Clearly a topic which polarises opinion, and the trouble is both sides of the argument have, to myself at least, good points.
Someone mentioned that we should not try and police americans on their own law, and I fully agree. I don't see anything wrong, however, with people from outside the society in question arguing that a certain law may not be a wise one. It isn't an order for the law to be changed, its just an opportunity to look at the points against it, as well as examing your own points in support of it.
Having grown up in Britain, we've never had a particularly positive outlook on guns. They're something we never (if we're lucky) see in everyday life and one that most of us would never wish to. I remember recently I just got off the train on the way to college, and saw police officers all over the place carrying MP5's, and I wanted to get as far away as possible from them. When you aren't used to them, you really feel the potential of harm they carry. I notice that a few americans see guns as objects with which to defend themselves, whereas when I look at one, I only see something which is designed to kill another human. Realise here that I'm not differentiating between which is the correct initial viewpoint to have, just that there is clearly a big difference. I can completely understand why a parent, or anyone with a desire to protect others, would want to carry a gun to protect those around them from potential harm, but who differentiates between those that wish to protect and those that wish to harm when these guns are sold? Someone remarked earlier that it is easier to kill someone with a light pull on a trigger, than to stab someone with a knife, and I can only agree with that.
As to the argument about the Church shootings - first of all let me say that its fantastic to hear that your brother, and that the people in that church, left with their lives. The two girls who were shot outside, my thoughts go to their families. What struck me though was this - a man had a machine gun with 1000 rounds. Yes, thankfully someone within that Church had something with which to stop him, but would he have been able to get hold of such firepower if guns were illegal in the first place? Of course, its by no means a certainty that he would have been prevented from doing so, but I can only imagine that the chances would be decreased. That is the thought that stays with me in relation to guns - even if 99% of those with guns wish to use them for good, the other 1% can do a whole lot of damage still.
Someone else mentioned how Britain is doing having banned guns - well, yes, we are currently going through a period where knife crime, in London in particular, is causing a lot of deaths, of primarily teenagers. Guns are around, and in the wrong hands, but the fact that they are illegal surely makes it harder for their trade. Knives are awful, agreed. However, they are short range, and to kill with them takes a lot more effort than with a gun, as mentioned before. I know which one I'd rather someone have if they were chasing me.
If there weren't people in the world that want to fatally harm others for no real reason, then I couldn't care less who owned one. The trouble is, though, there are people like that, and as such it would make me feel incredibly uneasy that anyone would be able to easily get one.
