“Your declaration contains no effort at persuasion”
No, it was a simple statement directed at a thoughtless proposal the writer designed to instigate.
“Making the use of a weapon, whether blunt, bladed, projectile or phased plasma a major factor in sentencing would do more than any amount of permit or registration requirement.”
Really? There are numerous states which have tried this. Have they helped? If someone is proposing a radical change it is incumbent upon them to support their argument. Its not up to those who do not support their idea to refute.
His proposal was to impose a life sentence on anyone committing ANY crime with a firearm. Does that include speeding? How about shooting a buck with the proper tag?
Why are guns the only target of this law? Are knives more noble?
You want the law changed you need to come up with a reason. Change for changes sake is not leadership nor good for a country.
How do you commit "speeding" with a firearm? (I do not equate "having it nearby" with "using". Do you?)
How about shooting a buck with the proper tag?
If you mean "without", then...point taken.
Really? There are numerous states which have tried this.
Really? Mandatory significant increases in penalty for use of a firearm? Last state I had heard of that came close added five years for it....of course the convicts get paroled years before the original non-firearm sentence is complete...I assert, subject to correction, that no state has a mandatory, this-must-be-served-without-parole sentence other than "life without parole"--the death penalty for the squeamish.
Are knives more noble?
Knives are for bandits. Katanas or broadswords, please. I'd really like to see an old-fashioned claymore fight...
I forgot to add: as permit and registration laws are meaningless to the criminal community, ANY slight benefit “enhanced sentencing” might provide would be superior.