Columbine, Virginia Tech and now Ohio... are there still people who are against strict gun control?
by 
steelhamster@aol.com
ANSWERS: 8
-
I'm against strict gun control. Guns don't kill people, people do. They'd have found a different way to do it if that's what they wanted to do.
-
Yes, there are. Just like there are people who are against ending the war in Iraq, giving the children of illegal immigrants a fair chance to pursue an education and legal employment, voting for a woman or a black president, gay marriage, etc. There are all sorts of crazy, ignorant people in America. Actually, it is a minority. But, it's a very vocal minority.
-
I was just reading about the kid in Ohio. I do feel that people should be allowed to own firearms. However, I do think they should be required to go through training, and be licensed to own a firearm. They should also be held accountable if the firearm they own is not controlled (keep them in a safe place, and if it is stolen, report it). I know where every firearm I own is right now. I can tell you where it is, what type of case it's in, where the ammunition is, I can tell you what direction they are pointing (shotguns are in a safe place, pointing east). There needs to be responsibility.
-
Notice something about each of the shootings listed here. Every single one of them occurred in a gun free zone. If you look at the vast majority of these types of shooting rampages, they occur in gun free zones. This is because there is no one there that can effectively oppose the shooter. Putting stricter controls on guns does not stop criminals from getting them. Heroin, LSD, PCP, meth, etc, are all completely illegal already and that does not stop the people who want them from getting them. What makes you think that outlawing guns would stop criminals from getting them? Outlawing guns does not stop them. It simply stops the law abiding from being able to defend themselves. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aeo05uPMmn4
-
As stated by Glen previously, all of these shootings were in violation of Gun Control Laws. Furthermore, the Columbine students illegally obtained their weapons, and technically, so did the Virginia Tech student (there was a lack of communication between state and federal officials so they could not check his mental health status). Ohio's shooting was again a disregard for gun control. So what would more gun control do except hurt the law-abiding gun owner? Those who want to go to school and shoot up the students obviously have no problem disregarding the law in their process. We need to allow armed citizens to protect themselves and others. Armed teachers in high schools and armed students and professors in the colleges. Many students and teachers already are licensed to carry weapons, gun-free zone laws just need to be repealed.
-
I am sorry some people live in cities where there are so many shooting deaths, but strict gun control doesn't apply to just cities, it covers Counties and states and (hopefully never) the entire country. Personally I doubt there are really very many LEGAL gun owners in cities, similarly to I bet there are many more ILLEGAL things going on in cities... Criminals engaged in criminal acts, use guns as tools, just as Legal owners, but there work is destructive. And criminals with records always buy guns illegally. All those shootings, I would bet (unless hunting related)lol are carried out by criminals whose gun is as a plumbers wrench a tool to carry out their work. Stop the criminals.
-
Strict gun control will only affect those of us who follow the law. The criminal element and the nut jobs will still get their hands on guns. So yes, I'm against it!
-
yes Ted kennedy's car has killed more people than my gun.
Glenn Blaylock RELATED QUESTIONS
Copyright 2023, Wired Ivy, LLC