Mr Moat

[Daniel]

I suspect most people outside of Britain haven't heard of this but there's a crazy running around with a gun up Mark's way :mark:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/10520061.stm
Wonder how much longer this crazy guy is going to last....

[Hondo]

Considering the fact that he is armed with a firearm and knows that the vast majority of what he may come up against isn't even allowed a knife. as long as his ammunition holds and he doesn't do anything stupid to reveal himself he could last awhile.

I'll give Brit law enforcement credit for one thing, when they decide to arm up, they don't screw around. Pistols, submachine guns and sniper rifles.

[Daniel]

I'll give Brit law enforcement credit for one thing, when they decide to arm up, they don't screw around. Pistols, submachine guns and sniper rifles.

Yeah, look at the footage and they're not running around with peashooters. I suspect that his life expectancy once spotted is probably a few seconds. You don't threaten to kill police and expect to live long....

[Hondo]

But I don't think they'll find him, all bunched up, walking down the middle of the road like that.

[Dave B]

The theory is that he wants to commit "suicide by cop", in other words he's too chicken to pull the trigger on himself but wants to be shot in what he'd probably consider a blaze of glory.

I suspect that will make the police even more determined to detain him rather than killing him, so as not to (a) give him the thousandth of a second of satisfaction, and (b) encourage others who may have the same idea.

[airshifter]

I can't see how this could happen. The UK has strict gun laws!

I also fail to see how the police might hurt the guy. After all I've read time after time on these forums how other countries are much more civil than the US.

[Daniel]

The fact that problems like this and the Cumbrian shootings are rare in the UK says to me that the gun laws here work.

[Captain VXR]

According to the Torygraph, he was given his gun illegally

[Mark in Oshawa]

You guys in the UK keep living under this illusion that everyone armed in the US is just out there flashing their guns around.

I come from a nation with more guns than the UK, but less than the US, and I can tell you the guns are not the problem, it is the headcase on the wrong end of them.

Take out gang crime, and the crimes of illegal drug operations in the US, and I suspect there isn't a great difference in the amount of nut jobs going nuts with guns.

You can give yourself the illusion that banning pistols in a society will work all you want, but Mr. Moat proves anyone nutty enough to go on a killing spree in the UK will find the weapon easily to do it with.

[Daniel]

You guys in the UK keep living under this illusion that everyone armed in the US is just out there flashing their guns around.

I come from a nation with more guns than the UK, but less than the US, and I can tell you the guns are not the problem, it is the headcase on the wrong end of them.

Take out gang crime, and the crimes of illegal drug operations in the US, and I suspect there isn't a great difference in the amount of nut jobs going nuts with guns.

You can give yourself the illusion that banning pistols in a society will work all you want, but Mr. Moat proves anyone nutty enough to go on a killing spree in the UK will find the weapon easily to do it with.

Yes, BUT if you make it easier to get guns you won't have as many frustrated nutters running around only wishing they could be killing people and not actually doing it.

[GridGirl]

I heard quite possibly the worst joke ever today. It went along the lines of "I can't believe this Raoul Moat situation. It's not raoulmoatly funny anymore." Told you it was a bad joke. :s

[Captain VXR]

Why does every thread that has anything remotely to do with guns become a gun law debate?
For the record, I'd feel safer if guns were more available here as some chav scrote is less likely to pull a knife on someone who may have a gun, or in the presence of possibly armed bystanders - I bet many Northumbrians would feel safer if someone were to shoot Moat

[BDunnell]

Why does every thread that has anything remotely to do with guns become a gun law debate?

Generally because someone British/mainland European/living over here/etc makes the reasonable point that such events are especially notable because of their rarity and that therefore the gun laws work, and then this is countered by a North American who doesn't seem to grasp said point.



For the record, I'd feel safer if guns were more available here as some chav scrote is less likely to pull a knife on someone who may have a gun, or in the presence of possibly armed bystanders

So none of those 'chav scrotes' would decide to get themselves a gun rather than a knife, would they, thus leaving all the guns in the hands of those responsible enough to use them sensibly? Somehow, I doubt it.


I bet many Northumbrians would feel safer if someone were to shoot Moat

Yes, if that 'someone' is a properly trained police officer, rather than a trigger-happy farmer or brain-dead vigilante, I expect they might feel safer. Otherwise, no.

[Hondo]

Getting back to the main theme, I have to disagree with Brockman's theory. I have read the following in the British press. Moat hates the police. Moat has stated a willingness to take non-police targets of opportunity. Moat has 2 guns and a plentiful supply of ammunition.

Moat's hatred for the police can be best served by taking unarmed targets of opportunity, especially unarmed police. Each victim will bring a new round of heat, embarrassment, and charges of incompetence towards the police, especially by media members that don't like the police either. Moat gains the most by dragging this out as long as possible as opposed to facing off to a heavily armed group and going down in a "blaze of glory". I don't know what his skills are, but if he can isolate a sniper, take him down, and take his L96, he'll be a real threat. He might even be able to drop a helicopter with an L96.

Moat wants to draw this out.

[Bob Riebe]

Yes, if that 'someone' is a properly trained police officer, rather than a trigger-happy farmer or brain-dead vigilante, I expect they might feel safer. Otherwise, no.
Hmm, if anyone beside a law officer kills Moat it is because the one is trigger-happy or a brain-dead vigilante.
Your prejudices come across as a bit silly, based on paranoia -- or it seems by your prejudices, you would have made a good follower of a despot because after all, they are in service of the government, and the government is superior to mere citizens, else-wise you are simply one who drops his pants and squats, when a government official says crap, simply because it was said by the government.

[Mark in Oshawa]

First of all I can't find a single post in this thread that gives the impression 'we' are under the illusion people in America flash their guns about, unless you are referring to past threads which I am not aware of.

I am well aware that people who have grown up in a country that have easy access to guns and where its legal to own pistols etc are very protective over this right. Fair enough. What does annoy me is when people suggest that owning guns is great and my society is just as dangerous because people who want to shoot people can get hold of them anyway. That is partly true but making guns difficult to get hold of and banning their use also cuts down on your opportunist nutters who snap one day and think "actually I've got a gun, I don't have to die alone" lol.

I am perfectly happy living in a society where guns don't have a wide presence and I feel slightly safer knowing that the chance of getting shot whilst walking down to my local Bargain Booze is quite slim. It doesn't mean it won't happy but its less likely IMO. :)

Henners, you maybe don't see it that way, but every time we have this debate, half the UK posters if not more think the Americans are a bunch of trigger happy morons. The reality is, they are not......

We have gun control in this country. It is likely too much for most Americans, but it is not unreasonable. That said, I do think like a libertarian at times, and on this one, I resent this attitude many have that government should dictate what freedoms you should have when it comes to things like Guns. Guns are a tool. Just like a shovel, an axe or a chain saw. The ONLY difference is a gun is designed to be a lethal weapon if it is used for that purpose. Most gun owners should not be kicked in the teeth financially or in their rights because the cops feel the gangs have too many weapons in Chicago or Washington. Maybe if the idiot politicians who would ban the guns worked harder on improving the education system in the inner city of many cities in the US or even in Canada, maybe the gang related killings would go away.

Taking guns away from legal gun owners in the desire to make people "safe" ignores the reality the criminals don't care, and it is one less part of life that is free to law abiding citizens.

I am still waiting to see how the UK and Australia in their outright ban of just about any weapon outside of shotguns have really made their societies safer. This loon proves that the idiots and criminals will still get weapons...

[Mark in Oshawa]

Yes, BUT if you make it easier to get guns you won't have as many frustrated nutters running around only wishing they could be killing people and not actually doing it.

Most of the nutters find a way to kill. If they cant get the gun they want, they wait until they do, or find a way to make a bomb, or drive a car into a market.

Why should my uncle who owns about 10 rifles and shotguns, and 4 pistols have them confisicated because the cops cannot keep a lid on crime in the big cities?

Guns are property. If it is lawful to have the state confiscating property because the state deems it not useful to society, how long before they decide your house is in the way of something they want to build and they don't need to give you market value for it?

Property rights are a foundation of civilized society, and people would do well to remember that.

[Mark]

I suspect most people outside of Britain haven't heard of this but there's a crazy running around with a gun up Mark's way :mark:
.

More Karen's way really. Scafell (the street where the guy was killed) was where she grew up and lived until she was 21 years old. We now live less than 3 miles away.

I had planned to go to Rothbury this weekend too!

[Mark]

The theory is that he wants to commit "suicide by cop", in other words he's too chicken to pull the trigger on himself but wants to be shot in what he'd probably consider a blaze of glory.

I suspect that will make the police even more determined to detain him rather than killing him, so as not to (a) give him the thousandth of a second of satisfaction, and (b) encourage others who may have the same idea.

I think that was the theory espoused by his mother (could have been another relation). That he either wants to "go down in a blaze of glory", or be in jail and be known as a cop killer.

Either way his grudge against the police stems from his girlfriend telling him she was now seeing a police officer, in order to deter him from doing exactly what he did do!

I wonder how much information Moat is getting, does he know that his girlfriend wasn't seeing a policeman, and does he know the poilceman he did shoot survived?

[Hondo]

If I were Moat, at the conclusion of my spree and especially if I had managed to bag a few cops, I'd surrender. You don't have capital punishment and I can think of no funnier ending than to have the very people I hunted now responsible for my health and well-being, bringing me my meals, providing TV and exercise, educational opportunities, and medical care for life while I work on book and movie deals.

[Mark]

If I were Moat, at the conclusion of my spree and especially if I had managed to bag a few cops, I'd surrender. You don't have capital punishment and I can think of no funnier ending than to have the very people I hunted now responsible for my health and well-being, bringing me my meals, providing TV and exercise, educational opportunities, and medical care for life while I work on book and movie deals.

The police are very different from the prison service! In fact it was the lack of communication between the two that led us to this problem as Moat had told them he was going to seek revenge when he was released from jail.

[Daniel]

Fiero you crafty bugger :p

[Mark]

Well they don't waste any time.
I've just heard that Moat has put his getaway car up for sale on ebay! As you can understand after what it's been through it's going cheap, he says he just wants a few coppers for it!

Sorry! :p

[Mark]

I've edited your post to make the email address valid :p

[Hondo]

Don't laugh too loud. As soon as this guy is back behind bars he'll have 200 female pen pals that all want to support his poor, misunderstood a$$ by sending him money, packages and marriage proposals.

There is a time and place for capital punishment in any society. Appeals and procedure examinations could be given a priority fast track and the condemned could be executed within a year. People like Moat have proven they intend to serve no useful place in society and his execution would certainly deter him from acting that way again. With life in prison there is always the possibility of escape, endangerment of the staff that are required to come in contact with him, and the possibility that some fool will decide he is a safe bet in 40 years and turn him loose again.

Hang him and let the NHS have him for parts.

[Daniel]

I like the idea of parting him out :D

[Captain VXR]

Generally because someone British/mainland European/living over here/etc makes the reasonable point that such events are especially notable because of their rarity and that therefore the gun laws work, and then this is countered by a North American who doesn't seem to grasp said point.



So none of those 'chav scrotes' would decide to get themselves a gun rather than a knife, would they, thus leaving all the guns in the hands of those responsible enough to use them sensibly? Somehow, I doubt it.



Yes, if that 'someone' is a properly trained police officer, rather than a trigger-happy farmer or brain-dead vigilante, I expect they might feel safer. Otherwise, no.
What about the killing sprees that happened in China where people went crazy with a knife? - a gun owner could have stopped them in a split second
If there was a mandatory IQ test before one could buy a gun, then no chav scrotes could have legal access to them
Less criminals would pull guns on people if there is a large risk of being shot at

[Dave B]

I think I'd kill myself if Gazza rocked up claiming to be my friend.

The coverage on BBC and Sky News does highlight the fact that The Day Today was a decade ahead of its time

[airshifter]

I agree a gun is a tool for certain people like farmers, and game keepers, but what possible reason for someone like me, is there to justify myself owning a gun? I'm a 27 year product designer who lives in suburbia and can't think of a reason why I would want to own one.

What possible reason is there for any government to keep a law abiding, tax paying person from owning a gun if they so desire? My wife is a more or less stay at home mom now, and she enjoys shooting. I've never applied or felt a need to apply for a concealed carry permit or keep a gun for personal protection at home, yet I own guns becasue I enjoy sport shooting.

Most people don't need nicer, faster cars, or a variety of other things that can be deadly if misused. Yet they don't prohibit law abiding citizens from owning a fast car or motorcycle, or prohibit that same person from having a drink when they desire.

[Hondo]

Looks like Mr. Moat's insurgency skill levels aren't all they could have been.

[Daniel]

What possible reason is there for any government to keep a law abiding, tax paying person from owning a gun if they so desire? My wife is a more or less stay at home mom now, and she enjoys shooting. I've never applied or felt a need to apply for a concealed carry permit or keep a gun for personal protection at home, yet I own guns becasue I enjoy sport shooting.

I'm all for people having guns for sport purproses. The only limit I'd have would be no automatic weapons and a limit on the size of magazines. I think however it should be an offence to be in possession of a gun outside of the home unless you're on the way to a shooting complex.

[Daniel]

Looks like Mr. Moat's insurgency skill levels aren't all they could have been.

and he wasn't as smart as you either. He didn't give himself up and ask for a writer instead of a lawyer.

[Zico]

As you may know, sadly the gunman has taken his own life, maybe the police should have let Gazza talk to him after all.

Paul Gacoigne or Gazza as he is affectionately known, a footballing legend, knew him and had offered to approach Mr Moat with supplies of a dressing gown, chicken and a can of lager and talk him into giving himself up... after a spot of fishing of course!

Gazza's Radio interview.. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pNiTwpLUzBg&feature=related

Would be comedy gold if it wasn't such a tragic state of affairs, not sure who needs/needed the most help here!

[Daniel]

As you may know, sadly the gunman has taken his own life, maybe the police should have let Gazza talk to him after all.

Paul Gacoigne or Gazza as he is affectionately known, a footballing legend, knew him and had offered to approach Mr Moat with supplies of a dressing gown, chicken and a can of lager and talk him into giving himself up... after a spot of fishing of course!

Gazza's Radio interview.. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pNiTwpLUzBg&feature=related

Would be comedy gold if it wasn't such a tragic state of affairs, not sure who needs/needed the most help here!
wtf? :crazy:

[wedge]

The coverage on BBC and Sky News does highlight the fact that The Day Today was a decade ahead of its time

Not really.

They show enough armed mentalists and car chases on live American TV.


As you may know, sadly the gunman has taken his own life, maybe the police should have let Gazza talk to him after all.

Paul Gacoigne or Gazza as he is affectionately known, a footballing legend, knew him and had offered to approach Mr Moat with supplies of a dressing gown, chicken and a can of lager and talk him into giving himself up... after a spot of fishing of course!

Gazza's Radio interview.. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pNiTwpLUzBg&feature=related

Would be comedy gold if it wasn't such a tragic state of affairs, not sure who needs/needed the most help here!


I would've paid to watch that!

[Hondo]

As you may know, sadly the gunman has taken his own life, maybe the police should have let Gazza talk to him after all.

Paul Gacoigne or Gazza as he is affectionately known, a footballing legend, knew him and had offered to approach Mr Moat with supplies of a dressing gown, chicken and a can of lager and talk him into giving himself up... after a spot of fishing of course!

Gazza's Radio interview.. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pNiTwpLUzBg&feature=related

Would be comedy gold if it wasn't such a tragic state of affairs, not sure who needs/needed the most help here!

I fail to see anything "sad" about it. At least the idiot saved the taxpayers the cost of a trial and the cost of feeding, clothing, housing, and caring for him for the rest of his life.

[Mark in Oshawa]

What possible reason would a government have to suddenly introduce guns to a society which has never had them on a grand scale? Hand guns were banned here in 1996 after the Dunblane Massacre and there was no huge backlash whatsoever. If I wanted to go shooting simply because I enjoyed it I'd buy an air rifle. As I said previously, people like game keepers and farmers are allowed to own shot guns for sports and 'tool' purposes. I think if I had a hand gun kicking around the house and someone broke in, I'd probably use it which is a scary thought, and I'm glad I'm in a position where its not possible to own one.. :)


I, unlike my American friends wouldn't advocate arming all you Brit's to return fire tomorrow.

The point is, the guns were banned after Dunblane. How many more massacres have there been since? Maybe the number of dead is different but they still happen. Taking guns away from legal gun owners didn't stop more of these loons.

What is more Henners, you state "I think if I had a hand gun kicking around the house and someone broke in, I'd probably use it which is a scary thought, and I'm glad I'm in a position where its not possible to own one.".

Well Henners, here is the deal: The guy breaking into your house with you in it is likely into home invasion for a hobby, He likely has his OWN gun, or more likely a weapon which he might use to tune you up to his satisfaction. So not having your own gun might not be the best thing for you or your family. Furthermore, lets also examine your own lack of willpower. If you decide not to own a gun, you tell me I should therefore have to live by the same rules? If you are too weak to not know how to use a gun properly and in the right emergency situation, you should condemn me to your fate? If you don't want the gun, that is your right, but I would at least like to the right to own a weapon. I likely wouldn't own one, but it is a CHOICE I would like to make on my own, not have some left wing bureacratic clown who is going to get a full pension because the twits in East Tree Stump elected him to Parliament made the decision for me by putting the bill that the other idiots voted for.

What other rights do they think I don't deserve to have? The right to assembly? The right of free speech? We have a very gray area in Canadian law already stomping on that one....

It isn't the guns, it is the concept. Legal property of the individual, whether it be your house or a gun you own should NOT be confiscated without just cause, or compesation and some legal standing more compelling than "We must stop another Dunblane" which of course fails to explain why you still have the Cumbria shootings, the terrorists blowing up the Tube and this latest go around, Mr. Moat.

I respect your right to not want a gun. I agree with you in modern British society, a lot of places you would never justify owning one for just protection on a lot of levels, but these decisions are not to be made by rash and intellectually bankrupt twits with would take everything you own if they thought it was for the "common good" of society because in a sense, they already proved it was "legal"....

[Mark]

The average house breaker in the UK will not be armed with a firearm, they may have a crowbar as a multi purpose tool for gaining entry and defence, but not usually a gun.
But if you had a situation where most people had guns in their house then the situation will be difficult and someone breaking into your house would turn into life or death, rather than just hassles with insurance companies.

[Brown, Jon Brow]

The average house breaker in the UK will not be armed with a firearm, they may have a crowbar as a multi purpose tool for gaining entry and defence, but not usually a gun.
But if you had a situation where most people had guns in their house then the situation will be difficult and someone breaking into your house would turn into life or death, rather than just hassles with insurance companies.

Exactly.

If you confront the intruder with a gun there is a 50/50 chance that you are going to be shot.

[Mark in Oshawa]

The average house breaker in the UK will not be armed with a firearm, they may have a crowbar as a multi purpose tool for gaining entry and defence, but not usually a gun.
But if you had a situation where most people had guns in their house then the situation will be difficult and someone breaking into your house would turn into life or death, rather than just hassles with insurance companies.

If they break in with you in it, crowbar or gun they will try to keep you out of the mix. So if I am woken up up by a crowbar across my melon or a gun shot does it really matter?

Hassles with insurance only occur when you are not home. I am talking about home invasions, which are usually carried out by desparate and violent men. It just isn't in the movie "Clockwork Orange" that violent thrill seekers exist. Now we all know the chances of home invasion are pretty low.....but if a guy comes in, and he is meaning to do you or your family harm, whether it by rape, or just beating on you, you tell me where a gun wouldn't be useful. You are not worried about the mess his bleeding mess is going to make on the carpet, all you know is that SOB is in your house with you in it.....and he isn't there for the tea....

The state has a responsiblity to protect the state, and enforce the law. However, the police CANNOT be everywhere....and the citizen should have some rights to defend himself with something more than cowering in the corner while he is clubbed with a crowbar....

Home invasions are a more popular crime now in Toronto mainly because criminals know it is highly unlikely anyone will have a gun....

[Mark]

If they break in with you in it, crowbar or gun they will try to keep you out of the mix. So if I am woken up up by a crowbar across my melon or a gun shot does it really matter?


It's a different scenario. Lets say you hear a disturbance and walk downstairs with a gun and find an intruder, you point your gun at him. Likelyhood is that he'll have a gun and shoot you first. Result: you're dead.

Same situation you're unarmed and he has a crowbar. You distrurb him again the likely result is that he's going to run away you then call the police and don't get back to sleep that night.

Don't get me wrong, crowbar or gun if someone breaks in with a mind to kill you, they are doing to get the job done either way, but that sort of thing is rare.

[Mark in Oshawa]

It's a different scenario. Lets say you hear a disturbance and walk downstairs with a gun and find an intruder, you point your gun at him. Likelyhood is that he'll have a gun and shoot you first. Result: you're dead.

Same situation you're unarmed and he has a crowbar. You distrurb him again the likely result is that he's going to run away you then call the police and don't get back to sleep that night.

Don't get me wrong, crowbar or gun if someone breaks in with a mind to kill you, they are doing to get the job done either way, but that sort of thing is rare.

First off, anyone breaking in with a gun doesn't know your house, and doesn't know if you have one. You have the advantage. Secondly, if you are in a society where people are more likely to have guns, such as the US, home invasions are WAY down because the criminals realize the odds of having someone open up on you are WAY up.....
Third, if he is coming in with a crowbar, that is what he used to get into the house...he may not have any plan of hitting you with it until you surprise him unarmed. However, if you have nothing, and he has the crowbar, at this point, it isn't going to work very well now is it if he isn't scared off by your presence. He is going to swing.

Listen, I don't own a gun, I don't feel I need one, but you keep dancing around the simple truth that guns are just tools, and if used properly by law abiding citizens, they are protection from people in society that don't care about rules, property or the law. Your government can outlaw them all they want, but it wont stop another Dunblane, or another nutjob like Mr. Moat, or the Cumbria killer. All the government has done is punish the legal gun owners for the psycho's who find their weapons anyhow....It is a Pandora's box. You don't make people any freer or safer by denying them the right to defend themselves...

[Mark]

Certainly in this case, what if Moat didn't have a gun? Certainly, he may well have still burst into his ex-girlfriends house and stabbed her boyfriend to death. He wanted to kill the guy, there's nothing much that could have stopped him there.

But the police officer who was shot and quite probably blinded on the A1 roundabout. He was in a police car, if Moat had come at him chances are the officer would have been able to escape.

Then there is the likehood that Moat wouldn't have been able to kill himself in the end.

Yes, guns are tools, I understand that, but if those tools had been absent, this situation would have turned out very differently.

[Daniel]

Mark in O. Do you have evidence that home invasions are less common in the US? If anything they will be more violent because the burglar will always have the suspicion that the person will have a gun....

[Bob Riebe]

Exactly.

If you confront the intruder with a gun there is a 50/50 chance that you are going to be shot.
BS- a gun is not for waving around, it is for using.
That cockamamy damned lie, is the liberals way of spreading false fear.

IF you confront the intruder and the intruder does not stop, you shoot.
If for some reason you cannot hit what you are shooting at, you deserve your misery for being a dolt.

Anyone who has the attitude to try and take your gun probably intended to harm you anyway.

[Bob Riebe]

Mark in O. Do you have evidence that home invasions are less common in the US? If anything they will be more violent because the burglar will always have the suspicion that the person will have a gun....
Why, they want to commit suicide?

[Bob Riebe]

It's a different scenario. Lets say you hear a disturbance and walk downstairs with a gun and find an intruder, you point your gun at him. Likelyhood is that he'll have a gun and shoot you first. Result: you're dead.

False, the NRA magazine has a page of documented reports of firearms being used for defense. If your statement was true, it would be a page of dead victims.
The dead ones are the criminals, with many of the intended victims being people over seventy years old.

Most end up with the intruder surrendering to the victim or being apprehended in a hospital with gun shot wounds, but a percentage of criminals end up in a morgue.

Some never get into a house, as they are shot through a door or a window.

[Dave B]

False, the NRA magazine has a page of documented reports of firearms being used for defense. If your statement was true, it would be a page of dead victims.
The dead ones are the criminals, with many of the intended victims being people over seventy years old.

Most end up with the intruder surrendering to the victim or being apprehended in a hospital with gun shot wounds, but a percentage of criminals end up in a morgue.

Some never get into a house, as they are shot through a door or a window.
And yet burglars still burgle. Seems that gun ownership isn't doing much, apart from resulting in deaths. :s

[Bob Riebe]

And yet burglars still burgle. Seems that gun ownership isn't doing much, apart from resulting in deaths. :s
People still rape, murder and maim, always have and always will.
The crime rate in heavily armed areas does drop, perhaps because a criminal who is worm food, cannot commit crimes.

http://kuruc.info/r/40/28418/

[Mark in Oshawa]

Mark in O. Do you have evidence that home invasions are less common in the US? If anything they will be more violent because the burglar will always have the suspicion that the person will have a gun....

There has been studies done by all sides claiming all sorts of stuff, some for, some against. The point is, regardless on whether you believe them or not, the principle I was trying to make was that no government can sit there and tell you that you cannot have a weapon when they cannot guarntee your safety, and they are denying you the right to defend yourself.

You can bust me on the lack of "evidence" on home invasions, the point I was trying to make is still valid. Your nation, and mine control weapons, to stop tragedy's like Dunblane or the U of Montreal shootings here years ago....and these things still happen.....

So again why take guns away from people choosing them as a personal choice to use in a responsbile manner? Daniel, I don't own a gun, and when my dad dies, will likely never use the ones he owns (hunting rifles) but it still doesn't change the fact that some politician with an agenda wants to take private property, make it illegal, and not compesate the owners for it and calls this "justice".

[Zico]

In yesterdays paper, the traffic cop who was shot was interviewed and told how he had nicked Mr Moat about a year or so previously, he impounded his van for driving with 'no' insurance... well ... Mr Moat was a Landscape gardner/tree surgeon, when they pulled him over they found his van to be full of scrap metal and because his line of work was not in scrap metal they decided that technically he was uninsured and so towed his works vehicle away to the compound !!!

When you learn about stuff like this you begin to wonder if there was a lot more to the story than first meets the eye.

[Mark in Oshawa]

In yesterdays paper, the traffic cop who was shot was interviewed and told how he had nicked Mr Moat about a year or so previously, he impounded his van for driving with 'no' insurance... well ... Mr Moat was a Landscape gardner/tree surgeon, when they pulled him over they found his van to be full of scrap metal and because his line of work was not in scrap metal they decided that technically he was uninsured and so towed his works vehicle away to the compound !!!

When you learn about stuff like this you begin to wonder if there was a lot more to the story than first meets the eye.

Still doesn't excuse him for breaking the law. I do agree though, the way the system does things you start to wonder how dopey government and big business can be on things like this....

[Mark]

In a final sad ending to the whole affair, the police officer who was blinded by Raoul Moat was found dead in his home last night, having seemingly taken his own life.

[Knock-on]

Very sad for the poor man. One day he was just doing his job and the next his life is snatched from him. There follows Blindness, PTSD, the breakdown of his marriage and finally an apparent suicide.

Yet another victim of gun crime.

[Azumanga Davo]

Just one day changed his whole perspective on life. Very tragic indeed. :(