"I want a gun, too, but I can't handle one," Martin says. "And you got some regular citizens out here as crazy as people across the street." He is pointing toward St. Elizabeths Hospital.
"The way I see it is, if you get guns, the crooks are going to break in the house and steal your arms. Second, if somebody is picking at you and they chase you in the house and you think that's them at the door, it could be someone else, but you fire through the door and kill an innocent person. I just think the law should stay where it is."
Two classical Leftist diatribes against ownership of firearms. What if someone steals your gun out of your house? It would be hard to steal if your gun is either on your person or close-by you in your house, not to mention most B&Eers are more interested in goods that can be liquidated without much fuss or muss. The other being that criminals can't be trusted with guns so the law-abiding citizen can't be trusted with them either. Hello? Dumba$$? A criminal by definition is someone who breaks the law. If possessing firearms is illegal, what is to stop the criminal, the lawbreaker, from seeking out, procuring and possessing firearms anyway? Absolutely nothing.
P.S. See my tagline. Aristotle had this covered back in the 3rd century B.C. Apparently limp-wristed Utopians and would-be tyrants existed in Hellenic Age. And here I was taught in publik skool that murder didn't exist before guns were invented.
Hmm. The article claims that Martin is a "Vietnam combat veteran" and yet he claims that he "can't handle one". I find that strange and paradoxical. It just doesn't add up.
Anyone have statistics with regards to crimes committed in nations with strict gun control?