I for one do not propose taking that choice from you. The only problem is that while you get to choose whether or not to be armed, you DON'T get to choose whether the criminals are armed. That choice has been made for you. You could argue that it's better that way, but when I read threads like this plus the violence in Chicago thread, plus VA Tech, plus Columbine-type threads, plus... well, you know - makes you wonder.
the fact that thatr choice is already made makes it that much more important. like someone said earlier..the onlyl way to stop violence with guns it to take them from virtually everyone.....including the military, police, and destroy all equipment to make them. that cannot and never will happen. this means we need to deal with the situation as best as we can, and truthfully, allowing the people to bear arms, is the best solution. i do believe the police in most states have no issue with RESPONSIBLE citizens owning guns. they take the proper training, and continually practice. i also do believe that i recall reading somewhere a few years back that some regions of the US that didn't before allow citizens to carry, changed that law, allowing them to carry their guns......and violent crime dropped siginificantly.
the colombine thing......i believe those weapons were legal.....and the parents of those kids should be hald more responsible than those kids.....the guns weren't secured properly obvously, as the kids got them. i also think i remember something about the kids there planting explosive devices around the school? again, the parents......there HAD to have been signs of something going terribly wrong in these kids minds. a parent should've noticed that behaviour change in his or her kid......if not, then i would thing a friend, or a schoolmate.
the VA tech thing./...i believe there were a few reports of this person being angry, and changing recently before this happened. again, someone that knew him, should have said something. on the other side of that though, imagine if only ONE of the victems or someone in the local vicinity was carrying and had the proper training? that incedent could've/would've been over very quickly.
that is the advantage to allowing properly trained citizens to carry. picture it this way. imagine you're the badguy. you live in DC......you know for fact that you can walk into the local convienence store, and pull your illegally obtained gun on the cashier, and nothing bad will most likely hapen to you unless a police officer walks in. same on the subway or train stations. now take the same situation and go to florida(i think they allow carrying of concealed guns ther, but not sure) or any other place that allows ou to carry. you again walk into the convienence store.....but you realize that that guy in the last isle may have a gun, as well as the guy behind the counter....not to mention anyone else that may alk in, or see what you're doing, and just wait outside for you. so what're you going to do? you're going to leave without ever doing anything this time.....unless you're stupid..then you're probably going to get heurt or die.
i respect your opinion, and again thank god i live in a country that i/we can freely express our opinions, but at least maybe now you can see the need for more citizens being able to protect themselves. the police have one of the hardest jobs in the country, and are never thanked for it....and they cannot be everywhere at once. heck, there's some places that even THEY try to avoid i think.....and it's due to these types of laws.
on a final note, we don't need anymore gun control laws....we need to more aggressivly prosecute the criminals that use them in crimes.
apologizes for such a long post.
<<S>>
