I've seen many a comment in the wake of Sandy Hook that there is simply no reason for a citizen to own an assault rifle. I give you this: There is no reason to have a camera on your phone. We don't need a reason. We don't have to justify the things we purchase with our hard earned money. If we want it and have the money to buy it, that's no business of anyone elses and we don't need to justify it. The only caveat being, we don't do any harm to others with it.
Monday, 31 December 2012
Quote Of The Month
Seeing out 2012 is Bucko The Moose in his new incarnation, with this post on gun control:
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
7 comments:
So why is it illegal to own a tank (the mobile artillery type) in the usa?
Wehay! I never win anything. Thanks Julia
Smith and Wesson got $6 million from Michigan to keep its factory open 'saving 225 jobs' (these were actually lost in New Hampshire). Owners will no doubt cough up the tax subsidy or insist on guns from China under this clot's logic. I saw an 'analysis' of UK and Aussie gun control changes - totally useless more or less summed that up - er - and the absence of the fact we haven't had mass killing sprees since!
allcoppedout
Did we in fact have any 'mass killing sprees' before the reams of legislation? No, what a surprise. So what makes you think the legislation has stopped any (if there were going to be any) or that should a criminally mad person wish they couldn't still easily obtain a firearm?
There are now more deaths using illegal guns in this country than there have been for hundreds of years. Well done!
And the three mass killings we did have? Oh yes, warnings were given that even the most short-sighted chief constable could have seen (even made by beat bobbies) and yet all three murderers were 'allowed' to keep their weapons (or given them back at said chief constables insistence. not one who even received censure).
The facts:
Weapons exist and they can't be magicked away (despite all your wishes)
Legislate all you like but criminals will not follow the law (the clue is in the fact they are 'criminals').
Each and every 'mass killing' in the US (and technically here too) has occurred in an area where the murderers can guarantee that no one will have a weapon to stop them.
Estimates vary on how often a normal citisen uses (not necessarily fires) a weapon to defend themselves or others in the US from over 2 million down to 40 thousand (by the Brady anti gun campaign - see even the anti gun lobby acknowledge it) a year. Compare the effect on crime statistics to here (and in Australia) where we can't legally protect ourselves without the police arresting us, the victims, too to the US where crime is dropping exponentially in every area where shall issue CCW laws have been allowed.
Sport, target general shooting as well as hunting is major pastime in the US with over 90 million guns estimated there. And yes a semi-automatic rifle is ideal and even usual for such pastimes.
So Mr (?) copped out - the only sensible method of stopping such killings is to allow normal law-abiding citisens to be armed to protect themselves and others. Not, as you obviously believe, to punish the 90 million law-abiding for the actions of a few patently mad people.
Collective punishment is not right just because you think it is and I'd count your opinion as more worthwhile if I didn't suspect you are quite happy for yourself and your colleagues to be armed. - just not us MOPs.
Try thinking it through before mouthing the party line, hypocrisy isn't clever.
Mark - What has that got to do with it?
Allcoppedout - The gun control issue goes much deeper than just the odd mass shooting as Able helps point out.
" I saw an 'analysis' of UK and Aussie gun control changes - totally useless more or less summed that up..."
Hard cases make bad law. But we never seem to learn that.
And we're overdue for a 'killing spree', by my reckoning.
"...and yet all three murderers were 'allowed' to keep their weapons (or given them back at said chief constables insistence. not one who even received censure)."
Yes indeed. And the Dunblane massacre is not due to have the full story told for 100 years. I wonder why..?
All this talk of mad gun rampages and yet no-one mentions the machete and knife rampages that seem to occur fairy often in safe gun free China,one took place within a couple of days of the Newtown killings,perhaps its not the weapons that send folk on murderous rampages but living in an intolerably prod nose and controlled society?
And as for Michael Ryan and Thomas Hamilton every person who knew them knew they were mentally unstable and not to be trusted with firearms and yet they were allowed to keep them.
Warning,tinfoil hattery follows.
A secretly desired outcome perhaps? a convenient outrage to move public opinion into supporting the govt on its anti gun stance?
either way,after Dunblane gun crime in the UK continued to rise.
Post a Comment