View Single Post

Default 

January 15th, 2013, 22:48
Again, that's just ONE element and is the element on this thread because Sam brought it up.

If you want to create a thread about the other factors, feel free.

Saying that it should not be done is like saying the following:

Adding more police to the street in town A did not reduce crime rate. (Let's do like you are doing now) This means we can remove all police officers from town A.

Gun control isn't doing anything, so let's halt all gun control.

However, what I am saying is:

Police officers on their own cannot reduce crime rate if everything else is going badly. For example if the police officers are all corrupt then adding more of them will not solve much, so what you would need to do is make sure the new ones you add are at the very least less corrupt than the old ones or purge the current one of corrupt officers.

For guns, having assault weapons is in my opinion (based on my Europeanised view of things) unnecessary for almost anyone, but the army. (I already find it strange that police officers have machine guns in the UK …)

So in my opinion banning them will do nothing bad to your beloved constitution compared to how much it can reduce gun-crime and thus save lives.
Making the gun-control laws better would also not harm your constitution and might save more lives. While the effect on their own might not be a lot. Combining them to other programmes (not discussed in this thread) it might result in many synergies.


Doing any ONE thing will not result in much. It's doing multiple things that will. THIS THREAD IS ABOUT GUNS !
Pladio is offline

Pladio

Pladio's Avatar
Guardian of Nonsense
RPGWatch Donor

#174

Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: London, uk
Posts: 3,139
Send a message via MSN to Pladio