From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Via my very helpful MP, David Prior I have received the following letter from
Charles Clarke. I need some help from CS contributors to reply. I have put
my queries in brackets:
Quote:
Thank you for your letter of 28 November enclosing a further letter from your
constituent Mr Kenneth � about controls over firearms. It may be helpful if
I seek to answer the points that Mr Pantling raises in turn.
I would agree with Mr Pantling that the overall rate of armed crime in this
country has risen in recent decades, albeit that it fell in the mid to late 1
990s. Likewise, the number of guns in lawful circulation has declined.
However, I do not share Mr Pantling's views on these figures. The overall
crime rate in this country has risen during the same period, and much armed
crime will be linked to rises in other areas of crime such as the trade in
illegal drugs. (I think this is pure BS, the rise in armed crime ought to be
checked by gun controls if his view has any validity, the overall rise in
armed crime is hardly relevant - KP)
The Home Office has not generally sought to put forward an estimate for the
number of illegal guns in circulation in the United Kingdom (I have seen
estimates - can anyone help me? I would also like details of the research
that identified the number of guns used in London crime which had been
legally owned - KP) . By definition, any estimate is likely to be prone to
wild inaccuracies. However, in 1998/99 there were 5,209 recorded offences in
England and Wales in which firearms - other than low-powered air guns - are
used. This does not bear out the idea that the pool of illegal weapons in
this country is large, though we are seeking to support the police in their
efforts to reduce this (again pure BS, one idea does not follow on from the
other - KP).
However, our levels of armed crime have been generally far lower than most
Western countries who have less stringent gun control measures than our own.
While there are some countries that are obvious in this respect, such as the
United States, there are many less obvious examples. Commonwealth countries
such as Canada and Australia and European countries such as France, Sweden
and Switzerland have more liberal firearms controls and higher rates of
firearms- related homicides than our own. (Help with this whole section
please -KP)
As our controls over firearms are amongst the strongest in the Western world
- not the strongest as Mr Pantling suggests - (where else is tougher, Eire? -
KP) then our rate of firearms homicide should be amongst the lowest in the
Western world. This is in fact the case. (Is this true? - KP)
I am satisfied that our low rates of armed crime by international standards
are due in part to our strict controls over firearms. Not only do these make
it more difficult for most criminals to obtain guns, but they also reduce the
scope for unsuitable characters to obtain firearms with tragic results. In
this respect, the school and workplace shootings that have taken place in the
United States in recent decades show that serious armed crime does not simply
involve professional criminals. (Any comments - KP)
The fact remains that the tragic shootings at Hungerford and Dunblane, which
remain the most serious shooting incidents in this country in recent decades,
were carried out using firearms that were legally held by the perpetrators.
It is to this problem rather than the wider issue of armed crime that the
recent legislation is addressed. The Government does not control firearms
simply because of statistics, but because of the dangers of their misuse, for
the same reason that we have controls in a variety of areas from poisons to
explosives. (Any comments - KP)
Kenneth Pantling
--
I think I've shown before that our armed crime rate is virtually identical
to that of Switzerland despite the widely different firearm policies.
"There are other examples", e.g. Norway, a rather closer country.
Ireland has much tougher gun laws than we do, and their firearm-related
homicide rate is twice ours. There are countries with tougher gun laws
than us other than Ireland, most of them are in Asia or are dictatorships,
like Libya for example. Or places like Algeria. I actually made a list
once of countries with tougher gun laws than ours, and a very
unsavoury list it was.
The argument the Home Office uses at the start of the letter is the one
they always use, which is complete and utter claptrap, and that is that
because crime is rising generally, that firearm-related crime is rising
too is unsurprising. The problem with that argument is that most crime
is not facilitated with implements subject to the level of control of
firearms, so for crime with firearms to be rising at the same rate as
crime generally (in fact slightly faster) then the controls must be
having absolutely no effect whatsoever on preventing criminals from
obtaining firearms!
Sweden, BTW, based their 1973 gun control law on our law, something
Mr Clarke obviously didn't know.
Another point that is constantly made by the police is that the number
of illegal guns in circulation is small. This is wrong. It is more
accurate to say the number of illegal guns in circulation that are in
the hands of criminals is small, but the overwhelming majority are in
the hands of otherwise law-abiding people. There are at least 600,000
illegally held shotguns in Great Britain. This I can demonstrate
statistically quite easily and have done in research I have presented
to the Home Office.
Steve.
Cybershooters website: http://www.cybershooters.org
List admin: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
____________________________________________________________
T O P I C A -- Learn More. Surf Less.
Newsletters, Tips and Discussions on Topics You Choose.
http://www.topica.com/partner/tag01
