Why is this not an argument for better gun control? And before you answer, please note that "gun control" and "gun ban" are NOT synonymous. Gun CONTROL is a system that keeps guns out of the hands of as many crazy people as possible. It's a screening process, not a revocation of every gun license in the world.
2007-12-10 04:39:56 · 14 answers · asked by Bush Invented the Google 6 in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
delphi: Please do elaborate: what IS the answer, then?
2007-12-10 04:45:41 · update #1
Jennifer: If someone wants to commit mass murder, they're going to do it with or without a gun? So does that mean that we should just hand out guns like leaflets to comedy clubs? And if they don't have a gun, what are they going to use to kill dozens of people on college campuses? Please cite an example from history.
2007-12-10 04:46:42 · update #2
there should be but conservatives have a hissy fit when u talk about gun control
2007-12-10 04:44:21 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 4⤊ 6⤋
Gun control CAN be synonymous with a ban as it can be a very slippery slope. Take for example the assault rifle ban. Some of these guns were banned because of characteristics of the gun, such as if it had the ability to be fully-automatic. The problem here is as it relates to defining "assault rifle" was not black and white. Some guns were banned because they looked to indimidating even though they did not fit the characteristics of what they defined as an assault rifle. Because of this vague law, what's to say a hunting rifle can't be banned because it's all subjective in defining what might be an assault rifle. I just feel that banning guns is only keeping them out of the hands of those that legitmately want them for purposes other than crime.
2007-12-10 12:49:39 · answer #2 · answered by Magnus 5 · 1⤊ 1⤋
I don't think it has to do with gun control I think it has more todo with young people now not knowing how to deal with disappointment. We are told that the best thing for children is to sheild them from disappointment and then when something happens like in Nebraska where the gun man wrote that he had broken up with his girlfriend and lost his job so now he is going out with a bang shows that if he had been better prepared for loss then maybe instead of killing people he would have been able to start over and pick himself back up.
2007-12-10 12:45:34 · answer #3 · answered by Tip 5 · 3⤊ 1⤋
Any federal gun control is a violation of the constitution. It could easily be argued that if all of the citizens were armed fewer shooters would feel that they could accomplish their goal.
Gun control means law abiding citizens are disarmed while those with no regard for the law are. Excuse me but that just don't make sense.
2007-12-10 12:57:41 · answer #4 · answered by Locutus1of1 5 · 2⤊ 1⤋
like the first person said.. it is a band-aid to the problem as it only addresses the symptoms.. not the true issue... which is mental health care, education and culture in our society. Until you fix these things more and more people are going to set out to do crazy stuff... with or without a gun.
2007-12-10 12:46:22 · answer #5 · answered by pip 7 · 2⤊ 0⤋
When you get the governments to enforce the 22,000 odd gun laws currently in existence maybe I can say you have a point. Funny how gun crime is lower in states with CCW laws and less draconian gun control laws.
2007-12-10 12:56:25 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
We should also try to keep 747's out of the hands of madmen. My point being if someone wants to commit mass-murder they will do so, with or without a gun. Guns aren't the problem, crazy people are. Guns aren't handed out like leaflets for one. Two, 19 Islamic Militants killed 3,000 Americans in 3 hours without at single firearm. Will that work for an example???
2007-12-10 12:44:19 · answer #7 · answered by Jennifer H 4 · 6⤊ 3⤋
So lets control the law abiding citizens.
Great, perfect world we just stopped the 'law abiding citizens from using thier firearms to commit crimes'
hmm, ok we have that now....... It works. 99% of the populous of law abiding firearms owners by thier silence show weapons are in sane and safe hands(not commiting violent acts)
Find a way to limit 'bad people' from using guns in acts of violence, not good people.
One way, ensure every citizen has the right to protect themselves.
2007-12-10 12:48:42 · answer #8 · answered by Destrier 4 · 0⤊ 1⤋
Gun control like prohibition is not the answer. Screening is just a band-aid. What needs to be worked on is our very sad mental health system. Our children seem to have very bad coping mechanisms.
2007-12-10 12:43:43 · answer #9 · answered by gone 7 · 5⤊ 2⤋
It is already illegal for "crazy" people to buy guns. Ever read a form 4473? The law is there, how do you find out who is crazy? Would you prefer to assume every one is crazy and a person has to prove themselves sane?
2007-12-10 12:47:19 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 2⤋
First of all you don't need a license to own a gun in your home. And do you REALLY think criminals wont use guns if there is more gun control?
2007-12-10 12:46:47 · answer #11 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 3⤋