I was just wonering if any republicans or people against gun-control now look at it differently due to the Virginia Tech. shooting.
2007-04-19 12:10:33 · 20 answers · asked by Dana 2 in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
For everyone who saids if we ban guns we might as well ban cars:
People needs cars. No one needs a gun.
If youre not a policeman or a soldier, you don't need to keep a gun with you.
2007-04-19 12:19:25 · update #1
Yeah, it brought to the surface the need for us to be able to defend ourselves from raving lunatics that should have been locked up but due to liberal programs were released because they "obviously won't cause any trouble."
2007-04-19 12:17:10 · answer #1 · answered by Paul McDonald 6 · 5⤊ 2⤋
Many leftists have actually rethought their position on gun control. Think about what it means. If you have gun control, you make sure that only Bush, the police, and criminals have guns and you lock people up in prison for a long time, even if they just own it for decorative purposes and never intend to use it.
Do you really want Bush (or whoever the president is) to be able to shoot anti-war protesters (like Nixon did) without fear of retaliation?
The law and order Republicans that are the "frontrunners" in the 08 election, such as Giuliani, support gun control because it allows them to lock more people up. That's the same reason why he loves the Patriot Act and the Military Commissions Act.
If gun control laws were going to work, it would be because criminals obey laws. However, murder control laws don't work to stop criminals from going into colleges and shooting people. Criminals will just buy guns on the black market to commit more murders. Virginia Tech had a rule banning guns on campus, as did Columbine and the planes that were hijacked on 9-11. With a gun, maybe that Holocaust surviver who taught at the school and got shot holding up the criminal so his class could escape would have survived and saved the day. The same could have been the case for any of his other victims.
2007-04-19 19:58:40 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 0⤋
My view hasn't changed one bit,this guy would not have been able to purchase a gun if people had followed through when he acted up before hand. If the two girls he stalked at one point had pressed charges instead of backing out for whatever reason he would have had a restraining order on him,which would have made him fail the backround check,result 32 people don't die. The laws were in place to stop this,it was a failure of the system not the laws. And as for me I am alive today because I owned and carried a gun, that as far as I'm concerned seals the deal as they say. If the law changes tommorow then I will just have to carry illegally because as the saying goes I would rather be judged by 12 than carried by 6.
AD
2007-04-19 19:49:28 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
No. I don't believe guns are the problem. Guns don't kill its the person pulling the trigger that kills. People today are looking for the easy way out and just blaming one thing. What happen at VT is not about gun control but how today to many people fall through the cracks of system. I have seen it with my moms work. You would be surprised how many people like him are out in the streets. Maybe we should be focusing more on the the laws and policies that kept him out of a mental hospital. Stop using guns as a scapegoat and focus on the real issues.
2007-04-19 19:45:22 · answer #4 · answered by thurtlebee 2 · 4⤊ 1⤋
Yes. I was never a big proponent of concealed-carry laws, but now I'm beginig to think they might be better-justified than I initially suspected. Of course, I'm not entirely convinced. It helps to reflect on things like this for a while, as the initially reaction to such a tragedy is bound to be emotional.
2007-04-19 19:16:53 · answer #5 · answered by B.Kevorkian 7 · 4⤊ 0⤋
First of all, I am not a republican or democrat, conservative or liberal.
I am a gun owner and I am against the war in Iraq.
Had there been at least one student in those classrooms who was a gun owner and was permitted to legally carry his or her firearm concealed on their person, the probability of the scumbag killing 30 people would have drastically lowered.
Guns don't kill, people do.
If we raised our children properly and taught them the responsibilities that most people seem to be lacking these days, there would be alot less of this foolishness.
2007-04-19 19:20:01 · answer #6 · answered by J. 3 · 4⤊ 2⤋
I don't believe in gun control...but I do not
think anyone needs a damn semi-automatic weapon. Maybe people would think differently if this type of tragedy hit their family.
2007-04-19 19:19:02 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 1⤋
Nope...because this was a legal gun....bought legally!
Leave the gun control alone....and start looking out for somebody else. Many people claim they saw 'strange' behaviour with the gunman...but did anyone do anything???
I think NOT!
EDIT: People do NOT need cars....they WANT them to make life quicker! They can walk, take a bicycle or....OH MY GOSH...take public transportation!
2007-04-19 19:14:46 · answer #8 · answered by Nibbles 5 · 6⤊ 2⤋
Yes, there are too many controls in place. when a criminal can buy a gun on the streets for half of what i would spend at a dealer, then the controls are too restraining.
2007-04-19 19:17:00 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 4⤊ 2⤋
No - I still think that there are too many gun control laws on the books as it is.
2007-04-19 19:14:57 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 4⤊ 2⤋