I applaud Governor Patrick’s and President Obama’s moves on gun control . However, my reaction to the proposed limit of one gun purchase per month in Massachusetts is the same as when the other Commonwealth I lived in (Virginia) enacted a similar limit in 1994 to blunt the flow of weapons to cities further north.
I ask: Who needs to buy a dozen guns a year?
Comments
Over and over we hear the statement about "People who do not NEED them". Strange, it is called the "Bill of Rights" not the "Bill of Needs". Maybe we should revamp and rename it, then when someone wants to write a comment, they will have to demonstrate a "need" to write it. How about, when the police want to search your home, belongings, person, you can say you will have to demonstrate a "need" not to be searched. Or, if you are ever in court, you will have to prove a "need" not to incriminate yourself.
I note we did not hear how that worked out in Virginia, what we do know is that DC, right next door, that had a law banning ALL GUN has a really nasty murder rate.
The facts are: Banning guns does not prevent gun deaths. High gun ownership does not reduce the murder rate, either. Sorry gun owners, you are wrong too. I am tired of all the "statistic quoting", it is all anecdotal.