How many of you carry a gun as part of your cycling equipment?

Discussion in 'Cycling Equipment' started by Joe West, Oct 2, 2004.

  1. cbjesseeNH

    cbjesseeNH New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 10, 2005
    Messages:
    424
    Likes Received:
    3
    Scary place to live...I'm staying in the US
    _________________________________________

    Firearms: cheap, easy to get and on a street near you
    From drug dealing to settling playground squabbles, firearms offences are rising
    Duncan Campbell
    The Guardian, Saturday August 30 2008
    http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2008/aug/30/ukcrime1/print

    The gun shown here, a Webley, is up for sale in London for £150, one of hundreds of such weapons that are easily and cheaply available on the streets of the UK's big cities, a Guardian investigation can reveal.

    The variety of weapons on offer in Britain is extensive and includes machine guns and shotguns, as well as pistols and converted replicas. A source close to the trade in illegal weapons contacted by the Guardian listed a menu of firearms that are available on the streets of the capital.

    "You can get a clean [unused] 9mm automatic for £1,500, a Glock for a couple of grand and you can even make an order for a couple of MAC-10s," he said. "Or you can get a little sawn-off for £150. They're easy enough to get hold of. You'll find one in any poverty area, every estate in London, and it's even easier in Manchester, where there are areas where the police don't go.

    "People who use shotguns tend to be lower down the pecking order. There is less use of sawn-off or full length shotguns, and if a criminal wants street cred, he wants a self-loading pistol, a MAC-10 or an Uzi submachine gun."

    This week a man who ran a "factory" for converting replica weapons into working guns was jailed for life. Police believe the products of Grant Wilkinson's workshops were used in more than 50 shootings, including eight murders. His speciality was turning legally purchased MAC-10s into weapons that could fire live rounds, an increasingly common practice.

    According to David Dyson, a leading firearms consultant, it is possible to learn through the internet how to make a firearm, given a degree of skill, and converted deactivated weapons also feature in shootings.

    But it is the arrival of eastern European weapons that, alongside a homegrown industry in converting them, has contributed to the firearms glut. "There has been an influx from eastern Europe and particularly from Poland, and there are also a lot coming in from people who have served in Afghanistan and Iraq," said the source. "In Liverpool docks, you can put in an order for 10 guns and some grenades and they'll say OK and two weeks later, they will be there - and they are straight goers."

    According to Dyson, the latest "weapon of choice" is a Russian 8mm Baikal self-defence pistol, originally used for firing CS gas. "They are legally sold in Germany and won't fire a bullet but they can be converted by removing the partially blocked barrel, and replacing it with a rifled barrel," he said. "After other small alterations, it can then fire 9mm bulleted ammunition. The replacement barrel is longer than the original, and is threaded so that it will accept a silencer, which is commonly sold as part of the package.

    "There are hundreds of these floating around and hundreds have been seized," he said. "They look the part as they are based on the Russian military Makarov pistol. If you are a 20-year-old drug dealer and you want a gun, that is what you will get and it will cost about £1,000 to £1,500."

    "The trends in firearms are driven by the suppliers," said Dyson. "About two years ago, a supplier brought back hundreds of German-made revolvers, blank-firing pistols which can be bought legally in Germany. They were then converted and new cylinders made. They could then be sold for £700 to £800 when the supplier would have bought them for €60 and spent about £30 on converting them."

    Home Office data shows that gun crime is up since last year, despite the recent doubling of sentences for possessing or supplying firearms. There were 9,803 firearms offences in England and Wales in the year to March 2008 with most in London, Manchester and the West Midlands.

    Most buyers are involved with drug dealing, the source said. Some are used to rob other dealers in crimes that go unreported, others are used as protection while a deal is under way. "Someone will have a tool and there is always one guy in a posse willing to use it. They will have one guy who doesn't give a fuck.

    "Everyone wants to be a gangster now, mainly the kids. You have five or six in a little crew and one of them will be carrying. They want handguns - shotguns are too big and bulky. The sawn-off doesn't look so good but use a machine gun and you get known as a heavy guy. They have them just to be a chap on the street, to pose. Some of them walk around all day with a .38. It's 16-year-olds at it and it's getting like America, silly as it sounds."

    In terms of nationalities, the influx of eastern European criminals has changed the balance of power. "Who's using the guns? The [Jamaican] Yardies' value for life was so minimal that they thought nothing of killing people," said the source. "We don't like them, they have no moral code. But it's the Russians and the Polish and Albanians around now. They are bullies. They want to take over the flesh business. The Russians are cold-hearted fuckers. What they have been doing is following the card boys [who put cards advertising prostitutes in phone booths in central London] and then taking the girls hostage, armed if need be."

    Detective Chief Inspector Colin Sutton, who has investigated some of London's most high profile shooting murders, said he believed the age of offenders was getting younger, and sometimes guns seemed to be used for the slightest reason.

    "Playground squabbles are now being settled with guns," he said. "And drug dealers are taking a policy decision to get youngsters to carry guns."

    He said guns could be purchased for a few hundred pounds in many parts of London. "You can hire a gun for a period and, if the gun has already been used for a murder, the going rate comes down."

    While the conviction of Wilkinson was seen as a breakthrough, it is accepted that with the increased traffic between Britain and eastern Europe, stemming the flow of weapons remains an almost impossible task.

    "Guns are always available," said Dyson. "You can go to the former Soviet Union, or countries with less stringent regulations than ours, and although British Customs have their successes, many guns appear to be smuggled into the UK."

    Amnesties for people to hand over weapons are greeted with scepticism by criminals. "The gun amnesties are meaningless," the source said. "All you get handed in are guns from boys who wanted to be gangsters and then got a job or someone whose mother found it in their bedroom. If I had a gun, I wouldn't take part because, if I got pulled, what would I say - 'Oh, I'm just on my way to the amnesty.' Also if it gets out that you've given in your tool, people will think you're a wrong 'un."

    Few professional criminals would keep guns on their premises. "Only silly people keep it in their homes. Normally, you have a 'keeper' a couple of miles away and some of them have been at it for 20 years. It's best to have an old fellow with no previous or a woman. You keep the ammunition separate because you'll get a much heavier sentence if you have them together."

    When guns are moved from place to place, a young woman is often used as the courier because there is less risk of her being stopped and searched.

    What is not in dispute is the devastating effect that the casual use of a gun over a minor argument can have on dozens of people. In December 2006, Sean "Stretch" Jenkins, 36, an amiable, 6ft 8in window-cleaner from south London, was shot dead at a party in Carshalton. His killer was a cocaine dealer called Joseph Greenland, a volatile man with a quick temper, who had apparently taken offence at something Jenkins said. The men had earlier been at a boxing night at Caesar's in Streatham, where there had been some fighting outside the ring. Greenland had left the party, driven home in his Range Rover, picked up a gun and returned to kill Jenkins in front of at least five witnesses, who were warned not to talk.

    None of the immediate witnesses gave evidence against Greenland, who had a reputation for threatening to "annihilate" anyone who crossed him, but there were traces of his DNA on a cigarette end and a wine glass at the party and his bragging about the shooting was to be his downfall. His recourse to a gun, for no other reason than some perceived slight, left Jenkins's six-year-old son without a father and saddened a wide network of friends and family. Greenland was jailed for life last week and will have to serve 30 years before he can be considered for parole.

    "We got what we wanted," said the victim's mother, Maureen Jenkins, of the verdict and sentence last month. "I went to the cemetery and said, 'Well, boy, I can put you to rest'."

    The detectives investigating the killing and the prosecution team that secured Greenland's conviction were "marvellous", she said. "I shed tears every day and I probably will till the day I die. Why do these people have to kill for nothing? If they want to kill people, why don't they join the army? You don't ever think a shooting will happen in your life. It's all down to guns, just guns."

    The Guardian's source said that guns were becoming a first rather than a last recourse. "A gun used to be used as a mediator; now everything is revolved with a gun. It's brought the heat on everyone. Before you would get a two [years jail sentence], now it's a five. It's getting like the US now, like The Wire. It's like a prediction of what will happen here. I think they all think they're playing Grand Theft Auto. It's madness out there."

    guardian.co.uk © Guardian News and Media Limited 2008
     


  2. stevebaby

    stevebaby New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 22, 2004
    Messages:
    3,515
    Likes Received:
    2
    Maureen Jenkins "...it's all down to guns, just guns'.
    Jessie has obviously seen the light by posting this anti-gun article.
    Either that, or he is still a fool who doesn't actually read what he posts.
    I'll let the reader decide. :D


    BTW How does that toejam taste? :D :D
     
  3. cbjesseeNH

    cbjesseeNH New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 10, 2005
    Messages:
    424
    Likes Received:
    3
    Yes - they should take some steps and ban guns in the UK. Oh, they have already done that and it didn't work. But us Yanks should do the same here anyway, eh?

    But I see it's all those nasty guns coming in from other countries. I'm sure the ban would have worked if only the entire world had eliminated arms too. Why can't we all just -- get along?
     
  4. CAMPYBOB

    CAMPYBOB Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 12, 2005
    Messages:
    11,945
    Likes Received:
    1,038
    it's getting like America, silly as it sounds

    They can only dream their little socialist shithole becomes as free as The United States Of America, where a man can still legally defend himself and his family against criminals.

    "Playground squabbles are now being settled with guns

    Highlighting lies again? Show me the thousands of fourth graders killed by guns over who gets to ride the merry-go-'round. No, one or two anecdotal stories aren't going to cut it. Let's see the stats for playground homicides by kids under the age of twelve.

    Few professional criminals would keep guns on their premises. "Only silly people keep it in their homes.

    Here's a clue; "professional criminals" and amatuer criminals alike WILL have a firearm on them when they need it.

    Will YOU have one when you need one? No, you'll just be another willing victim, shirking YOUR responsibility to uphold the laws of society.

    And "silly people"? Yes, those that are man enough to defend themselves, their families and possessions from the fuckstick wastes of oxygen that pervade all societies.

    What is not in dispute is the devastating effect that the casual use of a gun over a minor argument can have on dozens of people.

    Yes, the effect on those killed by an edged weapon/blade is far less "devastating". Thank God England's knife crime statistics are soaring thru the roof in lieu of firearm crime stats, which are merely climbing...thanks to a ban that did not work and can not be made to work.

    Greenland was jailed for life last week and will have to serve 30 years before he can be considered for parole.

    Well, no shit...as any convicted murderer should be treated. If it were my state, we would not be paying for his food and room for the next 30 years. The coke-head moron would be executed for his criminal behavior.

    guns were becoming a first rather than a last recourse. "A gun used to be used as a mediator; now everything is resolved with a gun.

    And yet YOU would have us be unarmed in a world where crime has been rampant for decades and criminals HAVE firearms. You feed the problem by offering the criminal another easy mark. Another willing victim ready to go to the slaughter like the sheep that you are.

    You haven't changed a single well-defended opinion with your ignorant attacks and moronic baiting. Nor have you changed one fact of the right and responsibility of a free man to self-defense.

    Knowing you, you're just too stupid to quit while you're well behind though so have at it spewing more of your idiocy.

    BTW How does that toejam taste?

    Probably about the same as the taste in the back of your throat.













     
  5. Tonto

    Tonto New Member

    Joined:
    Nov 3, 2003
    Messages:
    394
    Likes Received:
    0
    This one has always made me wonder exactly what freedoms are there in the USA that are not available in my country, Ireland?
    I have the right to defend my family from criminals. What made you think that people in other countries don't?
    Granted gun licencing is stricter here than many, but not all, US states. I can apply for a licence to hold a gun of some sort as I know. Not sure if I'd get one mind and I'm certainly not bothered about that.
     
  6. CAMPYBOB

    CAMPYBOB Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 12, 2005
    Messages:
    11,945
    Likes Received:
    1,038
    Try owning a centerfire pistol in England. Or a semi-automaic rifle or rifle over .22 calibre. Even airguns over certain velocities are strictly regulated. The British olympic shooting squad has found the firearm laws so restrictive that they practice on the continent!

    And I can cite cases in which English homeowners that have used firearms in self-defense of their life and property have been sentenced to jail as if they were the true criminal!

    I'm not an expert on Irish firearm law by any means, but can you own a defensive shotgun with a 18" barrel and holding eight rounds? Can you openly carry or concealed carry for personal protecion?

    Can you even own a firearm for any legal purpose other than the Garda accepted, "...target shooting, (provided the applicant is a member of an authorised gun club), pest control and other agricultural uses, and deer stalking."?

    It's my understanding that farmers are given wide latitude in types of firearms permitted, but most other folks are highly restricted. I'm sure the Irish site members can chime in with accurate data.

    That said, my rights to both firearm ownership and their use in self-defense/home defense are nearly unlimited.

    I can legally concealed carry a pistol almost everywhere.
    I can legally openly carry a pistol, shotgun or rifle almost everywhere.
    I can legally drive and ride a bicycle either openly or concealed carrywith a pistol.
    I can legally own short-barrel rifles or shotuns.
    I can legally own machineguns/fully automatic firearms.
    I can legally own or manufacture destructive devices.
    I can legally own or manufacture sound suppressors/silencers.

    I have no legal duty to retreat from anyone that causes me to fear for my life or serious bodily harm and I may defend myself using deadly force.

    What made you think that people in other countries don't?

    Reading crap like this:

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tony_Martin_(farmer)

    On the night of 20 August 1999, two burglars - Brendon Fearon, 29, and Fred Barras, 16 - entered Bleak House.[3] When confronted, they attempted to flee through a window, but were shot by Martin;[1] Fearon in the leg, and Barras in the back. Barras died while trying to escape the house; he was later found dead in the grounds by a police dog, but Fearon was able to leave and reach aid from a couple that lived near the house. He was then taken into hospital, where he was treated.[citation needed] Martin subsequently left the farm and fled to his mother`s house, where he hid the firearm. Later that evening, he reported to the local inn and stayed for the night.

    On 10 January 2000, Fearon and Darren Bark, 33, both from Newark-on-Trent, Nottinghamshire, admitted to conspiring to burgle Martin's farmhouse. Fearon was sentenced to three years in prison, and Bark to 30 months [3](with an additional 12 months arising from previous offences). Fearon was released on August 10, 2001.[3]



    Murder trial

    On 23 August 1999, Martin was charged with the murder of Barras, the attempted murder of Fearon, wounding with intent to cause injury to Fearon, and possessing a firearm with intent to endanger life.[3]

    The jury at the trial were told that they had the option of returning a verdict of manslaughter, rather than murder, if they thought that Martin "did not intend to kill or cause serious bodily harm".[4] However, they found Martin guilty of murder by a 10 to 2 majority.[5] He was sentenced to life in prison, the mandatory sentence for murder under English law.



    They should have pinned a medal on him and given him the keys to the city.
     
  7. cbjesseeNH

    cbjesseeNH New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 10, 2005
    Messages:
    424
    Likes Received:
    3
    One can apply for a pistol carry permit license in New York City, Chicago and Washington D.C. too but you are assured you won't get one issued. In most US states, you can't be denied a pistol carry permit without just and objective cause (felon, adjudged insane, etc).

    Reading http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/ireland/2008/0705/1215184149061.html one gets the impression that owning a gun for self-defense is under very strict control in Ireland. Maybe you might - might - get a permit for a single-shot .22 target rifle, but not a defensive firearm.


    "Possession of a firearm was not a right but a privilege granted in contradistinction of the prohibition imposed in the 1925 Firearms Act, as amended, he said. He was satisfied considerations of public safety were uppermost in the legislative policy behind various provisions of the 1925 Act.

    The 2006 Criminal Justice Act required a person to have a “good reason” for requiring a particular firearm, which had to be more than a simple desire to use it or to have sport with it in some way."

    As to freedoms in Ireland vs USA, perhaps you can refer me to the Irish equivalent of a Bill of Rights?
     
  8. Tonto

    Tonto New Member

    Joined:
    Nov 3, 2003
    Messages:
    394
    Likes Received:
    0
    Thanks for the information. I knew were some states in the US where firearm possession was very restrictive. Yes, in Ireland, firearms are usually issued to farmers for hunting purposes only and even then it's pretty rare. I am well aware that it is pretty much impossible for a private citizen to own anything more than a hunting rifle. Our police force, with the exception of special units who deal with organised crime and terrorism, do not carry guns by the way.

    The answer to your last question is Bunreacht na hEireann (the most relevant section being that entitled 'Fundamental Rights') . An amendment to Bunreacht na hEireann can only ratified after a referendum. So, can you come up with any basic freedoms available in the USA that are not available in Ireland?

    Nor do I, what's your point?
     
  9. cbjesseeNH

    cbjesseeNH New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 10, 2005
    Messages:
    424
    Likes Received:
    3
    From which derives our standard joke about UK police officers who, when in pursuit of a criminal, shout "Halt, in the name of the law, or I'll shout Halt again!"

    Fascinating document, obviously more recent in content than our so-called Bill of Rights. Oddly, the content looks like an amalgam of the most incompatible parts of our two parties' (Democrats & Republicans) platforms.

    Select phrases lead me to question whether the government has been given far more perrogative in Ireland than the US:

    "This subsection shall not limit freedom to obtain or make available, in the State, subject to such conditions as may be laid down by law, information relating to services lawfully available in another state."

    "The education of public opinion being, however, a matter of such grave import to the common good, the State shall endeavour to ensure that organs of public opinion, such as the radio, the press, the cinema, while preserving their rightful liberty of expression, including criticism of Government policy, shall not be used to undermine public order or morality or the authority of the State."

    "Laws, however, may be enacted for the regulation and control in the public interest of the exercise of the foregoing right."

    "The State, accordingly, may as occasion requires delimit by law the exercise of the said rights with a view to reconciling their exercise with the exigencies of the common good."

    How the consititution is interpreted and enforced means as much as the words themselves. In general, what is good for society as a whole, when it conflicts with individual rights, is seconded in the US. I don't get the feel that is the case in Ireland.

    In the US, the theory is government exists to ensure the maintenance of our rights, not to moderate whether we ought have them and when. The practice is mostly in accordance with the theory and word of our constitution, with exceptions allowed only in cases of war and insurrection. Of course, our departures from theory with blacks pre & post-Civil War and Japanese/Germans during WWII are glaring deficiencies in practice.
     
  10. Tonto

    Tonto New Member

    Joined:
    Nov 3, 2003
    Messages:
    394
    Likes Received:
    0
     
  11. jimmypop

    jimmypop New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 20, 2008
    Messages:
    439
    Likes Received:
    0
    This thread is proof that Campybob is a fuckwit. I can't wait until your generation leaves the planet. With any luck, you haven't reproduced.

    Queue the witty reply.
     
  12. CAMPYBOB

    CAMPYBOB Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 12, 2005
    Messages:
    11,945
    Likes Received:
    1,038
    Nor do I, what's your point?

    My point is that for all practical purposes you can not defend yourself with a pistol, should you be attacked on the street.

    Good luck should you actually have to try and use deadly force without a firearm.
     
  13. CAMPYBOB

    CAMPYBOB Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 12, 2005
    Messages:
    11,945
    Likes Received:
    1,038
    This thread is proof that Campybob is a fuckwit. I can't wait until your generation leaves the planet. With any luck, you haven't reproduced.

    Queue the witty reply.

    Actually, I did reproduce. One night I got very drunk and screwed a retarded gal.

    It's finally nice to meet you, son!
     
  14. rainrider

    rainrider New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 27, 2005
    Messages:
    24
    Likes Received:
    0
    I live in England , have you any idea how bizzare this question seems :eek: :D
     
  15. Tonto

    Tonto New Member

    Joined:
    Nov 3, 2003
    Messages:
    394
    Likes Received:
    0
    I thought the whole point was that people kill people, not guns :D

    I defended myself successfully on two occasions when I was attacked by someone with a knife (both occasions within the space of 2 months, I was young and foolish and taking far too many risks at the time). On both occasions I used my wits rather than brute force. Why would I need deadly force just to defend myself?

    It's a matter of opinion, but I feel safer walking around my city without a gun, where the police, by and large, don't have guns (man there are far too many idiots in the police force, I barely trust some of them to carry batons!) and where the bad guys (the types who commit random street crimes rather than organised criminals who will always have guns, but who are less of a direct danger to the average punter on the street) very rarely have guns, than I would in a city where everyone is carrying.

    cbjesseeNH, I had written out a very long response to your post but when I submitted it, it posted the blank reply. I was in work and couldn't take the time to rewrite it. I just wanted to say fair play to you for taking the time to read up about our constitution and I hope to find the time over the next few days to respond properly to you.
     
  16. cbjesseeNH

    cbjesseeNH New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 10, 2005
    Messages:
    424
    Likes Received:
    3
    I would note that you have made your choice by consideration and experience. And that same choice is exactly what our 2nd amendment affords all Americans - we can chose not to own a firearm. The only obligations we have are to serve on juries, enter the military if called forth (although you need not be a combatant if you object) and to pay taxes (although some would argue not). We are not compelled to exercise any rights - in fact, any right compelled is no right at all. For example, we are not compelled by obligation to society to vote, as in some countires. Our social obligation only requires that we not infringe others' rights but we are not required to be participants in society. That may be a big difference between the US, UK and AUS.

    Some, in the minority in the US, having made their choice to not own firearms, strive to compell others to mirror their choice by law. Fortunately, our courts have upheld a 2nd amendment right for the individual to keep and bear arms for defense of self and liberty. So, by and large, if one makes the choice to own a firearm, for self-defense or otherwise, one can do so in the US (subject to defined qualifiers - not a felon, not judged mentally unstable, etc).

    The NRA, GOA and other gun-rights organizations don't work to compel people to own firearms, but work to prevent others from compelling people from legally owning firearms. We have laws and penalties for unjust use of deadly force, so one must responsible for ones' choices here.
     
  17. kdelong

    kdelong Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 14, 2006
    Messages:
    3,477
    Likes Received:
    74
    I am so happy to hear the voice of reason from someone who is better informed, much more articulate, and probably much more intelligent than me and most of the other posters in this thread. cbjesseeNH is actually able to post to this thread in a non-combative fashion that will not offend anyone and cause a flame war. Good job:)!
     
  18. stevebaby

    stevebaby New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 22, 2004
    Messages:
    3,515
    Likes Received:
    2
    How is it 'self-defence' to shoot someone in the back?
    That's not self-defence. That's murder motivated by revenge. The jury's verdict was correct.
     
  19. stevebaby

    stevebaby New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 22, 2004
    Messages:
    3,515
    Likes Received:
    2
    Defending the right to commit murder now?
    Spongebob just gets madder and madder. :D :D :D
     
  20. stevebaby

    stevebaby New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 22, 2004
    Messages:
    3,515
    Likes Received:
    2
    "An armed society is a polite society." :D :D :D
     
Loading...
Loading...