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.
Matches (and cars, and knives, and sticks, and pipes, and pillows, and any other item than guns that can be used to kill people) have a primary use other than causing bodily harm. A gun has no such other use, than to cause bodily harm.
The primary use of gun outside of the military, is to deter crimes. They usually accomplish this without a shot being fired. Somebody contemplating a crime, who realizes that the victim (or the people around him) might have a gun, and so decides not to commit the crime after all. Even if a shot IS fired, it's more often into the air as a warning shot.
When the general populace has the right to keep and bear arms, free from the unconstitutional restrictions politicians and other gun-rights-haters place on them, most ordinary people still don't bother. But somebody who wants to mug and old lady, rape someone, assault someone etc. realizes that someone in the crown might have a gun and know how to use it. Even a madman who doesn't care if he dies, may realize he won't be able to rack up the huge body count and weeks of lurid headlines, if someone has a gun nearby. And often these people decide not to commit their crime.
There you go. A LOT of people who are NOT mugged, raped, etc. All without a shot being fired. Do you still feel like law-abiding people should not have guns?
Obviously, guns in the hands of law-abiding people have MANY uses other than causing bodily harm. And those "other" uses are a lot more important than the "other" uses of a match, knife, or stick.
The solution is simple. Law enforcement just needs to set up random roadblocks and checkpoints any night in the city and do a search for illegal weapons. Do not permit anyone from leaving the area without being searched. Teams can go from house to house looking for illegal weapons. Anyone found to possess one gets a fast trip to prison.
The road blocks and check points might work but going house to house is not a good idea because how many law abiding people will be subjected to unlawful search and seizures? I know if a cop comes to my door and asks to search my house I wouldn't allow it and I have nothing to hide. It is just the idea of the invasion of my private space.
The thing is the cops that work a neighborhood get to know who the bad guys are but procedure and a silly thing called "Rights" keeps them from grabbing these guys and throwing them into prison. The cops need to wait for the drug deal to go down or some other violation of the law. This is where stop and frisk comes into play. If a cop suspects someone is hiding something illegal like a weapon or drugs it starts with a conversation that could then lead to a quick search. The issue is with todays liberal judges even if the guy is found with an illegal gun he is back out on the street the next day. Why?
If a bad guy is caught carrying an illegal gun throw him in jail for a year. The word will then get around that if you carry a gun you will go to jail so the thugs will stop carrying and the brazen opportunistic random shootings that often hurt innocent bystanders will stop.
The Left need to stop coddling the criminals and start protecting the good people.
Gun sales are so regulated there are no illegal sales except from one criminal to another. So illegitimate Biden is full of it as always.
I wonder what Biden thinks of his son Hunter lying about his former drug use on a a federal form when he was buying his gun, you know the gun that his girlfriend thought he was going to hurt himself with, the one that she tossed into a trash can at a strip mall and then went missing? I wonder if that gun has been used in any crimes?
Lying on that form is grounds for prosecution and imprisonment. Has Hunter been arrested yet?
The road blocks and check points might work but going house to house is not a good idea because how many law abiding people will be subjected to unlawful search and seizures? I know if a cop comes to my door and asks to search my house I wouldn't allow it and I have nothing to hide. It is just the idea of the invasion of my private space.
The thing is the cops that work a neighborhood get to know who the bad guys are but procedure and a silly thing called "Rights" keeps them from grabbing these guys and throwing them into prison. The cops need to wait for the drug deal to go down or some other violation of the law. This is where stop and frisk comes into play. If a cop suspects someone is hiding something illegal like a weapon or drugs it starts with a conversation that could then lead to a quick search. The issue is with todays liberal judges even if the guy is found with an illegal gun he is back out on the street the next day. Why?
If a bad guy is caught carrying an illegal gun throw him in jail for a year. The word will then get around that if you carry a gun you will go to jail so the thugs will stop carrying and the brazen opportunistic random shootings that often hurt innocent bystanders will stop.
The Left need to stop coddling the criminals and start protecting the good people.
It is that easy.
It's not easy, but to your point, it's a common sense approach. One year in jail won't do it... that is slap-on-the-wrist approach. Make owning/having/using an illegally obtained gun a federal crime, punishable in Federal court, with a established MANDATORY sentence, so the woke AG's won't give slap on the wrist sentences.
The sentence has to be substantial and egregious to the perp to have any street affect.
Comparing modern guns capable of killing 50 people and hurting 500 from a hotel window in minutes is far different than 1776 guns that took MINUTES TO LOAD for a single shot.
Its like comparing a military flame thrower to a match. Just cause matches are legal, doesnt mean we should legalize flame throwers.
Notice back when people had more sense in early 20th century, and techology was rapidly advancing, they made it ILLEGAL to own machine guns capable of shooting multiple bullets in a short period of time. It didnt seem wise to have everybody with military grade weapons able to hold off dozens of cops. As far as fighting a tyrannical govt, if that became necessary, sure some could use a sharpened stick of wood to get a gun from some poorly trained officially sanctioned gun carrier.
So sure interpret the second amendment as free for all to own guns, though pretty obvious it was to ensure local OFFICIAL MILITIAS like modern National Guard, meaning the Federal Govt didnt have sole right to an Army. But only gun technology available in 1776. Let both cops and criminals take minutes to reload for a single shot, maybe give them time to think over their actions.
Though hate to mention, somebody already left that barn door open. Modern weapons already available in vast excess even if manufacture stopped immediately. Banning them would only drive up their price on used/black market. The real way to control modern weapons is to ban sale of all ammunition to anybody but the govt. You can still melt your own lead balls for your 1776 musket. Little harder to make uniform modern ammunition. Reloading it yea, but try manufacturing the whole thing from scratch in your basement including gun powder. If that were possible, people wouldnt be complaining of ammo shortages.
If he wasn't home and you heard your front door crashing in, would you want to know where the guns were?
Free guns is often a motive for crashing in your front door. Not keeping guns, drugs, large amounts of money or jewelry in your home is a great deterrent to break ins. Most break ins occur when no one is home.
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.