| From: | Walter Scheper Ratlaw@*******.com |
|---|---|
| Subject: | Value and so on.... |
| Date: | Sat, 17 Jul 1999 21:34:22 +0000 (GMT) |
<cyberraven@********.net> wrote:
> Don't know. I do know that in America, if you make a map of showing the
>per capita violent crime rates and a second map copairing gun regulations
>on a 0 to 100 basis (Vermont with our 2 laws being 0, DC with a full ban on
>handguns, many forms of repeating rifles and shotguns, various kinds of
>ammuniton, full registration, permits, and everything else being 99, and
>the few Federal Housing Projects were there is a total ban on firearms
>being 100), you would find that the maps have peak rates in smae areas.
>Also, there have been a number of states that have loosened thier concealed
>carry regs in the past ten years. Most of them have seen reductions in
>most catagories of crime that exceed the national drops.
Personally I feel that this is merely a case of mis-judged cause and
effect. How does it compare over time? I'd put down money that
you'll see stricter gun laws lagging behind crime rates, basically as
crime goes up cities try to control it by making it harder to acquire
guns. This really doesn't have any affect on the amount of gun
involved crimes because criminals tend to purchase illegal guns
anyway, but I doubt that stricter gun laws will lead to higher crime.
If you can provide some reasonable statistics that show the opposite
to be true (and if you can find "reasonable statistics" i'll be
impressed no matter what they say) I'll happily change my stance on
gun laws.
Ratlaw
Walter Scheper
-----------------------------------------------------
How should I look today, in the presence of Americans,
dividing and subdividing a discourse, to show that men
have a natural right to freedom, speaking of it relatively
and positively, negatively and affirmatively?
Frederick Douglass
