Posted 06 December 2012 - 06:27 PM
Holy poo. We ALREADY KNOW the person has intention. The problem has nothing to do with that.
Crimes, as you all know from watching Columbo, require two things, motive and opportunity.
Motive is a given, even if it's based in insanity/anger of the moment.
The difference is that a handgun allows immediate, simple opportunity to kill someone.
A rock is not a simple thing to use to kill someone. It requires close interaction with the victim, it requires brutal application of force, and it also does less damage per strike, so the chances of the victim surviving are much greater. This guys mom may have been willing to jump in between Javon and his GF when he only had a rock. A gun, that's probably not going to happen.
Also, it would have been a bit hard for the guy to kill himself with it later.
I agree that new laws would probably not have helped this situation. And of course, no one else here does. That goes back to the same tired idea that for some reason, people who favor more gun control laws are against gun ownership, which is, for the vast majority of people interested in gun control, untrue.
The problem is that whenever someone sticks their head out on the line to attempt to honestly and transparently discuss the idea of freedom of gun ownership vs. people getting killed, they are immediately labeled sniveling whining babies.
We DO have a big problem with gun violence in the country, and no one seems to want to discuss it in an adult manner, preferring to post cute cartoons about the Second Amendment (or at least just the part about bearing arms, leaving out the militia thing) instead.