jec0620 wrote:
shane.e.randall wrote:
Pfft if fire-arms protected us from bombs then we wouldn't get blown up on the road in by IED's in Afghanistan.
I really don't think more less people carrying weapons around really solves all that much in the long run. People just want to find scapegoats for Social issues that are much more complicated than the Rhetoric that people posts on their facebook statuses. I think many people need to spend more time studying history.
I don't or ever do plan to own a personal firearm, but I support the 2nd amendment. Taking responsible adults rights away is not going to stop violence. But on the other hand arming everyone is not going to decrease or prevent it either.
- I agree with you, and finally, a respectful answer to those who have different opinions. You know, some people use knives to kill people. Should we ban them too? Some people drive drunk...should we ban cars?......I agree that we are just passing blame. Study history....how were things before guns were invented......that being a REALLY long period of time....I think the world was just as violent. Remember, only honest, law abiding citizens actually respect the law. A criminal does not. You can punish the good guys.
Kind of like how switchblades and ballistic knives are banned? It's certainly not at all important that it is way easier to kill someone with a gun.
If guns shared some of the regulations of cars, that would be a step in the right direction.
While I'm at it, in response to JW: More guns, less crime? The U.S. already has the highest rate of gun ownership. When does the "less crime" part happen? The countries pointed to as shining examples of high gun ownership and low crime rates (Switzerland, Finland, and Denmark) have regulations that would have you crying about the government trampling on your rights.
