"Differing requirements," is an understatement!
.......so I'd pipe down about our firearm and game laws.
Lowell.
Sadly, more of your flippant unconsidered views and a non-sequetor. I never commented on either your game or gun laws; I was answering/providing clarity on questions asked above. Typically, you missed the point.
It is easy to start when one has a blank canvas, as the US ensured it had when it took control of the land in North America.
In Europe, we have a longer history. One of my homes has been around for considerably longer than the USA, and while the rights which come with that property might appear quaint, they can be useful, such as the right the game on it and to hunt over it. In England, hunting and weapons control started in the early Norman era, where even nobles had to tie their arrows to their bowstrings when traversing the King’s forest. Many of the citizens of Australia are there because their early 19th century ancestors poached a deer or hare. Someone comes onto my property, I have a right to prosecute them for poaching or trespass. Were they to carry a gun, I can prosecute for "armed trespass" which is a much more serious crime.
Most people in Ireland do not have a problem with our gun laws because they are perceived as reasonable. In Ireland we had a revolution and a civil war within the last 100 years; in my lifetime the arming of fanatics by other fanatics from the US and Libya ensured that we were kept aware of the damage that can be done by weapons in the wrong hands. Frankly, I see no need to own a H&K machine pistol or a Kalashnikov.
K.
FWIW, there was a parliamentary proposal in the early 1900s to have a United States of Great Britain, modelling the legislature on the US system. Some of it, such as the reduction in size and structure of the H. of Lords, has already come to pass.
K.
