VinTek wrote:I actually agree with you -- which is why I'm torn. I don't think that there are any gun laws that would have prevented the incident at Sandy Hook as those guns were legally acquired. And to ban guns from a home where there are mentally unstable people, as good as an idea as that might be, would put us down the slippery path of declaring people guilty by association.
The thing is, Oklahoma City happened in 1995 and we haven't had any successful copycats since then. In the meantime, there have been a sizable number of mass shootings. I don't think you can really equate the two. The comparison isn't really valid as evidenced by the real world.
There isn't a gun law on the books (or ever will be) that will stop someone from doing what they are bent on doing. The criminals don't care about the laws... that's why they are criminals.
If you pass more restrictive laws all you are doing is hurting the law abiding citizens... and possible turning them into criminals as well. I know a LOT of people that will never give up their guns. The believe the constitution was written for a reason and they support the oath that the military takes to defend the consitution against all enemies foreign and domestic.
If you pass more restrictive gun laws then you are a domestic enemy of the constitution. As it stands.. .there are way too many states that have essentially destroyed the 2nd Amendment.
No where does it state... you have the right to bear arms if you pay the state first. But that is essentially what the states are doing. If you don't pay to have a CCW then you are in violation of the law. However that law violates the 2nd Amendment of the United States Constitution. It says the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed! Period. I know that in Arkansas you must pay the state to carry concealed, and it is illegal to open carry.
But yet there are too many people in this country that don't care if they infringe on other peoples rights... as long as theirs isn't infringed on. Everyone wants to point the finger at the guns as a problem, but yet it is the person behind the gun that is truly the problem.
Chicago destroys the 2nd Admendment but yet they have the highest gun crime rate in the country... and that city is supposed to be a gun free zone. Yep.... those tighter restrictions on guns really are working. When in fact what it's doing is making an easy target for the criminals. Think about it... if you're a criminal which would you rather have. A city that bans the citizens from keeping guns or a city that promotes the citizens arm themselves. The criminals want the easy target. There is too much risk involved not knowing if your intended mark is going to pull out a gun and blow your head off.
As for the OKC bombing I listed that one to prove a fact. You don't have to have guns to commit mass murder, and it's easy enough to do exactly what they did in OKC. If you take away guns, then those set on destruction will just find another way. I know this from first hand experience since Im in law enforcement.
I can not dwell over that to which I have no control...