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.
You will never be able to get rid of all the illegal guns on the street. It's way more numerous that you might think, and a lot easier to obtain than you think as well. Laws will do nothing, because they will still be distributed and used. It's just something you have to get used to.
New Yorkers and out of towners come and go from places like Delaware and Virginia, hit US 13 to US 1 to the Jersey Turnpike and sell the guns in NYC for nearly double the price they were purchased in those "lax gun law" areas.
They were not boys. They were in their early 20's and had been arrested on prior charges. They were anything but choir boys.
To be fair, Bill Ayers has his "past", doesn't affect the future.
And in the two boys shot down, only ONE gun was actually "found", the family claims it was planted. NYPD has currently not stated specifically "who" the gun belongs to.
Gun Control is an issue that I have probably brought my viewpoint up from the South and Caribbean.
The Right to Bear Arms is HUGE in the South. I am telling you for certain, that If this were changed on the Federal Level, you would seriously see an uprising in the south not seen since the civil war. Dead serious on this one. Down there there is not one ounce of compromise.
I do NOT believe in Gun Control. If you got a problem, with people violating the law, then go after THOSE People.
You all know that GUN Control will be just as effective as the Prohibition (Alcohol) and the WAR on drugs. Gun control will just give gangs and mafia another hot market to build themselves up on.
In the Dominican Republic, almost EVERYONE is armed. And knowing of certain individuals involved in crimes down there, they are FULLY conscious of who is Armed, and areas in the countryside with heavy gun ownership. Many of the robbers are cowards and will not venture into areas where gun ownership is high.
I mean really, who thinks that Texas will be FIRST stop on some coward criminal's list for a robbery. No, chances are, Texas will be LAST stop, for good reason.
Regardless of gun laws, I hear more gun shots here in the BRONX than I EVER did down south.
What's wrong with putting a law in to place that says, unless you're in law enforcement, you can't have a gun in NYC? Or is there something like that already but it's hard to enforce?
Please educate yourself before you go around suggesting that government should take away the right of a person to defend themselves. Are you aware of the fact that the areas with the strictest gun control laws have the most gun crimes and crimes in general?
In NYC, it is EXTREMELY difficult (almost impossible) to get a gun permit. But you know who NYC easily grants gun permits to? The usual suspects: celebs and other rich folk. Look it up. Gun permits are public information. You'd be surprised to find out who's packing heat.
It's typical NYC to turn a right (the right to defend yourself) into a privilege for the privileged.
I do NOT believe in Gun Control. If you got a problem, with people violating the law, then go after THOSE People.
In the Dominican Republic, almost EVERYONE is armed. And knowing of certain individuals involved in crimes down there, they are FULLY conscious of who is Armed, and areas in the countryside with heavy gun ownership. Many of the robbers are cowards and will not venture into areas where gun ownership is high.
I mean really, who thinks that Texas will be FIRST stop on some coward criminal's list for a robbery. No, chances are, Texas will be LAST stop, for good reason.
Regardless of gun laws, I hear more gun shots here in the BRONX than I EVER did down south.
True.
Criminals with guns should be punished. But the treehuggers want to punish law abiding citizens.
In NC and SC we have a very liberal gun policy and we do not have an extraordinary shooting rate or crime rate as a matter of fact; I feel safer here than anywher in NY. Both States are "right to carry" states meaning you can carry a handgun as long as it's not concealed. You can also take a Concealed Weapons Permit, which allows you to conceal a weapon. NYC makes it extremely difficult (next to impossible) for an ordinary citizen to get a gun. They would rather all of you be victims for the criminals than defend yourselves. Again, it's the right of any citizen to protect himself, property and family against danger. however people need training and practice on the use and safety of a firearm. I wonder how many innocent people after being attacked say " I wish I had a gun?" One of the reasons I will never move back to NY is the right to protect myself and not being a sheep waiting for a wolf to attack me.
I heard guns are extremely unsuccessful in defense of your home, most people are just too panicked to use them correctly, especially if they were awoken from sleep. Gun ownership leads to more suicide and domestic murder cases than self-defense cases.
However, small businesses have a much better success rate of blowing a robber's brains out, I've heard.
Please educate yourself before you go around suggesting that government should take away the right of a person to defend themselves.
Excuse me, that's what I wanted to do, as I stated in the original post. I admitted I am naive to this issuse and I started this discussion because I wanted to hear the various viewpoint.
As far as limiting gun violence... I agree, it also has a lot to do with educating the people and dealing with the social problems that exist in these high crime areas.
The Right to Bear Arms is HUGE in the South. I am telling you for certain, that If this were changed on the Federal Level, you would seriously see an uprising in the south not seen since the civil war. Dead serious on this one. Down there there is not one ounce of compromise.
I started this thread by suggesting that we get rid of gun ownership to start a discussion. This suggestion is probably an extreme viewpoint, and perhaps not a realistic one. However, I'm not really sure what my position is because I haven't really thought about this until now. But I hope to learn more.
What do I know is that there are extremists on both sides. Just as wiping out gun ownership is viewed as extreme, so are the viewpoints of people in the South and other gun advocates who are absolutely gung ho about having their guns. There should be some compromises.
I am ok with people owning guns for hunting and other sporting purposes. But I'm not sure if owning a gun is the best way to protect oneself. And also, I'm not sure if the benefit outweighs the negative side effects that come from allowing people to own guns under the idea of protecting oneself.
In NYC, it is EXTREMELY difficult (almost impossible) to get a gun permit. But you know who NYC easily grants gun permits to? The usual suspects: celebs and other rich folk. Look it up. Gun permits are public information. You'd be surprised to find out who's packing heat.
It's typical NYC to turn a right (the right to defend yourself) into a privilege for the privileged.
Agreed with your take. If we are unable as a nation to move beyond the status quo where in some states it's okay to carry a firearm and in other states it's not, then nothing is going to change and we might as well resign ourselves to the way things are.
Yes, trying to get a NATIONAL policy at the FEDERAL level to outlaw gun ownership except for hunting will face the usual issues of states rights, right to bear arms, what to do with existing gun ownership, etc., especially from Southern states.
Now that leaves us in the Northeast and the more liberal states at the mercy of thugs who can easily obtain arms purchased in the "right to bear arms" states. We are still one country wherein people can freely move across state lines. We don't have patroled state borders checking our car trunks, etc., to see what contraband legally purchased in one state is imported into another.
Solution: Since we are unable to outlaw gun ownership NATIONALLY, let's even the playing field, give everyone - not just the big shots - a chance to protect their lives and property and that of their loved ones. How can we allow bigwigs to protect themselves and the average Joe can't? Are our rights predicated on the size of our wealth? Isn't our smaller property perhaps more important for our survival than that of the tycoons losing a million or two and whose gun rights are obviously premised on the size of their estates and their connections?
Don't be preoccupied with improper use of firarms, etc. We'll train everyone who gets a permit as a prerequisite before granting a license. And the argument that guns can lead to more family incidents, etc., loses luster when one considers that a kitchen knife or pair of scissors will do just as well for an irate spouse in a violent rage bent on murdering a spouse or family member. But a legally permitted firearm can truly help repel unlawful intruders and criminals who have the advantage over our hapless citizenry. There isn't a cop out there for everyone of us. Sometimes, we just have to defend our own lives and property. There isn't always a cop or a tycoon neighbor with a gun around to come rescue us.
If we can't outlaw guns nationally to level the playing field, then let's all have the right to defend ourselves. One way or the other, let's have a level field.
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.
