I don't think so
Quote:
Originally Posted by raytri";p="
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rebellion";p="
The interesting thing is that in BOTH instances the only way you prevent these people from getting shot is an outright ban on guns. Both men had no criminal record. Both were over 50. One had a long record in the service with an honorable discharge. The other was an ex-Marine on disability, again honorably discharged. Neither was a likely suspect to do this. The only way to control it would have been an outright ban, which I and most are totally against.
|
I'm against an outright ban, too. But would restrictions on carrying have prevented either one, for instance? Or a requirement that the gun be unloaded? Even the few seconds it took to pick up and insert a magazine might have provided time for second thoughts.
I don't know. I'm asking questions. |
In both instances these guys chased them, they want out of their way to drive after these people so they could shoot them. If the minutes it took to do that didn't give them time to think then the few seconds it takes to load a gun won't.
__________________
All you need to know about the energy crisis:
ANWR Exploration Republicans: 91% Supported. Democrats: 86% Opposed.
Coal-to-liquid R's: 90% YES. D's: 78% NO.
Oil Shale Exploration R's: 90% YES. D's: 86% NO.
Outer Continental Shelf Exploration R's: 81% YES. D's: 83% NO.
Increased Refinery Capacity R's: 97% YES. D's: 96% NO
SUMMARY: 91% of House Republicans have historically voted to increase the production of America’s own oil and gas. 86% of House Democrats have historically voted against.
|