Posted by: rethink December 19, 2012
Login in to Rate this Post:
0 
? 
?
Kiddo,
Looks like we will have to agree to disagree on this one.
I don't agree with your analogy of having to ban knives if guns are to be banned. The difference being one is a prehistoric weapon and the other one being modern 20th century weapon with ability to kill with one shot where victims don't have a fighting chance or chance to flee since the perpetrator can activate his weapon from far.
I don't agree with your differentiation of gun versus assault rifle. They both can shoot from far and can kill with one bullet. That in my opinion is too much power in the hands of the commoner who can be a mental case as opposed to in the hands of a government sanctioned police or army. If you don't have faith in the police/army to protect and serve then you might has wel not have faith in doctors either. Obviously there will be some cases of police excess and doctor excess but you have to have *some* faith in the system, otherwise you might as well go to the jungle and live there.
Your argument regarding what to do about people who already own guns shows a very defeatist mentality. You have to start somewhere. Just because your computer already has virus does not mean you don't install a new anti virus that came out. Maybe it won't affect the existing virus but it will stop the new viruses. The mainconcern here is the impulsive psycho who will not be able to go buy a gun to shoot out innocent people if there is an effective gun control in place.
It's not necessary for us to agree with each other. I am sure each of us think his point is more valid and neither of us may be wrong, just different type of people.
Looks like we will have to agree to disagree on this one.
I don't agree with your analogy of having to ban knives if guns are to be banned. The difference being one is a prehistoric weapon and the other one being modern 20th century weapon with ability to kill with one shot where victims don't have a fighting chance or chance to flee since the perpetrator can activate his weapon from far.
I don't agree with your differentiation of gun versus assault rifle. They both can shoot from far and can kill with one bullet. That in my opinion is too much power in the hands of the commoner who can be a mental case as opposed to in the hands of a government sanctioned police or army. If you don't have faith in the police/army to protect and serve then you might has wel not have faith in doctors either. Obviously there will be some cases of police excess and doctor excess but you have to have *some* faith in the system, otherwise you might as well go to the jungle and live there.
Your argument regarding what to do about people who already own guns shows a very defeatist mentality. You have to start somewhere. Just because your computer already has virus does not mean you don't install a new anti virus that came out. Maybe it won't affect the existing virus but it will stop the new viruses. The mainconcern here is the impulsive psycho who will not be able to go buy a gun to shoot out innocent people if there is an effective gun control in place.
It's not necessary for us to agree with each other. I am sure each of us think his point is more valid and neither of us may be wrong, just different type of people.