Welcome to Gaia! ::

I've never been able to understand the logic behind banning firearms.
The only thing I see resulting from it is making it much more complicated for regular non-offending citizens to own guns, and criminals still getting them.
They'd end up creating a bigger black market, were prices for guns are now sky-rocketing, making it nearly impossible for anyone without tons of money to own a gun.


But then again, I grew up in an anti-gun control house, so I'm probably biased.
But it makes sense that banning guns won't stop crime.
Maybe make it harder for small time petty crooks to get guns, and non-offending citizens, but I don't see it effecting gangs, or big time criminals.

most people where i grew up, and also where i live now, hunt and carry guns.

they also trap and fish.

but i feel better knowing that ordinary people have weapons, and that it's not just the government that has firepower.

why should i trust Washington to own the only weapons?

ima double post this! just to get some discussion in this guilds old bones.

while im all for stockpiling for a revolution and keeping a standing militia at all times. i dont think having everyone carrying guns is going to end up anything less than a bunch of people shooting eachother over increasingly stupid s**t.

the argument is that if everyone had guns not only would no one pull one out for fear of getting shot by everyone else, but that everyone would straighten their act up for fear of getting shot by everyone else.

this experiment has already been practiced. it was called The Wild West...in which we find; dumb and drunk cowboys with guns = alot of ******** violence.

I feel no different on the subject either.
I do agree with the glassy rolling eyes bit though, perhaps as a rule of thumb.