Murder is against the law. But murderers don't pay attention to that law, and comit murder anyways. What makes you think that they would abide by any gun control laws?
2007-09-15 03:17:04 · 16 answers · asked by smellyfoot ™ 7 in Politics & Government ➔ Law & Ethics
They won't. Gun control laws in Great Britain didn't work and they won't work here either.
2007-09-15 03:20:40 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 5⤊ 1⤋
I am a liberal, and I am a firm believer in NOT going to "toughen" the gun laws. Why? You're right - criminals typically ignore the laws, or else they wouldn't be criminals, would they? There HAS to be some gun control laws, but penalizing the law abiding isn't the answer.
What could be done is:
1. Lengthen the waiting period, and make the background checks more thorough.
2. Make obtaining weapons harder to do.
3. Penalize those that allow criminals to obtain weapons, or that circumvent the system and laws just as harshly as those that commit the crimes. If a dealer "bypasses" the background check, and the person that bought/got the weapon from them kills someone with the gun, then the dealer should be brought up as an accomplace to murder. I would think that serious prison time would make dealers very accountable for what they sell.
It all comes down to education and knowledge. If everyone is subjected to serious background checks before the purchase of a weapon, it would prevent the main way for criminals and mentally "unstable" individuals to get instruments of killing.
I guess if one would like to own a weapon, they need to make sure they keep their noses clean.
As for the guns on the streets - I think that getting some "truth in sentencing" laws would also do some good. Don't deal down those that commit crimes with guns. If they commit a robbery and get 5 years for robbery and an additional 10 years due to it being committed with a gun, then they serve 15 years - not 5, and for info, the gun charge will be tossed.
2007-09-15 03:37:11 · answer #2 · answered by volleyballchick (cowards block) 7 · 1⤊ 1⤋
The argument from gun control advocates is that gun control laws will limit or prevent access to guns, and in doing that reduce and end gun crime.
The statistics however demonstrate a contrary effect. Crime, especially violent crime, goes up in places with strict gun control.
Advocates of gun control usually come from one of two camps. Idealists that blame the tool rather than the person using it and the fearful that seek to control those aspects of the world that will make them feel safe.
The idealists are in denial about the problem and their rationale about gun control applied to drunk driving would ban cars rather than hod the driver responsible for their actions.
The fearful are just reactionaries. To them it is not about guns , but rather about control.
The problem of gun violence, is not guns, its violence. Americans have become acceptable and tolerant of violence to a point where the disregard for life or safety is commonplace.
For example a group of teenage boys were walking in the parking lot in front of our townhouse the other day. They had two or three air-soft BB guns, and were shooting indiscriminately including over the berm that separates the town houses from the local football fields. When I confronted them they were polite but indignant, and when I asked one of them why he would shoot over the berm without knowing what was on the other side he first denied doing it (I called him on it, since I had just seen it 30 seconds ago) he than admitted he saw no problem with his action. When I asked what would happen if he hit someone in the eye, he answered there was no one over in the field, and I asked how he knew. He answered he just knew, and I pointed out that he couldn't see over the berm, and that many adults ran on the track around the field and emphasized the ignorant risk with others' safety he was taking, and he went into teenage ignore mode.
That is the problem, not his BB gun, but his absolute disregard for the safety of others.
Banning guns won't solve that ignorance and carelessness, it will only ensure that criminals willing to break the law are armed and those that follow the law are disarmed and less able to defend themselves. Which ironically emboldens the criminal due to the reduced risk on his part.
A wise man once said an armed society is a polite society. I judge its validity using the Swiss model. All militia aged men in Switzerland have a military assault rifle at home, and shooting at ranges is common place.
Until then the only thing gun control does is to hinder people in their ability to exercise their inherent right of self defense.
Teaching people to respect one another is the better way to go.
2007-09-15 04:22:56 · answer #3 · answered by Brian B 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
im not a liberal, but that is a great question. our society has too many idiots and the probability of these morons that would abide by new gun control laws is the same ask asking the pope to convert to Islam. There needs to be more strict rules enforced with the gun makers and gun retailers, but to ban guns is stupid and foolish.
2007-09-15 03:24:00 · answer #4 · answered by Go Blue 3 · 3⤊ 0⤋
Keep in mind there are usually two reasons Leftists push anything: one reason is the symbolic holier-than-thou gesture (i.e., we are protecting the children) and the other is the subtle beneath-the-surface true reason (i.e., we want to diminish individualism and consolidate all power in the hands of some central authority).
There is no better example than something I saw in the news today:
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070914/ap_on_re_us/philadelphia_violence
Basically, crime is high in Philadelphia, which is not surprising since that city has some pretty tight gun control laws. And to fight this crime, the police chief is calling on 10,000 citizens to patrol the street (unarmed) for 3 hours a night and confront criminals.
There is nothing more silly or selfish than that. I imagine if Philadelphia would relax their harsh gun control laws, and let these citizens arms themselves, the crime rate for for this city would lower dramatically.
2007-09-15 03:26:24 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 1⤋
If guns were to be banned it would create only one good thing. Criminals would have to pay super high prices on the black market to get one, which would mean most criminals couldn't afford it. That being said, I believe in the second amendment. I own several. I am not however, opposed to the waiting period or registering my guns. Unlike the NRA I do not believe these laws will lead to confiscation.
2007-09-15 03:31:06 · answer #6 · answered by grumpyoldman 7 · 2⤊ 0⤋
They would not obey to law, but maybe the laws should be enforced to them and we would not have so many murderers roaming around with guns.
2007-09-16 01:59:39 · answer #7 · answered by The Daughter of the King, BaC 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Gun control only seeks to keep guns out of the hands, or at least make them more difficult to obtain for the mentally unstable or person proven to be irresponsible with fire arms.
America has one of the highest murder rates due to fire arms internationally. There is something wrong, I don't believe gun control in itself is the answer, however there needs to be some form of re-evaluation with regards to how firearms are managed.
2007-09-15 03:21:27 · answer #8 · answered by smedrik 7 · 3⤊ 2⤋
see the link.
2007-09-15 04:12:48 · answer #9 · answered by sirbobby98121 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Good question. Good point. I really dont have a problem with gun control as it stands now (with waiting period). It is the "slippery slope" that I worry about. I am a conservative.
2007-09-15 03:23:20 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 0⤋
Maybe they should pass a law,
Making it illegal to break the law.
Im sorry, just some liberal logic.
Remember when they banned bayonet holders on rifles ?
Now have you ever heard of anyone who had been bayonetted ?
Of course not, because there has never been a case of someone being boyoneted recorded in the US.
So why would the democrats, waste time, banning bayonet holders on rifles ??
2007-09-15 03:25:24 · answer #11 · answered by jeeper_peeper321 7 · 1⤊ 2⤋