The Washington times did an editorial on "Getting rid of gun control" on February 19th back in 2010. This editorial consisted of Virginia's willingness to repeal the unusual law of limiting law-abiding citizens from buying more tan one gun per month. The proof out weighed the means of the limitations that the law would curb crime. It did not.
Inconveniencing Americans to reduce the crime of the state by limiting handgun sales to once a month per person. The only other States with this law are Maryland, California and New Jersey. California had repealed the law back in 2004 while New Jersey's law just went into effect in start of 2010.
The Washington Times believes that the belief of the nanny state notion that gun control works; it does not, and can be quite harmful.
Two books "More guns, Less Crime," "The Bias Against Guns" covers how one gun a month rules reduce the number of gunshows significantly because of the limit of sales that take place. That reducing the legal rights of citizens increase the price of firearms to those who can buy them and reduces the number of firearms at local dealers.
Covering the Brady Campaign in Virginia the Washington Times quotes them on reducing the number of gun crimes has reduced without any offical source siting where they got that information "which is ultimately the bottom line."
The Washington Times understands that, " If people around the nation's capital should understand anything, it is how hard it is to keep criminals from getting guns." The fact that D.C. has banned handguns entirely with the murder tate still rising is evidince of that. Criminals are criminals because they do not follow the law. Gun bans and gun waiting periods are on par with One-gun-a-month ruels where they only affect legal law-abidding citizens.
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2010/feb/19/getting-rid-of-gun-control/
No comments:
Post a Comment