Nigel Farage behaviour during talk about Dunblane shooting

[MikeRafone]

Whatever anyone thinks of handguns, 5 year olds died due to gun shot injuries and some respect should be shown by all MPs whatever side they represent

as he sat during the talk smirking

This is what I'm talking about. Your reading comprehension and memory may need some improvement

You’re actually defending Farage on this topic?

Let us just put Nigel Farage together with Sir Andy Murray and Judy Murray in the same room with this topic. She would make mincemeat of him!

We had a knife crime epidemic way before 1995. Have a look at the history of knives in glasgow and other places. There is no connection.

As I said, if that was the intent, it paid off, as you seem eager to prove.

And to be fair, I'm generally pretty happy to assume Grant Schaaps (aka Michael Green when pursuing a pyramid scheme in Vegas), Boris Johnson and Michael Fabricant are deserving of whatever censure they receive.

The first instance, I don't know anything about the accused of the incident, so I'd be happy to keep an open mind and watch a video.

The laws in England weren't working so well, really, given Hungerford.

Farage is stupid if he can't see for himself that the proof has been in the pudding, in the shape of the school shooting statistics in the UK and US since the ban came in. The simple fact is that you can have the most stringent licensing system in the world, if it's reliant on humans you have to accept that they will be fallible.

The standard pro-gun excuse of "it's not guns that kill people, it's people that kill people" is also extraordinarily dim. It doesn't take Einstein to work out that people who want to kill can kill many more people when they (the killers) have guns than when they haven't.

We all know what Farage is and thankfully people are starting to see through him. Nobody wants hand guns to be legalised apart from violent nutters. Personally, I'd like to see a ban on all guns and all forms of hunting.

I agree, more and more people are seeing him, and his shambles of a party, for what they are: Expensive, lazy, useless grifters.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c93wv0ylq9yo

Boris Johnson was against the handgun ban in Uk after Dunblane, comparing it to comparing it to "nanny confiscating toys"
.

There's a very good, but difficult to watch, documentary on BBC iplayer called 'Dunblane: How Britain banned handguns'.

That would be good to see, but to be fair, a toddler could make mincemeat out of Farage.

Indeed, knife crime and crime in general started to rise fast in the 60's onwards and we've had waves up and down of knife crimes. It's nothing new, despite what spin shit MP's want us to believe.

I'm not interested in commenting on any specific MPs conduct, but irrespective of their personal views MPs must be able to raise objections to the law so they can be properly considered and debated. There should be no taboo subjects. They have to be able to raise legitimate opposing arguments even when seen as offensive by people who have suffered something awful. If this can't happen we end up with bad law more often.

Theres no way I can be objective on this issue. I was a child in Dunblane 30 years ago and campaigned for a handgun ban.
But I'm glad others can. Bad law from knee-jerk responses to awful things does happen. Its difficult to know what impact a law has had if offences are rare before and after enacting it. I couldn't confidently say for sure if this law has made us safer. I hope it has.

Yes, and it shows that the ban on handguns was the result of a two-year-long campaign by parents (and others). In no way was the ban a "knee-jerk reaction".

Tbf many people were, Prince Philip asked if cricket bats were next, because you can kill people with them, as well.

What a stupid comment. The PP didn't say they'd prefer stabbings. They said a knife will not kill as many people as a gun. You talk shite like Trump and Farage.

In Glasgow and the East End, knife crime was a result of gang warfare between rival factions.

Here's how it was tackled

https://inews.co.uk/inews-lifestyle/europes-murder-capital-glasgow-stopped-excluding-kids-school-3503749

Just read what was written.

PP said "if only these people had access to knives". So she makes it quite clear that knives are preferable, to her, than guns.

Don't berate me because another poster makes ambiguous posts.

So you think "I talk shite like Trump and Farage."?

What politician, IYO, doesn't talk shite and whose opinion you agree with?

I would be very interested in your response.

This is not correct.

The Dunblame massacre happened in 1996.

Restrictions tightened in 1997 through two major speedy pieces of legislation that targeted short firearms. The first law introduced a prohibition based on the physical size of the weapon, specifically covering firearms with a barrel shorter than 30 centimeters or an overall length under 60 centimeters.
While there was initially an exception for small-caliber pistols, a second law passed later that year removed that exception.
This effectively placed most handguns into the prohibited category, requiring government permission that is rarely granted.

That legislation went through parliament at a rate of knots.

I don't know what "2 year campaign" you are talking about.

Even if it was a “knee jerk reaction and excessive” why does it matter? What do you want a handgun for?

It matters to those sensible, responsible people who enjoy pistol (target) shooting as a hobby.
It is an Olympic Sport, where GB came 6th in 2024.

The thought of Nigel Farage becoming the next Prime Minister makes my skin crawl. Only stupid people will vote for him.

Anyone sensible reading that post understood that she meant she would prefer that someone determined to cause mass casualties had access only to knives and not guns, because it’s impossible for someone to cause the scale of injuries to as many people with knives as they can with a gun.

Because a gun allows them to kill multiple people within literally a second whereas a knife takes longer and requires them to physically go to each victim whereas a gun can be shot at multiple people from afar distance away.

Perhaps you genuinely didn’t understand that’s what they meant?

You accused her of preferring knife attacks to no attacks which was rather silly as she was very clear she would simply prefer a perpetrator to only have access to knives rather than guns. It would have been bizarre for her to add the caveat ‘but I’d prefer they didn’t murder anyone at all’ as it’s so obvious…

@BiggermommabearWhat she actually said was …if these people only had access to knives, far less people would die”

That’s very different to the “if only these people had knives…” which you seem to interpret as expressing a preference for people being stabbed.

I have to agree with other posters about your lack of comprehension skills.

I disagree, the post was ambiguous.

In addition if all you can post consists of "Ad hominum" attacks, it doesn't say much about the validity of your arguments.

Talking about comprehension, did you not understand Mumsnet HQ's post on Sat at 16.21 ?
Or maybe you thought, for some reason, it didn't apply to you?