Are the facts correct is one thing I would ask? Is gun confiscation strictly a liberal plan or mindset? Who else would want to confiscate guns? How would gun confiscation be administered?
I think banning guns means more than restrictions on sales of guns and more than gun registration, it must mean going door to door and confiscating the weapons.
Registered Democrats would own them. All others would not.
Would it have been any consolation if her sister was killed with a baseball bat? If someone wants to kill another human being, there are many ways to accomplish it.
Using the same logic:
There's only one way to stop teen pregnancy:
Ban Penises.
Poor Jenny, She has lost both her brother and her mind.......
Some crazy woman kills her brother and I have to give up my guns? I don't think so!
I'm wondering what the relationship was between the woman and her mother that would cause her to girl her own daughter?
Yes.
Who else would want to confiscate guns?
The Nazis and the Communists were fond of it, too.
IM gonna call Bulls**t!
Already discussed here but it's always worth a review since not everyone checks in on a regular basis.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1546966/posts?page=35#35
This story should be checked to see if it is bogus.
The story doesn't say why she shot and killed these people. Maybe it had something to do with threat of bodily harm. (Read: Self Defense)
Fascists and other statists of every stripe along with people like this writer, whose personal and tragic loss has left her bereft of some basic common sense. The mother of her brother's girl friend didn't kill the two of them because she had a gun handy. She killed them because she was a crazy deranged old woman who likely would have picked up a butcher knife or run them down with her car to do the deed.
We should try banning murder first . . .
Okay, I'll take the bait.
A serious problem (among many) with banning guns is that it is doomed to fail. Even if you confiscated all 60 million handguns (unlikely to be succesful, judging from efforts in NYC and DC) you would still have millions of illegal imports each year. US customs has utterly failed to stop the flow of drugs and humans across the border. How would they have any further success with easily concealed weapons?
There is also a serious moral issue. Handguns, unlike illegal narcotics, have a good purpose - to defend those who were not born with great physical strength from violent criminals who would prey upon them. Guns are an equalizer without a subsitute (i.e. knife, mace, etc.) By taking away the right to own handguns, you are depriving the individual of the right to protect his life and liberty (which the police cannot do unless they put a car in front of your house 24/7).
I find these arguments to be most persuasive on both a moral and practical level. There are other good arguments, i.e., Second Amendment, etc. but in the end you cannot implement a law that is morally and factually bankrupt.
Identical article (different title) from the Washington Post:
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1546966/posts
WHAAAAAAAAAAT?! What on God's good green Earth is this woman smoking and can she pass it when she's done?! This is by far the most uneducated, unqualified statement I've ever read by anyone in the MSM. I pray to the Good Lord that this was an editorial and not some article founded on fact. If so, this woman should be stripped of her journalistic devices and forced to endure a few months of education on how to correctly read and cite sources for facts.
In light of the article's basis... it's ludicrous. The thought that banning handguns across the board will do away with handgun violence is folly. BANNING handguns is foolhardy, at best. Completely obliterating them and destroying every single one of them on the planet? Complete lunacy! This is a MSM article based on an emotional plea, not fact. The fact that she cites the number of "self-defense" uses in the 100's is laughable as well. Self-defense is the defense of one's life. This does NOT mean taking the life of another to defend your own. I've drawn my firearm twice in protection of my life, and I never fired a shot. The perp ran in the other direction.
Let this article be a lesson to those who want to opine on emotion: it may fall on the hearts of the sheeple, but it will never pass the sniff test of those who understand the domestic war we fight against armed criminals. I'd rather be armed than dead.