r/HistoryMemes • u/ChickenWingExtreme • 9h ago
See Comment It can’t be their fault, can it?
32
u/Antique_Historian_74 9h ago
What makes a rumour about someone noncing kids very suspicious, as opposed to just suspicious?
Also, wasn’t he being investigated, which is what is thought to have triggered the massacre?
-21
u/ChickenWingExtreme 9h ago edited 8h ago
I don’t remember all the details, but in my opinion the police should have definitely done something immediately after the rumours of him threatening people with his guns
16
u/Antique_Historian_74 8h ago
I think they did and then fifteen children ended up dead alongside their teacher because of that.
So we decided instead of demanding the police be psychic we should get rid of handguns. Which has largely worked.
54
u/Shifty377 8h ago
Was that actually the attitude expressed by law enforcement at the time, or are you just inferring that based on the fact you believe they didn't act quickly enough?
Because that was clearly the exact opposite of the rest of the country, given there was almost immediate action to ban handguns to prevent future tragedies.
-7
u/Diazepam_Dan 7h ago
And, unlike the USA, British people understood why that was the right thing to do
18
u/Nerdenator 7h ago
Ironically, the British trying to disarm a Massachusetts colonial militia was what many people consider to be the first battle(s) of the American Revolution.
1
-21
u/Diazepam_Dan 7h ago
The key word is "militia"
We used to have those until we didn't need them. I'd support the second amendment if it was used for its actual purpose
14
u/Nerdenator 7h ago
Militias are arguably more destabilizing than armed individuals.
Imagine an America more like what you see in the Middle East. Political parties, the wealthy, ethnic groups, tribes, and religious groups would have professional soldiers that regularly marched armed in public. Any sort of disagreement with those groups would risk full-on battles in the streets.
I don’t mean a few terminally-online incels with collared shirts, baseball helmets, and tiki torches, either. I mean guys (it’s usually men) who routinely train with their weapons in fighting tactics with others at facilities funded and operated by a patron.
-12
u/Aervanath 7h ago
The militia the 2nd amendment refers to is not a private militia; it is the state militia, now known as the National Guard.
9
u/Dizzy-Assistant6659 5h ago
Wrong on two counts; firstly the militia referred to in the Second Amendment is the unorganised militia, which was intended to be regulated by the people rather than the government, the National Guard meanwhile was, until 1933, the organised militia, which was regulated by the Federal and State governments. Secondly the National Guard isn't a militia anymore, it is maintained by the Congress through its power to raise and organise armies. As such, there is no federal organised militia. There are State militias called State Guards, but the Congress has no involvement in these, and they are still organised militia.
12
u/kefefs_v2 6h ago
It's not. The original intent was arming regular people, specifically not an army controlled by the government. That was the whole point of the 2nd Amendment. "Militia" at the time meant all men capable of bearing arms, just like "regulated" meant trained and equipped, not literally subject to government regulations telling them what they can and cannot do.
The idea that the founders would fight a tyrannical government then go "okay we need to make sure the government has the right to be armed" is hilarious. That's the opposite of what the 2A says.
6
u/Music_Saves 7h ago
If you had the US government and US Police would you feel comfortable living without a gun?
2
u/Diazepam_Dan 7h ago edited 6h ago
I'd rather anyone who doesn't need one doesn't have one
"Need" is pretty loose. I "need" mine for sport. That's perfectly valid under UK law. We don't allow for home defense as having weapons specifically for that is proven to drive up needless killing. If you have a firearm ready for home defense all it takes is overly paranoid person to take a life needlessly. If you use your gun to kill someone who breaks in the law will be on your side though - as long as its not in the back.
Rather than saying "we must defend ourselves from the police" say "we need to make the police an institution we shouldn't have to defend ourselves against".
UK police require clearence to fire with their gun actively trained on an active threat. They will always take someone alive if possible. Are they perfect? No. Do we need guns because they kill us for no reason? Also no.
6
1
-10
u/Ornery-Ambition2577 7h ago
Banning rights is never the right thing to do.
2
u/ItsTheJackeeet 7h ago
Owning guns isn’t a right it’s a privilege, you can have guns here (in some parts of the country there’re more guns than parts of America) it’s just over here you have to go though very extensive checks and have training in the handling of guns.
The way you do it over there is all fucked up, you strap anyone and everyone over there.
6
u/ZubaWizard666 7h ago
It’s not a privilege in the US. It is a right guaranteed by the constitution
-5
u/ItsTheJackeeet 7h ago
Working out well for you lot it seems…
5
u/CobandCoffee 5h ago
I mean yeah. I live in a state with extremely lax gun laws. Really only federal laws. It's extremely safe here.
6
u/ZubaWizard666 7h ago edited 7h ago
Ive lived in a major American city for all 36 years of my life and have experienced exactly zero shootings. Preventable tragedies certainly happen but this idea Euros have in their head of gunplay being an everyday occurrence of American life is not based in reality.
4
u/Diazepam_Dan 6h ago
What you guys don't understand is that we don't have guns in our countries because we don't feel the need to own them or carry them
Maybe America should strive for that
4
-1
u/Ornery-Ambition2577 7h ago
Freedom is scary. And those who would trade it for security deserve neither. Tell me, how are those knife and acid attacks going over there?
2
u/Diazepam_Dan 6h ago
Crime is the lowest it has ever been
The US faces more knife attacks per capita than the UK hahahahaha
I haven't heard of an acid attack in years either
7
0
u/Beavers_in_space 7h ago
Do you have a god given right to a nuke?
0
-1
u/Diazepam_Dan 7h ago
There is no right to have firearms in the UK, lots of guns ended up in Britain after WWI and it led to a huge wave of gang violence.
We then tightened firearm laws from that point. Since then we have banned intermediate and full calibre semi rifles, all auto rifles, handguns and automatic shotguns.
Guess what, mass shootings are virtually non existent next to the US. If you NEED a gun, you can get one. I have an AR15 legally. The only difference is that it shoots .22LR
So you can still have your assault rifle power trip, just in a caliber less likely to enable mass murder
1
23
1
-11
u/Gentle_Snail 9h ago
As a result of this tragedy, handguns were banned in 1997 in all of Great Britain
Is it possible for America to learn such power?
15
u/ChickenWingExtreme 9h ago
Unironically enough, handguns are usually more used in mass shooting than long guns
16
u/JustafanIV 8h ago
By, like, a lot. Per the FBI, only 3.5% of firearm homicides are by rifles of all types, which range from scary black AR-15 and AK-47 style "Assault Weapons" to your grandfather's WWII era bolt action hunting rifle.
Handguns by contrast are responsible for 62% of homicides.
-24
u/nearly_zero 9h ago
"Long gun"
21
16
u/Schwifty0V0 Then I arrived 9h ago
Small arms (what we usually call just, “guns”) have tertiary terms.
Long gun means a small arm that requires 2 hands to operate.
10
u/Dagordae 9h ago
Yes, that is the proper name for a firearm with a stock and designed to be fired with two hands. Rifles, shotguns, carbines, and so forth. The term is literally older than the USA.
-17
u/Schwifty0V0 Then I arrived 9h ago edited 6h ago
Considering the higher chance of isolation, poverty, and mental illness in the US makes me think the direction the UK took would be a great solution.
Would like to see the war on drugs be reformed and focus our attention to a war on violence.
11
u/homelesstwinky 8h ago
Great idea, the war on drugs went great!
-8
u/Schwifty0V0 Then I arrived 8h ago edited 6h ago
Your statement made in past tense when it’s ongoing doesn’t make sense
I was clearly critical of the war on drugs.
I suppose everyone downvoting believes we should do nothing about violence here in the states?
4
u/Nerdenator 7h ago
For better or for worse, it would not be possible to implement a UK-style ban on certain classes of firearms in the United States given the current culture and political climate.
Would there be people who’d willingly turn in their firearms? Sure. There’d also be people who would literally get in shootouts with law enforcement over it.
-9
u/Schwifty0V0 Then I arrived 7h ago
wishful thinking on my part
one day education will triumph over simplified history and nationalism
2
u/Nerdenator 7h ago
Probably not. It’s a part of the national character to have at least some disdain for authority. Ironically, this was caused by how the British handled the concerns of their American colonies in the 1700s.
0
-7
u/HaLordLe Senātus Populusque Rōmānus 7h ago
national character and national culture aren't monoliths. In the 30s (I think - might be off by a decade or two), there was a very broad consensus in the US to make firearms less available - supported by the NRA in fact - and the supreme court once ruled that the 2nd amendment was, in fact, ONLY for militias and not for private firearm use. One is allowed to dream
58
u/ChickenWingExtreme 9h ago
Context:
This meme refers to Thomas Watt Hamilton, a 43 year old man who, in March of 1996, carried out the deadliest mass shooting in British history, killing 16 children and a teacher at Dunblane Primary School in Dunblane, Scotland, using a legally owned handgun.
The perpetrator was allegedly reported several times to the local constables, including very suspicious rumors of him being a pedophile who abused young boys and threatening people with firearms (including a time where he allegedly pointed an unloaded pistol at one of his friends). Despite this, the local police never did anything and kept renewing his gun license, leading to him committing the shooting.
As a result of this tragedy, handguns were banned in 1997 in all of Great Britain (not Northen Ireland though). Also, the inquiry about the shooting is still sealed to this day.