Perry should think about getting out of your self-created hellhole soonest.

If you read my comments, I have never said that I wished to kill anyone on my property that I took exception to, now if they were ‘in’ my property, it may be different matter, and I would suggest that even you would not expect someone who was in your house at 2 a.m. would ‘just happen’ to be there – all innocent like…

Likwise with the proverbial ‘drunk’ at the door of the wrong flat…total fiction.

The whole point of being armed is to act as a deterrent, that most burglaries are commited while there are people at home, and that residents are as likely to be injured, whether offering resistance or not, has to be taken into account.

Now, you may not want to own a gun, that is your choice, the problem with a total ban is that there is no choice, so those folk who may wish to arm themselves do not have that option. The argument that all the irresponsible nutters in town will have guns and go around shooting at all and sundry is just fantasy, the police, (God Bless their conniving little souls), would still have a say in who would be licenced and who would not.

Not forgetting that it was largely on the premise that the police would be there to protect the population in general, that this ban was enacted in the first place, something that they have patently failed to do. I would much rather have protection before I get killed, – what use is some hypothetical ‘clear up rate’, when you are dead and buried? Good for them, bad for us…if the situation demands a strong deterrent, then why ban it?

There is no doubt that where a sensible gun licencing policy is in force, that burglaries, and other crimes against the person are at a minimum, yes, even in the USA.

I would respectfully suggest that it’s a fair bit less stupid than your implication that you should be entitled to kill anyone you take exception to, just because they happen to be on your property.

As it happens, I didn’t actually mention meter readers and salesmen – I was thinking more along the lines of people who end up in the wrong place by mistake, for instance trying to gain entry into the wrong flat early in the morning while a little the worse for wear. What was that about "straw man" hypotheses?

You point out the case of the Japanese tourist, but make no mention of the fella shot by the police in London for carrying a chair leg home from the pub.

That’s because the case of the Japanese tourist demonstrated my point, while the Harry Stanley case had nothing to do with the immediate subject under discussion.

Ban guns for the populace, then ban guns for the police, they seem to be even more irresponsible than Joe Public in the usage of firearms. You don’t think that they carry them for your protection, do you?

Most British police officers are unarmed, and the impression I get is that they very much prefer it that way – especially as cases like the Harry Stanley affair show that they’re just as liable to prosecution as anyone else if they shoot someone with no good reason.

Incidentally, how many people have been shot dead – or even wounded – by British police officers who were subsequently found to be innocent of any wrongdoing? Given the vast publicity the Harry Stanley case got, my guess would be "hardly any".

No-one; it was obvious rhetorical hyperbole. I stand by both the basic point of the remark, and the rest of the post.

I’ll have mustard relish with mine, please.

Maybe he just wasn’t one of the burglars, just some poor sap who was conveniently at hand. A murder commited by stabbing, all that blood around, and they dont have enough evidence to hold the guy?

Your far-fetched suggestion that salesmen, meter readers etc. are likely to get shot just for doing their job is just plain stupid.

You point out the case of the Japanese tourist, but make no mention of the fella shot by the police in London for carrying a chair leg home from the pub. Ban guns for the populace, then ban guns for the police, they seem to be even more irresponsible than Joe Public in the usage of firearms. You don’t think that they carry them for your protection, do you?

Simon,

Don’t you folks just love to exaggerate, who is suggesting that children should be able to buy guns? – only you, and even you recognise that as being foolish….

Mark,

How nice that you speak for the rest of the population, just like the Beeb, if you wish hard enough, and say it often enough, it might just come true. Sure there is no ‘gun culture’, unless, of course, you are in the Army… but there is a longstanding culture of freedom…freedom to make your own decisions, and the freedom to take responsibility for your actions, but then I doubt that you would know too much about that. What you don’t seem to understand is that even if guns were ‘legalised’, no one would force you to go out and buy one. You would have a choice.

and please don’t smugly ask me to ‘prove’ this

Heaven forbid that should be held responsible for your equally smug assumptions…

Regarding the right to be "on’ a property, subtly, but significantly different from being ‘In’ a property.

Finally, in houses where there will most likely also be alcohol, children, stress, arguments, risk of break-ins, misunderstandings, accidents, depression, etc What you describe is probably a normal household, what you miss, is that most normal people are mature enough to cope with all of the above without any of the superficial drama that you seem to imagine. You seem to imagine that most households are peopled by psychotics and maniacs, living from one drama to the next. You may well be surprised to learn that most homes, – and don’t smugly ask me to prove it! – are inhabited by nice normal folk.

I imagine all three of you to be of a similar age, all of you delight in posing ‘straw man’ hypothesis’, – just too prove how smart you are, and none of you seem to have any appreciation of the concept of freedom, responsibility, or even reality. I would suggest that this is more indicative of a poor education, rather than of a poor intellect. You all pose similar ‘cookie cutter’ arguments, with little original thought, – have you all been forced to read the Statist’s little red book?

Enough is enough, it’s been fun, but I think that it is a given that you just can’t nail jelly to a post…

Maybe he just wasn’t one of the burglars, just some poor sap who was conveniently at hand. A murder commited by stabbing, all that blood around, and they dont have enough evidence to hold the guy?

Your far-fetched suggestion that salesmen, meter readers etc. are likely to get shot just for doing their job is just plain stupid.

You point out the case of the Japanese tourist, but make no mention of the fella shot by the police in London for carrying a chair leg home from the pub. Ban guns for the populace, then ban guns for the police, they seem to be even more irresponsible than Joe Public in the usage of firearms. You don’t think that they carry them for your protection, do you?

Simon,

Don’t you folks just love to exaggerate, who is suggesting that children should be able to buy guns? – only you, and even you recognise that as being foolish….

Mark,

How nice that you speak for the rest of the population, just like the Beeb, if you wish hard enough, and say it often enough, it might just come true. Sure there is no ‘gun culture’, unless, of course, you are in the Army… but there is a longstanding culture of freedom…freedom to make your own decisions, and the freedom to take responsibility for your actions, but then I doubt that you would know too much about that. What you don’t seem to understand is that even if guns were ‘legalised’, no one would force you to go out and buy one. You would have a choice.

and please don’t smugly ask me to ‘prove’ this

Heaven forbid that should be held responsible for your equally smug assumptions…

Regarding the right to be "on’ a property, subtly, but significantly different from being ‘In’ a property.

Finally, in houses where there will most likely also be alcohol, children, stress, arguments, risk of break-ins, misunderstandings, accidents, depression, etc What you describe is probably a normal household, what you miss, is that most normal people are mature enough to cope with all of the above without any of the superficial drama that you seem to imagine. You seem to imagine that most households are peopled by psychotics and maniacs, living from one drama to the next. You may well be surprised to learn that most homes, – and don’t smugly ask me to prove it! – are inhabited by nice normal folk.

Enough is enough, it’s been fun, but I think that it is a given that you just can’t nail jelly to a post…