|
I'm a big believer in the "slippery slope" of government - when a special interest group can't get their way, they start small. Remove a freedom here. Add a restriction there. Sooner or later, they get their way.
Of course, this also holds true for policies I believe in (almost always the retraction of legislation), so I'm not bashing the process.
Gun ownership is one of my main topics of interest when researching political candidates. Kerry scares the heck out of me while Bush only disappoints me. If I was placing my vote solely on this issue (I'm not), I would have to pick the lesser of two evils.
Anywhoo, going back to the subject of the article that was posted, I believe the concept was when you take away firearms from law-abiding people, violent crimes increase in numbers because the criminals know there is very little risk. This is an assertion I support. As more and more states enact carry laws (not always requiring the firearm be concealed), violent crime has decreased. Property crime usually increases because criminals move onto less risky activities, such as stealing empty cars or business burglaries. While I might not be happy someone stole my car, it's better than having some guy point a gun at me and demand I turn over my keys.
|