why make them illegal? only the good guys are gonna turn them in, all the killers arnt gonna turn them in, besides, there are studies to prove in Canada theres more deaths caused by guns where it is illegal, because its alot more safer for a murderer to go on a shooting spree where there are no guns (because its Illegal)
And, its easy to make a hand gun, some of my friends make guns, making it illegal would only take away the freedoms of the good guys,
And, if you make handguns illegal, where would you stop? next liberals would want all guns banned, then knives banned, and amish bombs, and potata guns, and fireworks banned too, and model rocket engines, etc. (actually in some eastern states, Amish Bombs are already illegal)
And, our founding fathers designed our country so we have a rght to bear arms,
And, because I said so 🙂
Please provide proof of your "studies" about Canadian shooting sprees. I have looked and looked and found nothing to back up your claim. The US leads the world in deaths by handguns in straight numbers and per capita. There is no information that I could find that says that people being armed causes less deaths. If you are to make such an outrageous claim please provide some facts to back it up, otherwise it is just crap.
Originally posted by CliffLandinI'm not sure who or what you're referring to here, CL but Dr. John Lott's "More Guns, Less Crime" might be a source.
Please provide proof of your "studies" about Canadian shooting sprees. I have looked and looked and found nothing to back up your claim. The US leads the world in deaths by handguns in straight numbers and per capita. There is no information that I could find that says that people being armed causes less deaths. If you are to make such an outrageous claim please provide some facts to back it up, otherwise it is just crap.
Originally posted by lauseyAccording to my reaserch the bradycampaign is fundamentally anti-gun and not an unbiased judge of Lott. When you read "More Guns, Less Crime" did you find any fundamental flaws?
According to some research. His book is fundamentally flawed:
http://www.bradycampaign.org/facts/research/?page=lott_mglc&menu=pro
Originally posted by Delmer
According to my reaserch the bradycampaign is fundamentally anti-gun and not an unbiased judge of Lott. When you read "More Guns, Less Crime" did you find any fundamental flaws?
Do I have to read Mein Kempf to know that it is fundamentally flawed? You also say according to your research. Could you let me know what this research involves?
The link I posted has scientific backing and sources.
I personally didn't say that it was fundamentally flawed, I just pointed in the direction that other independent scientific research has been carried out to suggest so.
I could also say that Lott is fundamentally pro-gun biased in contrast to your argument.
Originally posted by CliffLandinAre more deaths by hand guns done in states or areas where they
Please provide proof of your "studies" about Canadian shooting sprees. I have looked and looked and found nothing to back up your claim. The US leads the world in deaths by handguns in straight numbers and per capita. There is no information that I could find that says that people being armed causes less deaths. If you are to make such an outrageous claim please provide some facts to back it up, otherwise it is just crap.
are legal or illegal within the US? Are there more murders by hand
guns in areas they are legal or illegal within the US? These seem
like something worth knowing if we have a mixture of both legal
and illegal areas in our country.
Kelly
Originally posted by sasquatch672The 2nd Amendment was to protect us from the tyranny of the state. Why is that obsolete, SQ?
Legal handguns are a terrible idea. The Second Amendment is an anachronism. Can you even tell me why the Founding Fathers included the Second Amendment in the Constitution? If you can, then you know why it's obsolete.