IMO, the best gun control would be that proven law-abiding citizens could freely carry and proven criminals could not. (legally anyway) It seems like a simple thing to me. How could anyone reasonably think that by passing more and more gun laws or even bans that it would benefit law abiding citizens? The only benefits would be to the criminals who already obtain guns illegally. The problem in the U.S. is not guns its CRIME. I never carried in till my 30's and it was only because of the crime infested area's I have to travel into because of my work now. People who go on and on about gun control this or gun bans that should focus more on the problems that contributes to the crime culture. I don't hunt, Hell I don't even kill spiders but. Criminals, Junkies, Thugs & what ever else will viciously attack or kill you over the smallest of things & my family needs me that's why I carry everyday. I suggest more honest and proper citizens start to do the same. Specially us who have to deal with riffraff daily.
The best gun control is aiming and firing at the target, whatever that may be, then putting the sights back on target and repeating the process several times, before moving on to the next target of opportunity.
Two things. One, it's not about crime. Personal responsibility of any kind is deplorable to these types of people. They want to live in a protectionist culture, and want to force you and I to live the same way. They think they're smarter than the rest of us in general. Two, they think passing a law makes people tow the line. They don't even care about enforcement of laws. Their answer to crime is just pass more laws, which would be funny if it wasn't so stupid.
I would say the root of crime would be poverty. If you look at poverty rates and violent crimes rate they do seem to go hand in hand. That being said, the protectionist nature of many social programs and the "it's not your fault, it's racism/sexism/white males/whites males/white males" doesn't help either. We have people burning down cities for the police shooting death of violent criminals, but not over grenades being thrown into baby cribs. What kind of blatant stupidity is that?
I hear you, and I'm with you. But, what you propose is already in place. It's already illegal for criminals to carry. Yet, somehow, they seem to carry anyway. The only way to ensure that people who are bent on destruction cannot use a gun to carry it out, is to lock them away before they do it. That is to say, if a person cannot be trusted with his intact 2nd Amendment rights, he should not be trusted with his freedom, at all. Put another way; a person who will use a gun to carry out an act of violence, would use whatever means is available to him to carry out acts of violence. And so that person should not be allowed to be free amongst the peaceable public. Obviously, there are problems with stripping people of their freedoms, here in the land of the free. The only real solution, physically separating violent people from weapons, is not practical or possible. If we are to continue to enjoy our own liberties, then violent people are going to be amongst us, and those violent people will use whatever tool is available to them to carry out their violence. Therein lies the problem.
I don't think poverty alone is the issue. Where I grew up there were many poor rural areas, but extremely low crime. Many of those communities worked together to grow their own food, and shared what they had with their neighbors.
