In response to:

The Right Way to Combat Gun Violence

Don664 Wrote: Feb 24, 2013 11:44 AM
More police might help. But dropping all laws prohibiting concealed carry, "licensing" of concealed carry, and leaving it up to the individual costs nothing, and will in the long run reduce crime. The Sullivan Laws were written, not in a response to crime, but in a response to honest people shooting back. Look it up. Gun laws protect criminals.
Earl29 Wrote: Feb 24, 2013 11:52 AM
Yes, and that is so obvious that one wonders if protecting criminals is not the purpose behind gun control laws.
allblues Wrote: Feb 24, 2013 3:38 PM
Gun control is OSHA for criminals.
JMWinPR Wrote: Feb 24, 2013 7:16 PM
No, it is not. CONTROL is the operative word. Some people were even naive enough to think the Affordable Health Care Act is about health. Just like Card Check is about free and open elections. If the bill is sponsored by a (d), you can rest assured the "unintended" consequences are going to be devastating. If an (r) sponsors it, we have a 75% chance it will be bad.

Public policy is a lot like math: No matter what the problem, the wrong answers are far more numerous than the right ones. This is particularly true on the subject of mass shootings and other firearms violence, which have stimulated a new fervor for barking up the wrong tree.

Many liberals think the answer to mass shootings and street crime lies in stricter gun regulation: banning "assault weapons," limiting the capacity of magazines or, in their unrestrained moments, adopting ultra-stringent laws like those in Britain or Australia.

But most of these ideas are irrelevant or impossible. Even if the...

Related Tags: Violence Combat gun violence