Who do you want to see go?

[Weltall]

Originally posted by A Black Falcon
I'd argue more... but "arguing" with Weltall about politics gets you about as far as arguing with a brick...

Rush Limbaugh, Ann Coulter, Michael Savage, et al, are bigoted, foaming-at-the-mouth, hatemongering idiots.

[

If so, so is Al Franken and Michael Moore and... well, that's about all the left's got. :(

And as for gun-murder rates...

They are really high in the US, and we have many guns.

They are pretty low in Europe, and they have very few guns (though its been going up a bit in England, compared to levels here they have next to none...). They are similarly low in nearly gun-free Japan... and they are similarly low in Canada, a nation with many guns.

Now... are we the only nation with lots of gun violence? No. But there are a lot of nations out there that do a significantly better job than us.

"morality"? Sorry... I don't understand that arguement at all... by your bizarre standards most of the nations that have the low levels of gun violence are "less moral" ones, I'd think... or something, I don't get your arguement.

Once again you demonstrate an amazing ignorance. It's not the availabilty of legal guns that is responsible for our high murder rates. It's OUR morality, or lack thereof. We have a humongous drug problem that Europe doesn't have! Bingo, that's a huge reason why we're worse off in the violent crime aspect! We have a lack of discipline as human beings that makes some of us murder for no good reason. People like this RARELY use legal weapons to do their crimes, and this is OBVIOUS.

It is proven. Getting rid of guns reduces crime a lot of crime. Now, sure, it'd be better to do it like Canada and just have a society that just isn't as violent, but we don't have that... but of course that brings up more issues. We do have people who use guns for legitimate purposes, after all... in a perfect world I think that we'd have all handguns (most violence is handguns) and automatic guns and stuff banned, but people would be able to get guns for hunting if they pass the background check... I don't think we could ban those. Not without a more dramatic change in our society than is realistic.

You point it out yourself: It's America's violent tendencies that is responsible. And of course, the point you and all liberals ignore without fail is that most weapons used in criminal activities are illegal to begin with, and if gun laws aren't doing anything to stop THEM, what good would a total ban accomplish, besides preventing the odd accident? Not much, it would just give criminals the peace of mind knowing that they can prey on any innocent, law-abiding person because they know that person isn't carrying a gun themselves.

Look, I'm all for making it VERY hard to obtain a gun legally. I steadfastly believe that only people who meet very certain criteria and have proper training and knowledge should ever own and carry a weapon. But banning legal weapons is a stupid idea and so far in America has been a miserable failure. If one really wants to reduce violence, the drug scene is where it should begin, starting with but certainly not limited to extremely harsh punishment for the so-called 'non-violent offenders', in other words, the drug users who give business to the dealers and cartels who are at the true root of much of our nation's violence, and who quite often cause trouble and violence themselves obtaining money for their habit.

But what would that accomplish? After all, we'd be a peaceful utopia if law-abiding citizens couldn't own guns!