|
- 帖子
- 4840
- 精華
- 1
- 威望
- 1333
- 魅力
- 354
- 讚好
- 0
- 性別
- 男
|
9#
發表於 2007-4-22 09:18 AM
| 只看該作者
Originally posted by specificness at 2007-4-20 09:39 PM:
3 y0 ?8 r% _. M+ |; N3 z% T要反思的話，我就會覺得應也要從一個...
) O: Y, g" F8 M* l
well I have to ask you about drunk driving, since most countries' drinking age is 18 and the US is 21. Does your country ban alcohol when drunk driving kills people? No, and are there more incidents of drunk driving killing people than guns, definitely. Just because our 2nd amendment allows Americans to buy guns doesn't mean it's a bad law or obscure law or any less safe. In fact, it's MUCH safer to have a law that allows people to buy guns. For one, people will buy guns no matter what, the problem with that is you have no legal way to track who has what gun. In America, you get a background check before you can get a gun, and there's a 3 day wait. After that you are in a database so if the gun you own(numbered of course) shot someone, you'll get questioned/arrested/jailed. I don't see that happening to the people who have guns in China.3 u' [+ \" f" k( [) Z4 x4 N
; M }* B: Y3 ]: B7 dAnd secondly, when you give rights to people, there will be a small number who will abuse those rights. Of course, when you don't give rights to people you don't have to worry about it, but then that won't be a democracy. America's a democracy, and that's why they have such laws, of course I'm not saying it's perfect because there are people who break laws or worse, find loopholes, but it's a system that works for us and it gives the people a chance to fix those loopholes and make life better. That's what makes a civilized country, where politicians have to be responsible to the people they are governing over, and a means of fixing loopholes or archaic laws that are no longer relevant. The 2nd amendment will NEVER be irrelevant as long as people have guns. |
|
: b) u- T) h. H+ [
