$1:
Kimver Gill was legal as well. In both cases firearms laws were ineffective---CC may have lowered the body count.
Learn your facts. In both cases they acquired legal firearms which is entirely why gun ban proponets (and I am not one) say that gun bans will prevent at least
some gun related crimes.
Very few people actually have the knowledge, street cred, and/or ability to simply pick up an illegal firearm and thos ethat do will not be put off in the least over the possibility of somebody else having a gun.
$1:
Every shooting incident is blamed on firearms laws by the usual suspects so am I ***** or something----I reserve the right to be as irrelevant as anyone else.
In Utah, a CC state, a guy opened up in a crowded mall and was promply dispatched by an armed citizen---who only hit the perp.
A single incident of unverified origin doesn't somehow make the moronic belief that if everybody carried a gun there would be no crime.
Everbody has access to guns in Iraq, Afghanistan, Rwanda ......
Its absurd to hold the belief that in every case of shooting incidents like that above would be prevented had everybody not simply been carring a gun.
How many troops have been killed despite extremly well trained soldiers conducting themselves professionally?
How many times have we seen cops unload at a suspect and hit nothing on COPS? Loads.
Its wrong to think that gun bans will have a viable impact on gun related crime but it is equally stupid to believe that simply arming the citizenry will somehow reduce it.
In virtually every category Canada has far less crime then the US despite our gun laws and liberal laws. If your theory was anything but false that would not be true.