Who will regulate this? So basically you want to turn these "gun free zones" into police state sections, and futhermore just because its a "Gun free zone" isn't going to stop someone from walking into with a gun and opening fire...... YOU obviously dont know how they work.
But it was an exception, this was the first shooting in a public place since WW2. Not having guns available freely does not remove the possibility of being shot. But it does makes the chance significantly smaller.
---------- Post added 2012-12-29 at 12:09 AM ----------
Being able to own weapons does not make you free. You never will be free, infact if you where completly free you would be an outcast to society, because (I'l keep repeating this) the more people you live together with, the more freedom you are giving up. Living in a huge thriving society like todays has its price.
Owning weapons should be a privilige, obtained after a couple of years of police/guard training where you learn to prevent the use of weapons(any weapon from knife to assault rifle). It shouldn't be a right.
But like you said different cultures ....
Last edited by JfmC; 2012-12-28 at 11:11 PM.
The FBI keeps track of all crime stats and the South is the most violent place in the country. And by a relatively wide margin too. Sorry if reality doesn't comport with your world view.
When survival is the goal, it's into the spider hole!
Gotta add a few cents to this discussion.
I have my CCL and own several guns, at least one would fall into the category of an "Assault Rifle". That being said, I think there should be a national discussion on gun regulation. This doesn't mean we should ban any/all guns, but we should have an open and honest discussion about it, looking at facts and opinions from both sides. This is apparently not allowed in congress, and the public seems incapable...
We see it all the time here on the forums, but it's not any better up to the highest levels of government. Take this thread for example. Do you think the OP had ANY room for a dissenting opinion when he created this thread? We see the same thing all over. People want to talk, but no one wants to listen. People look for facts to support their opinion instead of looking for facts to INFORM their opinion.
On the internet (and in life) it is easy to hear someone express an opinion, and then lump them in with people who you have heard share that opinion. You start to argue past each other because instead of listening to their point, you are already forming your counter-argument. Usually this counter-argument isn't even directed at the person you are talking to, but some other person or thing you read about before.
I'd like to address a few specific statements from this thread:
Guns are designed for...
Guns are a tool, but they are a tool that is designed with a very limited purpose. That purpose is to injure or kill another living being. A tool that has this purpose has another name which is "Weapon". Now weapons are in fact tools, but I prefer to call a spade a spade. Are you in favor of limiting US citizens access to weapons?
Gun Free Zones:
The purpose of a gun free zone is to remove the ambiguity of a gun threat, not to prevent criminals entering with guns. No one thinks that putting up a sign will prevent a madman from breaking the law. Yet we still post speed limits. This way the average person knows what is expected of them, and someone traveling 120 has no excuse when caught. In the same vein, someone carrying a gun into a Gun Free Zone can be instantly identified as a threat, rather than having to wonder if they are just some child's uncle there to pick him up with an AR-15 for self protection / hunting. I'm not saying it works, but lets be clear on the intent rather than characterizing the other side as unable to comprehend basic logic. I will repeat one more time: NO ONE THINKS GUN FREE ZONES ARE MAGIC.
So much more... but I can't spend all of my time on the internet. These were just two that I see as comments that are made over and over again, that really don't carry water.
Aside from what you may conclude my opinions are on gun control from the above statements, here are some really well thought out points from someone who is against increasing gun control:
A situation like making something out of objects for ill purpose use, projectile or not.
To say otherwise is foolish. the next process you will see is the 2nd amendment being "voided" and what then? when 1 is stricken. that just means the rest will follow sooner or later. I will say it again (the word foolish) to think that's not possible is also foolish.
The very essence of our country is based on a sacred document that millions have died for, what makes us so different from the rest of the world. I think the deaths should not be in vain when people think of now, rather then consequences or tomorrow. Think about that.
All of this nonsense goes back to the core. 'the right to bear arms"
in parting, exercising your right of free speech doesn't make someone a crazy or ignorant.
---------- Post added 2013-01-02 at 01:56 PM ----------
---------- Post added 2013-01-02 at 02:02 PM ----------
--- Want any of my Constitutional rights?, ΜΟΛΩΝ ΛΑΒΕ
I come from a time and a place where I judge people by the content of their character; I don't give a damn if you are tall or short; gay or straight; Jew or Gentile; White, Black, Brown or Green; Conservative or Liberal. -- Note to mods: if you are going to infract me have the decency to post the reason, and expect to hold everyone else to the same standard.
I suspect crime rates in the South tend to be higher because of poverty, and warm weather. People don't go out as much and end up confronting each other (leading to violence) when it's freezing out.