You are viewing an obsolete version of the DU website which is no longer supported by the Administrators. Visit The New DU.
Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Reply #53: Oh God no... [View All]

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Topic Forums » Guns Donate to DU
Maine_Nurse Donating Member (688 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-16-11 09:41 AM
Response to Reply #33
53. Oh God no...
"What is needed is a well thought out, well crafted national standard that applies to all jurisdictions"

This I disagree with strongly. What NYC or Chicago might think they need for firearms laws are certainly not applicable to my state (although I subscribe to the thought that the only people that comply with their inner-city laws are the ones that you'd want to allow to own firearms anyway). There are some issues that are best dealt with nationally such as the NICS check database, however as heavily armed as Maine is and as little restrictions as we have on firearms, we are near the bottom of the list on firearms crimes and deaths, as are NH and Vermont, two other "local" states with very permissive firearms laws and very high rates of ownership, yet low rates of crime. What fits us probably doesn't fit you and vice versa.

You're portion about "police protection" is also laughable in many areas. I live about 45 minutes from a police response in an emergency (also 30-45 minutes from an EMT response in an emergency). There IS not police protection to be had, only after the fact investigation.

It really does come down to enforcement of current laws, especially in the larger metropolitan areas. As an example, you have criminals that commit felonies, yet because your courts are so over-burdened the prosecutors offices make it a matter of practice to offer misdemeanor convictions in exchange for guilty pleas to speed things along and avoid prolonged prosecution. This results in many people who would otherwise then be prohibited from firearms ownership getting off the hook in that aspect. I understand why this is done, but it essentially short circuits existing firearms laws. Somehow this needs to be changed.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 

Home » Discuss » Topic Forums » Guns Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC