Because so many people are blinded by the media's anti-gun campaign. Guns are not responsible for the deaths of so many people, people are responsible. When some nut-job cracks and goes walking through a bussiness with a AK-47 the media is all over it, focusing on the weapons and encouraging the ban of all guns. Does it ever occur to people that these weapons are already illigal? Or that guns in the hands of criminals mean that legal gun owners should give up their rights? When a crime is committed with a gun, it's committed by criminals, and criminals are notorious for not following the Law. Dur. And then to say that less police officers should be carrying guns... Unbelievable! Only a coward or a criminal would want there to be less good guys armed. What about that guy that went into a business with a double barreled shotgun? He was caught on tape walking slowly from hiding person to hiding person, talking with his victims while he slowly reloaded. He clearly fired both barrels with the first shot. It's a double-barreled shotgun! Anyone could have stopped him right then, with a gun, or with a chair or a telephone or a fist in the face. Has the entire human race become either cowards or madmen? And compared to the hundreds of rounds of ammo fired in crimes a year, three trillion bullets are fired in gun ranges, safely and without malicious intent. The media lies and decieves. Their statistic that 36% of guns are used to kill someone the gun owner knows? They never mention how they got that statistic. Crack heads shooting dealers, dealers shooting druggies, gang bangers killing gang bangers. People who cannot, legally, own a gun.
Guns are dangerous, yes. But so is a spud-pealer if someone wishes to make it so. Guns can be fun, they can be masterful works of art, they can be tools for survival (food gathering or self-defense), but when a gun is used in a crime, it is not the gun's fault. It is the criminals. Stricter gun laws? We already have strict gun laws. You cannot own a firearm unless you pass a rigorous background check, and in some places, a test (I think their should be a test everywhere, like driving). Criminals are not allowed to legally purchase firearms. Certain ones can not be purchased legally at all. Make it so no firearms can be bought by citizens and you will have no Law abiding, safe gun owners with guns, you will still have the criminals with them, though. And the next time some reporter calls a 9mm an "assualt pistol" I'll shit myself. The damn thing is better then a dry stick for self defense, but not by much.
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
(no subject)
Date: 2006-11-15 11:11 am (UTC)Guns are dangerous, yes. But so is a spud-pealer if someone wishes to make it so. Guns can be fun, they can be masterful works of art, they can be tools for survival (food gathering or self-defense), but when a gun is used in a crime, it is not the gun's fault. It is the criminals. Stricter gun laws? We already have strict gun laws. You cannot own a firearm unless you pass a rigorous background check, and in some places, a test (I think their should be a test everywhere, like driving). Criminals are not allowed to legally purchase firearms. Certain ones can not be purchased legally at all. Make it so no firearms can be bought by citizens and you will have no Law abiding, safe gun owners with guns, you will still have the criminals with them, though.
And the next time some reporter calls a 9mm an "assualt pistol" I'll shit myself. The damn thing is better then a dry stick for self defense, but not by much.
(no subject)
Date: 2006-11-15 08:29 pm (UTC):D
A very lucid argument, my friend :)
(no subject)
Date: 2006-11-16 04:31 am (UTC)