Quote:
Originally Posted by Paul Markham
So you are willing to accept the numbers killed in the mass shootings, just to keep your guns.
Limiting the power and magazine capacity lowers the number killed.
|
I am. I am also willing to accept the 1.2 million deaths of men and women who gave their lives to protect the Constitution. I am also willing to accept the number of people that are killed by the police every year (more are killed by the police than by mass shootings) to keep the police on the streets. I am willing to accept that people can still purchase and rent cars despite the number of people killed in car accidents. I am willing to accept the fact that you can purchase a pressure cooker at a Bed Bath and Beyond despite two terrorists using them to kill and maim. Or that you can still buy fertilizer despite it being used in two terrorists attacks on US soil.
I choose to live in a free society which has inherent dangers. Anytime anyone that is innocent is killed, whether it is in a mass shooting, a car accident, an abuse of police powers or a terrorist attack it is tragic and unfortunate, but it is the price of being free.
Does that mean that nothing should be done to try to make tragic deaths less likely? Of course not, but the regulation or law should be carefully calculated not to impinge upon rights or privileges of citizens while lowering the number of injuries/deaths. A good example of this is seat belt and air bag regulation on automobile manufacturers.
By the way, lowering the magazine capacity will not stop mass shootings. I dont think it will even lower the kill number.
Perhaps a regulation requiring bio-metric security features on all new guns might help. If my phone can only be unlocked with my fingerprint why cant my gun (if I owned one) also only be unlocked by me ?
While I havent done any research on it, I would guess that making guns inoperable by anyone other than its owner will reduce the number of accidental shootings. More children die in accidental shootings than school shootings every year. It will make stolen guns relatively useless, perhaps reducing the number of murders on the streets by the "bad guys" but with 300 million guns in the US, it will take generations until "smart guns" replace traditional guns and even then, you will still have old revolvers being used to kill.
There really is no answer to gun injuries/deaths other than confiscation. And then you will only be taking the guns from those willing to hand them over. The "bad guys" wont be lining up at the local police station to hand in their guns.