h2g2 The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy: Earth Edition

First of all, I don't really want to open a discussion on this topic, because it would just go around in circles (much like the one on religion). We are on opposite sides of the issue and I'm sure we will stay that way, so why get all worked up?

OK, this is about gun control. I myself am pro gun control, if I could have it my way, we wouldn't have any guns. I read in the political forum that you don't agree with Bradley on gun control, so I'm assuming that you are anti gun control.

I'm sure that you've heard about the six-year-old boy who shot and killed on of his classmates yesterday. This kind of thing makes me really angry, because it could have been prevented. I personally think that the kids parents should be charged with homicide just as though they pulled the trigger. The whole thing is just scary.

What I want to know is what do you think should be done to stop this kind of thing from happening. I am intreagued (sp?) as to what you will say, because I know that you won't say that it's because they took God out of schools since you're an atheist and all. And, you are an intelligent guy and most of the anti gun control people I see on tv are not, and they can never state a way to solve the problem, just reasons why we need guns and we can't have locks on them, because then we will be killed by strangers and so on. So, what do you think?

I just want to say that I'm asking you 1. because you're on of the few people I communicate with who are pro gun, and 2. because I respect your opinion as you and I share the same stance on other issues (religion, vouchers). No one agrees on everything. I just wanted to hear an intelligent soultion to a growing problem, from someone on the other side.

Thanks
GreyRose

Never been one to avoid such conversations, as both my political statements in that forum and my anti-Christian crusade can attest...

Well, I am going to bore you with some of the same rhetoric that most pro-gun idiot-types use. Law breakers can get access to guns, so by controlling them, you only hurt the law abiders. The states with the toughest gun control laws (California, New York, and Washington DC) have the highest incidences of violent crime, and the states with the loosest gun laws (Georgia, Texas, and Tennessee) have the lowest rates. It's a simple fact that it's an excellent crime deterrent if you have a suspicion that the guy you want to mug is packing a .45 in his coat and a 9mm in his boot.

So, what do we do about kids getting their hands on them? Hold the parents responsible. Take the brats who shot up Columbine, and throw them in prison for life. Then, take their parents, and throw them in prison for a decade or so. Make them face punitive damages from the kids' victims and their families. Everyone who takes a gun into their house assumes the responsibility for a tool that can take away life, and we need to send a message to the idiot parents out there that it is THEIR responsibility. And if it isn't the parents who gave them access to the firearms, find out who did, and go after them.

Thanks for answering.

When teenagers go into their school and start killing people, (I don't want to say that it doesn't bother me as much) but it's not the same as a six-year-old. Teenagers can get guns illeagaly without their parents having one. What do you think about gun locks?

I do think that the parents should be held responsible. I think that they should have their children taken away from them. But teenagers should also take responsibility for their own crimes. By the way, you know those Columbine guys killed themselves.

What do you think about waiting periods? A lot of pro gun people have a real problem with that. I can't see why, because if you're just an average joe who wants a gun to protect his home and haven't had a gun until now, whats seven days more?

Yeah, forgot about those Columbine brats offing themselves, but I do applaud it...perfect solution to the problem. We should convince more mass murderers that that's the way to go.

If a teenager commits that sort of crime, they should be treated as adults. You don't let the sort of person capable of that kind of thing out into society...ever. But the parents should still face criminal negligence, at least. And if the parents didn't provide the firearms, somebody did, and that person needs to be targeted as well, as an accessory or something.

If a kid does that sort of thing, you can't try them, because they really don't know the difference. But you do take the kid away from the parents, and force them to face criminal charges. I saw a bit on that kid on tv today. His mom is a crack-whore, his dad is serving time, and some asshole in the house left the loaded gun on the sofa for the kid to find. Throw the whole lot of them in jail, and never let them near the kid again. I think he'll do it again though.

Law abiding citizens should have no problem with waiting periods, and I am one. I think they should prevent guns from landing in the hands of criminals, and a background check is a way to do that. I've had background checks done before each job I've taken, and a gun is even more responsibility (except for the job where I managed a missile system...little more opportunity for collatoral damage there. ) than those jobs. Pro-gun types can be such paranoid retards sometimes, which is why I usually keep my views silent on this one.

Are you afraid they're going to come after you?

It's too bad more people like you don't say what you think. If the normal, responsible pro gun people did that, maybe we could come to a compromise and figure out something that will actually work.

I really hope that that kid is kept away from his parents. But he'll probably end up in foster care and end up feeling unwanted and treated as such. I think he'll do it again too.

You didn't tell me what you thought about gun locks. The talking heads (not the band, the people they got their name from) say that they can't use gun locks, because what if someone breaks into your house and your gun is locked so they kill you. What do you think?

The hunting rifles need to be locked up. Period. As for self-defense weapons, this is why I favor concealed carry laws. They have an amazing power of crime deterrence in the states that have them. Muggers and rapists think twice when you might have a .38 in your purse and a .45 in your male friend's coat. If paranoid types want to have it available to them in their homes, they can wear it on themselves. At night it can be in the top drawer of the nightstand, within easy reach. If the worry is that the kid might creep into the room and take it, and you're both sound sleepers, then hide it in the vent duct above the bed, or some other obscure but easily available place. If they want to make gun locks mandatory, they are way out of their league. What you do in your own home is protected under the Bill of Rights, and it would be unbelievably unconstitutional.

OK. I think that it's legal to carry a concealed weapon here.

What do you think of those people who say that they don't have to keep their gun away from their kids because their kids know they're not supposed to have it?

If they think their kids are going to obey them in all things, they've forgotten what they were like as kids. That's why I say the parents are guilty of, if nothing else, criminal negligence if their kid manages to do some damage with their guns. It is the parents' responsibility to teach the child about the hazards of guns, and it is also their responsibility to keep them out of the kids' hands. If they choose not to live up to that responsibility, they'd better be prepared to face the consequences.

BTW, where is 'here'?

That's right. I get so mad when I hear those people.

'Here' is Oklahoma. I've lived here all my life, and it sucks most of the time, but there are some good things about it.

Oh yeah, I posted something on your entry on Mark Twain. I mean Samuel Clemens. I say Mark Twain, but I knew his real name. I just say it b/c it has fewer syllabyles (sp?)

Did you notice that you have 'responsibility' in a column? You might not have because I'm looking at the 'the message you are replying to' page. It's very striking.

Naw, it doesn't show up that way in the forum. I guess I was being a little redundantly redundant, but responsibility is what it's all about.

Too bad not everyone knows it.

Sorry to restart this forum...

If everyone had a gun, wouldn't there be many more accidental gun deaths?

And with that six year old - though it's (by now) a forgotten issue) - if his parents hadn't had a gun, he wouldn't have been able to attain one illegally. So there's someone you would be protecting.

Accidental gun deaths have steadily fallen since their peak in the 1930's despite the fact that the population has doubled and the number of weapons have quadrupled. The answer is awareness and training. Both are readily available. In fact, I would make it mandatory for new gun owners to have attended some sort of firearm safety course and range drilling. Having done both, I know the benefits.

You protect the victim of that crime by charging the who left the gun out as an accessory to the crime. When you allow someone to get their hands on your firearm, you are responsible for the consequences. A few examples like that, and gun owners will start to take better care of their weapons.

Incidentally, that kid got that weapon through a failure of the current laws. The jerk who left the gun out (it wasn't a parent, but a friend of the parents) wasn't supposed to have one anyway, since he has quite a police record. Once again, we see an example of the gun laws only hurting the law abiders.

Thank you.