Joined
·
72,090 Posts
Standing Up
1 - 3 of 3 Posts
Joined
·
4,981 Posts
Yet this is all our current gun control laws can possibly achieve: Armed criminals confronting unarmed citizens. The 1993 Brady Bill was no exception. It could do nothing but add some annoyance and red tape to the life of a law-abiding person who wished to purchase a gun.
Brady did not stop a person with a criminal record. Such a person could buy an illegal handgun around the corner, which he probably preferred to do anyway. Criminals don't like committing crimes with guns registered to them.
Neither does a five-day wait deter the deranged or the enraged. The mad sniper simply waits; he has all the time. As for the impulsive or domestic criminal, he seldom goes shopping for weapons. He uses whatever is handy, whether a meat cleaver or a 12-gauge shotgun.
Is there a kind of gun law that could reduce violent crime? Yes, a complete ban on the possession of all firearms, coupled with draconian penalties. Such laws existed in most totalitarian countries, and they worked. There was almost no gunplay in the streets. In those societies, no one had to worry about his safety -- until he saw a policeman.
Its like here is a good point made about the stupidty of keeping law abiding citizens from having protection. To then offering the last paragraph. Not sure how I feel about the article. Criminals will always get what they need.
Brady did not stop a person with a criminal record. Such a person could buy an illegal handgun around the corner, which he probably preferred to do anyway. Criminals don't like committing crimes with guns registered to them.
Neither does a five-day wait deter the deranged or the enraged. The mad sniper simply waits; he has all the time. As for the impulsive or domestic criminal, he seldom goes shopping for weapons. He uses whatever is handy, whether a meat cleaver or a 12-gauge shotgun.
Is there a kind of gun law that could reduce violent crime? Yes, a complete ban on the possession of all firearms, coupled with draconian penalties. Such laws existed in most totalitarian countries, and they worked. There was almost no gunplay in the streets. In those societies, no one had to worry about his safety -- until he saw a policeman.
Its like here is a good point made about the stupidty of keeping law abiding citizens from having protection. To then offering the last paragraph. Not sure how I feel about the article. Criminals will always get what they need.
The author of that article did an excellent job of explaining the difference between criminals and the law-abiding and how so-called "gun control" laws favor the criminals.
Unfortunately, the antis don't see it that way...
It really makes me wonder how seemingly intelligent people can buy into the "gun control" thought process as though more laws will really make a difference. It's like the religious right, they have a blind spot that normal intelligence and common sense can't seem to overcome. It's sad. Really
sad...
And a total pain in the ass for the rest of us! Makes me want to just slap some sense into them! However, that ain't gonna happen anytime soon. And, probably wouldn't help.......! :banghead:
"My mind is made up. Don't confuse me with facts!"
Unfortunately, the antis don't see it that way...
It really makes me wonder how seemingly intelligent people can buy into the "gun control" thought process as though more laws will really make a difference. It's like the religious right, they have a blind spot that normal intelligence and common sense can't seem to overcome. It's sad. Really
sad...And a total pain in the ass for the rest of us! Makes me want to just slap some sense into them! However, that ain't gonna happen anytime soon. And, probably wouldn't help.......! :banghead:
"My mind is made up. Don't confuse me with facts!"
1 - 3 of 3 Posts
Join the discussion
