Although I'm not against gun ownership I do have a serious problem with the ease at which weapons can be obtained. Guns in the hands of manics who think the way to solve their problems is to shoot their ex-wife, or some attorney or anyone is enough to make me think perhaps their needs to be some speed bumps in gun ownership.
A gun and a car are not the same thing... you can't sneak a car into school or a court house in your back-back.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070718/ap_on_re_us/singer_shooting;_ylt=AmQZ1HwliMU_Yes9Iomdw9FvzwcF
2007-07-18 09:21:54 · 3 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Government
apologies I meant back-pack
2007-07-18 09:23:45 · update #1
While I can understand what you are saying because this is a tragedy, we have to accept that adding more gun laws don't always work. Even if you put more and more restrictions on gun ownership, those who want a gun to commit a crime are going to get one. Even the drug laws do not successfully kept drugs off of the street. Those who want drugs still manage to get their hands on them. Same thing with gun laws. For example, Benjamin Smith went on a shooting rampage. He was denied a gun legally, yet he got one illegally. By adding more gun laws, the only thing that we will be doing is obstruct the law-abiding citizen's way to defend themselves. At Virginia Tech, Cho didn't seem to mind breaking the law when he brought a gun on campus. Those that were obeying the law by not bringing a gun on campus were slaughtered. By adding more gun laws, the only thing we will be doing is driving it underground. Also keep in mind that he could have just as easily gotten his hands on another type of weapon such as a knife. A knife can be bought just as easy, and concealed, just like a gun can. Maybe instead of adding more restrictions, we should lessen them.
2007-07-18 09:59:49 · answer #1 · answered by j 4 · 1⤊ 0⤋
The last I heard it was a high powered rifle that he used, so yes it was probably legal.
If someone wants to kill someone else they will use whatever weapon is at hand, whether that is a gun, a knife, a car, or the common chemicals most people have in their home. Nothing you can do will ever stop a person who is intent upon committing murder. Ever since Cain killed Able murder has been, and will always be, a part of society. More laws restricting the ownership of firearms will not stop killings. This guy was 1 of the people who would have had access to firearms even if there were a ban on all firearms. If you had paid attention to the article you would have seen that he was a member of the National Guard, a soldier, who has military training and knows how to use a weapon. So what is your suggestion for people who have been trained how to use firearms? Keep them locked up so that they will not interact with people who have been banned from owning firearms?
I have a better idea, teach people morals and values again and that respecting one another should be a way of life and maybe then some of these murders, rapes, and robberies would stop.
Putting more restrictions on firearms only endangers those of us who want them to protect ourselves. It won't do a thing to reduce the crime rate.
2007-07-18 17:52:03 · answer #2 · answered by Tater1966 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
If one person wants to kill another person they will do it, gun or no gun.
A ban on guns is a feeble attempt at solving the wrong problem.
2007-07-18 17:41:30 · answer #3 · answered by Mathsorcerer 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋