Gun Laws and Socialized Medicine in Europe.

Socialized medicine is a problem because the people who are purchasing the health care are not paying for it. That causes prices to be expensive

 

The people of the UK can never prevent their government from being taken over by Islam or dictators. That cannot happen in the US. Nuff said

 

Gun violence is on the rise in Britain despite the fact that it is very hard to legally obtain one. But okay, so shootings are low, but knife crime is of epic proportions and the use of acid in attacking others is also very common.

We do not think shootings are good for America (where did you get that idea?) - I do not know anyone who thinks this is a good thing, but being able to protect oneself and family with a particular firearm of your own choosing is indeed a good thing.

 

Typical liberal approach - restate the comment so they can NOW argue against their "interpretation" of what you actually say!! (standard CTB tactic.)

 

Do you know how to catch wild Pigs? | theawakening

How socialism/communism catches the herd. Our fence has how many sides up? The UK is already toast. Their ‘subjects’ brag about it here. Enjoy. We will fight, we will win. WWG1WGA

 

How Gun Ownership Saves Lives

"In the United States, burglars generally try to break into homes that are unoccupied. We tend to take this fact for granted, but it isn’t true everywhere. There are advantages to breaking into residences when the owners are home: you can force them to tell you where valuables and drugs are kept, rather than having to search. And if a woman is present you may choose to assault her. This is why, in countries where gun ownership is rare, invasions of occupied homes are much more common.

Last week the Telegraph reported: “Half of burglaries on occupied homes as thieves grow bolder.”

Half of burglaries in Britain now take place while householders are inside their homes, as thieves become emboldened by police inaction.

Figures show 58 percent of burglaries happen at occupied properties, as campaigners said criminals no longer feared being caught in the act.
***
Analysis of the most recent Office for National Statistics crime figures shows the proportion of burglaries targeting properties when someone is at home has soared in recent years. The Crime Survey for England and Wales found such incidents made up 44 percent of raids in 2004-2005, but have since shot up to 58 percent in 2016-2017.

How do the numbers compare in the United States? It is surprisingly hard to find up to date data; this 2010 report by the Department of Justice doesn’t seem to have been superseded. The DOJ report found that the household was occupied in 28 percent of residential burglaries. In 26 percent of burglaries where someone was present, one or more individuals were physically harmed by the burglar or burglars.

So burglars are around twice as likely to invade occupied residences in the U.K. than in the United States. Why is that? Certainly not because the American police are any more likely to interrupt a burglary in process. The obvious answer is that hardly any homeowners in the U.K. possess firearms, while gun ownership is common in the U.S. Bluntly put, a burglar who invades an occupied residence in the United States takes a not-immaterial risk that he may be shot by his intended victim. As, for example, here, here, here and here.

The conclusion: if gun-grabbers get their way and the Second Amendment is effectively nullified, many more Americans will be terrorized by home invasions; more will be injured or killed; and more women will be raped."

 

All within the last two weeks:

Police sheriff calls US woman 'shining example' for shooting and killing escaped prisoner

Warren homeowner shoots man during burglary

No charges filed against 74-year-old woman who fatally shot burglar

Detroit Woman Leaving For Church Fatally Shoots Burglar During Home Invasion

 

Do you know that socialized medicine forces many who are not the very richest to come to America to have surgeries, as they will not be able to get qualified and approved to have that done in time to save them? That its based upon those who can contribute the most, as in skills, age, or wealth? And that the problem is not with guns themselves, as those cities who actually allow for guns to be worn and used have a much lower crime rate than those areas who refuse to allow for guns!

If I was a terrorist, or a mass murderer, would I risk going to a city or a store/place that permits firearms to be used, or go to where they cannot be used by private citizens?

 

Careful, you're trying to use logic on a liberal; same basic fallacy as "casting pearls before swine!"

 

The top marginal income tax rate is 45%...but you have to be earning over £150K for that