|
|
|
Interesting article, Life. I for one am a pro-gun person. I believe and support the 2nd amendment. Shootings like this provoke a lot of movement by the anti-gun groups. It's a knee jerk reaction. Political motivations aside, I understand the desire to solve these shooting sprees by either making guns harder to acquire or by getting rid of them altogether.
However, there's a couple things to consider. In this specific case we have an individual who was very intelligent. He didn't just use guns to attack people. he used tear gas (possibly home made? I haven't hear anyone mention where he got the tear gas from), and rigged his apartment with explosives. If this guy couldn't have gotten a hold of some guns, we must ask ourselves how likely it would have been that he would have simply used a bomb instead to inflict damage?
Another aspect is one people on the left will not want to hear. It's a very hard right approach, but there's some truth to it. If you were a gunmen and were going to attack a theater, would you attack the theater filled with unarmed people or the one full of armed people? I've heard people say "an armed society is a polite society." I know, some people are very scared of the thought of everyone having a gun. But that doesn't change that fact that there's some truth to the statements.
As viable a solution as anti-gun laws might be, pro-gun gun laws are just as viable. There isn't just one solution, and I think people should consider that.
Of course I'm also a big believer in moderation. Taking the extreme solution in either direction would be the wrong choice. _________________

|
|