The difference is how effective each object is at getting the job done.
Guns are more effective than most objects because they're specifically made to be weapons
You could argue that I'm assigning motives to people who manufacture guns. I'm pretty sure that they are aware that they're making weapons.
In contrast, a crowbar manufacturer's intent isn't to build crowbars to be used as weapons.
I wonder, when Boeing built it's 767-223ER -N334AA, if they thought it could be used to bring down a tall skyscraper building?
Man, and here I thought these planes were built for transportation purposes? Wrong again!
I keep learning so many good things from gun owners.
Competitive target shooting is not violent.
Hunting, for practical reasons, is not violent to other people (outside of the PETA people).
Even if you buy a weapon for self defense the point is not to be violent but to defend yourself from violence.
If someone is out to harm you and the closest thing nearby is a hammer, guess what? It becomes a weapon.
The idea that guns are only about violence is bunk. It entirely matters on what the person holding it is doing.
One of the more reasonable threads I have read. I too am a gun owner. I don't think banning any type of gun will prevent many crimes. I think the right to carry should be allowed yet I probably wouldn't in most instances. Now if I was going to Baltimore I might be more inclined to carry then if I was going to the grocery store in my home town.
I also think every gun should be registered and the registered owner should be criminally liable if their gun is used in a crime. I think all purchases should require a background check. I think gun owners should be accountable for the whereabouts of their guns and if they are stolen I think they should be required to immediatley report it. I think the menatally ill should not be allowed to have guns in the house they live in either.
In the end owning guns is both a right and a tremendous responsibility. If you are not able to meet that responsibility then you should lose the right to own one. However if you are a responsible owner I see no reason why you should not be allowed to own whatever type of gun you choose.
While this is only my opinion on the topic I think my post as well as the one I quoted show that reasonable people should be able to sit down and come up with a consensus on how to regulate guns in this country. Of course our elected leaders and the special interest groups who control them are often neither reasonable nor able to sit down and come up with a consensus on anything.
With millions of guns out there, very few of them are used to kill people. The fact is that most people are not using them for violence. So obviously the idea that violence is all they are used for doesn't pass the reality test.
I'm a gun-owner (a shotgun and a classic Army-issued Colt pistol), and I have no problem at all with intensive background checks for all purchasers, a ban on high-capacity magazines, and other rational measures aimed at minimizing future mass-murders.
I suspect there are a lot of gun owners like me who think the NRA is controlled by irrational extremists.
With millions of guns out there I'd wager that most people who own them don't intend on violence either. If they are then they're pretty bad at it.
|Terms of Service | Search/Archive | Feedback | Contact Information | DC50tv |
Baltimore Sun | Chicago Tribune | Daily Press | Hartford Courant | LA Times | Orlando Sentinel | Sun Sentinel
The Morning Call | The Virginia Gazette
Baltimore Sun, 501 N. Calvert Street, P.O. Box 1377, Baltimore, MD 21278