I prefer to have the ability to shoot the criminal when he commits a crime against me at least he won't do it again.
Does gun crime make you want harsher gun control laws?
La
2012/05/21 12:53:14
|
|
|||||
|
17 votes
|
|
18% | ||
|
58 votes
|
|
62% | ||
|
19 votes
|
|
20% | ||
Top Opinion
-
No, it just makes me want to buy more guns
+8Criminals don't obey gun laws or any laws that's why they're criminals. Much of what you want to call gun crime is committed by repeat Felons who are not allowed guns.
I prefer to have the ability to shoot the criminal when he commits a crime against me at least he won't do it again.
Freedom has a price. If part of that price is indicated by the concept of your anecdotal missive, then that is a price worth paying.
Florida law does not prohibit an 18 year old from purchasing a handgun, however, many FFL dealers will not sell a handgun to an 18 yr. old for a variety of reasons.
Also, the minimum age at which a CCW permit may be obtained in Florida is 21 years. So an 18 yr. old may own and possess any firearm he is not otherwise legally prevented from owning, but may not carry concealed until age 21..
Florida Statute 790.17 says: Furnishing weapons to minors under 18 years of age or persons of unsound mind and furnishing firearms to minors under 18 years of age prohibited
................. how soon until Operation Fast + Furious gets DoJ people a jail term ?
That is the type of harsher gun control laws you referred to, isn't it ?
The FBI came here for an exercise with a van full of weapons a couple years ago and parked the van at a motel, they cleaned it out, I don't think they ever recovered all of them and it wasn't old stuff, it was all state of the art nastys that we couldn't buy.
Can you imagine if you or me were to testify in Congress and basically wave a center-digit at them after we lied to them .... we'd be in handcuffs !
........... laughable even moreso ..... they bring in a Baseball Player and grill him over steroids, yet they let real criminality walk
Were I getting the invite over Steroid use to the Clown Committee aka Congress .... my initial opening response would be as follows ....
You see how 1600 is trying to intimidate Romney donors ?
If I had the kind of money they had I'd be looking into some things and tipping the scales back.
http://www.thugreport.com
2. How many of those murders involving guns actually involved legally owned guns?
The answer to gun crimes is to have more guns. If there were more canceled carry laws passed there would be a lot less gun crimes committed. If a criminal knew that just about everybody around was carrying he/she would think twice about pulling a gun to commit a crime.
These people hadn't become criminals until they shot the first of their victims, which is why they were allowed permits; however, the idea that only would-be criminals will be able to acquire guns is simply ridiculous. I live in the countryside, so I know a disproportionately high number of people with guns, none of whom are killers. That said, generally speaking, guns are so obviously out of place in Britain as to make it very difficult for traders/smugglers/criminals to have them without getting caught.
I'd also like to point out the statistics (I don't remember them exactly, but will have a quick look for a link on google in a second -- although I ought to be revising for an exam so I probably won't spend too long looking) in relation to knife-crime in the UK, whereby the vast majority of knives used in incidents where there was a fatality had been the vict...
These people hadn't become criminals until they shot the first of their victims, which is why they were allowed permits; however, the idea that only would-be criminals will be able to acquire guns is simply ridiculous. I live in the countryside, so I know a disproportionately high number of people with guns, none of whom are killers. That said, generally speaking, guns are so obviously out of place in Britain as to make it very difficult for traders/smugglers/criminals to have them without getting caught.
I'd also like to point out the statistics (I don't remember them exactly, but will have a quick look for a link on google in a second -- although I ought to be revising for an exam so I probably won't spend too long looking) in relation to knife-crime in the UK, whereby the vast majority of knives used in incidents where there was a fatality had been the victim's own -- they were carrying it in order to defend themselves, but ended up getting hurt or killed with it themselves. Every one of those victims thought that having a knife on them would help to keep them safe, but it led to their death because it meant that any altercation they got in was automatically one where a knife was present, regardless of whether or not they wanted to use it.
HAVING LOADS OF WEAPONS ON THE STREETS IS NOT A WAY TO KEEP SAFE! Surely that's just common sense, right?
Amnesties have proven successful in recent years at getting knives off the streets in the UK (I'm referring to knives a lot purely because there's been a lot happening in relation to them over here in recent years, and it's more or less the same principle). Yes, some criminals will keep them, so the effect on knife-related crime is lessened, but the effect on knife-related fatalities has still been considerable, which is the most important thing if you ask me.
Besides, gun crime is not something which increased strictness in the law will eradicate overnight, but it is a problem cannot be solved without it.
Also, your stats, are those padded with self-defense cases and police shootings?
All more laws would do is confuse law enforcement further.
If a cop was to know all the laws on the book, he would spend most of his days in a classroom learning laws instead of attempting to enforce them.
They can catch them red handed and a judge or jury pop them out of jail for whatever reason.
We need more standardized sentencing, and more enforcement, not more laws.
Sweden 2005 9,002,000
N.Zealand 2006 4,027,947
Australia 2004 20,252,132
England 2001 49,138,831
Canada 2004 32,048,000
U.S. 2010 308,745,538
Gee wonder why our numbers are higher, like comparing oranges and bananas.
New Zealand:1.41
Sweden: 0.86
Australia: 1.16
UK: 1.23 *
Canada: 1.62
USA: 4.8
* This figure includes Scotland and Northern Ireland, which are generally higher than England and Wales, so it's almost certainly been brought up by their inclusion.
Also, all of these figures are the most recent ones I could find - either 2010 or 2011 - so no going back over 10 years to 2001.
Sorry to ruin your theory, though...
Also, Straw Man - where's the response to the rest of my post?