Er... personally I am always amazed that conservatives heads don't explode from the massive cognitive dissonance.
A kid raped by her father who gets an abortion is a despicable murderer. But... we should arm more people with guns whose only real purpose is to kill another human being.
Life is sacred 'till you're born. Then you're fair game?
But... we should arm more people with guns whose only real purpose is to kill another human being.
This Pandora's box has been open for a very long time. I'm afraid that even hope will escape it should we try to close it.
The mere existence of these weapons in the population makes them a deterrent for some crimes against the elderly and disabled. Even if it isn't a deterrent for some criminals, I would rather see the scumbag criminal breaking into an old person's home die than the old person getting killed, robbed, or otherwise abused. Dead criminals don't commit additional crimes.
Hmm, well why is it that, then, everyone in the UK (where guns are illegal, appart from the occasional farmer with a shotgun and a lisense for it) isn't being shot and robbed. It's just america, with the obsession of guns that has that problem. Look at the UK's gun crime rate, maybe a few people a year shot per year at most (and most of them are shot by [bbc.co.uk] police anyway [bbc.co.uk]!)
I personally think that no-one has the right to bear arms appart from soldiers and SPECIAL police units...not your avarage police officer!
Could that possibly be because guns aren't rampant on UK streets?
You are trying to compare apples and oranges here. In the US, a large portion of our violent criminals CURRENTLY possess firearms, and there are plenty more weapons on the illegal market waiting to be sold. Strict regulation is not going to remove those firearms from the streets, it will only remove the firearms from law abiding citizens. I wouldn't have a problem with not to be allowed to have a gun if it were only the very rare criminal t
Most gun crimes are not committed by "violent criminals". They're crimes of opportunity, crimes of passion and other spur-of-the-moment kinds of things. Take guns away, and then ONLY the "violent criminals" will commit gun crimes. This may sound pretty bad, and to be honest, it is... but really, it's better than the alternative.
May prevent crimes of passion, unless the offender found something else to use as a weapon. Say the lamp on the nightstand, beside the bed, where your wife is currently screwing another man. Or the car to run the SOB down as he's running away, or next time you see him.
Yeah, the law-abiding citizen that turns his gun in when it is outlawed is suddenly going to decide to start knocking off liquor stores for no reason.
Frozen salmon!?!? By all that is holy, freezing salmon should be a crime in and of itself. One should never freeze such a tasty creature in this day and age, it should be eaten fresh. We have the transportation and refigeration technology to get fresh salmon delivered anywhere in the world without it spoiling. There just is no excuse for freezing salmon.
God, please let this be true. (Score:5, Funny)
I want to see liberals' heads explode when they realize that Socialized medicine is being used to buy people guns.
LK
Re: (Score:5, Insightful)
A kid raped by her father who gets an abortion is a despicable murderer. But... we should arm more people with guns whose only real purpose is to kill another human being.
Life is sacred 'till you're born. Then you're fair game?
Re: (Score:5, Interesting)
But... we should arm more people with guns whose only real purpose is to kill another human being.
This Pandora's box has been open for a very long time. I'm afraid that even hope will escape it should we try to close it.
The mere existence of these weapons in the population makes them a deterrent for some crimes against the elderly and disabled. Even if it isn't a deterrent for some criminals, I would rather see the scumbag criminal breaking into an old person's home die than the old person getting killed, robbed, or otherwise abused. Dead criminals don't commit additional crimes.
If guns were banned t
Re: (Score:0)
I personally think that no-one has the right to bear arms appart from soldiers and SPECIAL police units...not your avarage police officer!
Re: (Score:2)
Could that possibly be because guns aren't rampant on UK streets?
You are trying to compare apples and oranges here. In the US, a large portion of our violent criminals CURRENTLY possess firearms, and there are plenty more weapons on the illegal market waiting to be sold. Strict regulation is not going to remove those firearms from the streets, it will only remove the firearms from law abiding citizens. I wouldn't have a problem with not to be allowed to have a gun if it were only the very rare criminal t
Re: (Score:2)
Most gun crimes are not committed by "violent criminals". They're crimes of opportunity, crimes of passion and other spur-of-the-moment kinds of things. Take guns away, and then ONLY the "violent criminals" will commit gun crimes. This may sound pretty bad, and to be honest, it is... but really, it's better than the alternative.
Re: (Score:2)
May prevent crimes of passion, unless the offender found something else to use as a weapon. Say the lamp on the nightstand, beside the bed, where your wife is currently screwing another man. Or the car to run the SOB down as he's running away, or next time you see him.
Yeah, the law-abiding citizen that turns his gun in when it is outlawed is suddenly going to decide to start knocking off liquor stores for no reason.
Re: (Score:2)
It takes one second of mental debilitation to pull a trigger and kill someone.
It takes a different kind of mentality to bludgeon your wife and her lover to death with a frozen salmon.
Again, your argument doesn't hold. None of them do.
Re:God, please let this be true. (Score:2)