Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2006/10/20
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]Larry Z tells us that... > > The only statement not blaming the US for Britain's wave of violent > crime was an editorial in the London Times which suggested that if > tough gun laws were the only answer, then Washington D.C. would be > the safest place in the US. In fact, they pointed out, the safest > places are Vermont and New Hampshire, both states with the highest > percentage of gun ownership in the country. Perhaps, the editorial > suggested, the stratospheric crime rate in Britain is because there > are too few guns. If home owners felt that they had a moral > obligation to shoot housebreakers and thieves it might convince a few > bad guys to think twice. Then Britons too could leave doors and cars > unlocked - just like in Vermont. The NRA would have rejoiced. All this shows, Larry, that a Rupert Murdoch paper in the UK is as "fair and balanced" as a Rupert Murdoch product in the U.S. - First off, how could D.C. possibly control gun violence when Virginia is one of the biggest sources in the country of guns that end up on the streets of other cities and states? And second, of course the crimes rates are low in New Hampshire and Vermont - they are both low population, low population density, largely rural states.