Note added August 2, 2005: The previous post had well over 50 responses attacking my position. I didn't get rid of them intentionally; switching blog templates deletes all your comments and I did not know this.
Eddddie, did you run and grab all your gun nut friends to come say hi?
Why do I feel the need to look over my shoulder?
Some of you really need to get back to sleeping with your cousins, and stop leaving posts repeating things said by other people, a million times over.
I come from a Northern Ontario hunting family. I spent my early years target shooting, shooting fowl, and hunting deer. It's not as if I've never handled a gun.
The biggest concern expressed here?
Basically, you like target shooting.
This is your concern.
Target shooting.
Sorry, but that's pathetically trivial, and should be the last priority when discussing guns.
Increase penalties for illegal gun use? Nice sounding, but deterrment really isn't that useful. Deterrment really only works if the punishment is swift, immediate and certain. Our justice system, which values due process, cannot offer these factors.
As for self defense, exactly how many rounds have any of you ever fired in self defense?
(Rabid bunnies don't count)
There's something none of you seem to be grasping about guns. Guns are very impersonal weapons. I can't believe you can't see a difference between a baseball bat and a gun; the psychology is very different. A gun is fired at a distance; the person feels removed and less responsible for the damaged inflicted. You don't have to be tough to fire a gun in anger. Melee weapons are an entirely different matter.
I can't believe all these comparisons to cars, of all things. One was developed and designed to kill, another obviously not. One is living up to it's original purpose when it kills, another kills almost entirely through accident.
Yes, guns are inanimate objects. But I think it's pretty clear that as a culture, we've proven that we can't handle the things responsible. Heck, I'd say as a species.
The Chinese had the right idea, you know. Fireworks. Much better use for gun powder.
Friday, September 17, 2004
Wednesday, September 01, 2004
Gun Control 1
Gun Control
Chris Rock once did a comedy sketch in which he suggests we drive the price of ammunition up, making guns an impractical weapon of choice for criminals.
I'm not sure how serious he was, but it strikes me as a great idea. Here's how we do it.
Make the manufacture of handguns, automatics and certain semiautomatics and their corresponding ammunition illegal.
Just the manufacture. Sale and ownership would remain legal.
Gun companies could continue to manufacture hunting rifles. They would have to downsize and there would be some resultant unemployment, but likely no more than a stand western country's economy could absorb.
The manufacture of handguns for police officers would be restricted to government contracts.
You want to own a handgun or two for home and personal defense? Fine, go ahead. You're not going to need more than a few rounds in an entire lifetime for that purpose. And practice sparingly.
You want to own an automatic rifle? You'd be a nut and need your head checked, but go head. Just remember that while you're yee-hawing and pretending to be Rambo, you might not be able to replace that ammo. Better keep it for when King George tries to take your rights away!
As for the thing about if guns are outlawed, then only outlaws will have guns, well, they'll have to check their ammo too. Certainly a black market for guns and ammunition would spring up, but can you imagine how fantastically expensive weapons suitable for use in crime would become?
Hunting rifles and their respective ammo would remain legal to manufacture. I'd like to see a street thug try to mug somebody with a .22? Or a gang try a drive by with a bolt action?
We could even abolish the gun registery, and not have to experiment with other forms of it.
So. Nobody would have their guns taken away. Some loss of jobs. Loss of fun at the target range. Gun crime would be reduced drastically, at least in the long term. Seems to me like every concern from the anti-gun control corner is addressed with this plan, with the exception of "fun at the range", which I think we can all agree is a minor, trivial issue, in the face of the enormous amount of suffering gun crime is responsible for, no?
Chris Rock once did a comedy sketch in which he suggests we drive the price of ammunition up, making guns an impractical weapon of choice for criminals.
I'm not sure how serious he was, but it strikes me as a great idea. Here's how we do it.
Make the manufacture of handguns, automatics and certain semiautomatics and their corresponding ammunition illegal.
Just the manufacture. Sale and ownership would remain legal.
Gun companies could continue to manufacture hunting rifles. They would have to downsize and there would be some resultant unemployment, but likely no more than a stand western country's economy could absorb.
The manufacture of handguns for police officers would be restricted to government contracts.
You want to own a handgun or two for home and personal defense? Fine, go ahead. You're not going to need more than a few rounds in an entire lifetime for that purpose. And practice sparingly.
You want to own an automatic rifle? You'd be a nut and need your head checked, but go head. Just remember that while you're yee-hawing and pretending to be Rambo, you might not be able to replace that ammo. Better keep it for when King George tries to take your rights away!
As for the thing about if guns are outlawed, then only outlaws will have guns, well, they'll have to check their ammo too. Certainly a black market for guns and ammunition would spring up, but can you imagine how fantastically expensive weapons suitable for use in crime would become?
Hunting rifles and their respective ammo would remain legal to manufacture. I'd like to see a street thug try to mug somebody with a .22? Or a gang try a drive by with a bolt action?
We could even abolish the gun registery, and not have to experiment with other forms of it.
So. Nobody would have their guns taken away. Some loss of jobs. Loss of fun at the target range. Gun crime would be reduced drastically, at least in the long term. Seems to me like every concern from the anti-gun control corner is addressed with this plan, with the exception of "fun at the range", which I think we can all agree is a minor, trivial issue, in the face of the enormous amount of suffering gun crime is responsible for, no?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
