I feel that under current gun control laws, the most effective way to prevent crime is to establish draconian laws to punish those caught using them in the commission of a crime. If you have a gun on your person and you commit a crime, you should be given double the maximum sentence with no chance of parole. Life in prison with no chance of parole for anyone who commits a violent crime while in posession of a gun, whether or not it is used, sounds reasonable to me. Anyone, dealer or individual, who illegally provides a gun to anyone who uses it in a criminal manner, should be prosecuted for any crime that is committed with that gun. I firmly believe that laws like these, rather than outright bans, would dramatically reduce gun violence.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Charlatan
I can agree that rifles are a tool but handguns sole purpose is anti-personnel. The average citizen has no need of these sorts of tools.
Access to them should be strictly controlled and punishment for those found using them should be unusually severe.
Sadly, given the number of handguns that have been produced and are readily available, I don't see this ever happening.
|
A carried handgun (or a long rifle or shotgun in my home) and my proficiency are the most reliable way I know of to defend myself against an act of violence. Only a person who is willing to commit an act of violence against myself or those in my company needs to fear my guns and their owner. I will not carry when I will not be fully mentally capable of rationally deciding whether or not to draw and/or fire, and I would not fire if I felt that there was a risk of harming anyone other than an attacker. I will not allow anyone to touch my guns who I would not trust to do exactly as I would with them.
How is it harmful for me to own guns and be proficient in their use?