Re: CT elemetary school shooting; praying all my BDC friends and family are ok!
posted at 12/17/2012 4:55 PM EST
In response to msobstinate99's comment:
In response to 12-Angry-Men's comment:
In response to WhichOnesPink2's comment:
Ok, for sake of argument I'll give you guns original purpose was for killing. Mainly for food but also for protection. Ok. But so what? Guns are no longer solely used for killing food to live and for protection to the level it was hundreds of years ago. But really what does that have to do with nutbags going on killing sprees? While horrifically tragic, they are the exception and not the rule. And getting rid of assault rifles (which I agree with) is not going to stop these mass killings. And please stop with the drunk driving laws. It's a joke. 10,000+ per year die from drunk driving accidents. Stop acting like these laws are doing some great job. We still need these laws but come on...
They are 'exceptions' of more and more frequency and lethality. These horrific crimes are being visited on children in schools or movie theaters. And in the light of uch tragedies, the gun lobby continues to push for less restrictions.
How absurd would it be for a group to form to advocate for less restrictions on DUI?
Your false equivalence misses the entire point.
In response to public outrage over DUI deaths unprecedented action was taken to minimize it's effects and it was hugely successful. DUI deaths have fallen dramatically.
No one believes that there are any laws that could protect people entirely, that's your reducto absurdum argument, not reality.
What people realize is that in order to REDUCE DUI deaths, extraordinary measures must be taken. And they were. There was no one proclaiming it would eliminate DUI deaths but rather it was in society's best interest to forgo a little personal liberty in the effort to REDUCE DUI deaths. And it has been a huge success by all measures.
Again, no one believes that any laws are foolproof but they do want a concerted effort to REDUCE gun-related massacres. They want the gun advocate groups like the NRA to stop it's ridiculous '2nd Amed. rights are inviolable' nonsense and realize that no rights are absolute.
If we as a society were/are willing to give up some personal freedoms in an effort to reduce DUI deaths then it is not extreme to ask the gun owners to do the same.
Like I said, how crazy would it sound if a lobby was formed for more rights for DUI drivers?
This is where I have issue with new gun laws....will the time and money it takes to create these new laws even make a difference? How many times have you picked up a paper and read the headline that so and so was arrested for an eigth, ninth DUI? I am not making light of a tragic situation, all I am trying to say is ..... will new gun laws prevent someone that is set on killing, from killing?
Something has to change, but I'm afraid people think by changing these laws the killings will stop. They won't. And we'll all be around the round table once again.
I heard somewhere that there are 25,000 gun laws0on the books. How will the 25,001 law really make a difference?
If anything, gun ownership is over regulated, to the point where law-abiding citizens are at risk.