 | | Re: Gun Control, Unnessesary Evil
|
|
(...) wrong (...) Well if by "wrong" one means, morally, then no. If by "wrong" one means, not a good idea, then yes. (After reading Lindsay's post I relized I needed to clarify my statement) I realize that my position is a minority one in this (...) (23 years ago, 27-Jul-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Gun Control, Unnessesary Evil
|
|
(...) It is evident that the levels of gun use you enjoy in the USA is not stopping criminals either. Do you not think for one second that gun control may have the ability to reduce the numbers of guns which reach the hands of criminals? Do you not (...) (23 years ago, 27-Jul-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Gun Control, Unnessesary Evil
|
|
(...) One can obtain a gun illegally more easily than one can legally. If the legal means were eliminated logically only criminals would have guns then. (...) It probably would reduce accidental shootings by persons that own a firearm but do not (...) (23 years ago, 27-Jul-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Gun Control, Unnessesary Evil
|
|
(...) You recognize that this ridiculously popular mantra is a tautology, of course? One might as well say that Internet access requires a computer, so only people who have computers will access the Internet. (...) It is a falacy that people choose (...) (23 years ago, 27-Jul-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Gun Control, Unnessesary Evil
|
|
(...) then. (...) It is oversimplifing the situation, I'll grant you that, but is essentially true. If it is illegal to purchase a firearm the only way to obtain one is to become a criminal and break the law. Of course as I stated, at present time (...) (23 years ago, 28-Jul-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
