Voting

[sawleaf]

Gun laws only affect law abiding citizens? What do they do to stop criminals from getting guns? Nothing. Therefore more gun laws only give an advantage to armed criminals. Plus who is the government or anyone to say how you can or can't protect yourself??? More restriction is less freedom. My vote went to Badnarik.

sawleaf Reviewed by sawleaf on 11-02-2004. Voting All you Americans, who are you voting for/ would vote for? If you aren't American who would you vote for? Seems to me most people here would vote for Kerry but I dunno Rating: 5

[Kombucha]

More restriction is less freedom?! How far are you gonna take that? "The government can't stop me killing people."

It is the governments job to protect people through law. Guns are obviously responsible for more loss of life than saving of lives.

You dont need to "protect yourself" with guns. If you get attacked chances are you wont have a gun on you. If no one has a gun, no one needs one to protect themselves. Who cares about some 200 year old right? You think the British are gonna try to invade America, and that ordinary people with guns could do anything to stop them? Be realistic, is it worth the loss of 1000s of lives just so you can have a right that doesn't make really affect you at all?

[sawleaf]

Do you have any idea of the current gun laws we have on the books? We already have tons of gun laws. The problem is that they are not enforced. People think new gun laws will stop violence. What we really need is harsher penalties for commiting crimes with firearms. How are more gun laws going to solve anything if criminals don't care about the law??? It's not the NRA members who are commiting crimes.

[Torog]

Do you have any idea of the current gun laws we have on the books? We already have tons of gun laws. The problem is that they are not enforced. People think new gun laws will stop violence. What we really need is harsher penalties for commiting crimes with firearms. How are more gun laws going to solve anything if criminals don't care about the law??? It's not the NRA members who are commiting crimes.

Howdy sawleaf,

You're right,there's already more than enough gun laws,better enforcement of existing gun laws and a well-armed citizenry is proven to reduce crime at every level.

Stay Safe-Stay Armed !

[pisshead]

and if bush only expands and creates more gun laws torog...does that make him conservative?

[pisshead]

More restriction is less freedom?! How far are you gonna take that? "The government can't stop me killing people."

It is the governments job to protect people through law. Guns are obviously responsible for more loss of life than saving of lives.

You dont need to "protect yourself" with guns. If you get attacked chances are you wont have a gun on you. If no one has a gun, no one needs one to protect themselves. Who cares about some 200 year old right? You think the British are gonna try to invade America, and that ordinary people with guns could do anything to stop them? Be realistic, is it worth the loss of 1000s of lives just so you can have a right that doesn't make really affect you at all?

care to back up the statement that guns are more responsible for loss of life than saving lives? the opposite is true. guns are used anywhere from 40 to 80 times more often for protection than to kill, depending on if you believe demopublicans or republicrats...

http://www.gunowners.org/fs0404.htm

you're incredibly ignorant of history. and how do you plan on getting rid of guns? anywhere strict gun control laws are in effect, that increases crimes. criminals who get guns (you're NEVER going to get rid of all guns) are more apt to break in to your house and shoot you because they figure you won't have a gun.

research any city that has strict gun control laws and compare it to cities that have lax gun control laws.

it seems logical that banning guns will make you safe, but it's just not true.

[Bro DZ]

But what about their gun policies? What are they, psychos? Do they really think letting anyone have a gun will make the streets safer? Their idea is that if you give people guns they can protect themselves. That might be true in some circumstances, but in most, you wont be able to get to your gun. Then even if you do, you might shoot someone you didn't mean to, or shoot someone through misunderstanding. The person attacking you with a gun has a huge advantage over you.

They are simply trying to uphold the constitution. Its our damn right to have guns.

but i voted for Bush because he was the only guy i partially agree with and had a good shot at winning.

[pisshead]

yeah, historically, governments don't disarm their own citizens because they love them and care about them, it's because they have some evil stuff planned, and they want as little resistance as possible.

[Kombucha]

Guns might be used more to protect yourself but that doesn't mean that people are successful in protecting yourself. I have already shown you statistics which prove that a country without guns is much safer.

Pisshead, I am not in the slightest ignorant of history. What's your point.

Bro DZ, it might be your constitutional right to own a gun, but it shouldn't be. It's stupid. Why have that right just for the sake of having a right. I'd rather lose the right to own a gun and be much safer.

It is a proven fact that you are more likely to shoot yourself or someone else you don't want to shoot with your gun than someone that is threatening you.

[sawleaf]

Kombucha who are you or anyone to say how we can or can not arm ourselfs? Just because you hate guns doesn't make you right. That is just your opinion. Nobody is forcing you to arm yourself, but don't hate people who choose to arm themselves and enjoy firearms.