On Feb 6, 2007, at 5:00 PM, john harvey wrote:
> The crime and violence in the "old west" was greatly exaggerated in
> the
> movies and tv. Gunslingers sometimes even had shootouts where
> nobody got
> shot. Iraq is a different place. Look at where the most crime
> occurs in the
> US, and you'll see that the worst places are those where it is
> illegal for
> most citizens to have guns.
I think it's the other way around. Most of the places where owning
certain types of guns is restricted is precisely because of the high
violence those places experienced *before* such laws were put in
place. You are trying to make it sound as if things were nice and
peaceful before those restrictions were put in place, and then the
crime and violence erupted.
Most of the "worst places" are the ones with the highest population
densities. This is true in countries where guns are common, like the
US, and where they aren't, such as most European cities. Compare the
rates of fatal crimes in both areas to get an idea of just how useful
guns are to keeping us safe.
BTW, I'm all for gun ownership. I just believe that not all guns are
the same. Handguns have no purpose other than killing people. The
same is true for the high-output weapons commonly referred to as
"assault weapons". Ownership of both of these types of guns is linked
to increased crime. Rifles, shotguns, and the like, OTOH, do indeed
have legitimate uses, and ownership of such weapons is not linked to
higher levels of crime.
-- Ed Leafe
-- http://leafe.com
-- http://dabodev.com
_______________________________________________
Post Messages to: ProFox@leafe.com
Subscription Maintenance: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profox
OT-free version of this list: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profoxtech
** All postings, unless explicitly stated otherwise, are the opinions of the
author, and do not constitute legal or medical advice. This statement is added
to the messages for those lawyers who are too stupid to see the obvious.
