Not for yoshi. He lives in one of the nicest parts of his state. He never deals with gun crime. He might deal with voter fraud.
Printable View
And if we want to be hateful, lets put it another way.
If you're a spoiled white conservative, gun crime never impacts you. The area you live in doesn't have enough decay to produce much if any violent crime.
Minorities in other counties or states voting in people that Mr. White Conservative finds annoying, does impact him. So it would be in his best interest to make it harder for them to vote. It doesn't really matter if it fixes the presented problem if it can do that.
I'm surprised the most recent gun bill died so quickly. Some people say that it was useless but from what I saw; it had some practical usage and was within constitutional law. The pro-gun lobby is just as harmful as the anti-gun lobby and stands in the way of positive progress.
I'm a strong supporter of gun owning rights but I'm also all for legislation that helps prevent guns from getting into the wrong hands (while not infringing on constitutional rights). The anti/pro gun special interest groups have turned the whole issue into a political one that ignores the real steps that should be taken.
I had to do a research paper on gun ownership (mostly focused on assault weapons) a couple of year's ago. I generally burn through even the most major research papers in several hours and would get good marks but this one ended up taking me 30-40 hours of research for a 10 page report. The amount of misinformation, misapplied and irrelevant statistics, blatant lies, plays on emotion, and interest group related propaganda was insufferable to wade through from BOTH sides. I never want to read another NRA article again.
Meanwhile, the town I live in is filled with illegal gun violence. Some lady just got gunned down and killed three blocks away from us today. The local government has relied on all the political lobby bullshit to solve the problems and it hasn't made a damn bit of difference either way.
Who shouldn't own guns? People with certain political views? People with a "mental illness", which would mean almost everyone?
Discriminating against such things won't be tolerated.
Either gun ownership needs to be licensed, or people need to accept that occasional shootings are the price of having a right to own guns.
I think excluding certain types of criminals or mentally ill people from owning guns is appropriate. It all depends on what sort of mental illness and criminality that we are talking about. I also do believe that shootings are a price to pay for this freedom but in my opinion, the benefits outweigh the negative issues.
If it was plausible to remove the guns from all civilians and criminals tomorrow and there was never a threat of a domestic oppression from our government and/or a foreign invader; I'd be all for it. I no way believe that these things are possible (or very likely) at current but it could be possible 20 or 30 years from now if the populace was disarmed. My take on it is that an armed populace is more to deter these things than be a practical defense in the event that they actually occur. Sort of like how a nuclear armed Soviet Union and NATO probably prevented a conventional conflict breaking out into World War III.
Limits on mag capacity would have helped at Rep Giffords' shooting and in CT.
Lol @ Yosh making the "careful what you wish for" argument when he's shouting for torture and shredding Constitutional due process rights.
I like Joust's "bootstrap store" reference. Going to start using that.