SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Politics : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: Alighieri who wrote (142173)1/28/2002 1:48:39 PM
From: TimF  Respond to of 1579125
 
Gun control does not have to mean a reduction of legally owned/carried guns...it is desirable to control who is legally allowed to buy and carry them.

Gun control often does mean a reduction in legally owned and carried guns. In places like New York City the hoops that you have to jump through to get permission to own a gun and the time that the process takes means that few people try. If they do get permission they still are extremely restricted as to when and how the guns can be carried.

Gun control causes less people to legally carry guns and limits the situations and places where they carry them. If it was effective at keeping guns out of the hands of criminals it might reduce gun deaths but it is ineffective. Per capita more crimes are committed with guns in the jurisdictions that have the tightest gun controls in the country then in the rest of the country.

Controlling who is legally allowed to by and carry them has limited effectiveness because criminals will buy and carry them anyway. However I can still support the idea of denying the mentally insane and convicted felons the ability to get guns to the limited extent that we can do so. However when most people argue against gun control they are not arguing against laws of that type but rather laws that limit or sometimes take away the rights of law abiding citizens to buy, keep, and carry guns.

Tim