Funny after all the tripe, I still hold to my original statement.
Having worked in the business so despised by brother Malgus, I can say that recidivism is the norm.
The war on drugs? Sorry but that victimless crime has thousands of victims, children and families of the users and victims of their associated crimes. Having worked with the victims, having taken children away from tweaked out meth heads, armed tweaked out meth heads no less, having watched those tweakers not just ruin their lives but endanger their families with their crimes, over and over. I can say beyond any reasonable doubt, they don’t need guns and are too stupid to vote.
But back to the original thread concept, there has to be some laws.
This isn’t the 1880’s. People are different, the culture is different.
You can’t fix what’s wrong with the legal system, or the culture but you can work within it.
Gun control, registration, limits on capacity and styles, all bad and should be avoided.
I said it before, felons shouldn’t be able to possess guns.
Its the simple and effective answer. Anything else gets complicated and drawn out in legal battles because some person doesn’t think one thing is a crime but another does. Assaults, domestic problems, drug dealing, how does one choose where that imaginary line in the sand is? And what about plea bargains? He may have committed one crime but gets convicted of a lesser included crime?
Too complex and only makes the lawyers the winners.
No guns for felons, unless they get their record expunged.
Funny, was just telling a couple people the process on how to go about that.
And those mentally defective I spoke of? The Aurora theater shooter, because of his mental issues may one day get out. Does one really think that he can be cured or fixed? Or Ted Kaczynski? Do they truly need a vote? Or a gun?
You can’t just start executing people for various crimes, no matter how cute it sounds. Mistakes are made, those three gents recently released after the evidence proved them innocent.
Unless someone is caught and shot in the act, you must prove beyond a reasonable doubt their crime and guilt. And even then, the guilty go free and the innocent are occasionally caught up.
So ignoring any pipe dreams, what’s a more reasonable method?
We are a nation of laws, what are reasonable laws?
The libtard dems seem to think gun control is reasonable, Malgus seems to think that there should be no laws. Already two opinions that will never agree and would argue and belabor the point until they are both dead.
The answer, a simple line drawn in the sand as it were.
Simple, easy to understand, and legal within current laws.
Get rid of the rest, enforce the minimum.
You can’t stop nuts or crooks with laws.
But you can make sure they can’t get guns easily through normal means.