Gun ownership poll

[Mark17]

Originally Posted by Carter08

I bet he wish he didn’t have to confront a bad guy with a gun in the first place.

You are living in a fantasy existence if you think eliminating bad guys with guns from society is possible.

So, the next best thing is to figure out how to deal with them (capture and incarcerate, or kill them.) One usually needs a gun to do this.

[cgjackson222]

Originally Posted by Mark17

You are living in a fantasy existence if you think eliminating bad guys with guns from society is possible.

So, the next best thing is to figure out how to deal with them (capture and incarcerate, or kill them.) One usually needs a gun to do this.

You are living in a fantasy if you think anyone thinks it is possible to ELIMINATE bad guys with guns.

We are just trying to find ways to REDUCE gun crimes.

And the idea that laws will be broken by bad guys so we shouldn't have stricter laws is maybe the weakest argument of all. With that reasoning why have laws at all?

[Carter08]

Originally Posted by cgjackson222

You are living in a fantasy if you think anyone thinks it is possible to ELIMINATE bad guys with guns.

We are just trying to find ways to REDUCE gun crimes.

And the idea that laws will be broken by bad guys so we shouldn't have stricter laws is maybe the weakest argument of all. With that reasoning why have laws at all?

Agree

[G1911]

Originally Posted by cgjackson222

You are living in a fantasy if you think anyone thinks it is possible to ELIMINATE bad guys with guns.

We are just trying to find ways to REDUCE gun crimes.

And the idea that laws will be broken by bad guys so we shouldn't have stricter laws is maybe the weakest argument of all. With that reasoning why have laws at all?

There is a colossal difference between:

1) Laws that punish the perpetrator of a specific, wrong act, rooted in tradition (like theft, murder, assault, etc.).

and

2) Laws that punish half of the country and seize commonly owned items or overturn long-standing traditional rights.

No serious person objects to 1. Almost everyone objects to 2, when it is being weaponized against them instead of them doing the weaponizing of the law.

[bnorth]

Originally Posted by cgjackson222

You are living in a fantasy if you think anyone thinks it is possible to ELIMINATE bad guys with guns.

We are just trying to find ways to REDUCE gun crimes.

And the idea that laws will be broken by bad guys so we shouldn't have stricter laws is maybe the weakest argument of all. With that reasoning why have laws at all?

Same reason there is a lock in the door knob on the front of your house. They keep honest people honest.

[Mark17]

Originally Posted by cgjackson222

You are living in a fantasy if you think anyone thinks it is possible to ELIMINATE bad guys with guns.

We are just trying to find ways to REDUCE gun crimes.

And the idea that laws will be broken by bad guys so we shouldn't have stricter laws is maybe the weakest argument of all. With that reasoning why have laws at all?

Laws should not be based in stupidity. Reducing the ability of people to be able to defend themselves is exactly the wrong thing to do.

Reality:
If you're a gang member, or other violent criminal, sitting there with your weapons of choice and large capacity magazines, you would LOVE to have stricter gun control laws that your law abiding victims will have to follow.

Fantasy you seem to be living in:
Gang Member #1: Whatcha doing?

Gang Member #2: Loading up so I can jack a car and knock off a gas station. Getting a little low on funds.

Gang Member #1: Yeah, that's cool, but don't you know, that magazine you're still using is now illegal.

Gang Member #2: Oh, man, thanks for reminding me! I'll stop by the police station to turn it in on my way, and use a compliant magazine.

Gang Member #1: It'll save me a trip if you'll turn in my clips too.