On Feb 6, 2007, at 5:00 PM, john harvey wrote: > The crime and violence in the "old west" was greatly exaggerated in > the > movies and tv. Gunslingers sometimes even had shootouts where > nobody got > shot. Iraq is a different place. Look at where the most crime > occurs in the > US, and you'll see that the worst places are those where it is > illegal for > most citizens to have guns.
I think it's the other way around. Most of the places where owning certain types of guns is restricted is precisely because of the high violence those places experienced *before* such laws were put in place. You are trying to make it sound as if things were nice and peaceful before those restrictions were put in place, and then the crime and violence erupted. Most of the "worst places" are the ones with the highest population densities. This is true in countries where guns are common, like the US, and where they aren't, such as most European cities. Compare the rates of fatal crimes in both areas to get an idea of just how useful guns are to keeping us safe. BTW, I'm all for gun ownership. I just believe that not all guns are the same. Handguns have no purpose other than killing people. The same is true for the high-output weapons commonly referred to as "assault weapons". Ownership of both of these types of guns is linked to increased crime. Rifles, shotguns, and the like, OTOH, do indeed have legitimate uses, and ownership of such weapons is not linked to higher levels of crime. -- Ed Leafe -- http://leafe.com -- http://dabodev.com _______________________________________________ Post Messages to: ProFox@leafe.com Subscription Maintenance: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profox OT-free version of this list: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profoxtech ** All postings, unless explicitly stated otherwise, are the opinions of the author, and do not constitute legal or medical advice. This statement is added to the messages for those lawyers who are too stupid to see the obvious.