2006-10-03 16:54:51 · 10 answers · asked by Hector V 1 in News & Events ➔ Other - News & Events
Because that would mean someone would have to take responsibility. People will blame anyone but themselves.
2006-10-03 16:59:06 · answer #1 · answered by Joey R 5 · 2⤊ 0⤋
Because the liberals (democrats) feel that a person is not responsible for his or her actions. For instance the liberal media asked the Pa State Police Commissioner why they did not take the perpetrator 10 second warning more serious than they (from what the media idiot believes) they did? His question was said in a tone where it was the fault of the police not the fault of the animal who shot those little girls in the Amish school house.
This animal was loaded. He had 600 rounds of ammunition for at least 3 weapons.
People don't kill people, guns do. OH PLEASE!!!!!
Just like in Wisconsin and Colorado less than a week ago.
2006-10-03 17:15:12 · answer #2 · answered by KC2EGL 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Guns don't kill, people kill. Knives, bombs, poisons, and letter openers have been used to kill other human beings. It's always the person behind the weapon, that does the killing.
We have to be wary of folks that are a little on the emotionally tilted side. We'll never achieve total success, but we need to try.
As a responsible adult, my children have no access to my considerable arsenal. My guns are safely locked up. Please do the same with your guns!
2006-10-03 17:07:45 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
The only purpose of a gun is to kill some lifeform so where do you draw the line.
Would you be happy living next door to a man with a heavy machine gun, rocket propelled grenades, surface to air missiles, a supply of explosives to strap around his body when he goes shopping.? If so go and live in Iraq.
2006-10-03 17:40:28 · answer #4 · answered by brainstorm 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
one reason might be that some people dont want to take a responsibility for their direct actions of using their finger to pull a trigger.
another could be that they are reasoning that the bullet comes from the gun, not the actual person. tho the gun might be seen as an extension of the person.
2006-10-03 17:05:22 · answer #5 · answered by briar_rose1080 2 · 1⤊ 0⤋
I agree. If there were no guns in the world they would use a bow and arrow, if there was no bow and arrow, they would use a knife, if there was no knife they would use a rock . . .
The problem is not with guns, but with the human psyche.
In Australia, weapons are not allowed. Yet, this has not solved their crime rate.
2006-10-03 17:05:10 · answer #6 · answered by beautyofthesea 5 · 1⤊ 0⤋
It is the availability - the more Guns - the more shootings - it is statistically proven - it is inevitable.
2006-10-04 00:45:05 · answer #7 · answered by fatsausage 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Allow me to link to another 'question' that i just 'answered' regarding this subject.
http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20061003204934AAPW8Wd&r=w#Q8d8XzO_VmbATtoX2..f9MdaENAdMEAYw.bfHWOYgH0mEX12E3CQ
Give people the right and they will give the means.
2006-10-03 19:16:41 · answer #8 · answered by iPiG 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Stupidity.
And those people vote too.
2006-10-03 17:03:40 · answer #9 · answered by usaf.primebeef 6 · 1⤊ 0⤋
because liberals are not to smart
2006-10-03 19:48:56 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋