Re: Alarming statistics.

[CamaroGen1@xxxxxxx]

In a message dated 6/30/01 5:58:43 AM Pacific Daylight Time, ebenson@uiuc.edu 
writes:


> I would much rather see a
> requirement for 'proof of competence or training' rather than the absurd
> 'gee that gun looks cool' or absolute laws currently in vogue.



       I TOTALLY AGREE.  I personally, have no problem going to the range, 
and taking saftey tests to obtain my license for a firearm.  In fact, you 
usually DO have to do that to use a range.  Most law-abiding gun owners have 
no problem with LOGICAL and USeFUL restrictions, but the innane and retard 
ones are what bothers us.
       I have not done anything wrong, so I don;t mind the background checks, 
and they will serve to keep it from being EASIER for criminals to obtain 
guns, but hey, if you think more gun control laws will cut down on crime, 
your crazy.  LAWS only affect LAW-ABIDING citizens for the most part.  All 
the majority of our gun laws do now is keep firearms out of the hands of 
those that obey the law, those that don't, are armed to the teeth.
       Everytime a "tragedy" occurs, the media and anti-gun advocates point 
out how many "laws" were "broken"..........so then they want to make MORE 
laws.  Why?  If penal code 12021a didn;t stop them, why will they care about 
12021e?

Benjamin