | Science | Culture | Politics | Media | News | Internet | Op-Ed | Fiction | Meta | MLP ]
We need your support: buy an ad | premium membership

[P]
Why Brits Cannot Understand Gun Rights

By procrasti in Politics
Fri Dec 21, 2012 at 07:42:55 AM EST
Tags: guns, gun rights, second amendment, subject, crown, sandy hook (all tags)

It is difficult for British subjects to comprehend why American citizens might consider the right to bear arms to be a natural right.

The problem derives from the fundamental differences in their respective political theories. This affects their beliefs, which are conditioned on living within the framework of one of the two competing ideologies.

British subjects[1] are not citizens. In English law, the individual does not derive their rights from being an individual, rather they derive their rights due to the grace of god who acts through the will of the reigning monarch[2]. The British are conditioned to believe that they are the property of the crown, not their own persons. If the crown decides that a person has no rights, then that is all jolly good, because their's is not to reason why, but their's is to do or die, on order of the crown!

American citizens[3] on the other hand fought a long, hard and bloody battle against this very repression and formed a new government on the basis that the government derives it's power from the people[4]. That the rights belong to the individual, not the state. Hence the idea that the individual is a citizen of the country, not it's subject.


On this basis, Americans are responsible for their own protection, especially from the state. This necessitates their right to bear arms. The British on the other hand, must never fight back, preferring a polite raping to a disgusting display of self defence - and why even kitchen knives and rolled up newspapers must be kept from their child like hands.

Finally, the argument that the weak cannot overcome the strong, leads the British to believe that the idea of self defence against a modern equipped military is an absolute futility. Again, when British women are confronted by a stronger male adversary, they know the only reasonable response to a rape attempt is to 'lie back and think of England'. They understand that fighting back against a stronger aggressor is hopeless, and rightfully know their place.

American women be packin heat, and will pop a cap in a nigga's ass if he be tryin shit like that.

In conclusion: Rape British women, not American women.

[1]: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Government_of_the_United_Kingdom
[2]: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monarchy_of_the_United_Kingdom
[3]: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Government_of_the_United_States
[4]: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Constitution

Sponsors

Voxel dot net
o Managed Hosting
o VoxCAST Content Delivery
o Raw Infrastructure

Login

Poll
I am a
o Free Citizen 16%
o Willing Subject 16%
o Citizen who wishes to be subjugated 0%
o Subject who wishes to be free 16%
o Sheep 0%
o Meat Popsicle 50%
o K5 Troll 41%
o Self Empowered Individual 25%
o Gun Owner 16%
o Victim 16%
o rapin' compliant council housed bad-tooths 8%
o rapin' gun-totin' trailor park whales 16%
o WIPO 8%

Votes: 12
Results | Other Polls

Related Links
o [1]
o [2]
o [3]
o [4]
o http://en. wikipedia.org/wiki/Government_of_the_United_Kingdom
o http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monarchy_of_the_United_Kingdom
o http://en. wikipedia.org/wiki/Government_of_the_United_States
o http://en. wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Constitution
o Also by procrasti


Display: Sort:
Why Brits Cannot Understand Gun Rights | 47 comments (31 topical, 16 editorial, 0 hidden)
America began as a political experiment (3.00 / 6) (#11)
by tdillo on Wed Dec 19, 2012 at 08:27:25 AM EST

It continues as an experiment. An experiment in lulz.

"the idea of self defence against a modern equipped military is an absolute futility"

As Americans we have learned time and again how wrong this idea is. We learned it in Vietnam, in Korea, in Irag and now in Afghanistan. It's not a matter of FIREpower, it's a matter of WILLpower.

A place to Dump kuro5hit.
We're talking about you behind your back right now.


Holly, I really appreciate you looking after my (3.00 / 2) (#12)
by balsamic vinigga on Wed Dec 19, 2012 at 12:22:31 PM EST

countrymen and countrywomen, and countrykids like that, I thought I'd do the same.

Each year at least 2000 brits die every year through road accidents!

Can you believe that Holly? Clearly your population isn't responsible enough to handle their vehicles, even under current stringent regulations of the use of vehicles in Great Britain! Like seriously, it would cost way more to just make sure that transportation is the exclusive right and responsibility of The Royal Crown. You really want to keep the streets smeared with the blood of british children so that you can have your weekend joyrides with the top down and the radio jamming Spice Girls? That may be a British way of life, but clearly it's been a failure! AT WHAT COST HOLLY!!! AT WHAT COST!

---
Please help fund a Filipino Horror Movie. It's been in limbo since 2007 due to lack of funding. Please donate today!

At the very least, Holly (3.00 / 2) (#13)
by balsamic vinigga on Wed Dec 19, 2012 at 12:28:20 PM EST

stick with imports if this is the best your engineers can achieve

---
Please help fund a Filipino Horror Movie. It's been in limbo since 2007 due to lack of funding. Please donate today!
[ Parent ]
Also you need to get your nanny state priorities (none / 1) (#14)
by balsamic vinigga on Wed Dec 19, 2012 at 12:58:56 PM EST

right!

Population of GB: 62,300,000

2000/62,300,000 = 0.0031%

Population of USA: 314,964,000

9000/314,964,000 = 0.0029%

Which idiot masses need their government to intervene more???? Which idiot masses is incapable of handling their machines????

Clearly you're in denial. The vehicle problem in GB is WORSE than the gun problem in the USA!

---
Please help fund a Filipino Horror Movie. It's been in limbo since 2007 due to lack of funding. Please donate today!
[ Parent ]

2000 is a lot less that 9000 (none / 0) (#20)
by procrasti on Thu Dec 20, 2012 at 01:48:07 AM EST

That's about 7000 not as convincing.

-------
if i ever see the nickname procrasti again on this site or anywhere in my life, i want it to be in an OBITUARY -- CTS
doing my best at licking arseholes - may 2015 -- mirko
-------
Winner of Kuro5hin: April 2015
[ Parent ]
Australia (none / 0) (#46)
by horseskin spacesuit on Sat Mar 23, 2013 at 06:09:23 PM EST

294/22,958,012 = .001280598%



This is quite literally the only computer I'm capable of not being offended by. ~ balsamic vinigga
[ Parent ]
Saw a motorcyclist get run over today: (none / 1) (#15)
by Wen Jian on Wed Dec 19, 2012 at 01:13:06 PM EST

Fucked up. Taxi driver not looking where he was going.
It was an experiment in lulz. - Rusty
[ Parent ]
TOO BAD THE QUEEN WASN'T DRIVING THAT TAXI (none / 1) (#16)
by balsamic vinigga on Wed Dec 19, 2012 at 01:15:39 PM EST



---
Please help fund a Filipino Horror Movie. It's been in limbo since 2007 due to lack of funding. Please donate today!
[ Parent ]
Cars have a purpose other than running people over (none / 0) (#29)
by Wen Jian on Fri Dec 21, 2012 at 10:06:53 AM EST

Similar arguments relating to firearms are unconvincing in the face of assault weapons, high-cap magazines, and the 2nd amendment itself.

I actually think that we do presume to allow people to drive inappropriately. It is common that drivers will kill people, be found culpable through negligence, and not even have their licence revoked - let alone an appropriate punishment for manslaughter be applied.

So even if it is proven in a court of law that you are unfit to drive and a deadly threat to others, you can still drive away from the courthouse.

I mean, we have a licensing system for cars - so why don't we enforce it?

The US approach to guns seems like one whereby you can walk into a car shop on your 16th birthday and buy a pick-up truck under your constitutional right to run people over; currently the politicians are tussling about whether you should be permitted to attach enormous spikes to the bonnet without requiring some sort of a permit.
It was an experiment in lulz. - Rusty
[ Parent ]

purpose is in the eye of the sniper rifle (none / 1) (#31)
by balsamic vinigga on Fri Dec 21, 2012 at 10:57:52 AM EST

If you were to look at all rounds fired from assault rifles, I think that the majority of them would have been fired safely and out of harm's way. Why? Because there is an alternative purpose. Such as: fun, amusement, training, etc.

Who are you to tell me that somebody who has fun with their top down listening to spice girls has fun in a better way than somebody who enjoys firing assault rifles at targets?

Also, that, "yeah but assault rifles are meant for killing humans" tactic is pretty much the same tactic where, "yeah right to choose, but women need to have their vaginas probed" argument. It's people who want to ban all guns trying to start somewhere that sorta kinda makes sense because they don't have facts, statistics, and rationality on their side. As soon as they get the assault rifles rebanned the next target will be hand guns, since they too, are mostly intended for killing humans, and they are used more frequently than hunting rifles in school shootings, etc etc etc.

You're also wrong about the "US Approach to guns" - The amount of regulations when it comes to the use of guns in public far exceed the regulations on the use of cars in public.

---
Please help fund a Filipino Horror Movie. It's been in limbo since 2007 due to lack of funding. Please donate today!
[ Parent ]

The fun derived from recreational assault weapons: (none / 0) (#32)
by Wen Jian on Fri Dec 21, 2012 at 12:16:59 PM EST

Is essentially an abstraction of their primary intended purpose.

Use in public / ownership, though I accept your point.

Regulation is not the same as banning - the pro-gun side like to use the term 'ban' because it pushes people's buttons better. We are not and have never been talking about a blanket ban on firearms in the US.
It was an experiment in lulz. - Rusty
[ Parent ]

But where is the logic behind a non-blanket ban? (none / 1) (#33)
by balsamic vinigga on Fri Dec 21, 2012 at 12:38:57 PM EST

If you're not talking about a blanket ban then what are you talking about? See, that's why it doesn't make any sense. What are you going to do that's going to stop tragic incidents like Sandy Hook? You can pick apart features of guns that make them more deadly, or whatever - but the essential characteristic of a gun that makes them deadly is that they fire rounds...

"On the basis that it's better to kill 20 students per minute than 21 students per minute, we should limit semi automatics to 20 rounds per minute."

That argument is awfully specious. It has no essential logic behind it. Only a full ban makes sense. Because it's better to kill 0 students per minute than 1 per minute.

---
Please help fund a Filipino Horror Movie. It's been in limbo since 2007 due to lack of funding. Please donate today!
[ Parent ]

And yet it's entirely the reverse trajectory: (none / 0) (#34)
by Wen Jian on Fri Dec 21, 2012 at 01:17:54 PM EST

Of military small arms. If, as you say, reducing the number of rounds a person can have ready to fire, or the rate at which they can fire them, is only of marginal significance, then why aren't soldiers still running round with muzzle-loading rifles and carrying about 12 paper-wrapped rounds in a leather pouch?

You are attempting to paint the pro-legislation lobby as a bunch of baby-abusers, just because they think the bathwater needs changing...
It was an experiment in lulz. - Rusty
[ Parent ]

I didn't say they are of marginal significance (none / 1) (#35)
by balsamic vinigga on Fri Dec 21, 2012 at 01:43:05 PM EST

What I was trying to say that if you want to grab guns on the basis of incidents like Sandy Hook. What is the logic?

The only argument that makes sense is a total ban.

When death by mass murder is such a statistically insignificant problem, the only way to effectively solve it is to treat people like irresponsible idiots, and cattle. Or, on the other hand you can say that being treated like an irresponsible idiot and cattle creates a society not worth living in.

---
Please help fund a Filipino Horror Movie. It's been in limbo since 2007 due to lack of funding. Please donate today!
[ Parent ]

I've read some (3.00 / 2) (#18)
by Marvin Suggs on Wed Dec 19, 2012 at 06:55:39 PM EST

amusing shit written by some of you americans this week. Who exactly are you trying to convince?

Ultimately, someone want to take away your toys and you're not happy. am I right?

I find the resorting to conspiracy theories expecially amusing.

Don't tell me this is about 'freedoms'. You've done such a wonderful job of protecting your individual rights going back to the time of Franklin -- not.
<>|<>
   .0. gimme a bitcoin: 1M9vApgDo5Dw45Awfem75mrVtMJvaMKpjy

Would this make less sense if I was a Brit? $ (none / 1) (#23)
by procrasti on Thu Dec 20, 2012 at 04:30:10 AM EST



-------
if i ever see the nickname procrasti again on this site or anywhere in my life, i want it to be in an OBITUARY -- CTS
doing my best at licking arseholes - may 2015 -- mirko
-------
Winner of Kuro5hin: April 2015
[ Parent ]
soap, ballot, jury, ammo (none / 0) (#38)
by procrasti on Fri Dec 28, 2012 at 04:51:14 PM EST

No need to jump straight to shooting, but it's necessary that it's there.

> am I right?
No, your assumptions are wrong.

-------
if i ever see the nickname procrasti again on this site or anywhere in my life, i want it to be in an OBITUARY -- CTS
doing my best at licking arseholes - may 2015 -- mirko
-------
Winner of Kuro5hin: April 2015
[ Parent ]

Of course (none / 0) (#43)
by Pseudonym on Wed Jan 02, 2013 at 01:20:52 AM EST

That's why the US government was stopped dead in its tracks when it tried to illegally intern Japanese-American citizens during WW2. It's also why civil forfeiture laws and sundry unreasonable search and seizure laws as part of the "war on drugs" never happened. It's why the US government was prevented from wiretapping people without a warrant, or committing torture. It was thanks to gun owners that the US government has been effectively prevented from infringing civil liberties. Thank a gun owner today!
sub f{($f)=@_;print"$f(q{$f});";}f(q{sub f{($f)=@_;print"$f(q{$f});";}f});
[ Parent ]
I think the drug war might have been over a while (none / 0) (#44)
by procrasti on Wed Jan 02, 2013 at 01:32:46 AM EST

back if they didn't all have access to weapons.

It's the guns involved that have stopped the government being able to completely stop it. Guns are a major feature of the black market, where non-government backed force is the only means of dispute resolution. This is true no matter where in the world you are and what the law abiding citizens are legally allowed to do.

That is an actual ongoing (global) civil war, guns are making a difference even if there are casualties, and is one where the minority or 'enemy' still has a chance of winning. So you don't have that one.

The rest, yes, definitely to some extent. At some point, maybe all these things you mentioned actually are pointing at the need for another revolution. Just at a time when you recognise the acceleration of the government taking your rights you want to disarm the population?

-------
if i ever see the nickname procrasti again on this site or anywhere in my life, i want it to be in an OBITUARY -- CTS
doing my best at licking arseholes - may 2015 -- mirko
-------
Winner of Kuro5hin: April 2015
[ Parent ]

Blames the victim, (none / 1) (#25)
by k31 on Thu Dec 20, 2012 at 03:11:03 PM EST

but is historically accurate,
I liked it as a diary
so +1 SP.


Your dollar is you only Word, the wrath of it your only fear. He who has an EAR to hear....
Was good (none / 0) (#27)
by Corwin06 on Thu Dec 20, 2012 at 05:09:19 PM EST

up until it devolved into racist jokes, which the Internet has enough of.

"and you sir, in an argument in a thread with a troll in a story no one is reading in a backwater website, you're a fucking genius
--circletimessquare
nigga isn't a racial thing... (none / 0) (#36)
by procrasti on Sat Dec 22, 2012 at 12:30:25 AM EST

It refers to a the sociopolitical class most likely to be involved in crimes like rape.

I don't think you have to be the offspring of ancestors of an east germanic tribe to be a vandal.

-------
if i ever see the nickname procrasti again on this site or anywhere in my life, i want it to be in an OBITUARY -- CTS
doing my best at licking arseholes - may 2015 -- mirko
-------
Winner of Kuro5hin: April 2015
[ Parent ]

Mrs. Lanza packed heat ... oh wait! (none / 0) (#28)
by Edmund Blackadder on Thu Dec 20, 2012 at 11:51:47 PM EST



---
MAY I SUCK YOUR PENIS? - Nimey
Hi! I fail at basic sig technology! En plus, je suis pédé! - smegko
British gun regulation: (none / 1) (#30)
by Wen Jian on Fri Dec 21, 2012 at 10:11:21 AM EST

Was actually introduced after WW1, because of all the foreigners, returning soldiers, and communists.

Gun regulation will begin in the US the instant that someone works out how to shoot a corporation in the face.
It was an experiment in lulz. - Rusty

because Brits have uncle Sam to do the dirty work (none / 0) (#37)
by sye on Thu Dec 27, 2012 at 05:18:22 PM EST

Queen only need to secure that William and Katy are on good terms and no longer bring bastards to the British Courts around the world.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
commentary - For a better sye@K5
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
ripple me ~~> ~allthingsgo: gateway to Garden of Perfect Brightess in CNY/BTC/LTC/DRK
rubbing u ~~> ~procrasti: getaway to HE'LL
Hey! at least he was in a stable relationship. - procrasti
enter K5 via Blastar.in

Arrg. 2nd Amendment has it's roots... (3.00 / 2) (#39)
by claes on Sun Dec 30, 2012 at 08:37:22 AM EST

in English Civil Law.

Wikipedia:Second Amendment

Influence of the English Bill of Rights of 1689

The right to have arms in English history is believed to have been regarded as a long-established natural right in English law, auxiliary to the natural and legally defensible rights to life.[9] The English Bill of Rights emerged from a tempestuous period in English politics during which two issues were major sources of conflict: the authority of the King to govern without the consent of Parliament and the role of Catholics in a country that was becoming ever more Protestant.
...
The historical link between the English Bill of Rights and the Second Amendment, which both codify an existing right and do not create a new one, has been acknowledged by the U.S. Supreme Court

True, but it took the american revolution to (none / 0) (#40)
by procrasti on Mon Dec 31, 2012 at 12:19:13 AM EST

fully implement a system not based on the monarchy.

And start with a 'clean slate' if you will.

-------
if i ever see the nickname procrasti again on this site or anywhere in my life, i want it to be in an OBITUARY -- CTS
doing my best at licking arseholes - may 2015 -- mirko
-------
Winner of Kuro5hin: April 2015
[ Parent ]

It's so difficult to take this seriously. (none / 0) (#41)
by tweet on Tue Jan 01, 2013 at 03:30:50 PM EST

History is a big subject. It did not start a few hundred years ago. And when people disagree with you, it may be because they disagree with you, not because they don't understand what you're saying.

Or, in case this was the laziest troll ever, IGTT 2/19.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Not everything in black and white makes sense.

Thanks for biting anyway (none / 1) (#42)
by procrasti on Wed Jan 02, 2013 at 12:46:43 AM EST

I don't mind people disagreeing with me, its a matter of whether or not your arguments make sense philosophically and rationally or are just emotional arguments that have no objective basis in reality.

If you disagree about a normative, unprovable statement (such as your comment), then these need to be recognised as nothing more than a matter of opinion until a rational objective basis is demonstrated for them.

-------
if i ever see the nickname procrasti again on this site or anywhere in my life, i want it to be in an OBITUARY -- CTS
doing my best at licking arseholes - may 2015 -- mirko
-------
Winner of Kuro5hin: April 2015
[ Parent ]

Well, it was the least I could do ~ (none / 0) (#45)
by tweet on Wed Jan 02, 2013 at 06:45:05 PM EST


~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Not everything in black and white makes sense.
[ Parent ]

so...ja (none / 0) (#47)
by rusty nail head on Thu May 09, 2013 at 10:33:59 AM EST

The problem is that most people who carry guns don't have 2 brain cells to rub together.

Why Brits Cannot Understand Gun Rights | 47 comments (31 topical, 16 editorial, 0 hidden)
Display: Sort:

kuro5hin.org

[XML]
All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective companies. The Rest © 2000 - Present Kuro5hin.org Inc.
See our legalese page for copyright policies. Please also read our Privacy Policy.
Kuro5hin.org is powered by Free Software, including Apache, Perl, and Linux, The Scoop Engine that runs this site is freely available, under the terms of the GPL.
Need some help? Email help@kuro5hin.org.
My heart's the long stairs.

Powered by Scoop create account | help/FAQ | mission | links | search | IRC | YOU choose the stories!