🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <38sftl$msp@Starbase.NeoSoft.COM>, positron@Starbase.NeoSoft.COM (Jonathan Haas) writes:
> 
> Well, Tom, here's the problem.
> 
> Most anti-gunners don't want gun control for the sake of gun control...
> they want gun control for a *purpose*. Specifically, most of them
> believe it would reduce crime... despite all available evidence. We
> pro-gunners know differently, and patiently try to explain why gun
              ^^^^
I hope you mean "think".  No one, pro or anti, knows for sure.

> control is something most criminals favor, and why gun control would
> not reduce crime. Unfortunately, the anti-gunners invariably don't
> listen, and eventually throw up their hands and say, "Why are you making
> such a fuss? It's only a *few* little controls we want, nothing too
> inconveniencing." And they pass what they want.
> 
> But then a funny thing happens. See, we pro-gunners are *right*, and
> lo and behold, the modest gun controls fail to reduce crime. In fact,
> usually the opposite effect happens... crime goes *up*. Rather than
> make the connection between the increased gun control and the increased
> crime, the anti-gunners conclude that the recently-passed gun control
> legislation wasn't *enough*, and that tighter controls are needed. "We
> just want a few restrictions" quickly becomes "We just want a few *more*
> restrictions", which quickly becomes "We need to get rid of all the
> guns!"

Pretty well written.  No comments that anti-gunners sell their babies
or something.

Questions:  

Do you (or anyone else who wants to respond) support increasing
the rate of incarceration even more than it has been?

Do you believe this helps reduce violent crime?

More generally, what should be done to reduce the criminal use of guns?