Brewha wrote:Anthony, I do respect your view, particularly as it is a part of your profession. Yet I am confused by it. Especially from a law officer. I would think you would want all the legal tools you could have, not less. To keep the peace, as it were.
At face value it's easy to make that assumption. Years ago, I would have agreed with you. But, think of it like this, certian people are going to have guns regardless. But, if simply possessing one wasn't illegal under certian circumstances there would be many less foot pursuits through dark abandoned buildings. Also, I would venture to say a number of officers might still be with us because some felons may not have been worried about going back to jail for an extended length of time because they had guns.
Brewha wrote:A law never stops a crime. It does allow us to punish it though. And it does have a level of deterrence. And for some, they never go above the posted speed limit - because it is a crime. Of cource not everyone.
Now it is a truism that a criminal will always find a way. But to me that has little bearing on what should be crime by law.
Here is the truism in that. If you look at all firearm related homocides, I would say at least 90% of them are not crimes of opportunity. By and large firearm related homocides are committed by career criminals, true predators. They can and will acquire a firearm by any means. To keep guns out of their hands which would prevent the overwhelming vast majority of firearm homocides there would have to be absolutely no way for them to acquire a firearm.
Brewha wrote:
And I think the person that allowed the child access to the gun did something criminal. Or it should be a crime. Truth is I don't even know how old one needs to be to carry. But 12 or 13 is too young.
No disrespect, but those words are very naive. You're an engineer. I would assume you live a comfortable life in a neighborhood where it's safe to leave your doors unlocked. The world that child came from is one where it is common to see people shot and killed in the street in front of their house in broad daylight. A world where his role models hand him a gun and tell him to go get the money from the ice cream truck when it turns onto his block.
In his world a loaded gun is as common to him as a gameboy would be to your children. In essence, what we find appalling it exactly what he was exposed to since the day he came into this world.
Brewha wrote:
I think the regulation should be appropriate to the risk. Like driving a car, flying a plane, handling explosives. You can do it if you meet requirements and know what your doing - which means not everyone. Owning a fire arm is a big responsibility. And we need laws regarding who can have what.
Therein lies the fallacy, you're attempting to regulate people who will for the most part self regulate. I grew up around firearms.
When I was about 6 years old, my grandfather taught me how to shoot using an old .22 rifle. He and my father took me hunting. They both taught me gun safety. Above all they taught me to not to be afraid of firearms, but to respect their ability to destroy. Most importantly they taught me firearms were not toys to be played with. I would feel confident in saying that most accidental shootings by minors occurred because those children were not properly taught to respect firearms.
Brewha wrote:
I don't own a gun. Not that I have not fired them. And I don't want one.
But I am glad that you as a pro have one.
It's the other clowns that worry me...
They worry me every day.
