To me it would be a far bigger crime if someone died who would have been willing to defend himself and people like you told him he couldn't because you aren't.Trotgar said:I meant that if guns were given only to people who really need them (hunters, police on duty etc.) so they would be very hard to obtain. To me it seems logical that if there were much less of guns and they would be behind locks etc, the shootings would decrease.danpascooch said:Shooting someone is a much larger crime than having a gun illegally, if they are going to shoot someone, illegal gun possession isn't going to stop them.Trotgar said:Disaster Button said:For a Ninetendo Wii?
Why not take something useful? Hell at least a game or something to go with it.
Sucks the clerk got shot because of it though.OT: He just probably wanted to shoot the clerk. Luckily in the leg than in any other body part. Still crazy, though.After waiting for an automated timer on the store's safe to expire, the gunman took the cash, a Nintendo Wii and some games - and shot the clerk in the leg on his way out.
I think the gun ownership-law sucks in the US.