Question for gun ban people:
I have posted on a number of these types of threads and I always put this in:
When guns are outlawed
Outlaws will have guns
I don’t usually get too much of a response on this statement. So Gun Banners, on face value, what you think of the logic of this statement. Agree or disagree?
Also, I’ve linked:
http://ift.tt/1OKkllB
http://ift.tt/21zIv9v
From an overview, there are three groups of people who have guns:
1. Government – biggest, baddest, the most and the most hi-tech
2. Bad guys – the smallest group of people to have guns, but almost always used for bad intentions and usually state of the art handguns, semi-autos, etc.
3. Citizens – almost always used for recreation, i.e., hunting, target practice, etc.
From the links above, it appears that defensive gun use is close to what bad deaths from guns are. So if you criminalized guns, the only people without guns will be the citizens. Outlaws will still have guns but the price for an illegal gun will increase quite a bit, which in turn means more crimes to offset the increased price.
Many gun deaths are suicide, accidental discharge, hunting accidents, etc... The amount of senseless killing like the one that just happened in California constitute a very small portion of gun killings, wounding, etc..
So just who are the gun ban people trying to save? Is it innocent people? If so, why make the people who use guns to thwart crimes vulnerable and defenseless when their numbers are far greater than school type shootings which number in the minority?
p.s. Notice how The Hill and Obama jumped so quickly on the band wagon as a way to politicize the issue as opposed to showing real concern?
I have posted on a number of these types of threads and I always put this in:
When guns are outlawed
Outlaws will have guns
I don’t usually get too much of a response on this statement. So Gun Banners, on face value, what you think of the logic of this statement. Agree or disagree?
Also, I’ve linked:
http://ift.tt/1OKkllB
http://ift.tt/21zIv9v
From an overview, there are three groups of people who have guns:
1. Government – biggest, baddest, the most and the most hi-tech
2. Bad guys – the smallest group of people to have guns, but almost always used for bad intentions and usually state of the art handguns, semi-autos, etc.
3. Citizens – almost always used for recreation, i.e., hunting, target practice, etc.
From the links above, it appears that defensive gun use is close to what bad deaths from guns are. So if you criminalized guns, the only people without guns will be the citizens. Outlaws will still have guns but the price for an illegal gun will increase quite a bit, which in turn means more crimes to offset the increased price.
Many gun deaths are suicide, accidental discharge, hunting accidents, etc... The amount of senseless killing like the one that just happened in California constitute a very small portion of gun killings, wounding, etc..
So just who are the gun ban people trying to save? Is it innocent people? If so, why make the people who use guns to thwart crimes vulnerable and defenseless when their numbers are far greater than school type shootings which number in the minority?
p.s. Notice how The Hill and Obama jumped so quickly on the band wagon as a way to politicize the issue as opposed to showing real concern?
via International Skeptics Forum http://ift.tt/1OKkju6
Aucun commentaire:
Enregistrer un commentaire