
Do you support increased gun control?
BigT
2012/06/03 08:31:11
|
|
|||||
|
21 votes
|
|
24% | |||
|
56 votes
|
|
65% | |||
|
9 votes
|
|
10% | |||
Top Opinion
-
CAPISCE 2012/06/04 13:10:32No






















I wonder how many people, that believe in gun control, actually realize
*THE POLICE HAVE NO DUTY TO PROTECT INDIVIDUALS*:
“Law enforcement agencies and personnel have no duty to protect individuals from the criminal acts of others.” -Lynch vs North Carolina Department of Justice 1989
This means that if you want protection from violent crime, for you and your loved ones; it’s up to YOU and YOU ALONE to provide it.
But ask yourself this question, in your heart of hearts: Why should a cop risk his life to save something so insignificant (your life or the lives of your loved ones), that even the owner is unwilling to protect it?
In fact, being unarmed *ENCOURAGES* evil people to attack them.
The Petit family lived peacefully, but were also unarmed.
http://www.radaronline.com/ex...
We would be just fine enforcing the ones we have.
Well that and getting rid of a few of the stupider ones.
or
let's capture the kidnappers ?
or
let's take away the freedom from theifs ??
the point , laws are only followed / obeyed by honest people, we already have plenty of laws on the books concerning firearms..
HOW ABOUT WE ENFORCE THE EXISTING LAWS. ?????
Oh wait no they didn't, evil bigoted people caused those deaths.
I mean the top pic on that list was a woman burned to death in Italy, was that caused by guns too?
http://www.pinkpistols.org/
How many of them would never have been harmed if the killers knew they were able to defend themselves?
What are you trying to say?
Disarming the law-abiding, because of the actions of the *CRIMINALS*, is only the ideas of tyrant wannabes and dumbasses.
It appears that each of the people you listed . . . were *UNARMED* when they were murdered.
Wishing to prevent trans people and gay people from being able to protect themselves from assailants is outrageous!
No one ever bashed a .38!
Because surely you aren't so simpleminded, that you actually believe, the people who willingly commit *MURDER*, would obey a gun control law.
They decided it was a complete failure.
And proficiency tests are also worthless. How many terrible drivers are out on the roads after passing the tests?
I could drive better than most people when I was 10 years old, and it wasn't because I had passed any tests.
You're good!
Now tell one about a Priest, a Rabbi and an Irishman!
The primary benefit of car registration, is to generate revenue for the Government.
Gun registration has never been shown to reduce crime, but registration has definitely been used for the confiscation of the guns of the law abiding.
I would *DEARLY LOVE* for guns to be treated like the much more deadly cars!
But then again, I don't believe there should be a proficiency test for any specifically enumerated Constitutional Civil Right.
One of the reasons why the United States of America hasnt been invaded is because there are well over 600,000 registered gun owners.
trying to control guns is foolish...how about punishing those that use it in a crime
I live in Pittsburgh , Pa. the commonwealth sells over a million hunting license each year. I believe in just this one state there are more than 600,000 gun owners, I have an estimate of in execess of 10 million gun owners ... now if we can get out the vote for those candidates that are going to defend the Constitution.....
Multiply that by 20 and you may have a number of people that own guns in the U.S.
The gun safety and training should be handled in the same manner in school as Drivers Ed.
Driving is *NOT* a Right, while "Keep and Bear Arms" is a Right.