English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

March 25,1982 is when Kennesaw passed a law requiring all heads of house hold to have at least one gun in their home.It was followed by a dramatic drop in crime.This was in response to Marton Grove,IL passing a law that banned handgun ownership and the crime rate increased afterward.
Why is the media not zeroing in on Kennesaw.This is hard evidence that an armed citizenry is the best way to fight crime.
Also note that both of these towns are roughly the same size and have the same population.So the number of people can't be used against Kennesaw.I'm not saying we should have mandatory gun ownership nation wide,you also have the right not to bear armes.But I do think strict gun control is not the way to go either.
Most would think a pro-gun nut like myself would use the lenient gun laws in Switzerland as an example,but I think its best to use a place in my own country as one.
I also don't see evidence that gun control lowers crime. Do you agree?

2007-07-15 09:34:50 · 10 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government Other - Politics & Government

10 answers

An excellent question and I really wish the gun control zealots would read it and think about their position. I use the term zealot because this type of mental position refuses to recognize anything that doesn't support their line of thinking.

If it were true that draconian gun control laws actually had any impact on crime then New York City and Washington, D.C. would be the safest cities in the U.S. But they are not, in fact, D.C. was the murder capital of the U.S. several years ago and has been in a hot race for that questionable distinction ever since.

Gun control does not keep guns away from criminals. After all, these people are "criminals", they aren't obeying the law; what makes the GC advocates think they will?

You cite but one example of the impact of responsible recognition of the Second Amendment. Even interviews with prisoners reveals a great reluctance to intrude into housing areas where the presence of guns is know, but the converse situation is an open invitation to crime.

Gun Control simply does not lower crime. Just ask the British.

2007-07-15 09:52:10 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 4 1

Well you need a gun in suburban Atlanta, if not for escaped convicts and mall parking lot safety, you might need it to shoot a Japanese eschange student who accidentally walks into your house on Halloween with a mask on and didn't understand the word "FREEZE", so he died.
But if you had that rule in New York City, Miami, or Los Angeles, total Chaos would break loose. There are too many people crowded together and burglaries and a gang of guys all 5 with a gun can overpower one person with a concealed weapon permit and get another gun.
The funny thing is, Kennesaw wasn't very dangerous before the law either, but they think about attacks far more often than the average New Yorker who passes 10,000 people a day on the streets.

2007-07-15 09:46:59 · answer #2 · answered by topink 6 · 2 4

the anti gun lobby always use statistics that this many kids were killed by guns, and as you know statistics can show what ever you want them to show, however, one thing is for sure if these people were really interested in saving children's lives, they would be yelling for the end of skate boards, bicycles.swimming pools, cars, hell I could keep going until I filled this page with all of the things that have and are killing more of our children than guns , yet, who is yelling to get rid of the biggest killers of all??? this makes me wonder if there is not a underlying agenda, such as us being taken over by another country or ?? as it is well known that every country that the communist took over they first collected all of the guns they could and by disarming the people they were helpless,it is damned easy to take over a unarmed country, that has always been one of America's strength's so make up your mind are you a kiss butt commie and scared to death idiot? or do you want to live free as our forefathers planned , fought for and died for? as for me I fought for this country for 23 years as a dedicated marine. have I and millions more fought and bled in vain? what happened to the(give me liberty or give me death attitude)? and your question is correct, crime is reduced when people have guns and can protect themselves, just try calling the cops and see how long it takes them to arrive, I have called them and it has took over 2 hours, what can happen in 2 hours, ? also the courts have ruled that the cops are not obligated to protect you , ( they are only obligated to enforce the law)??? just ask the truck driver in Los Angles who the blacks were beating and stomping during the riots and over 100 cops were within 100 ft,????? civilians are the ones who helped him??
crabby_blind guy you are fullof ****, and youknow it but since youare black youhad to say something cad about the whites. which is expected, however I owned a service station in the little five points on moreland ave, every one in that area was robbbed several times by blacks, some were beaten senseless some killed, my brother and I carried guns all of the time and we were never robbed, nno one is safe in Atlanta. and not very many people will even go to Atlanta after dark anywhere.even the cops won't go into carver homes,after dark,( a black housing project)

2007-07-15 10:14:50 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 3 0

I don't own a gun and never will, but you are pretty much correct.

Legal, registered handguns owned by average Joes are rarely used in crimes. The vast majority of gun related violence involves black market weapons owned by people who can't even get legal weapons do to criminal records.

Banning guns would not do a whole lot to reduce crime rates, since there is a healthy black market which is already heavily utilized by those who commit gun-related crimes.

2007-07-15 09:40:05 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 4 1

Its a fact that communities with tough, strong PRO-gun laws have less crime. Look at any of the stats. Its never about doing what is right or really preventing crime with the left. Its about destroying your Constitutional right to bear arms.

The Founding Fathers are regarded as some of the smartest men ever, does anyone honestly believe that out of all the brillant things they wrote into the Constitution that this was there one error??? Seriously, look at history and see why they put that specific protection into the Constitution! Those who ignore history are doomed to repeat it. Our so called gun violence is a result of the destruction of the American family, the loss of good Christian values and principles being taught, and dare I say the proliferation of things such as homosexuality. (Uh oh, no he didn't! Yep I did. Its called freedom of speech and up until Yahoo answers, was a protected right!!!)

2007-07-15 09:43:12 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 7 1

Well I am against guns but I have one and I think every household should have one-the crime rate would be down if you knew everyone had one cause your chances of being shot are more than 50%!!

2007-07-15 09:41:27 · answer #6 · answered by sally sue 6 · 2 0

Claiming that gun laws are responsible for crime is just another scape goat used by piss-poor parents and tree-huggers who are afraid to own up to the fact that they're the real problem with society.

They're too stupid to teach their kids right from wrong and want to blame anything and everything they can to keep from blaming themselves, where the blame REALLY lies.

"It's gun laws"
"It's video games"
"It's the drinking age"
"It's the driving age"
"It's the schools"
"It's the bullies at school"
"It's their friends"
"It's television"
"It's cartoons"
"It's movies"
"It's music"
"It's the internet"
"It's anything but my piss-poor parenting skills and the fact that I sit on my lazy *** and let my kid run around and do anything it wants while I don't bother teaching it right from wrong or that doing something wrong will be met with consequences."

Remember people, while you're busy pointing at a scape-goat to claim it's what caused little Jonny to turn out to be a punk-*** brat who runs around shooting at people because it's "cool" you still have three fingers pointing back at the REAL cause.

2007-07-15 09:50:31 · answer #7 · answered by Odd Little Animal 5 · 6 1

No--I don't agree. Becase--as everyone in the metropolitian area of Atlanta knows--the young WHITE thugs you call your teen-agers just go outside the city limits to harass African-americans, homeless people and hang out at Town Center and Cumberland Malls buy their drugs. We see them all the time on the MARTA trains (the subway, for those not familiar with Atlanta).

Just a corrective from a resident of Atlanta.
BTW--I--or my roomate-live in the city--Little Five Points. WE can go take a walk anytime--day or night--without guns and without being bothered (a 50/50 black white innercity area)--which is more than you can say for the neoconservative pestholes like Kennessaw. LMAO.

2007-07-15 10:01:45 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 1 6

i just did a quick look up on this town - it has about 21,500 people living in it.

this is hardly any true measure of what gun ownership has as an effect on crime.

there is also no indication that any of the intelligent citizens ever paid any attention to the ridiculous law and actually bought guns...

2007-07-15 10:09:07 · answer #9 · answered by nostradamus02012 7 · 0 4

you bet ye, now every crook knows he might get shot dead.

2007-07-15 09:41:38 · answer #10 · answered by acid tongue 6 · 1 0

fedest.com, questions and answers