Bridgeton Police Chief Mark Ott is of the opinion that no matter what is done to stop them, criminals will always be able to gain possession of a gun if they really want it.No duh.
“Here’s one way to look at it. If criminals can import tons of illegal narcotics into the country they can import tons of foreign firearms,” he said. [More]
If Joe Blow walks up to rob a person without a gun, that victim might fight for their purse or wallet. If you put a gun into the equation, it takes the physical confrontation out of it,” he [Gaimari] said.
ReplyDeleteWell no Sh*& Sherlock! That's why, when you allow people the tools to defend themselves, you actually see LESS crime. Criminals go for the easy target. When they know that no law abiding citizen will be able to defend themselves, they go there for 'work'.
I know, I'm preaching to the choir here, but these friggin idiots make me want to go slap them all upside the heads.
Aaaarrgh!!!! I don't know why I still get upset when these morons talk, but dammit, how can people be so stupid?
The solution is not serving the maximum sentence after the armed crime, arrest and conviction. That only prolongs the interval between the crimes by an individual. Armed crimes only succeed because the victims lack the means to defend themselves and must give in to the threat of violence imposed by the weapon. Criminals deny to themselves that they will be caught and believe that they will most likely prevail with no immediate harm to themselves. That perception must change to effect the desired behavior change. Instead, promote the possession and trained use of weapons for all adults. For example, armed holdups at ATMs in Florida were frequent until a female victim in her 60's pulled out a .45 instead of cash from her purse and killed her robber. There was an instant behavior change for that robber and for others who learned that what they thought was an opportunity had a threat associated with it. That effect did not last long for others.
ReplyDeletehttp://wn.com/Man_at_ATM_Shoots_Armed_Robbers
http://www.tampabay.com
/news/publicsafety/crime/armed-diner-shoots-robbery-suspect-outside-st-petersburg-applebees/1184869
http://www.dailycommercial.com/081011ATMshooting-
Even trained police officers are vulnerable to armed ATM robbers:
http://www.realpolice.net/forums/officer-down-47/72804-orlando-police-officer-killed-during-atm-robbery.html
http://blogs.orlandosentinel.com/news_homicide/category/al-gordon
Video surveillance cameras record who is at an ATM and aids arrests, but that does not prevent the armed robberies because there is no immediate potential adverse consequence:
http://www.mysuncoast.com/mostpopular/story/Video-of-murder-suspect-generating-tips-for/QkS2p-rxG0OOuA9eIvXAMw.cspx
http://www2.tbo.com/news/breaking-news/2011/dec/05/sarasota-man-charged-in-fatal-shooting-ar-331073/
Draining a pond to kill an undesired fish species has the unexpected and unintended consequence of killing all the fish species. Banning guns removes some guns, but prevents effective defense from other weapons.
Interesting that some people still think MORE "gun control" or stricter "enforcement" of "laws" like the odious Nazi-inspired GCA68 will have an effect on violence in general,when that "law" in particular has been on the books for almost 50 years,and in that time violence has become an epidemic in America.
ReplyDeleteThe promoters of such "laws" claimed that they would "solve the problem",and yet,exactly the opposite thing has happened.
They say the definition of insanity is to do the same thing over and over again expecting a different result.
And yet,here we are,considering stricter enforcement or more of the same.
Its rather simple in the end.You commit murder,rape,armed robbery,etc- you are never let out of prison in the first place.
Then,we wouldn't need "laws" that violate the Second Amendment to "keep guns out of the hands of dangerous people",because dangerous people would be in prison.
Repeal all "gun control" and start putting dangerous people where they belong.