Rick <Rick@cyborg.force9.net> said:
> Most people who claim they have a gun for personal protection have very
> little need for that claim. Unless you work for the government or some other
> agency that MAY put your life at risk or threat then chances are you have no
> need for a gun. But what about home security? Bullshit! Guns can be
> expensive not to mention the ammo ... why not spend that money in investing
> in better alarm systems and top quality locks for your home and windows?
> Invest your money in a silent alarm connected with the local police
> department. But ohh no, that would take away the fun of blasting the gun toy
> at an intruder ...
> If freedom comes at the cost of the lives of dozens of kids every month,
> then screw it, I support the government and the security agencies that are
> trying to restrict such a free flowing gun-ridden society. New gun laws does
> not mean violation of rights (that were written when the earth was still
> cooling) or is against freedom, its against unnecessary death and reduction
> of terrorism. True, criminals could still get hold of guns, but the last 10
> incidents at schools usually involved guns from normal households, not
> illegally through the black market.
I would recommend that you actually examine some of the evidence compiled by
Professor Lott. If you see that your precepts are inaccurate, perhaps you will