This is a very good question.
You must understand that I have never seen a gun kill anyone. People kill people and if you start blaming inanimate objects on human actions then your going to have to say the spoon makes people fat.
Making gun laws doesn't really effect crime where a gun was used. Remember criminals don't go to the gun store and order a gun the way law abiding citizens do. They steal one or buy a stolen one.
Instead of gun laws we should uphold the laws against the criminals and have severe and just punishment. I am so sick of hearing the bleeding heart groups say"Oh that is a human life we need to rehabilitate them and make them a good citizen" what! What we need to do is stop p_s_y footing around with the criminals and really give them consequences, instead we house them in country clubs and feed the bastards steak!
Instead of life sentences where the criminal gets free education in the prison to sue the states for being uncomfortable and getting money in those cases, we need to take away their rights and wholeheartedly impose the death penalty and terminate them. Why spend a billion dollars on people that will never contribute anything positive to society. Why house them. Get rid of them and put the money to good use in schools and education, help the needy, etc etc.....
So, stop feeling passive and start writing things that are against people whom kill people and not against objects!
2007-04-16 14:30:18
·
answer #1
·
answered by Imperator 3
·
3⤊
1⤋
I am an advocate of legal & lawful gun ownership. Since my childhood, I have been around and have owned many guns. I don't hunt. I don't murder people.
Guns do not kill people. People kill people. Prohibiting guns will promote guns. I don't have a problem with extensive background checks either. And I would insist that the laws allowing gun purchases at gun shows without any background checks to be STOPPED immediately. This practice is asinine. Guns protect people. I was mugged in February, and I wish I would have been carrying a gun. If I had perhaps I would not have been assaulted & robbed to the extent that I was.
There are times and places for everything. Taking away gun rights is going backwards. Full-prosecution of gun violators should be mandatory. There are too many laws that protect people that break laws. That is one of the dichotomies of freedom.
2007-04-16 23:31:28
·
answer #2
·
answered by Active Denial System™ 6
·
1⤊
0⤋
And I take it the action of the murderer was perfectly legal. He broke one law, what makes you think breaking a second would slow him down.
Would you outlaw cars, they kill thousands more than guns. And you would have the added advantage of preventing drive by shootings.
Gee and while we are at it, maybe we should eliminate Gays, after all they can't procreate so what good are they.
Sorry, sometimes the personal touch is the only one that is heard.
This man was nuts, and had guns. Law one.
This man concealed guns on his person. Law two
This man had, I believe, illegally large capacity magazines. Law three.
This man transported firearms he should not have had (he's nuts). Law Four
He possessed a firearm during the commission of a felony. Law Five
And that list can go on for several more steps. And if he crossed a State line it opens a whole new can of worms.
How many laws do you have to pass against my hobby before you pull your head out of your ash and realize that criminals by definition break the law? Some of you touchy feely idiots made Gun and Drug Free Zones around a school. So guns and drugs were legal prior to your action.
All in the world we have to do is enforce the 100,000 plus gun control laws now on the books. But we can't do that because it might violate someone right to a free abortion.
Why do I allow myself to get into with a lib?
BTW, if this guy had been captured would you have held a candle and cried big tears the night the State of Virginia put a needle in his arm. My guess is YES.
2007-04-16 21:40:10
·
answer #3
·
answered by gimpalomg 7
·
3⤊
1⤋
I don't think banning guns is the answer. I'm not an NRA nut, in fact I'm not even a member. I've never owned a gun but I don't think the two (gun violence and the right to own guns) are as correlated as you might think. Canada has a higher gun to person ratio and they have almost no gun related crimes or deaths. What we have is a societal problem that is built on the foundations of class-ism and racism. But that's another issue for another question.
2007-04-17 09:57:07
·
answer #4
·
answered by SDTerp 5
·
2⤊
0⤋
Because the gun lobby is so powerful in the US. It's ridiculous that sme people say that it could have been better if other people had their guns as well. When will the carnage stop? I totally agree that guns should be prohibited. Sure the black market will still conyinue. It does in Australia. But in crimes of passion such as this one, another type of weapon would have done alot less damage.
Sincerely.
2007-04-17 11:06:55
·
answer #5
·
answered by Wayne B Australia 2
·
0⤊
1⤋
I am afraid this cannot be stopped except with the Goodwill of all including gun owners. I have not said so before but as well as self defense I was trained in firearm use and safety. Watching some idiots perform made my blood run cold. All we could do was kick them out of the club.
How can we possibly prevent certifiable people from possessing firearms. I wish I knew.
Rose P.
2007-04-16 22:55:57
·
answer #6
·
answered by rose p 7
·
2⤊
0⤋
makes me wonder myself sometimes. I hate guns...don't want anything to do with them. Do background checks include psychological checks as well a criminal records? I know not all people are going to buy guns and go around killing people like what happened today. I've only ever shot a BB gun at beer/soda cans. If someone lives in a dangerous city, I can understand wanting to have a handgun for protection. Or those who like to hunt to have a hunting rifle (not that I like hunting, either). But I find it disturbing that everyday citizens think they should be able to own lots of guns, or even assault rifles. those aren't for protection, those are for just that...assault! mass killing! and yes, I know you can't blame the gun, but only the person using it. and the biggest convention this city ever had (St. Louis) was the NRA convention this last weekend. I find that disturbing. after today's events, even more so. my father and one of my uncles graduated from Virginia Tech....I've visited that campus myself many years ago. What is it with society these days?
2007-04-16 21:23:43
·
answer #7
·
answered by redcatt63 6
·
2⤊
1⤋
In Australia a few years ago, we had a shooting in which 35 people were murdered. The public outcry to toughen gun laws was too large for our government not to act. I will admit it is a lot easier in a culture that is not gun crazy but the government had to act and we have not had an incident like this since.
Where is the people power?
2007-04-16 21:20:52
·
answer #8
·
answered by nicevolve 2
·
2⤊
2⤋
ok, so we take away the guns.
next a person gets in a car and drives around striking pedestrians and killing them. Do we take away the cars?
It is not the gun that is the problem. It is the mental condition of the individual. If they choose to kill lots of people they will do it regardless of whether or not there are guns.
In prison, weapons are not allowed. The prisoners will sharpen the end of their toothbrush to make a knife. Where there is a will, there is a way.
ââ
2007-04-16 21:25:20
·
answer #9
·
answered by Tegarst 7
·
7⤊
1⤋
I hate guns. I really do. I think in some aspects they are a necessary evil but not in the hands of most of the general public.
2007-04-16 23:00:14
·
answer #10
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
1⤋