Quote:
Originally Posted by billethkid
It would be very helpful when folks are discussing gun control just exactly what it is they want to accomplish.
The anti gun folks always paint with the broadest brush possible when proposing more controls.
Additionaly they never contrast how having more gun control laws does not work as demonstrated in Chicago, Los Angeles, NYC, et al.
There needs to be more specifics as in how to keep mentally ill from getting guns. How to prevent criminals from getting guns.
Those two alone would all but elinate the so called gun problem here in the USA. And of course in our permissive, don't offend anybody society there is no chance to make either work (as proven in Chigao, Los Angeles and NYC).
However to have something to say to appeal to the anti gun voter base, politicians and most all other anti gun people go broad brush. The merry go round continues to spin, hence nothing changes.....
|
I am not for broad brush policies but more contextual solutions. More power to local governments to get various weapons off the streets through more common sense approaches like perhaps putting a reasonable New Yorker, Chicagolander, etc. in as a test to what guns/weapons/etc. they should get out of the community. Cases would decide what the "reasonable" Chicagolander would actually sound like.
What works in New York City would not really work that well in the Villages.
Colorado Springs would be a different standard as well. I assume there are a lot of avid hunters in that area of Colorado as well as Air Force personnel.
Criminals-- gangs primarily- do get around various City, State and Federal laws in places like Los Angeles. I do not believe armed gangs like these are what the Founding Fathers had in mind with a well regulated militia and the right to bear arms. They seemed more to be addressing the National Guard that at times might be called in to deal with various riots in cities like Los Angeles.
Watts Riots