10/26 Replying to peace-loving caste member who love gun freedom:
\_ I don't buy that having
guns available would make
a difference in controlling
government abuses in a
established democracy
like the US, with a
mature system of checks
and balances and a free
press.
\_ Except the press is bought
off and biased. People
are people. Nothing
magical about the press.
As for carrying out the
laws and controlling
crimes, that's what
governments are for, or
would you rather have
mob justice and blood
revenges like they have
Azerbajian or some other
3rd world hell hole?
\_ Governments don't always
"get it right".
As a matter of fact, I do
not believe in banning
guns totally in the US.
I believe that, given the
wide availability of guns,
people should have the
choice to have a gun for
personal protection.
\_ "As a matter of fact, I
do not believe in banning
murder totally in the US.
I believe that, given the
high murder rate, people
should have the choice to
murder or not."
But if you believe that
having guns available to
the general populace have
helped reduce crime or
helped curb government
abuses, I think you are
very much misguided.
\_ URL, please. Don't put
your opinion as fact on
the motd without a URL
to back up your statements.
It only annoys people who
are intelligent and want
a discussion rather than
a rant.
In short, having a gun
may be beneficial to
an individual in
specific circumstances,
but the wide spread
availability of guns
has been detrimental
to the US populace in
general.
\_ So a good thing for one
person becomes a bad thing
when many individuals
benefit from that same
thing? Hello?
Given the above, I
think it is right
to call for tougher
gun laws, but not to
ban it altogether.
\_ Tougher gun laws? Like?
This is the phrase a lot
of the gun ban lobby use
to cover the writing of
laws which chip away at
the 2nd amendment until
there's isn't one.
\_
Registering guns annually (or some reasonable time period). Penalty
and responsibility if gun registered under you is stolen or used to
commit a crime. |