Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login
Posted: 5/13/2003 7:43:36 PM EDT
Just watched a PBS program "Guns and Moms".It dealt with the "million mom" march lobbying for more gun control while the "SECOND ADMENDMENT SISTERS" were defending the 2nd Admendment. The "million mom march" crowd stated that 12 children a day are "killed by guns"(not killed by the individuals who used the guns. I wonder if the police should destroy the guns that killed the children and let the inocent criminals who were just in the wrong place at the wrong time and just happened to be holding the gun that killed the child should go free?) while the "SECOND ADMENDMENT SISTERS" cleared up that statement a little. It seems that those children killed everyday range in age from 15 to 20 years old and include individuals who were ingaged in crimial acts or had criminal records including violent crime. One woman had three children "killed by guns". It's hard to belive that three brothers get killed in separate incidents and not be involved in some type of criminal activity. So here's my question! Do you really give a flip if crack head, drug dealing gangbangers are killing each other? Do you consider criminals human and deserving of compasion? Even if you do think they are humans and not animals are there lives worth more than our society? Is having compasion for these individuals more important than your rights as a productive and law abideing citizen? I once read an artical about how much "gun violence" is running up the cost of the health industry in America. One guy was shot in a gang fight over crack selling turf and of course crack dealing doesn't have good health care benifits (one issue on the democrats platform next year), so $350,000 later he is in a wheel chair and guns are blamed the health industry eating the cost of treating the guy and then passing on the cost to you and I. Man, why didn't the cops just let him bleed to death in the street like they did one of the guys in the famous "Hollywood bank hold up/shoot out".
Link Posted: 5/13/2003 7:54:15 PM EDT
I don't know if I'd use the wording "not human", but I do believe that anyone who threatens an innocent person with serious harm loses his normal human rights to life, liberty, and property.
Link Posted: 5/13/2003 8:30:58 PM EDT
Originally Posted By mace: I don't know if I'd use the wording "not human", but I do believe that anyone who threatens an innocent person with serious harm loses his normal human rights to life, liberty, and property.
View Quote
Agreed. It would be great if it were in the constitution (Amendmant perhaps?) that 'A person, While in the process of commiting a felony(or serious misdemeanor?), is excempt from any and all protection/rights guaranteed by the constitution, and any necessary force may be used to stop them'... Basically, commiting a crime would be suicide in many places, so criminals would beware of the possible consequences of some 'little' offense. An ammendmant like that would have a greater effect than ANY gun-control ever could (UNLESS were talking about INCREASING crime).
Link Posted: 5/13/2003 8:52:55 PM EDT
If it was just drug dealers killing each other then I don't have a problem with that. Unfortunetly they also kill innocents and terrorize every one else that was in the wrong place at the wrong time. If a mom has all three sons of hers killed by guns there must be some thing going on. Then again most people are just looking for some thing to blame and not really deal with the problems at hand.
Top Top