You take the position that gun owners should lead the way in "responsibility" and then define "responsibility" as gun control laws; specifically those restricting ownership of certain types of weapons and so on.
You follow by accusing pro-gunners of reactionary knee-jerk opposition to all gun control laws.
It has been well established by innumerable studies and scholarly research that:
A. Strict gun control invariably causes an increase in violent crime. (see DC, Chicago, NYC, etc. Even Britain experienced an increase in violent crime.)
B. "Shall issue" (easily obtained) concealed carry laws invariably result in a decrease in violent crime in each state where they are enacted.
The AWB demonstrably did not decrease that tiny fraction of a percent of violent crimes committed with so-called "assault weapons".
In short, pre-emptive (ie taking it away from lawful citizens) gun control accomplishes nothing of any benefit, and typically makes things worse.
On the other hand, putting violent criminals away and keeping them out of society most definately DOES. Also proven fact.
So, if it is crime you're worried about, the type of control you need is CRIMINAL CONTROL. Not gun control. Hm, that makes a good slogan: "Control Criminals, not guns!"
In the matter of how guns help safeguard liberty, you have been given half the answer: the arms of the colonists were their tool in freeing themselves from the oppression of King George III. If oppression reaches a similar point again, privately held arms will again be such a tool. I suspect that is why tyrants confiscate guns before revealing their full agenda (ie Hitler, Stalin, Pol Pot, etc). (Btw, there are so many Founders quotes supporting this position that it would take all day to read them all.)
It comes down to this: YOU do not get to define what is "responsible" for everyone else. If a man commits a crime or an act of negligence with a firearm, hold him accountable for his actions; leave the rest of us alone.
Last edited by Goshin; 03-19-09 at 06:01 PM.
Last edited by Thorgasm; 03-19-09 at 10:21 PM.
Originally Posted by Jerry
So, for the most part, the responses were substantive and not "ridicule." Unless you think "ridicule" is "anything other than complete agreement"?
2001-2008: Dissent is the highest form of patriotism.
2009-2016: Dissent is the highest form of racism.
2017-? (Probably): Dissent is the highest form of misogyny.