We have plenty of laws in place to restrict the possessing of firearms. Do we need more, or enforce the ones we already have? Do we really need more restrictive laws on abiding citizens? Was the shooter at VT a law abiding citizen with legal gun ownership? If so, did the gun free zone the school had in place help or hurt the students?
2007-04-17 07:48:10 · 5 answers · asked by Bear Arms 1 in Politics & Government ➔ Law & Ethics
"Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety". Benjamin Franklin
2007-04-17 08:04:25 · update #1
"Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety. Benjamin Franklin
2007-04-17 08:05:59 · update #2
They deserve neither. As the quote says.
2007-04-17 08:49:30 · answer #1 · answered by Laquishacashaunette 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
The possession of a firearm is not the issue in this instance. The laws of the State of Virginia allowed the shooter to own a gun and requires little or no background check. Thats the law of that state. Whether the university had a GFZ policy is of zero consequence to his use of the gun and ultimately hurt the students.
Nothing will stop a person who is determined to hurt others from gaining access to a firearm, legally or illegally.
2007-04-17 14:55:34 · answer #2 · answered by ken erestu 6 · 1⤊ 0⤋
You mean, "Those who are willing to give up freedom for security deserve neither and will get neither." or something like that?
2007-04-17 14:51:47 · answer #3 · answered by Bill W 【ツ】 6 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Where is the "B. Franklin quote in reference"?
2007-04-17 14:57:46 · answer #4 · answered by surffsav 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Not me... I will keep mine thank you
2007-04-17 14:51:30 · answer #5 · answered by Antiliber 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋