Automoderated users, edit
1,887
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Line 12:
Line 12: +
Debate:What level of Gun Control is appropriate? (view source)
Revision as of 18:45, December 11, 2008
, 18:45, December 11, 2008→No Gun Control is best, since it's a Constitutional Right: ++Cho would simply find some other way; Lawful Students with Guns would be able to stop him and probably deter him from even doing it.
Had Virginia Tech not had this [http://www.ravnwood.com/archives/005264.php for evil doers only]] policy, then chances are some student would have had a gun and stopped [[Seung-Hui Cho]] before he carried out his massacred. It seems to me that most policy pundits and makers are confused about the obvious. There's far too much gun control already. --[[User:RickD|RickD]] 13:24, 11 December 2008 (EST)
Had Virginia Tech not had this [http://www.ravnwood.com/archives/005264.php for evil doers only]] policy, then chances are some student would have had a gun and stopped [[Seung-Hui Cho]] before he carried out his massacred. It seems to me that most policy pundits and makers are confused about the obvious. There's far too much gun control already. --[[User:RickD|RickD]] 13:24, 11 December 2008 (EST)
:However, one of the contributing factors to the VT massacre is that a disturbed individual like Cho was allowed to purchase weapons and ammunition without a background check. In this country you are free to make and sell food provided you get permits and pass food-safety inspections, and you can own & drive a car provided you are trained, licensed and register your vehicle - why should gun ownership be less restrictive when the consequences of letting a Seung-Hui Cho through the cracks are so tragic? If every VT student carried a gun that wouldn't stop a suicidal, insane gunman from trying to hurt or kil as many as he could before he got his death wish. --[[User:DinsdaleP|DinsdaleP]] 13:35, 11 December 2008 (EST)
:However, one of the contributing factors to the VT massacre is that a disturbed individual like Cho was allowed to purchase weapons and ammunition without a background check. In this country you are free to make and sell food provided you get permits and pass food-safety inspections, and you can own & drive a car provided you are trained, licensed and register your vehicle - why should gun ownership be less restrictive when the consequences of letting a Seung-Hui Cho through the cracks are so tragic? If every VT student carried a gun that wouldn't stop a suicidal, insane gunman from trying to hurt or kil as many as he could before he got his death wish. --[[User:DinsdaleP|DinsdaleP]] 13:35, 11 December 2008 (EST)
::A degranged, but motivated individual like Cho would simply find some other way. If there were more gun control, one situation would be for Cho to have bought a Car or Truck and driven it onto campus, running down unspecting students and killing them. A student with a gun could stop Cho in this and most other means of massacre. Students being allowed and encouraged to carry guns is obvious deterant. Half-baked, "feel-good" policies don't save lives or deter the criminally insane, lawful gun carrying citizens will either persuasively or forcefully.
==Some Gun Control is best for society==
==Some Gun Control is best for society==