marko I disagree with you about banning gun sales in Serbia or keeping guns banned in societies where they are already outlawed.
The real problem in Serbia (and other parts of former Yugoslavia) is that people will not return the father's gun in the house. To him its the family tradition and he keeps it there 'just in case'. Of course some don't even know how to use a gun properly and in a situation the gun could be more dangerous to themselves or to their children than they are to some potential burgler. But it is a problem that these fathers will become criminalised and many of them will have not done anything wrong with their guns. However, I'd like for this tradition to end with the 'father' generation. There are many other positive traditions and I think that firing a gun when one's son is born - as if to warn potential enemies that a warrior has been born, belongs in another age.
And you can't measure banning guns with reducing violent crime. The correct argument to use would be to say that banning guns has not caused a reduction in gun violence, but it clearly has. In the UK the problem is knife crime, but what, does anybody really believe that making guns available to those that use knives will make the situation with violent crime better? Or would there be more deaths? The answer is obvious.
But I agree with you about fighting poverty, that this is a real preventative method. There is a hell of a lot of work to be done on this front in all societies.
Ataman, we all share an interest in reducing crime and violence in Serbia, but where you and I disagree is that I fear that a ban on leglal gun sales and ownership will cause a boom in illeagal gun sales and ownership.
Jurisdictions such as the UK and Australia have banned legal gun ownership, and this has resulted in no reduction of violent crime.
In Canada, it it is very difficult to obtain a handgun legally, and almost impossible to obtain permission to cary one on your person yet criminals have made a very lucarative trade in smuggling Guns from the United States. Tough Canadai
Meanwhile in Switzerland, where almost everyone has a gun, there is very little crime and violence.
Instead of spending money to buy back guns, the state should spend money on social programs that fight poverty and prevent crime. The fact of the matter is these youngsters should have been in school today.
Ataman, we all share an interest in reducing crime and violence in Serbia, but where you and I disagree is that I fear that a ban on leglal gun sales and ownership will cause a boom in illeagal gun sales and ownership.
Jurisdictions such as the UK and Australia have banned legal gun ownership, and this has resulted in no reduction of violent crime.
In Canada, it it is very difficult to obtain a handgun legally, and almost impossible to obtain permission to cary one on your person yet criminals have made a very lucarative trade in smuggling Guns from the United States. Tough Canadai
Meanwhile in Switzerland, where almost everyone has a gun, there is very little crime and violence.
Instead of spending money to buy back guns, the state should spend money on social programs that fight poverty and prevent crime. The fact of the matter is these youngsters should have been in school today.
marko I disagree with you about banning gun sales in Serbia or keeping guns banned in societies where they are already outlawed.
The real problem in Serbia (and other parts of former Yugoslavia) is that people will not return the father's gun in the house. To him its the family tradition and he keeps it there 'just in case'. Of course some don't even know how to use a gun properly and in a situation the gun could be more dangerous to themselves or to their children than they are to some potential burgler. But it is a problem that these fathers will become criminalised and many of them will have not done anything wrong with their guns. However, I'd like for this tradition to end with the 'father' generation. There are many other positive traditions and I think that firing a gun when one's son is born - as if to warn potential enemies that a warrior has been born, belongs in another age.
And you can't measure banning guns with reducing violent crime. The correct argument to use would be to say that banning guns has not caused a reduction in gun violence, but it clearly has. In the UK the problem is knife crime, but what, does anybody really believe that making guns available to those that use knives will make the situation with violent crime better? Or would there be more deaths? The answer is obvious.
But I agree with you about fighting poverty, that this is a real preventative method. There is a hell of a lot of work to be done on this front in all societies.
Ataman, we all share an interest in reducing crime and violence in Serbia, but where you and I disagree is that I fear that a ban on leglal gun sales and ownership will cause a boom in illeagal gun sales and ownership.
Jurisdictions such as the UK and Australia have banned legal gun ownership, and this has resulted in no reduction of violent crime.
In Canada, it it is very difficult to obtain a handgun legally, and almost impossible to obtain permission to cary one on your person yet criminals have made a very lucarative trade in smuggling Guns from the United States. Tough Canadai
Meanwhile in Switzerland, where almost everyone has a gun, there is very little crime and violence.
Instead of spending money to buy back guns, the state should spend money on social programs that fight poverty and prevent crime. The fact of the matter is these youngsters should have been in school today.
marko I disagree with you about banning gun sales in Serbia or keeping guns banned in societies where they are already outlawed.
The real problem in Serbia (and other parts of former Yugoslavia) is that people will not return the father's gun in the house. To him its the family tradition and he keeps it there 'just in case'. Of course some don't even know how to use a gun properly and in a situation the gun could be more dangerous to themselves or to their children than they are to some potential burgler. But it is a problem that these fathers will become criminalised and many of them will have not done anything wrong with their guns. However, I'd like for this tradition to end with the 'father' generation. There are many other positive traditions and I think that firing a gun when one's son is born - as if to warn potential enemies that a warrior has been born, belongs in another age.
And you can't measure banning guns with reducing violent crime. The correct argument to use would be to say that banning guns has not caused a reduction in gun violence, but it clearly has. In the UK the problem is knife crime, but what, does anybody really believe that making guns available to those that use knives will make the situation with violent crime better? Or would there be more deaths? The answer is obvious.
But I agree with you about fighting poverty, that this is a real preventative method. There is a hell of a lot of work to be done on this front in all societies.
IMAGE SOURCE
4 Komentari
Sortiraj po: