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.
Truth is, all the arguments concerning more restrictive gun laws made by gun advocates are true. The Mantras of "Criminals will get guns no matter what", "Banning guns will not stop mass murderers" and on and on are true statements. My point is that the pendulum of society's perceptions has swung in the direction of more restrictions. The bulk of society is looking at our president to lead in this matter and have no doubt, he will. He didn't want to have this fight but now that it is in his lap via recent events, he will lead in the only way society wants.
I'm certain that the real solution is to completely overhaul the nation's mental health system that Ronald Reagan dismantled during his administration as a cost saving measure. If this guy's mother had mental health services readily available for her son, this probably would never have happened.
But I'm afraid politicians won't do this, as the cost would be in the many billions of dollars and the benefits would not be realized for years. Creating flashy restrictions against all manner of guns will play big with the American public and not cost the government a dime. This is the kind of legislation politicians love and goes front and center on their resume.
I do believe that there are enough republicans in the house to get a bill through. Remember, politicians play to their constituents and public opinion is very much for "some definite action" concerning these mass killings.
I believe what you are trying to say after reading your posts are we should all just be good little followers and let our trusty government handle it all. If they want everyone's guns then just give them up, everything will be ok. Good Luck with that.
It's a moot point. This is a problem within the power of government to solve, and the only way government can act is by legislation. Since mentality can't be legislated, the instrument must be. You can't stop me from thinking pyromaniac thoughts, but you can outlaw my possession of kerosene.
Do you have any idea how many accelerants are out there that can be used, to include MANURE!!!!!
Legislation isn't going to change a thing and government is NOT the answer.
If you outlaw kerosene you will start a fire with whatever else is available. Or just illegally get you some kerosene. Criminals don't follow the law.
Another irrelevant argument. Banks continue to be robbed, despite laws prohibiting bank robbery. Shall we annul those laws because "they don't work"? Obviously not. We do the right thing and uphold laws against bank robbery to the fullest extent.
Another irrelevant argument. Banks continue to be robbed, despite laws prohibiting bank robbery. Shall we annul those laws because "they don't work"? Obviously not. We do the right thing and uphold laws against bank robbery to the fullest extent.
So how are laws banning guns going to change anything when criminals don't obey laws as you just pointed out?
The shear senseless brutality of the CT. school shootings has everybody on all sides of the gun issue on edge. Due to constant fear mongering by special interests...
The solution is obvious: too many gun laws create problems that put innocent people in danger. Any honest observer can see that we need to back off gun laws now more than ever.
So how are laws banning guns going to change anything when criminals don't obey laws as you just pointed out?
This is so elementary. Until something is made illegal, police agencies are unable to do anything about it. Criminals risk getting caught - we have a criminal code, not in the belief that we can abolish crime, but because it increases the risk of crime.
Your logic would hold that we should revoke laws against rape, because we know that such laws will not entirely prevent rape. But then, that does seem to be the direction of RWNJ thinking, lately.
As big and strong as I am my hands could be considered deadly weapons. You gonna ban my hands?
Should an individual also have a right to own a bomb? How about if the individual is certifiably insane and has a felony criminal history?
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.
