How many times, Lawrence, has your house been broken into and you shot the intruder? How many times have you saved your life or those of your loved ones by brandishing your guns? We can get rid of the damn things. Every single one of them. Make owning one so expensive no one can afford them. Melt then down and build enormous statures to Gandhi and Martin Luther King. We don't let people have bazookas or howitzers or rocket propelled granades -- some do, I know -- why then do we allow any weapon that's made to kill? Hunters? No one needs to hunt for their food anymore. It's insanity. It's a sickness. I'll bet you'd get rid of your guns if there was a $50,000 penalty for each weapon you're found with. 2nd offense, $50,000 plus 5 years in prison. The cost to society is too damn high to allow people this fetish. Mike Geary if you think you need a gun, you need a psychiatrist. ----- Original Message ----- From: Lawrence Helm To: Lit-Ideas Sent: Thursday, April 19, 2007 10:18 AM Subject: [lit-ideas] Re: Gun control Are the British safe from violence as a result of their restrictive gun laws? And if not utterly safe at least safer than citizens in the U.S.? It wouldn't appear so to me after a brief Google search: http://wheelgun.blogspot.com/2007/01/crime-in-uk-versus-crime-in-us.html Even if the numbers were comparable, and they don't seem to be, and you had the same chance of being injured by violent crime whether or not you owned a gun, it seems somewhat ingrained in the non-Europeanized portions of the U.S. that it would be more honorable to go down fighting than to present one's neck to the criminal like an obedient lamb. Lawrence ps: I wonder about certain aspects of these statistics, e.g., if a criminal breaks into my house and I shoot him, does that count as a violent crime? If I kill him before he kills me, how does that show up in the statistics?