And the long term consequences would be? What, something like the movie Red Dawn? Or we are going to stand up to our military when the Joint Chiefs decide to take over? Yeah, let's keep all the guns so that we are prepared for an invasion and we can stand up to an army coming in with fighter planes and laser-guided missiles and tanks. The well-armed militia argument, if that is what you are referrng to, just doesn't work for me. If the world starts to change and we begin to feel a threat is out there that would try and gain control of the millions of square miles the US encompasses, then let's revisit the need to arm the citizenry.
Dan -----Original Message----- From: jon hall [mailto:jonhall@;ozline.net] Sent: Friday, November 01, 2002 11:58 AM To: CF-Community Subject: Re: 40 Reasons For Gun Control Probably would reduce the murder rate, but Americans were not given the right to bear arms in order to raise the murder rate. People are looking at only the short term advantages of gun control when they support banning gun ownership and not the long term consequences. -- jon mailto:jonhall@;ozline.net Friday, November 1, 2002, 2:00:38 PM, you wrote: DH> Maybe guns don't cause the crimes, but don't they do make it easier for it DH> to turn violent? And I don't think the argument is that getting rid of guns DH> gets rid of crime in general ... the argument is getting rid of guns reduces DH> the 69 per 100,000 murder rate in DC. DH> Dan ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~| Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?forumid=5 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?method=subscribe&forumid=5 Your ad could be here. Monies from ads go to support these lists and provide more resources for the community. http://www.fusionauthority.com/ads.cfm
