The Texas shooter who killed people when they were in a helpless situation fled because a resident with a shotgun started shooting at him. Given that the shooter was already barred from legally owning firearms, did local gun laws help save lives?
I often wonder, in these cases, if the system to support the laws has an issue to fix. Generally I am pro gun, but not in favor of those who are ineligible to own them having them. In at least one other case, a gunman who could not have a gun bought one, legally (actually multiple). Turns out the background check system had loopholes. So even the dealer doing due diligence was not enough.
Perhaps. But there cannot so many that a small force can’t go around and verify. If it’s done to verify welfare recipients, it can be done for persons with weapons illegally.
The AR was purchased legally, so that says that some idiot sold a lawful weapon to a person unable to purchase one on his own - and the creep in TX had several. So - how does that “friend” feel now about helping out a weaponless buddy who felt his 2A rights are being denied.
It’s my personal opinion. As long as we keep making excuses like:
It was legally purchased
The gun doesn’t kill, people do
My cold dead hand ...
I’m sick of being ruled by NRA platitudes and excuses. People need to stand up for non-gun-owners as well.
.
Yes. The gun laws allowed the person to shoot at the guy with a shotgun. He wouldn't have been able to do so if the law hadn't allowed it, because he's a law-abiding citizen
You can ban guns but you can't ban the knowledge of how to make guns. There will always be guns, even if they are crude and hand made. The IRA used to make guns out of nothing but scavenged garbage.
Show of Hands
Comments: Add Comment