Quote:
Originally posted by DelayedReaction
And how tight would the law have to be to prevent this kind of tragedy? Did the man demonstrate some kind of mental illness or a criminal record? Was there indications of something that should have prevented him from owning a firearm? Most likely there was no reason that he shouldn't own that shotgun, so tighter gun laws would do nothing in this case.
|
You know this is a really good point. In Canada where I live, the Gov has enacted a new set of gun control laws that are supposed to create a safer life. From where I sit, all it has done is provide a number of expensive hoops for gun owners to jump through to comply, and cost the tax payers a shitload of $$$$.
Keep in mind that I am not a gun owner, so am exressing this opinion as a sideline observer.
I have seen no drop in the amount of gun related crime on the evening news whatsoever. In fact it appears to be increasing. But this is just my feeling from watching the news etc. The law has not been in place long enough to gather any useful stats yet.
My personal prediction is a rise, not drop, in gun related crime in Canada.
Most people I know all see this new set of laws as a reaction to a specific incident, where a gunman shot and killed a number of women at a school. (Yes an act too terrible for words) What I don't see is any way for this new law to prevent this from happening again.
There is not enough info in the above article to determine if tighter laws could have prevented this specific incident.