🚀 go-pugleaf

On 10 Jul 1999 22:48:40 GMT, "David Geesaman"
<gees...@NOSPAMnewsguy.com> wrote:


>	I'd like to agree, but banning guns is an ineffective short term solution.
> I disagree with a gun ban because of principle, but I also believe that a
>gun ban won't work.  It will only remove guns from law-abiding citizens
>like you and I.  Banning guns from criminals would be even bloodier than
>our current situation and offer no short-term solution, much less a
>long-term solution.  That a gun ban would not work has been hotly debated,
>but I will sum up my most powerful reasoning by saying that laws do not
>change lawbreakers.  There are many historical examples of this, past and
>present, and guns would be no exception.

Let me set this straight.  I'm against weapons of destruction.
Pistols in my view are just that.  They serve no other purpose.  I
don't believe they deter crime.   In my opinion, they are the bane of
our society.  It has gotten to the point that children are shot by
police officers because cops fear for their life so much that a toy
gun illicits a death warrant.  Why is our culture so obsessed with
guns?  Why do we NEED to have them?  I for one think it's simply
ridiculous to think that we are better off with them than without
them.

You say we would be removing guns from the innocent and leaving the
guilty armed.  In the short term, yes.  That's true.  However, a ban
on guns could possibly work.  If the guns, ammunition, and supplies
are banned it wouldn't be long before most criminals wouldn't have
anything to shoot.  Sure, big time drug smugglers, and bank robbers
may have access to some form of ammunition, but your local crack
addict will not.

Considering that most crime in this country is not committed by big
time gangsters, I believe a gun ban will work.

>> Why would a patriotic american want to ban guns?  
>
>	I hope my discussion didn't appear patriotic.  Patriotism is an old trick
>designed to rally people based on emotion.  There are two ways to make a
>decision: emotion and reason.  Both have their place.  I believe that
>emotional decision making has no place in our laws.  Furthermore, I don't
>agree with writing laws to fix short-term problems.  Laws are never
>removed, and they eventually get in our way (e.g. the New Deal).

Emotion is what our constitution is based on.  It's what "rallied" the
people against tyranny.  The Boston Tea party was not a reasonable
action.  It was grounded strongly on emotion.  It was used as kindling
to ignite a passionate outcry against the throne.  Without emotion,
there is no reason to change.  A reasonable man, would not take on
Great Britain.  Only one with a strong faith in God, and knowing that
what he is doing is for the benefit of his children and his country.  

That is patriotism!  That is why we have rights.  That is why our
country is strong.  Not because some of intellectual debate.  

I am a patriot, and my decisions are based on my love for my country,
and her children.  Guns are a pestilence.  They are turning our cities
into warzones, and our schools into crime scenes.  They have no value
in our country.  Except to commit murder.  

If you can't see that, I'm sorry.  You have your belief, I have mine.

>> It sounds silly I
>> know, but I fear that we must relinquish certain rights to protect us
>> from ourselves.  Americans have become their own worst enemy.    
>> 
>	I agree that we are our own worst enemy.  People do not become responsible
>by insulating them from responsibility.  It's not fun believing in the
>right to keep and bear arms, but its the only thing that makes sense.

The right to bear arms is a joke.  Should the US decide to declare
facist rule, and enforce it with blood do you think we the people
would have a choice?  Not a chance.  We are a country divided.
Divided on every issue from birth control, to capital punishment.  Our
people vary from the politically correct, to the anarchistic gun
toters.  What makes you think that for one instant.  All of the sudden
the people of the US would turn around and unite for the common good?
I'm laughing out loud thinking about it.  Heck, if Uncle Sam decided
to pull "Friends" half of america might revolt, but increase their
taxes and everything's fine.  

Guns are a problem that we could do without.  The sooner we eradicate
them, the better off we'll be.


--------------------------
NOYB [SC]
Remove xxx from my address to reply