|
Mocker
|
 |
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: WestPac
|
|

Mar 30th, 2003, 06:36 AM
I think your argument is flawed. Its not a matter of how real the danger is. To my knowledge, nowhere is so bad that you must "dodge bullets on a playgrond or in front of the supermarket." If the neighbourhood were that bad, people would not frequent those places. The park would be abandoned, and the supermarket would close its doors, permanently. Fuck, in juniour high I was friends with a guy who ended up moving to Watts, which for those outside the west coast, is buried beneath LA's sprawl. I visited him a few times over the years, and the most lethal thing I ever saw was the tap water which seemed to be brown in colour.
To be precisely honest, it has to do with who believes they are in danger. The threat need only be real in their minds, especially as gun control laws are only a placebo solution. Criminals rarely buy their arms legally, because in doing so, they creat a trail of paperwork which could eventually lead to an arrect. Elsewise, how do you explain the strict gun laws in Maine (I hope I'm remembering the right state) as opposed to less strict laws of Texas?
Having said that, I am against a ban. It would not solve anything. I have no problem with a waiting period, or even having ballistic tests filed to link bullets to the barrel which fired them.
|
|
|
|