Who are you to decide what DR needs?
I nor you decide....it is the objective of gun ownership of the current law #36.
Who are you to decide what DR needs?
I suspect the consideration of the law will remain a consideration. This thread could be merged into the one I started on this topic previously.
That one is in Off Topic, can't be merged here because too many non-DR posts in there.
Look at it this way. If they take away all guns from citizens, then all citizens are at the mercy of the criminals and even worse, the Police. They will have the guns and no one can protect themselves and their families. At lease legally they can't.
What always makes me nervous is the clowns at the banks etc who drag the point of their gun against the floor as if it is a cane or such. As if they do not realize what it is.
Also if this goes ahead, it'll probably start the same day as some kind of "volunteer police officer" or "part time security officer" program. I suspect they'll be some loophole to extend cronyism to legal gun ownership, and if that happens I think that would be a bad thing as well.
What always makes me nervous is the clowns at the banks etc who drag the point of their gun against the floor as if it is a cane or such. As if they do not realize what it is.
That guy just shot ten people. Now we can move him from the "Normal" list to the "Bad" list. Just happy we learned that before he shot my kid.
Take this topic. Where did I lose you? How do you know who is bad?
I don't believe there is any serious proposal to take all guns from law abiding citizens. What some are proposing more or less seriously is to turn the gun permits into ownership-not-carrying permits. Presumably you could still own a gun. But you couldn't carry it with you. Supposedly you would keep it always at home, for protection against intruders.
This wouldn't be that revolutionary. In some jurisdictions you can only carry a gun (with a legal permits) unloaded (and possibly in the trunk of your car).
Of course it'd be a terrible idea, nonetheless. This sort of measures just put law-abiding citizens at a disadvantage against lawless criminals who, by definition, do not obey any law, and would continue their activities unabated.
Rule #2, people of virtually every other nation other than the USA have different values and opinions and are not lemming like.
Dominicans will make up their mind on this issue and their current law is not intended to promote gun ownership as anything but a means to provide self defense on ones property and for ones family.
They...Dominicans will make a decision on this and you need to man up and accept it if it goes against your thinking.
Stop wasting hot air...it is not our decision.....they have a law and are in process of amending it and maybe the events of the last few days will produce a result not to the liking of some but that is part of living in DR.
As gorgon said...if you don't like it you know where the airport is.
2% of the population in DR owns guns legally and that is perhaps enough and still a manageable threshold
For the most part , it's not the legal guns that are doing most of the killing.
I am sure the families of Juancito and the PLD supporters shot at the weekend will feel better knowing this.
Carried guns are the issue for DR whether legal or illegal, and not legal gun ownership licensed under the exiting law to protect person, family and property.
Let the Dominicans review and modify their laws to try and address such issues.