....there is violence everywhere in the world, but in Canada there aren't as many gun involved incidents in one day as in the States. I felt it was strange to see one gun related incident after the other. The worl has gone mad. Do you feel your gun laws should change? What do think would be best to control these gun related incidents?
2007-01-26 12:17:33 · 21 answers · asked by I am a Muppet 4 in Politics & Government ➔ Law Enforcement & Police
I am so sick of this adage that "people kill people". If Americans didn't take their "constitutional right" to bear arms so literally there would not be as many problems. Yes, ultimately, it does come down to the person behind the trigger and if they are intent on harming someone then they will find an alternative means, however with guns being so easily accessible, I think gun incidents are higher than they should be.
2007-01-26 15:47:52 · answer #1 · answered by Taminha 1 · 1⤊ 3⤋
If you outlaw guns, then only outlaws will have guns,,,,,,,by the way, I was in Toronto for the holidays and they had their first shooting, yes like with a gun, on New Years Day, this crazy guy knocked on a womans front door an dwhe she opened the door, he shot her in the face and yelled, "Happy New Year", and was caught. Then a day or two later there was another shooting of a woman in a park. I was there and saw the news. Many guns are being smuggled into Canada, and the sad, and crazy thing is, that the entired Canadian Border is manned by "unarmed" officers, either on a land border, airport, or sea port, no guns.. I am not saying that carrying guns solves everything, but being able to protect ones self, on an International Border, should be a priority.
2007-01-26 12:45:01 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 0⤋
Much of the violence is done by people for whom it is already illegal to be in possession of a firearm, yet they get their gun and despite all the existing laws they commit the crime anyway. Law, by their very nature only affect the law abiding. More guns laws simply make it harder for honest folks to have a chance against the criminal. Why would you want that?
There has been NO proof or even any evidence that gun laws reduce crime. Even the fairly anti gun CDC has admitted it cannot show that more than 60 years of gun laws has had any effect on deterring crime.
Yet states that have "shall issue" concealed carry laws have less crime than other states. What does that tell you?
2007-01-28 15:20:53 · answer #3 · answered by Christopher H 6 · 1⤊ 0⤋
#1 Canada's Population does not compare to that of the states.More population= crime. #2 crimenals will get guns no matter what the law is. I think if anything the justice system fails us because you can rape a small child and get hardly any time if you do not believe me check out the sex offenders web sites.No matter what ,the punishment rarely fits the crime that is where we need to begin. Kill someone and be killed .if you had that thought placed in your brain you may think twice before pulling that trigger . People that use guns in the way they were intended for should not be punished by banning guns. If the liberals had there way we would all be defensless in this cruel world
2007-02-02 13:25:31 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
As has been said many times in this thread already, it isn't the guns, it's the people using them. If I take my pistol and place it on the table in the middle of my kitchen and walk away from it, that pistol will lay there until one of two things happens: until the end of time, or until someone else comes along and picks it up.
Like it or not, the "tired old adage" of "guns don't kill people, people kill people" is 100% accurate. I've heard a lot of gun tales in my life, but I've NEVER heard of a gun jumping up off a table and shooting someone all by itself. A firearm is a tool that is used by the person holding it; how that person uses it is not up to the gun.
I'm a gun owner, and proud of it. I own eight firearms, have a Concealed Weapons Permit in the state of South Carolina, and have never killed anyone.
The "logic" of passing yet more gun laws (we already have more than 25 THOUSAND of them in effect nationwide) to "control gun crime" is ludicrous. The only thing that gun laws do is restrict and impede the actions of law-abiding citizens. I have never - NEVER - heard of a criminal caught committing a crime with a weapon he purchased legally. Using a weapon bought on the streetcorner, yes; using a weapons stolen, yes; purchased legally? NEVER.
Gun control laws are useless. Case in point: our nation's capital, Washington DC. Home of the most restrictive gun laws in the nation; also home to the highest murder rate in the nation. Not too hard to figure out who has all the guns in DC, huh?
Second case in point: New York City. Home of some of the most restrictive gun laws in the nation next to DC, yet every day on the news you'll hear about who was shot in a drive-by shooting today. Again, not too hard to figure out who has all the guns.
We have enough laws already in effect; instead of passing more useless ones, how about enforcing the ones we have?
As for "gun violence," I'm here to tell you that if it weren't guns it'd be something else. Humans are, by their very nature, an emotional and violent species; if we can't use a gun to kill someone else, we'll find another way of doing it.
You don't change human nature by banishing the tool; you try to change human nature to begin with.
Which, by the way, is impossible.
2007-01-27 00:46:54 · answer #5 · answered by Team Chief 5 · 1⤊ 0⤋
In the perfect world, changing or stiffening the gun laws would make a difference. But since this world is FAR from perfect, then you have to look at facts:
The ones that do the violating of gun laws are CRIMINALS - do you think that stiffening the gun laws or changing them will make Joe Criminal stop his robbing spree in lew of something more on the legal side??
I think the way to deal with gun violations is to stiffen the penalties. Instead of a slap on the wrist for a crime committed with a firearm, double the sentence - with no deals, and no chance of parole. That would make the guys think twice, and it would make it so breaking a law with a gun would definitely be something they don't want to do. Sure - some will still choose to commit crimes with a gun, but I think the small time criminals may feel the need to do something else.
2007-01-26 13:09:53 · answer #6 · answered by volleyballchick (cowards block) 7 · 1⤊ 1⤋
All gun control does is limit access to guns from law abiding, non-murderers. Criminals by definition are people who have commited a crime, therefore are legally denied access to guns, yet still manage to get them. With all the paperwork and background checks involved in buying a legal firearm I really doubt that many criminals would go to a gunstore to buy a gun. For some reason Gun Control supports seem to think that, "The more helpless you are the safer you are from criminals."
2007-01-28 23:08:22 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
Our culture is the problem, not our guns. Culture that glorifies violence and is focused on obtaining material possessions at any cost, and devalues human life, and teaches lack of respect for other's beliefs and rights.
IF we had stricter gun laws, only criminals would have guns, and the culture would be the same- parts of the US inner city would deteriorate even further and many would not be able to defend themselves. The criminals would know only they had guns and they had nothing to fear from law abiding people.
Liberals often think that the police's duty is to protect people- but this is actually not their job. They investigate and arrest criminals. Everyone in the US is responsible for protecting yourself legally. (if you don't believe it look up court cases involving officers choosing not to put themselves at risk to protect the public- they are never found at fault- this is not their job).
2007-01-26 12:38:59 · answer #8 · answered by castlekeepr 4 · 1⤊ 0⤋
It is not the guns that is the issue. It is society as a whole who blames an inanimate object for destruction when it is who operates the object that is at fault. People need to start taking responsibility for their own actions, and start blaming those who do the crime. We don't blame an embezzlers computer for the crime the embezzler commits.
Also, think of how many millions of people own weapons. Most are law abiding citizens. You can make any law stricter, but when it boils down to it, those that commit the crimes aren't law abiding anyway, so it won't change a thing. Stricter penalties on those who commit crimes should be the focus - not those who exercise their constitutional right.
2007-01-26 12:35:28 · answer #9 · answered by HG 4 · 7⤊ 0⤋
Young lady, remember when you read of an armed robbery or a drive by shooting that no gun law would stop these acts. They are perpetrated by people who do not acquire guns in a legal fashion. They are criminals (the bad guys) and they do not apply for pistol permits nor do they purchase their guns at a registered gun dealers shop. Gun laws would only serve to disarm the law abiding citizens (the good guys) leaving them defenseless in the face of an armed adversary. This is why gun laws are not only pointless, they are in fact harmful and will only give the bad guys more of an advantage, do you understand?
2007-01-26 12:29:40 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 11⤊ 0⤋