The Triangle

I think the old adage comes to mind, "Guns don't kill people, people kill people."

If it wasn't a gun that killed a person, it would have been a knife, a car, a random piece of furniture, gravity, poison, etc. If someone wants to kill someone else, and they feel so compelled to do so, they will. If the situation is so dire, and their only method they know to solve the problem is so macabre, then they will do it.

How about instead of fixing the symptoms, we actually treat the disease? The problem is the lack of focus of medical, employment, and psychological care for those involved with violent acts. The city of philadelphia doesn't really care about the people involved, and how to make life better in this "City of Brotherly Love". Their solution is to get rid of guns, since obviously getting guns off the street will solve all the problems in the world.

I am, by no means, saying everyone, their mother, and their yippy cocker spaniel should have an AK-47 in their backpack and a Glock in their pocket. I'm just saying that there is a more deep-rooted problem at heart, and that it needs to be solved if there is any real course of action to save the city from the wave of violence and death.

And besides, where there's smoke, there's fire. If you just take the guns off street, it's just like blowing the smoke away from the flame. You might be able to see a little better, but there's a chance you might also be fanning the flame as well.

Lord Forbid more violence, but the problem at heart needs to be solved.

That's why she said "People with Guns kill People." Did you even read the whole article?

How do you feel about the First Amendment? Do you think it's ok for our government to erode rights granted by the Constitution via legislation? What if we regulated what's printed in student newspapers because they are too provocative?

Like it or not, the Second Amendment gives us a basic right handed down by the Founding Fathers. It should not be "heavily regulated" any more than the other "nice" amendments. If you don't like it, amend the Constitution. Don't pick and choose those rights you're willing to see legislated away and those you are not. That's hypocrisy.

"Across the nation, there has been an increase in almost all major cities' crime rates".

False.

Violent crime in New York city has decreased 75% in the last twelve years and the murder rate in 2005 was at its lowest level since 1963. (http://samoa.istat.it/Eventi/sicurezza/relazioni/Langan_rel.pdf)

In fact, a cursory look at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crime_in_the_United_States would have been more than enough to show you this is not the case, that crime has dropped in every major city within the past two decades.

"When the statistics change, the laws that combat them should too."
Oh, I agree completely. Lets look at the most violent cities in America, with homicide rates even higher than Philadelphia's:

Among cities with populations of 100,000 or more, Detroit; Baltimore; Washington; Oakland, Calif.; New Orleans; St. Louis; Cincinnati; Newark, N.J.; Birmingham, Ala.; Richmond, Va.; Little Rock; Kansas City, Mo.; Flint, Mich.; Inglewood, Calif.; and Gary, Ind., recorded higher murder rates last year than Philadelphia, according to FBI figures.

http://www.philly.com/philly/news/20071019_Homicide_rate_falls_slightly.html

Washington DC? Oakland and Inglewood in CA? Newark NJ? Baltimore MD? All of these cities have high amounts of gun control; DC, NJ, CA are all well regarded by the Brady campaign, but it seems that despite nearly a decade of vigorous gun control in those cities, criminals continue to use illegal guns. It is almost as if gun control legislation limits legal users but has little to no influence on felons acquiring guns illegally.

Gun control laws solve nothing. They are a worthless solution to a problem caused by poverty and lack of education (which, yes, leads to poverty). Instead, they tie up resources and political capital in a never ending struggle for more and more regulation when it is proven, again and again, that existing laws do nothing. Legal gun owners suffer, criminals continue to break the law.

I am a liberal as well; I want equal rights for gays, support the abolishment of the death penalty, hold that most of the crime in major cities is an end result of poverty and poor education - but I don't have to buy every aspect of the liberal creed like some brainless nitwit. However, as every inch of your body is a liberal, I suppose that means not a single inch is a journalist - which would explain your distressing lack of facts, figures, or anything of substance in this throughly worthless editorial.

Try to form your own, factual opinion instead of spouting shit because its the proper line to toe.

Gun laws already exist.

Criminals, by definition, disobey the law.

Making gun ownership by private, law abiding citizens, more difficult would be absurd and do nothing to curtail the problem.

Criminals would continue to disobey the law. They would also work without fear of being met by a citizen with a concealed carry permit. Haven't violent crimes gone up in the UK since gun ownership was cracked down upon? Have you looked at DC? - Their violent crime and murder rates are sky high, and yet handguns are illegal there too. Here's to hoping the Supreme Court overturns that ridiculous ban in our Capitol.

Whatever happened to personal responsibility?

You'll find on my door not a sign that says "Protected by ADT" (of which most, I;d warrant, are fake) but "Protected by Smith and Wesson." What is more likely to make a criminal pause before s/he breaks into my house or attempts to harm me or my loved ones?

Police respond to assaults, batteries, and murders- they rarely stop them in medias res. It is up to yourself to protect yourself from imminent harm.

If any student, security guard, or teacher on Vtech's campus had been carrying a sidearm, that maniac could have been stopped.

I just read that a person just shot a police officer around 22d and Chestnut after the Presidential Debate and them jumped into the river. There is no doubt in my mind that he was not a law abiding citizen with a carry permit, but rather a criminal. My thoughts are with the family of the injured officer. What a way to make the national spotlight, Philadelphia!

Signed, A proud gun owner, concealed carrier, and Drexel grad student.