|
| Sylv wrote:
> Alex;
>
>
>
>
> Or theft of guns. I think that's where most of the illegal owners
> get their guns. Either they steal the guns themselves, or they sell
> those guns to an underground dealer.
>
> One of the reasons I decided not to buy a gun; my neighborhood was
> high in "property" crime, so chances are that my place would have
> been broken in to when I wasn't home. And the gun ripped off, no
> doubt.
>
> Sylvia
>
True, I hadn't considered about that avenue. Again though, as I
mentioned before, I do believe in stronger consequences for crimes
involving guns. I know that many jurisdictions to enhance sentences for
crimes committed *with* a gun, but I think that theft/burglary
convictions involving guns should be enhanced as well. Increase the
cost of "doing business", so to speak.
Of course, none of that would not stop guns from being smuggled in to
the country. If the supply drops because guns have been taken away from
the honest citizen, the criminal enterprise *will* find another supply.
Of that there can be no question.
At this point in time, there is no way to monitor 100% of our borders or
verify 100% of the cargo coming into the country. Just like with the
drug smugglers, you make a lot of shipments, some get through & some
don't. To them, its just the cost of doing business. Until some kind
of magic technology arrives, 100% inspection would slow the shipment of
goods to a crawl & cripple the economy.
The criminal element will always look to get the advantage, one way or
another. I just don't think that restricting the rights of the honest
citizen will have any impact at all on overall gun violence.
I know that some will point to domestic violence situations involving
guns. But again, even in those situations, if it has gotten to that
point, the offender *will* find something else to use. Instead of gun
violence, we'll see an increase in baseball bat violence, or scissors,
steak knife, etc.
I just have a hard time with gun control issues. Yes, gun violence is
rising. Allentown, near me, has set a new record for gun deaths this
year. Almost all of it appears to be gang/drug related. But how does
taking guns away from the honest citizen solve/reduce that problem?
I know its been discussed before, but lets look at alcohol. Alcohol
causes many more deaths/injuries/violent incidents each year than guns.
Where is the outcry for "Alcohol Control"?
There is no question that DUI's are a problem. We have requirements for
all new gun purchases to include trigger locks, where is the requirement
for all new cars to have alcohol interlocks? Seems just as reasonable
to me.
Everyone seems to agree that underage drinking is a problem, why not do
something effective about it? Where is the requirement to register your
alcohol purchases? If all alcohol containers were serialized, and
traceable to the purchaser as with guns, then when kids are caught with
alcohol, you could easily track down & charge the person who provided it.
What is the difference between gun legislation & alcohol legislation?
Money, plain & simple. I don't know the numbers, I haven't tried to
look them up, but I would guarantee that the alcohol industry far
outweighs the civilian gun industry many times over. (I'm purposely
distinguishing between civilian and military sales.)
BTW, here's something that the anti-gun lobby is sure to use. Of course
I'm sure they'll conveniently leave out the part about the mother.
Full story here:
http://www.zwire.com/site/news.cfm?...&dept_id=455154
Quick summary:
Boy admits during juvenile hearing he brought gun to school
The boy brought a pistol to Hunlock Creek Elementary school twice,
showing the gun to classmates and packing 50 rounds of ammunition in his
knapsack in November.
....
The boy's mother, Linnea C. Holdren, is also being charged. The
43-year-old Shickshinny resident is a special education teacher at the
same school.
Holdren was charged with two felony counts of endangering children and
related offenses, for allegedly allowing her son unfettered access to
the pistol. Her case was forwarded to county court Dec. 22 by a district
judge. A trial date has not been set yet.
....
The woman was charged after allegedly telling police that she could not
lock her son's gun because it "belonged" to the child.
"Well, I can't lock up his guns," Holdren allegedly told police after
they offered her a free gunlock. "They belong to him and he has the
right to use them when he wants to use them."
In Pennsylvania, it is illegal for a child under 18 to carry a weapon
unless supervised by a parent, guardian or grandparent. Children cannot
hunt until they are 12 years old.
Butera, who is also Holdren's defense attorney, argued at her
preliminary hearing that the woman was unaware her son took the gun to
school, and could not be held criminally responsible for the child's
actions. The boy's father, who lives with his wife and son, has not been
charged with a crime.
....
I think they did the right thing in charging the mother, as she acted
wholly irresponsible with her lack of safeguarding the gun, especially
given her statement to the police. The child is obviously not
responsible enough yet for independant control of a gun, even apart from
the legalities. I do question, however, why the father was not charged.
They don't go into any detail on that aspect.
Alex
|
|