|
Post by Captain SpExtacular on Jun 14, 2007 12:46:34 GMT -5
Ok the gun is just sitting there minding it's own business untill sombody comes along and uses it to kill somebody, same w/ a bow and arrow. Those are still fatal but you dont see a ban on them. Now, if you can blam gun violence on the guns themselves then im allowed to blame miss spelled words on my keybord.
|
|
|
Post by RELLIK on Jun 14, 2007 15:52:53 GMT -5
for hunting use a bow. it'll give you some more muscle. cops need em. people should be able to ge them but not so easily. smg's are not necessary. criss rock says bullets should cost more. some people would be more likely to kill people with cars than guns. (or drugs etc.) i could kill 3 people with no gun. all n all if ya dont like guns and dont want to get shot i suggest you move to a little suburbia with no rednecks, prolly outside of america, and start a block watch or somethin. or japan. (i think it had lowest amount a death from firearms)
so... ya neway it needs to be enforced.
|
|
|
Post by Captain SpExtacular on Jun 14, 2007 19:50:34 GMT -5
There isnt much to enforce though. There are so may laws in place, there is the brady bill that puts a mandatory waiting period on gun purchase, and there is the gun control act of '64 which regulates who can purchase the guns. And it really comes down to the person, i mean sure im nice and chocolatey on the outside, but on the inside im full of angry nuget and hatefull carmel. And alot of people may have depression or another mental disorder that either hasnt been diagnosed or they aren't aware of. Kinda like at Virginia Tech with that Sueng Hung Cho dude who was dpressed and killed like...what 28 people? So its not really that the guns are availiable, because there are plenty of ways to kill a person.
And no SMG don't really have a good purpose, but trust me, watch a movie called Red Dawn and you just might change your mind on this whole gun thingy.
|
|