Farage and the Gun

I’m a bit late picking up on this – although I have commented over at Samizdata and Kath’s. Two blogs that take opposing views on the matter. My own view coincides with Perry and differs from Kath’s. I feel that in the circumstances (an almost hysterical attitude towards weapons) that exists in today’s climate, Farage has taken a fairly pragmatic and reasonable stance. There is no justification for the current ban – but that isn’t really what I wanted to say here. It is that the discussion set off another train of thought. A hundred years ago, just prior to the outbreak of world war one, you could own a handgun if you wanted. You didn’t need to have a passport and you could take narcotics if you chose. Now, the question is; has the draconian regulation in these three areas improved matters? Are we better for it?

Clue – how well is that war on drugs going? Winning yet?

6 Comments

  1. Good to see Farage reinforcing UKIP’s libertarian credentials. Let’s hope he takes a similarly robust view on foxhunting.

    I’ve seen Farage speak in the flesh and found him very impressive. We would probably agree on 95% of issues.

    The problem is that a growing number in UKIP seem to espouse a very different right-wing populist message that at its worst seems not all that far away from Franco.

  2. XX You didn’t need to have a passport XX

    Do you mean to travel, or just the fact of needing one?

    IIRC, those days, you did not need a driving licence either.

    • In those days, there weren’t many cars 😉
      Also, the drink-driving laws are recent. Previously you could drive plastered but if you crashed into something you were prosecuted. For crashing, not for drinking. Now we live in the land of ‘could have been’ and everyone is scared of what might happen if they dare get out of bed.

      As for guns, I’ve never owned a real one (I’ve had airguns) and don’t want to but the ban has made me less safe. Previously, a burglar would have to consider whether I might have a gun on the premises. Now, that burglar knows for certain I don’t have one. Likewise with the knife ban – the mugger knows I don’t have a knife on me, whereas before that ban he would have to consider that I might have a Crocodile Dundee-style knife strapped to my back.

      It was funny (to the slightly warped mind) to note that the Mail carried the Outrage! story of Farage’s words in the same issue as the story of a businessman gunned down in the street in the UK…

      If it wasn’t for gun control, he might have been able to defend himself.

      The criminals were never affected by the gun ban. Their guns weren’t legal anyway. All it did was disarm the law-abiding.

      What we need are politicians with actual brains rather than those with heads stuffed with cotton wool and slogans.

  3. “If it wasn’t for gun control, he might have been able to defend himself.”

    Er, not really. By the time you realise you need your gun, it’s already too late: your mugger for the evening will already be pointing his gun at you and demanding your money or your life. He isn’t going to wait while you fish around for yours and point it back at him. Unless you have the reflexes of a lynx, anyone who gets the drop on you with a gun has *already* won.

    If guns are no longer banned, you also automatically raise the stakes: criminals aren’t particularly interested in getting shot at any more than you are, so given the choice between your life or theirs, chances are they won’t agree to let you have a go first.

    *

    Incidentally: guns were bloody expensive to own and maintain back in the day. They were very much luxury items for most. Farmers and other trades could justify the expense as part of the cost of doing business, but the working classes had to make do with cheaper alternatives.

    Good guns are still expensive now; if you can’t afford something like an iPad, chances are you can’t afford a decent gun either, let alone the training needed to use one effectively. And a crap gun isn’t something you want to entrust your life to.

    Personally, I think a good, solid piece of two-by-four will do the job just as well. Get the drop on a would-be attacker and a whack on the head will have the little scrote down on his knees and grovelling for his life just as effectively as any gun. What’s more, there are no consumables to speak of, it’s less noisy, effectively maintenance-free—just bang in the occasional rusty nail for visual and cranial impact—and it’s even bloody biodegradable! What more could you want?

  4. Many years ago, I was very seriously injured, & had to use a stick to walk more than a few metres.
    Now, even though I need a cane, perhaps 3 days a year [ Temp about 2, sleeting + E wind, will do it ] I always carry one. If some idiot pulls a knife on me ( & I’ve had fencing lessons) I will either poke him really hard in the gut – & leg it or, if lucky, push his adams-apple out through the back of his throat.
    Guns? [ Specifically hand-guns ]
    NOT a good idea. As Sean says, if you have one, so will the thief, & theirs will be drawn first – so forget it.

  5. It’s not all about thieves and robbers. Just imagine if the State became a ‘Big Brother’ then they have all the weapons!

Comments are closed.