i dont think its even an issue as to whether restricting guns would have a positive effect on crime. most people who are able to look at it objectively believe it would not. its more of a liberty issue with most americans. kinda like a "dont punish all of us for the misdeads of a few" kinda thing which translates to much more than just guns.
not everybody "needs" a gun. i live in a nice area, but i feel better knowing i have one. again, education is they key here people. nicky, i can see how you feel that way growing up in a culture without guns, but if you dont have expierience with them then its harder to explain how certain people feel about them. like ive said before this whole "assault weapons" thing drives me fucking crazy. an assault rifle is a selective fire weapon, meaning it has the ability to fire burst or full automatic fire in addition to single shot with the flip of a switch. these weapons are not readiliy available to the public.
notice all these politicians (mayor bloomburg) who just want all guns banned have thier own private security so realisticly they dont give a shit about what happens to you as they have thier own guns. the fact that this piece of shit pretty much told the police that they should all go on strike until everyone give up thier guns should tell you all you need to know about him. a good quote i heard is" i carry a gun because a cop is too heavy". everyone has a right to protect themselves and nobody can tell me any different. lots of people always use the quote "those who don't study history are doomed to repeat it" but when this comes up in regards to guns its ignored time and time again.
i know im gonna catch alot of crap for this but here goes anyways. pre ww2 in germany, what did hitler do? first, all guns had to be registered. soon after guess what happened? since the state had a list of everyone with guns it was much easier to take them and thats what was done. all guns were taken and look at the results. nobody could resist that nutjob as he consolidated his power. millions died, fact. funny how all those events took place in a time when the worlds economy was doing horrible, kinda similar to today, huh?
are we headed in the same direction? hopefully not but the point is these things are always done incrementally. you always have to be mindful of the future as you can never be sure how a law or restriction put into place today will be used by politicians down the road. there has to be a line in the sand and many see gun rights as that line. again, the overwhelming majority of gun owners are law abiding so the idea that nobody needs or can be trusted with a gun is just utter bullshit. the only arguement that anti-gun people ever have is you dont need them, they are dangerous, only the government should have them as we always act fairly and in the best interests of the people
another good quote is "you have to reason with somebody with a gun" that is very true as without protection you are basically at the mercy of whoever has them, whoever they may be.
heres a link to an article about some new proposed regulations on magazine capacity, similar to the old "assault weapons" ban.
http://thehill.com/video/senate/240657-cybersecurity-bill-includes-gun-control-measure for people living in america, did we see all out bloodshed when the old assault weapons ban expired in 2004 like some of theses scumbag politicians would lead you to believe? nope, same as its always been.
one of the main points that i got from the acticle is its a prime example of how sleazy theses politicians can be. they added this new proposed legislation as an ammendment to the new cybersecurity bill? what the fuck do these two things have in common other than they both serve to further erode peoples rights. it doesnt matter what side of the fence you are on(pretty obvious about my side) the fact that these people wanna be sneaky like this and we should trust them with an issue like this boggles my mind. ok now my rant for the day is over and boy do i feel better!
