News, Critics blast Massachusetts city's new 'essay' rule for gun-carry applicants
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Critics are blasting a Massachusetts city’s new law that they claim requires residents applying for a license to carry handguns to write “an essay” and pay upwards of $1,100 for training.
Most crimes committed by those using guns and gun deaths are at the hands of criminals. These deaths are the reason "gun control" exists in the first place, because we're alarmed at our own gun death rate, but the issue isn't with law abiding citizens. The average law abiding gun owning American citizen never even thinks about using his or her gun in a crime or to kill someone, let alone does it. The vast majority of gun deaths occur in inner cities involving gangs and other scum of the Earth idiots.
The point is, gun control measures like this don't really do much to stop gun violence when most is at the hands of those who don't even obtain guns legally anyway and who have no respect for authority or the law.
No one gives a flying about "criminals". Criminals don't kill law abiding folk with guns. Rarely, if ever. Law abiding folk kill other law abiding folk with guns on purpose, and by accident, at a distressing rate. Law abiding folk kill themselves with guns at an even higher rate than "criminals" kill each other!! But law abiding folk are convinced that they have to keep guns away from ... those people, law abiding or not. That way when they see one of us they know they have the arms advantage. So now they have a freaking literacy test for hand gun ownership. Great. Lets see how they do with that.
Critics are blasting a Massachusetts city’s new law that they claim requires residents applying for a license to carry handguns to write “an essay” and pay upwards of $1,100 for training.
No one gives a flying about "criminals". Criminals don't kill law abiding folk with guns. Rarely, if ever. Law abiding folk kill other law abiding folk with guns on purpose, and by accident, at a distressing rate. Law abiding folk kill themselves with guns at an even higher rate than "criminals" kill each other!! But law abiding folk are convinced that they have to keep guns away from ... those people, law abiding or not. That way when they see one of us they know they have the arms advantage. So now they have a freaking literacy test for hand gun ownership. Great. Lets see how they do with that.
No they don't. The vast majority of gun deaths are not from mass shootings or people gone crazy out in the country, they're occurring in poor, dangerous areas of cities. Gang-infested cities where people shoot their illegally obtained guns just for the hell of it, then a stray bullet goes through two houses and kills a 13 year old doing his homework in bed. This kind of ridiculous stuff is how most people die at the hands of guns (and deliberate gang member killing gang member or something like that), not mass shootings or accidental deaths at the hands of an idiot with a gun in some suburban neighborhood in Texas.
And nothing is going to stop a suicidal person form killing him or herself. If not a gun, it would be something else.
No they don't. The vast majority of gun deaths are not from mass shootings or people gone crazy out in the country, they're occurring in poor, dangerous areas of cities. Gang-infested cities where people shoot their illegally obtained guns just for the hell of it, then a stray bullet goes through two houses and kills a 13 year old doing his homework in bed. This kind of ridiculous stuff is how most people die at the hands of guns (and deliberate gang member killing gang member or something like that), not mass shootings or accidental deaths at the hands of an idiot with a gun in some suburban neighborhood in Texas.
And nothing is going to stop a suicidal person form killing him or herself. If not a gun, it would be something else.
You are so wrong. Gang thugs stray bullets are a trivial source of collateral gun deaths. Gang thugs killing other gang thugs are not. The only people losing sleep over gang thugs are other gang thugs. The people behind this law are paranoid about the infinitesimal likelihood of someone of the better classes having to face down someone from the lower classes. A gun is only worth having when the other guy doesn't have one. I've known this for years, but it is only slowly dawning on people that this is so. Rather than ban guns for everyone we rig it so that only the people we want to have a gun can get one. Do you really think anyone is worried about a gang thug with an illegal gun using it against decent upstanding law abiding people? No, its unaffiliated, but desperate, people down on their luck who might need to use a gun to obtain money. Most of the time the gun, if any, is used to intimidate. This law should not upset the majority of people reading this thread. I'm surprised it does.
You are so wrong. Gang thugs stray bullets are a trivial source of collateral gun deaths. Gang thugs killing other gang thugs are not. The only people losing sleep over gang thugs are other gang thugs. The people behind this law are paranoid about the infinitesimal likelihood of someone of the better classes having to face down someone from the lower classes. A gun is only worth having when the other guy doesn't have one. I've known this for years, but it is only slowly dawning on people that this is so. Rather than ban guns for everyone we rig it so that only the people we want to have a gun can get one. Do you really think anyone is worried about a gang thug with an illegal gun using it against decent upstanding law abiding people? No, its unaffiliated, but desperate, people down on their luck who might need to use a gun to obtain money. Most of the time the gun, if any, is used to intimidate. This law should not upset the majority of people reading this thread. I'm surprised it does.
No, I'm not. My point is, most gun deaths don't happen at the hands of the average law abiding gun owning citizen in a suburb or rural area. Most happen in cities, which are inherently violent in some parts. Whether it's an accidental death (stray bullet) or an intentional hit on someone (much more common, yes), this is where the vast majority of gun deaths occur. And fact is, many of these guns, probably most, are not legally obtained. Suicides drive up gun death stats, too, but like I said, a suicidal person is a suicidal person. If not a gun, they'll use something else, and the death will still be a death.
The law doesn't upset me at all. But most laws aimed towards gun control are useless because most people who own guns legally, people these laws target, aren't the problem. That's the point I'm trying to make. The government can use whatever measures it wants targeting law abiding legal gun owners, but they won't see gun deaths change much.
The government can use whatever measures it wants targeting law abiding legal gun owners, but they won't see gun deaths change much.
And my point is that this law has nothing to do with wanting to prevent gun deaths...
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
