But it's not just about gun ownership. Switzerland has the highest percentage of gun ownership in the world. Having no standing army every male of adult age is required to be part of the people militia. However, they all also get trained in the proper use of the guns they are legally required to own. As I said above, it's not just the guns that is the problem, it's the fact that the majority have no idea how to store, secure or use them properly and responsibly, combined with a legal framework that almost promotes a shoot first ask questions later state of mind. The way the law is over there you are better off killing a burglar, because if you just seriously injure them then there's a chance you could end up paying for their treatment.
Michael Moore's "Bowling for Colombine" is well worth watching for an interesting take on gun ownership. The comparison on gun crime between an American city and a Canadian city, separated only by the width of a river and both with no gun control laws is quite shocking.
The US city was Detroit I believe. Funny, Moore interviewed some folk from the nearby Canadian town and the only murder they could recall in their town was carried out by somebody from Detroit!
Without wanting to defend American gun owners too much, I'm guessing the Canadian city compared would have been Toronto? It's certainly the only city anywhere near Detroit with a comparable size.
That being the case it really is an unfair comparison. Detroit has been on a steep downward slide for 30-40 years. Whilst Toronto is a prosperous city. Even without gun crime, the crime rates, and types of crimes, in the two cities will be massively different.
the idea that you can be free to murder a burglar is wrong ... at least in this case the father suffers for his crime rather than making another father suffer
the idea that you can be free to murder a burglar is wrong ... at least in this case the father suffers for his crime rather than making another father suffer
I completely disagree. In fact, this is one of the few aspects of US Law that I agree with. If you choose to enter someone's property with the intent to commit a crime then you have to suffer the consequences. You always have the option not to do it!
Without wanting to defend American gun owners too much, I'm guessing the Canadian city compared would have been Toronto? It's certainly the only city anywhere near Detroit with a comparable size.
That being the case it really is an unfair comparison. Detroit has been on a steep downward slide for 30-40 years. Whilst Toronto is a prosperous city. Even without gun crime, the crime rates, and types of crimes, in the two cities will be massively different.
That's what I thought. It's like carrying out a survey on crime down Lewisham High Street & comparing it to Blackheath Village.
the idea that you can be free to murder a burglar is wrong ... at least in this case the father suffers for his crime rather than making another father suffer
I completely disagree. In fact, this is one of the few aspects of US Law that I agree with. If you choose to enter someone's property with the intent to commit a crime then you have to suffer the consequences. You always have the option not to do it!
Totally agree. If you are choosing to invade someone's property and put those people and all they've worked for at threat, then they cease to have any rights.
the idea that you can be free to murder a burglar is wrong ... at least in this case the father suffers for his crime rather than making another father suffer
I completely disagree. In fact, this is one of the few aspects of US Law that I agree with. If you choose to enter someone's property with the intent to commit a crime then you have to suffer the consequences. You always have the option not to do it!
Totally agree. If you are choosing to invade someone's property and put those people and all they've worked for at threat, then they cease to have any rights.
what if the burglar went into someone else’s property but was actually stealing back what was already stolen from him the week before and nothing else.
the idea that you can be free to murder a burglar is wrong ... at least in this case the father suffers for his crime rather than making another father suffer
I completely disagree. In fact, this is one of the few aspects of US Law that I agree with. If you choose to enter someone's property with the intent to commit a crime then you have to suffer the consequences. You always have the option not to do it!
Totally agree. If you are choosing to invade someone's property and put those people and all they've worked for at threat, then they cease to have any rights.
what if the burglar went into someone else’s property but was actually stealing back what was already stolen from him the week before and nothing else.
He should have just shot the bloke that tried to nick it last week. Save himself the trouble.
the idea that you can be free to murder a burglar is wrong ... at least in this case the father suffers for his crime rather than making another father suffer
I completely disagree. In fact, this is one of the few aspects of US Law that I agree with. If you choose to enter someone's property with the intent to commit a crime then you have to suffer the consequences. You always have the option not to do it!
Totally agree. If you are choosing to invade someone's property and put those people and all they've worked for at threat, then they cease to have any rights.
what if the burglar went into someone else’s property but was actually stealing back what was already stolen from him the week before and nothing else.
mmmmm M'lud .. not burglary as there is no intent to take the property of another .. BUT .. an illegal intrusion nonetheless and that m'l'ud is worthy of a far more painful death than merely shooting
the idea that you can be free to murder a burglar is wrong ... at least in this case the father suffers for his crime rather than making another father suffer
I think this was suicide by Dad. Why when the man went indoors for his gun did he not call the police. Why did the boy go for his Dad?
A masked intruder is trying to break into his sisters house, he reacted on instinct to protect his family, doubt he thought his time would be best spent on the blower chating to an emergency services operator, explaining the situation and giving his address etc whilst his sister is in danger!
Just looking at it from the Dads point of view if this had been this country. The Dad would probably be dead and the son would be caught and stuck in a prison for a few years and let back out in to the community.Police happy that they caught a murderer but an innocent man would be six foot under.Make about page 5 of the Sun, read at the tea break and forgotten about the following day.
Comments
That being the case it really is an unfair comparison. Detroit has been on a steep downward slide for 30-40 years. Whilst Toronto is a prosperous city. Even without gun crime, the crime rates, and types of crimes, in the two cities will be massively different.
Why when the man went indoors for his gun did he not call the police.
Why did the boy go for his Dad?