Killing made easy!

[azdesertrhino]

This is some of the B.S. the anti-gun people believe. Disarm the whole country. The bad part is the anti-gun groups are well funded and very vocal. What did you do today to protect out rights?

Killing Made Easy


Monday, January 16, 2006; Page A16

WITH PITIFULLY little notice paid, another rash of year-end homicide statistics points up the madness of this country's fascination with handguns. The domestic arms race continues full tilt. More kids are taking handguns to school in Maryland and Virginia, according to a report by The Post's Daniel de Vise, and one big, sorry reason is that more than a few of them are responding to a perceived threat of violence in their midst. Murders by handguns continue to rock Prince George's County and the District with a vengeance.

Three Maryland jurisdictions -- Baltimore City, Baltimore County and Prince George's -- accounted for more than half of all school weapons incidents (the statistics include knives) in the state. Prince George's tallied 533 weapon suspensions in 2004-05, up 74 percent from 306 in 1999-2000. But the prevalence of weapons in the schools is only one reflection of the regional scene and that of the nation as a whole. Police in most jurisdictions report that the majority of killings occur after two men argue and one or both pull out guns.


There's an obvious thread here that members of Congress choose not to see: The all-too-free flow of handguns, a warped way of life that cows presidents and members of Congress who ought to recognize that the availability of handguns is murderous. The problem is that Americans own 65 million handguns and the only effective safety measure would be a ban on these made-for-murder weapons. As writer Jenny Price noted in a Dec. 25 op-ed in The Post, only 160 of the 12,000 guns used to kill people every year are employed in legitimate self-defense; guns in the home are used seven times more often for homicide than for self-defense.

Lawmakers know all this and know as well that handguns -- however exalted they seem to be in America -- should not be in general circulation. Political long shot that it may be, a national ban on the general manufacture, sale and ownership of handguns ought be enacted. It would not pacify kids or adults with violent tendencies, and it might not curb general criminal activity markedly. But it might well save thousands of lives. Handgun exceptions could be made for federal, state and local law enforcement and military agencies; collectors of antique firearms; federally licensed handgun sporting clubs with certain safety procedures; security guard services; and licensed dealers, importers or manufacturers that are determined to be meeting those needs.

Such a bill was proposed more than a decade ago by Sen. John Chafee (R-R.I.), who has since died. "I hear people say it's a radical proposal," he said then. "Well, I think to have the current situation is radical. No other country has anything like it." He described slaughter by handguns as killing in record numbers, threatening education and pushing the high costs of education even higher. So what's new today?

[My1stJeep]

Sad but true. However taking hand guns out of the equation will not make a difference. Maybe in the short term, but in the long run it may make things worse.

Think about that second picture, the vest on. Why does he have such a vest, is it from hand guns? More likely (guessing here from the attire being worn that he is from Isreal) it is for any type of gun fire, automatics to be more precise.

You can look to the Middle East or even Ireland. Kids in Ireland have used home made grenades, children going to school have been shot at with high power rifles. Now I am not going to go into why, that is a whole different discussion, but the fact is it will just change the type of weapon being used.

It is not the guns that are the problem, it is the mentality of those using them. Our society has allowed us to fall into this black hole, the results are things like killing someone is not an issue. I think there are several factors, one of which is lack of education and respect for firearms and a big one is that the guilty often become the victum. I am sure we could put together quite a long list of the factors, but to me that is what this boils down to. Society as a whole is allowing this, partly by making the person who did this the victum. Make sure their rights are not violated, don't hurt them, make sure the cuffs are not on too tight, be sure they get their smokes, coffee in the morning and the TV is set to their favorite show. While they are carrying out their sentence please be sure to not make them work to hard or say anything mean to them, they were abused growing up.

Ok, what a bunch of cow poop. I know we have to assume innocent until proven guilty, but how come we don't care this much for the true victums? This backwards way of thinking, and in addtion allowing the person time off for good behavior and letting them out after only a few years makes the problem worse after their little vacation.

To me we need to make them work hard while in jail and teach them. Give them an education so that they have the tools to break the cycle. This will work for some, but not all. Make them serve their sentences, and get harsher on killers and rapists (put molesters in this category too).

The gun did not make the decision to pull the trigger, the person holding it did. Take away the hand gun and you have temporarily slowed the issue, however since the underlying issue as to why the crime was commited had not been dealt with the criminals will just move to a different weapon if they have to (that is if you can find a way to get the guns off the black market, in reality you will only be removing the guns from the law abiding citizens, teh criminals will still have them). You may stop the kid who grabs mom or dads hand gun and takes it to school, but with today's internet that child will just learn how to make a homemade hand grenade, saw off a rifle or shotgun or similar weapon, so in the end you have changed nothing.

Don't add new laws when you are not even enforcing the current ones. Enforce those already on the book and see if new laws are required then. Change the root of the problem to get actual results, taking the tool away for them to complete the task will only make them change the tool to carry out their violent action.

JMO

[AZG23]

Good post Chris

[jeepsonly]

It's already illegal to kill someone, for the most part, right? Using a gun in a crime is illegal too, right? Just curious how more gun laws is going to stop gun crime. Seems to me the criminals are ignoring the laws. :eek:

[AZG23]

Actually...education is the key for kids....we need firearms education in schools...years ago kids used to bring rifels and shotguns to school to participate in shooting sports...

Kids need to be educated jsut like they need the information on smoking and drugs...

[AZG23]

Good point...no...its not the states "responsibility"...its the parents...we all know not all parents teach their kids what they SHOULD.

Firearms safety courses should supplement and be available for the above reason.

[SavageSun4x4]

Guns in schools, this is how I grew up:
Around Christmas and the week before deer and quail-dove season, a steady stream of students AND teachers heading out to the parking lot to view:
* Deer rifles [Win 94 30-30, assorted military and converted military rifles most often in 30-06]
* Quail shotguns [12 and 16 gauge pumps and semi autos]
* Squirrel rifles [22's and 410 shotguns]

Not a truck out in the parking lot that didn't have a snake pistol or rifle in 22 or a 410 shotgun under, behind the back seat or in a gun rack in the back window. You didn't go anyplace without a snake gun.

I don't know of nor ever heard of any incident involving a gun on school grounds.

WHY:confused: :confused: :confused: :confused: :confused:

[xFallen]

Maybe we should start charging parents along side their children (for murder) when such tragedies occur?

As far as enforcement, what laws are their currently, that require an adult to safely and responsibly handle weapons in a home occupied by children???

Point to one and I will defend it.

A legal guardian is already legally responsible for their child's behavior. There have been cases of many types where adults are charged along with or instead of the child.

If I leave my keys in ready access and my underage, unlicensed child takes the vehicle and perhaps does something illegal, I would fully expect to be held accountable. I am the owner of the vehicle. It, and access to it, is my responsibility. I consider it negligent to leave the keys in ready access for anyone to use. I believe there is case law to support this and similar circumstances and I believe research would demonstrate it applies to firearms also.

There are enough laws on the books now. There are far more violent countries on the planet. We don't need more laws to protect ourselves from stupidity, criminals (who by definition will ignore the law), or otherwise bad judgement.


Barry

[RokNRich]

Guns in schools, this is how I grew up:
Around Christmas and the week before deer and quail-dove season, a steady stream of students AND teachers heading out to the parking lot to view:
* Deer rifles [Win 94 30-30, assorted military and converted military rifles most often in 30-06]
* Quail shotguns [12 and 16 gauge pumps and semi autos]
* Squirrel rifles [22's and 410 shotguns]

Not a truck out in the parking lot that didn't have a snake pistol or rifle in 22 or a 410 shotgun under, behind the back seat or in a gun rack in the back window. You didn't go anyplace without a snake gun.

I don't know of nor ever heard of any incident involving a gun on school grounds.

WHY:confused: :confused: :confused: :confused: :confused:

That's kind of the point though isn't it ? Nowadays you do hear about school shootings and people have a right not to worry about their kids at school.

The key is to seperate the nutballs from the normal people.

[My1stJeep]

Actually my comments are aimed at both. Children growing up right now are getting less and less of parents time, and things like gun safety are just not fitting into the time families have together.

As for the children being shot at in Ireland, it was adults shooting at the children, that time. However there are many instances were childrean under the age of 10 have been found with home made grenades and in some cases been caught using them. Thus my point, you can take away the guns and only thing you will change is the weapon of choice. If we the adults don't do something to change the mindset of the children to not turn to weapons to solve our problems. the only thing that will change is the tool by which the children carry out their actions.

My point is as the adults we need to change the mindset of these young generations that have come to believe it is ok to grab a gun (or weapon) and strike someone down. We need to educate them of consequences for their actions and teach them this is wrong. So yes it may be for the adults to begin the teaching process, but if we don't taking the guns away will not solve the problem.

As for the laws we have loads of them that limit the type of weapons we as the public can have. There are barrel size limits, automatic weapon laws, etc... I could fill the entire bandwidth on current laws limiting the types of guns that can be owned and by whom. Look back the Columbine school murders. There were several laws broken, selling an automatic to someone who was not legal to possess one, selling to someone under age, etc... So just for arguments sake, they ahd too tough a time getting the guns, what next? Bombs? They actually had bombs with them, they just had not set them off. So if they had not spent the money on guns, and turned to other methods think of the size of bomb they could have made and how much farther this tragedy could have reached? I by no means want to lesson what happened, that is not the way this is intended. However just for a moment think if they had spent that money and built a truck like what was used in Oklahoma City, how this tragedy could have been even worse and reached even farther.

I don't have exact numbers for each law, I am sure an internet search could locate them, just don't have time to do that right now, maybe later.

We need to first try to enforce our current laws before we try to create new ones. That will just create more laws not being enforced and penalize the law abiding citizens.

Another case and point. Many of those other countries have gun laws, it is difficult to find them or afford them, however they have no problem making a bomb out of themselves or a car. We even had experience with that on our homefront with Oklahoma City. So just taking guns away will not solve the problem on any level. Short term may drop the numbers, but as they look for other ways (car bombs, grenades, themselves wired as a bomb) I think the killings will increase and be far more violent.

We need a conscience change in society right now, not a gun law increase.

JMO

PS I did catch your slant on the response picture

[treeofliberty]

What we need is "Thinking Made Easy".

[TRobertsRN]

I guess the question then is...At what point does one 'right' infringe upon another? What is the tipping point?

I will hit on a point I made in an eariler discussion. The tipping point is that my rights should not be taken away due to the actions of my neighbor. Only my neighbors rights should be at risk if his is irresponsible and that would be subject to due process.

If he kills a child with a car should the government take my car away? Many more adults and children killed by cars than guns.

If he has aids should the government restrict me from having sex? More people and children dying of aids than by guns.

If he insights a riot should my free speech be taken away by the government?

I don't perscribe to the "you can have my handgun when you pry it from my cold dead fingers".

My point of view is like my Dad's (USMC retired). I am willing to risk and take life in order to protect the rights of the people as guaranteed by the constitiution.

So even if the government made law to take my gun they can't have it without loss of life.

Some may think this extreme but reguardless of that my argument that my neighbors actions can not take my rights away is valid.

[AZG23]

Cars have nothing to do with guns...cars are not a right afforded by the constitution...cars are a luxury and a priveledge...selfe defense and firearms are a right. You are confused on this issue.

Take a look at what happened in Australia when they banned all firearms...they nutjobs turned to knives and SWORDS...yeah...swords...again...the tool is not the issue..it is the person.

Murder rates will not start to climb as more and more states inact CCW for LAW abiding citizens. Watch as SanFran starts to have problems like DC...

Laws that are on the books need to be enforced..not more laws and more gov..people who think that taking things away and punishing those who WILL FOLLOW the law...need to step off and leave MY rights alone. Rights are only relative to the current events because of politicians.

What part of SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED dont you understand?

[My1stJeep]

Easy Button Pressed

It breaks down simply...

Making laws to take more guns away (already enough laws with no enforcement) will do nothing to stop the kid who is angry and is going to pull the trigger. That kid is going to get a gone illegally if he can't find one at home, or he will get a knife, or a bat, or make a granade or some sort of explosive devise he reads about on the internet. That kid is still going to kill their target.

The only way to fix it, it so get to the root of the problem which has nothing to do with the gun itself.

[My1stJeep]

Ok, so you have taken away the gun. Now what are you going to do next? take away the kitchen knives from the house? How about taking away all baseball bats from the little leagues too? How about bottles so you can make a grenade? How abuot fertilizer made to make bigger bombs? How about pipes to make pipe bombs?

How far do you propose we go? See the taking the guns away still does not solve the problem, it only alters it to a different weapon of choice.

I am not just saying identify those kids, the problem is in general these youth do not have a respect for life and loss of it, so they have no problem taking it. When I was growing up if you had a beef you went toe to toe, be a man and look your opponent in the eye and gave the a beat down, but you did not go so far as to kill them. This is the issue, not laws to take guns away, that solves nothing.

Ok on a lighter side...

It was long ago when a fair maiden Wesson was out for a stroll when out of the brush came a big strong prince, his name was Smith. Smith was smitten by Wesson’s good looks, long and slender, with a gleam in her sights. Smith was big and burly, packing allot of power. Not long after they were married, the Pastor happy to be the first to announce Smith & Wesson to the world.

Everything was peaceful, Smith & Wesson had children, Ruger (nice young chap), Glock (strong like his father), Colt (real sportsmen here), Uzi (the black sheep of the family). Ruger though nice, became quite the hero, saving their entire nation from an invasion, he stood strong and proud as he led everyone to defend their land. Glock at the time was younger, but very proud of what his older brother did, so as he grew older he knew he would like to follow in his brothers foot steps. Glock now proudly defends the law as the head of the police department. Colt went on to travel a lot, winning contests where ever he was. Colt set records like no other and was a favorite in everyone’s hearts. Then there was little Uzi, a mean little streak he has in him. Always seemed to be causing trouble, he received several whoopins from dad. Never did seem to do much good for long, Uzi just had a mind of his own. Uzi dropped out of school and ran away. He felt so bitter towards his brothers who had done so much good and felt he could never live up to those standards. Uzi soon fell into the wrong crowd. It was not long after Uzi heard his family was coming to find him. Uzi ran farther, his time on the streets being harsh as they were, made him grow stronger. Uzi was running with the bad boys now, Mac10, Berrata, and Hi Point.

These boys were trouble. Soon Uzi was spraying his lead all over the place with no regards to anything or anyone. Boozing it up and just shooting off his mouth without a care. After Uzi got started, there were many lying on the floor. Uzi went from town to town, getting deeper and deeper into the underworld with more and more falling at his feet. Uzi was running his own way, and no one was going to stop him.

To this day Uzi is running amuck, taking lives wherever he goes. His brothers Ruger, Glock and Colt are still searching, Smith & Wesson have not given up hope in finding their son, and getting him out of trouble. Till then beware of Uzi and his crew.

See, after all it is the guns fault, they do pull their own triggers…
:D

[Sautin]

I was just poking fun at one major thrust of that first post...i.e. the overwhelming increase of guns and violence in general in schools.

Somehow, I just cannot believe that an 8 year can fathom the implications of their behavior. So with kids, all involved are victims. I think My1stJeep's comments are largely aimed at adults, in which you will find no objections here. Maybe we should start charging parents along side their children (for murder) when such tragedies occur?

As far as enforcement, what laws are their currently, that require an adult to safely and responsibly handle weapons in a home occupied by children???

Point to one and I will defend it.


I second that!

[AZG23]

You have the right to "self" defense....There are laws in place to protect you for the most part...but in the end..YOU are ultimatley responsible for your own safety. If someone is taking your right to life..then its your obligation to exercise your right of defense. There are always going to be people that are willing to harm others. Laws are made to try to reduce these instances...but it will never be cut and dry. As long as you have tools to defend yourself and your family..and TAKE the responibility to protect yourself..you can. Once the tools of defense are gone...then only those who dont care about obeying existing laws will suffer. Look at countries and history...take the people right to defend away...and you are left with slaves to those that do. Look at the bigger picture...if the people cannot defend against enemies foreign or domestic...the populace is easily controlled.

I think you are missing the point of the last thread...I understand 'shall not be infringed', but what happens when that right 'INFRINGES ON OTHER RIGHTS'?

That is the question here.

[AZG23]

Here is the problem...its :easier" to remove something...

Ok...let's take a look at a law/ban that was enacted. The AWB of 1994.

So called military "looking" weapons were banned from manufacture and importation, and the manufacture of full capacity feeding devices.

This only removed these items from those that could not afford to buy them at rediculous prices that were charged. This in no way dropped crime. No more AK's were used in the commision of violent crime than before. So lets do a knee jerk reaction and do the easy thing..remove these types of weapons from law abiding people. Now that the ban has sunsetted...there are no more crimes commited with those types of weapons than before...so what did it solve?

We are going farther and farther into a society that is blameless and people that cannot take responsibility for themselves and their action. Root of this peoblem..for 100's of years...people have been killing people. It wont stop..you can only do what you can to preserve you and your family.


I agree with you, but from a policy perspective, it may be easier to take the gun away than identify a kid with those sort of tendencies...

[AZG23]

My1stSheep...good story...

[My1stJeep]

Quote:
Originally Posted by 0IIII0
I think you are missing the point of the last thread...I understand 'shall not be infringed', but what happens when that right 'INFRINGES ON OTHER RIGHTS'?

That is the question here.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
In this world over (sorry but it is the truth) liberal PC no matter what you say or do will infringe on someone's rights. Not everyone agrees on any one issue across the board, so by limiting or not limiting you are infringing on someones point of view. Where does it stop? Good question, PC has already gone beyond what it was intended and now go way over the other direction. But I digress.

If someone can prove to me, that hand guns kill people and that removing them will stop the killing I would be all for it. So good luck proving it. I can't wait to see the first hand gun that fires all by itself without help. I want to see it load itself, aim and fire with no help. At that point I will be all over getting them banned. Until then I say we have to attack the real problem.

As I said before, take the guns away and they will just find a new weapon cause you have not changed their mindset.

[My1stJeep]

Cause banning hand guns would solve what? Just as in previous posts I have pointed out that a new weapon of choice will appear since we have not fixed the issue.

Yes I think there should be some regulations on guns and ownership. We have them now, but do not enforce them so what will putting new laws in place accomplish? Will we then choose to enforce those? Why not try enforcing the laws we have first.

Heck we round up dead beat parents, why not also pay visits to felons to see if they own weapons? Or is that going to far? We could go round and round on this issue with no resolution.

So I go back to my question, why the need to ban handguns? What other weapons are we going to take away, the steak knives, baseball bat, rolling pin, butcher knife, pencils (yes they could be used as a weapon), fertilizer, etc? How about when people start taking rifles or shotguns, cutting them way down in size to conceal, will those go next? Point is we need to take a stand somewhere. To this day no one can prove that a hand gun by itself takes lives, it takes someone to fire it, to load it, aim it, etc... (Yes I know past the point of loading and aiming it guns can accidentally go off, but it took the human interaction to set things in motion), therefore why try to solve the problem on the surface? Just because it would be easier to pass laws and restrictions in hopes does not mean that is the right way. Heck if taking the easy way out is always the best, I doubt the Boston Tea Party or the revolution would have ever happened, it would have been much easier to just keep paying the taxes and living under the English rule.

[My1stJeep]

So lets say they take away all hand guns. I can chop down a rifle or shotgun and make it fit in my back pack and still get it into class and at close range the affect will still be the same, a dead kid. Or a kitchen knife on the playground... no matter what without a mindset change taking the hand guns away will do nothing, and once they are gone you will never get them back, even after they determine it changed nothing except how they are killed, cause the death numbers will not go down.

[AZG23]

Nice there 1stJeepboy...

Brad wishes he had my Jeep - (too poop on)!

[My1stJeep]

Yours would have to be able to catch me on the trail to do that...

Oops I think we just went Off Topic, in an Off Topic thread, does that make it on Topic? See theory does two wrongs make it right?

[AZG23]

Eeeez getting closer my freeeend...now I just gotta learn how to drive a 5 speed

[TRobertsRN]

I agree with you, but from a policy perspective, it may be easier to take the gun away than identify a kid with those sort of tendencies...

What if anything on this forum would make you think that it would be easier to take handguns from American Citizens than to identify a problem child. Even if it is easier does not mean it should be done. No one else here appears to believe kids would be safer if hand guns were banned in the first place. My highschool had and has gang problems. I was in I don't know how many fist fights, was shot at 4 times (never with a hand gun), stabbed 3 times, and went away to college as soon as possible with my hand gun.
Anyone who knows me knows my family is no fan of the Kennedy family, but one of them said something I liked. "We do no choose to go to the moon because it is easy, we choose to go to the moom because it is hard".

[Antman]

I respect your opinion Tom, but I said 'policy makers' not 'I think' it would be easier.

I am just trying to understand the reasoning behind their decisions.

Someone, somewhere, believes it will make a difference, but why?




Because someone, somewhere, with a Liberal Agenda, is afraid of guns.:D

Its the "OLD" we cant trust the common citizen with their Constitutional Rights.

The Second Ammendment was put in our Constitution for a reason, and

Liberal Democrats who are usually scared of "Guns", are more concerned

about the First and are flat scared of the Second.

But why are these politicians so concerned about the First ammendment and

not the Second or Tenth?:

confused:








Because an armed people are Citizens and not Subjects! :D


Want to know why there wasnt any looting in Texas after Katrina?

http://www.virtualjeepclub.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=4049&stc=1&d=1138981103



:D

[TRobertsRN]

It is my opinion that neither the democrats or the republicans believe that one way or the other is easier or will make any difference. The laws we have already are not well inforced. What both sides are doing is paying lip service to get votes. I think it is the same with controling the border, peace in the middle east, and abortion. None of these subjects have easy answers and may never have solutions that please the majority. This is why they are political issues. Because the country is divided on what to do or not to do. People have strong opinions on both sides of these issues and the subject of guns. The objective of a newspaper is to sell news papers, not to inform the public of the truth. The objective of a politician is to get elected and re elected (power), not to serve the people and do the right thing unfortunately.

[Antman]

I highly doubt they are 'afraid' of guns. I am liberal and I own guns. I am not afraid. :D

They are not even talking about taking the rigths away, just regulating.

I can see the real issue is regulation.

I think I am done with this topic.



I would hope that you are smart enough to realize where it goes after

regulation.

Your gun rights will be regulated right out of existance! The concept that

"People kill people, not guns, just doesnt get through to these people, as

they live in a sureal world with most of their ideas either not plausible in the

REAL world or they have a hidden agenda anyway.

Have a nice day! :)

[My1stJeep]

OIIIIO

What type of regulations in addition to what we already have do you think will make a difference? Why do you think it will make a difference? What type of evidence is there to support such a claim that these additional regulations will make a difference?

[Antman]

Ok so I am not done...

By that logic, safety regulations on cars will eventually have us walking. :rolleyes:

But, you see John, there isnt a hidden agenda in creating safety regulations.

The gun control bunch are simply "boiling the frog".

I am not saying you are part of this, because you say you are pro-gun. I am just trying to

help you see what these people are trying to do.

[TRobertsRN]

They are not even talking about taking the rigths away, just regulating.

I can see the real issue is regulation.
.[/QUOTE]

They want to regulate guns? They don't want to regualte handguns they want to eliminate them.

[TRobertsRN]

Ok so I am not done...

By that logic, safety regulations on cars will eventually have us walking. :rolleyes:

Again it is about politics. Maybe half of Americans want to own handguns. Almost all want to own cars. It would be political sucide to try to eliminate cars. They are not proposing safety regulations for hand guns, they propose to eliminate them.

[Antman]

Joe West


Thank you for creating the Firearms Forum!



:D

[AZG23]

Salvation...one soul at a time....;)

[TRobertsRN]

Whether a hand gun ban would lead to a ban of all guns is debateable, I believe it could. I know it is one of the outlined steps of groups against guns in general.
Register
Regulate
Confinscate hand guns and eventually all guns.
It is also my belief that this action has always lead to oppression.

Even if my belief in the above were proved wrong I will not give up my hand guns under any circumstance short of due process for commision of a felony. If hand gun ownership is made a felony I will not give up my hand guns.

I do not understand your analogy to bank robbery, nor understand how you see my arguement as a slippery slope. Please enlighten me.

[TRobertsRN]

I understand what a slippery slope is I don't agree that my statement is one.

[bomberopm]

Correct me if I am wrong, but I did read somewhere that Maryland and Washington DC area have the most stringent gun control laws in the country. The first post mentioned that all this was happening there, and supposedly all accross the country. Look what gun control got them!

[1eagle]

Gun control or regulation only effects the everyday citizen. Not the guy on the street that should not have a gun due to what ever reason. Do you think that the normal gang banger, drug pusher, felon is going to the gun shop to fill out the proper paper work and wait the time for a back ground check to obtain a hand gun or other firearm. I do not think so. They are going to the local corner hang out to get their firearms from their homie.

Most everyone obtains a firearm for protection, hunting, recreational use. The Banger, Pusher or felon obtains it for a few different reasons, Power, territorial disputes, Drug deals gone bad, looking at his Homie for the wrong reason, wearing the wrong colors etc......

No mater how many regulations, restrictions or bans you put on firearms, the only ones that will be effected by them will be the everyday Joe.