• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

If everybody in America was allowed to carry a gun...

Page 2 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
I'd probably already be in jail for shooting a retard.


I don't think some people should be allowed to carry.

Minors, convicted felons, anyone that has been in juvee.

I think all teachers and government/state employees should be encouraged to pack.

Would a guy robbing a bank be more likely to rob one, where all the tellers and most of the patrons were carrying...I think not.
 
Yesterday I was walking down a busy boulevard in Portland, a fairly non-violent town. At one of the busier pedestrian intersections a man was screaming profanities at a woman at the top of his lungs. I didn't want to get involved, but from what I could make out, the woman had cut him off or taken his parking place (something car related). This man's response was to scream "f***ing c*nt" at her for several minutes in broad daylight with hundreds of people around. If he had had a gun, I think he would have pulled it. If she had a gun, she would have used it and claimed self-defense. If I had a gun, I would've shot the guy in the knees, cause regardless of whether someone cut you off in traffic, you shouldn't act like a complete douche. Fortunately, no guns were involved.

If you want to carry a gun, more power to you. But I think we need to be real careful about who we let have guns. I like to think people are generally rational, but rage can make even the most level-headed person into a savage beast. If everyone had a gun, gun violence would go up. If you argue otherwise, you are a fool. Personally, I'd like to see gun violence go down, and I don't see that happening by giving everyone a gun.
 
Originally posted by: Narmer
Originally posted by: PrinceofWands
Originally posted by: techs
Originally posted by: Narmer
Can I get some second opinion here. A lot of gun owners are claiming that everything is honkey-dory with everyone armed. I simply don't believe that there are no drawbacks. I mean, look at all these third-world countries where there are gangs/warlords and weak central governments. The stats may be non-existant, but I doubt that gun-ownership is as perfect as some people make it out to be.


We would see a HUGE increase in gun violence. Just imagine how many people get into fights every day. Then imagine what would happen if they had a gun in their pocket.
What people overlook, is that in the old west gun violence was epidemic. They fixed the problem by passing laws against carrying guns in town.
If anyone could get a concealed weapons permit, the most aggessive people would get guns. Then those who feared the aggressive people would have guns.
Clearly, their would be tens of thousands if not over a few hundred thousand more gun deaths every year. Crimininals would also start shooting their victims, secure in the knowledge that with so many gun crimes and accidental shootings every day, the use of guns in crimes would be commonplace.

And yet huge numbers already carry guns and this absolutely NEVER happens. Why is that? It's because you're wrong, and I'm right quite simply. Nearly everyone can already get a concealed weapon permit, yet most don't.

You have not fact one to support your claim, I have research done over the last 20 years that totally supports mine. CCW holders do not commit crimes, do not have accidents, etc. They are statistically the safest citizens in the world with a weapon...statistically safer than military, safer than law enforcement, and so on.

In other words, you're talking out your ass while I'm providing a reasoned and supported argument. Thanks for playing, ok, bye-bye.

Do you have references?

Texas conviction rates by total and CHL holder
 
Originally posted by: Atomic Playboy
If I had a gun, I would've shot the guy in the knees, cause regardless of whether someone cut you off in traffic, you shouldn't act like a complete douche. Fortunately, no guns were involved.

Maybe we should just put people like you in prison? You admit you can't control your behavior. It's only a matter of time before you injure somebody, gun or no.
 
Originally posted by: BrunoPuntzJones
Originally posted by: Narmer
Originally posted by: PrinceofWands
Originally posted by: techs
Originally posted by: Narmer
Can I get some second opinion here. A lot of gun owners are claiming that everything is honkey-dory with everyone armed. I simply don't believe that there are no drawbacks. I mean, look at all these third-world countries where there are gangs/warlords and weak central governments. The stats may be non-existant, but I doubt that gun-ownership is as perfect as some people make it out to be.


We would see a HUGE increase in gun violence. Just imagine how many people get into fights every day. Then imagine what would happen if they had a gun in their pocket.
What people overlook, is that in the old west gun violence was epidemic. They fixed the problem by passing laws against carrying guns in town.
If anyone could get a concealed weapons permit, the most aggessive people would get guns. Then those who feared the aggressive people would have guns.
Clearly, their would be tens of thousands if not over a few hundred thousand more gun deaths every year. Crimininals would also start shooting their victims, secure in the knowledge that with so many gun crimes and accidental shootings every day, the use of guns in crimes would be commonplace.

And yet huge numbers already carry guns and this absolutely NEVER happens. Why is that? It's because you're wrong, and I'm right quite simply. Nearly everyone can already get a concealed weapon permit, yet most don't.

You have not fact one to support your claim, I have research done over the last 20 years that totally supports mine. CCW holders do not commit crimes, do not have accidents, etc. They are statistically the safest citizens in the world with a weapon...statistically safer than military, safer than law enforcement, and so on.

In other words, you're talking out your ass while I'm providing a reasoned and supported argument. Thanks for playing, ok, bye-bye.

Do you have references?

Texas conviction rates by total and CHL holder

Thanks for the info, but what percentage of the general population are CCW holders? We have to keep things in perspective.
 
Originally posted by: Narmer
Originally posted by: BrunoPuntzJones
Originally posted by: Narmer
Originally posted by: PrinceofWands
Originally posted by: techs
Originally posted by: Narmer
Can I get some second opinion here. A lot of gun owners are claiming that everything is honkey-dory with everyone armed. I simply don't believe that there are no drawbacks. I mean, look at all these third-world countries where there are gangs/warlords and weak central governments. The stats may be non-existant, but I doubt that gun-ownership is as perfect as some people make it out to be.


We would see a HUGE increase in gun violence. Just imagine how many people get into fights every day. Then imagine what would happen if they had a gun in their pocket.
What people overlook, is that in the old west gun violence was epidemic. They fixed the problem by passing laws against carrying guns in town.
If anyone could get a concealed weapons permit, the most aggessive people would get guns. Then those who feared the aggressive people would have guns.
Clearly, their would be tens of thousands if not over a few hundred thousand more gun deaths every year. Crimininals would also start shooting their victims, secure in the knowledge that with so many gun crimes and accidental shootings every day, the use of guns in crimes would be commonplace.

And yet huge numbers already carry guns and this absolutely NEVER happens. Why is that? It's because you're wrong, and I'm right quite simply. Nearly everyone can already get a concealed weapon permit, yet most don't.

You have not fact one to support your claim, I have research done over the last 20 years that totally supports mine. CCW holders do not commit crimes, do not have accidents, etc. They are statistically the safest citizens in the world with a weapon...statistically safer than military, safer than law enforcement, and so on.

In other words, you're talking out your ass while I'm providing a reasoned and supported argument. Thanks for playing, ok, bye-bye.

Do you have references?

Texas conviction rates by total and CHL holder

Thanks for the info, but what percentage of the general population are CCW holders? We have to keep things in perspective.

In 2006 it was over 23mil, so figure in 2005 it was something like 22.5. So figure about 1% are license holders. Probably a bit higher if you take out the Mexican population that aren't naturalized.
 
Originally posted by: Atomic Playboy
Yesterday I was walking down a busy boulevard in Portland, a fairly non-violent town. At one of the busier pedestrian intersections a man was screaming profanities at a woman at the top of his lungs. I didn't want to get involved, but from what I could make out, the woman had cut him off or taken his parking place (something car related). This man's response was to scream "f***ing c*nt" at her for several minutes in broad daylight with hundreds of people around. If he had had a gun, I think he would have pulled it. If she had a gun, she would have used it and claimed self-defense. If I had a gun, I would've shot the guy in the knees, cause regardless of whether someone cut you off in traffic, you shouldn't act like a complete douche. Fortunately, no guns were involved.

If you want to carry a gun, more power to you. But I think we need to be real careful about who we let have guns. I like to think people are generally rational, but rage can make even the most level-headed person into a savage beast. If everyone had a gun, gun violence would go up. If you argue otherwise, you are a fool. Personally, I'd like to see gun violence go down, and I don't see that happening by giving everyone a gun.

So your argument against carrying guns is that you're an idiot who can't be trusted with a gun, and so you don't trust other people with guns. I've already addressed the two types of gun controllers in this thread. You're the first kind.
 
Originally posted by: BrunoPuntzJones
Originally posted by: Narmer
Originally posted by: BrunoPuntzJones
Originally posted by: Narmer
Originally posted by: PrinceofWands
Originally posted by: techs
Originally posted by: Narmer
Can I get some second opinion here. A lot of gun owners are claiming that everything is honkey-dory with everyone armed. I simply don't believe that there are no drawbacks. I mean, look at all these third-world countries where there are gangs/warlords and weak central governments. The stats may be non-existant, but I doubt that gun-ownership is as perfect as some people make it out to be.


We would see a HUGE increase in gun violence. Just imagine how many people get into fights every day. Then imagine what would happen if they had a gun in their pocket.
What people overlook, is that in the old west gun violence was epidemic. They fixed the problem by passing laws against carrying guns in town.
If anyone could get a concealed weapons permit, the most aggessive people would get guns. Then those who feared the aggressive people would have guns.
Clearly, their would be tens of thousands if not over a few hundred thousand more gun deaths every year. Crimininals would also start shooting their victims, secure in the knowledge that with so many gun crimes and accidental shootings every day, the use of guns in crimes would be commonplace.

And yet huge numbers already carry guns and this absolutely NEVER happens. Why is that? It's because you're wrong, and I'm right quite simply. Nearly everyone can already get a concealed weapon permit, yet most don't.

You have not fact one to support your claim, I have research done over the last 20 years that totally supports mine. CCW holders do not commit crimes, do not have accidents, etc. They are statistically the safest citizens in the world with a weapon...statistically safer than military, safer than law enforcement, and so on.

In other words, you're talking out your ass while I'm providing a reasoned and supported argument. Thanks for playing, ok, bye-bye.

Do you have references?

Texas conviction rates by total and CHL holder

Thanks for the info, but what percentage of the general population are CCW holders? We have to keep things in perspective.

In 2006 it was over 23mil, so figure in 2005 it was something like 22.5. So figure about 1% are license holders. Probably a bit higher if you take out the Mexican population that aren't naturalized.

Yup. About 1% of the population is licensed, and they're responsible for about 1% of crime. Sounds like a wash to me.

There was another thread where the same type of numbers from Florida were posted, and their CHL holders were something like 2% of the population but only responsible for .025% of crime. Those Floridians are uber law abiding. 😀
 
Originally posted by: Narmer
Originally posted by: BrunoPuntzJones
Originally posted by: Narmer
Originally posted by: PrinceofWands
Originally posted by: techs
Originally posted by: Narmer
Can I get some second opinion here. A lot of gun owners are claiming that everything is honkey-dory with everyone armed. I simply don't believe that there are no drawbacks. I mean, look at all these third-world countries where there are gangs/warlords and weak central governments. The stats may be non-existant, but I doubt that gun-ownership is as perfect as some people make it out to be.


We would see a HUGE increase in gun violence. Just imagine how many people get into fights every day. Then imagine what would happen if they had a gun in their pocket.
What people overlook, is that in the old west gun violence was epidemic. They fixed the problem by passing laws against carrying guns in town.
If anyone could get a concealed weapons permit, the most aggessive people would get guns. Then those who feared the aggressive people would have guns.
Clearly, their would be tens of thousands if not over a few hundred thousand more gun deaths every year. Crimininals would also start shooting their victims, secure in the knowledge that with so many gun crimes and accidental shootings every day, the use of guns in crimes would be commonplace.

And yet huge numbers already carry guns and this absolutely NEVER happens. Why is that? It's because you're wrong, and I'm right quite simply. Nearly everyone can already get a concealed weapon permit, yet most don't.

You have not fact one to support your claim, I have research done over the last 20 years that totally supports mine. CCW holders do not commit crimes, do not have accidents, etc. They are statistically the safest citizens in the world with a weapon...statistically safer than military, safer than law enforcement, and so on.

In other words, you're talking out your ass while I'm providing a reasoned and supported argument. Thanks for playing, ok, bye-bye.

Do you have references?

Texas conviction rates by total and CHL holder

Thanks for the info, but what percentage of the general population are CCW holders? We have to keep things in perspective.
What a troll.

Obviously you only want one answer to a question that can't really be answered 100% correctly anyway. :thumbsdown:

 
Best I can tell (and keeping the 129 number of offenses, I don't believe in the 14+27 for unlicensed carry (not having the license on you) or in a "no gun zone" should apply, but I'll keep the number) with say 23mil people.

Comes out to 0.00056% of residents are holders with offenses. The majority of them having nothing to do with having a gun at all. Indecent exposure, sexually assault on a child, etc.

If you were to take the "real" offenses that matter when talking about CHL, such as battery, threats, manslaughter, the number would drop further.

 
Originally posted by: Narmer
1. Would America resemble Israel where the reason is for protection from an external threat?

Considering our open borders? Hell yes.

2. Is Israel an exceptional case?

Might not be a common case, but I wouldn't call it isolated. Exceptional perhaps, but that is not to say anyone else couldn?t be in the same degree of threat from a foreign entity.

3. Or would it be like Afghanistan, Northwest Pakistan where you use it to protect yourself from others within society?

After the dredges from more crime ridden countries come here and transform ours into their previous homeland? Hell yes it would be to protect us from others within our own society.

4. Wouldn't this increase accidental shootings and death by gun astronomically?

Certainly more people, more guns, more accidents. Darwin said it best, regarding natural selection.

5. Would this be acceptable to those who advocate such protection?

Really depends on how great a threat people within our own society becomes. Every nutjob is argument for arming oneself in the event that you are at ground zero when they start their personal genocide.

6. Would this be an efficient way to deal with an overbearing government? Look at Afghanistan, Northwest Pakistan, where they have weak governments.

To a certain degree yes, but it takes more than men and guns to secede from the Union. One could learn a hell of a lot from Muslims with regards to how you defeat a foe who has superior brute force. They have all the experience in the world at it.

7. Are more guns the solution to guns? Or would it be better if there were no guns? But how would we answer #6?

It would be better, but there's no way in hell to abolish them from the face of the earth. It is illegal to run a stop sign, yet people do it constantly. Laws to make guns illegal have no impact on the existence of guns.

In such a scenario, where we?d magically whisk away all guns, the government would also not have any so #6 wouldn?t be a problem.

Are the negatives worth the positives? Are there certain places in America that allows people to carry guns, unconcealed?

Not here in AL, you need a concealed carry permit.

As for negatives/positives. I?m not particularly sure, but the second amendment was created with a purpose behind it so if I?m going to have to lean in any direction on this issue I?ll fall back on that to cite the need for everyone to secure themselves via all available means.

We may be coming out of an American golden age where our society was peaceful and good enough to not need an armed citizenry, but with economic hardship, immigration, and other factors raising civil unrest I see a need for the second amendment. I do not imagine our decline from the world superpower will be a peaceful one.

If such predictions do not come to pass, even though I?d argue it?s already begun, then you still have the very real issue that making guns illegal only prohibits those who would defend themselves, not those who would continue killing with guns.
 
Originally posted by: BoberFett
Originally posted by: Atomic Playboy
If I had a gun, I would've shot the guy in the knees, cause regardless of whether someone cut you off in traffic, you shouldn't act like a complete douche. Fortunately, no guns were involved.

Maybe we should just put people like you in prison? You admit you can't control your behavior. It's only a matter of time before you injure somebody, gun or no.

Seriously. He wouldn't have shot that guy in the knees.

1) He doesn't know what those people would do if they had guns, because he can't know. They may even have had them for all he knows, and chose not to use them. The only thing he knows is himself, and he knows he would have shot that gun in the knees if he had a gun and been arrested for assault with a deadly weapon or something.
2) He doesn't own a gun now, with the current laws, because he knows he can't control himself and doesn't trust himself with one. And he would get arrested quickly if he did.

Of course, he could also be full of shit and he wouldn't have shot anyone because he actually isn't a total idiot and was just making something up to try and prove a point. The point of course being "When people have guns, they just start killing people for any reason at all"
 
Originally posted by: Mxylplyx
I, as a conservative/libertarian, would gladly trade our gun situation with England, France, Germany, or other European countries that make it very difficult to obtain guns. The situation in America has gotten ridiculous, and our crime situation is frankly embarassing when held up against many other Western countries. However, the cat is already out of the bag in America, and the gun situation cannot be brought under control at this point. Therefore, any citizen who is trained with a firearm should be allowed to carry.

...didn't violent crime in australia and england increase right after the weapons were taken out of the hands of law abiding citizens?
 
Heh. There is one week of every month I hide all of my guns now. I don't want my wife carrying one.
 
Originally posted by: TheSlamma
Originally posted by: Narmer
Originally posted by: BrunoPuntzJones
Originally posted by: Narmer
Originally posted by: PrinceofWands
Originally posted by: techs
Originally posted by: Narmer
Can I get some second opinion here. A lot of gun owners are claiming that everything is honkey-dory with everyone armed. I simply don't believe that there are no drawbacks. I mean, look at all these third-world countries where there are gangs/warlords and weak central governments. The stats may be non-existant, but I doubt that gun-ownership is as perfect as some people make it out to be.


We would see a HUGE increase in gun violence. Just imagine how many people get into fights every day. Then imagine what would happen if they had a gun in their pocket.
What people overlook, is that in the old west gun violence was epidemic. They fixed the problem by passing laws against carrying guns in town.
If anyone could get a concealed weapons permit, the most aggessive people would get guns. Then those who feared the aggressive people would have guns.
Clearly, their would be tens of thousands if not over a few hundred thousand more gun deaths every year. Crimininals would also start shooting their victims, secure in the knowledge that with so many gun crimes and accidental shootings every day, the use of guns in crimes would be commonplace.

And yet huge numbers already carry guns and this absolutely NEVER happens. Why is that? It's because you're wrong, and I'm right quite simply. Nearly everyone can already get a concealed weapon permit, yet most don't.

You have not fact one to support your claim, I have research done over the last 20 years that totally supports mine. CCW holders do not commit crimes, do not have accidents, etc. They are statistically the safest citizens in the world with a weapon...statistically safer than military, safer than law enforcement, and so on.

In other words, you're talking out your ass while I'm providing a reasoned and supported argument. Thanks for playing, ok, bye-bye.

Do you have references?

Texas conviction rates by total and CHL holder

Thanks for the info, but what percentage of the general population are CCW holders? We have to keep things in perspective.
What a troll.

Obviously you only want one answer to a question that can't really be answered 100% correctly anyway. :thumbsdown:

WTF is your problem? if 1% of the population is carrying guns and 1% of the population of the same population is committing crimes, doesn't that mean that there's a linear relationship between CCW holders and crime? Does that not imply that if we increase that number the number of crime would increase linearly?
 
Originally posted by: Ozoned
Heh. There is one week of every month I hide all of my guns now. I don't want my wife carrying one.

My girlfriend is always packing. I got her one of the new Walther PPS 9mms (previously she carried a Sig 239 SAS in .357 Sig.) It's a tiny little single stack with a glock style action & trigger, plus now she's not running around with one of my thousand dollar guns. 😀

She was very anti-gun when I met her. I took her shooting, and she learned that guns weren't pure evil, but she still didn't like me carrying, and didn't see the point. I showed her a bunch of articles about women using guns for self defense, but she still thought that pepper spray was all someone needed. So I made her a challenge, if she could use her pepper spray and keep me from taking her down and getting her pants off, I'd concede her point. She carries all the time now. 😉

I ordered her a Galco purse for Christmas.
 
It wouldn't matter. Gun control laws have no effect on gun-related crimes.
I mean, if you believe that they do, think about it for a moment... you're saying the only reason you don't occasionally kill other human beings -- damn the consequences, legal and moral -- is because you lack the immediate ability to do so. That's pretty f'ed up. Would you also steal someone's car just because they left it unlocked?
 
Originally posted by: Narmer
Originally posted by: TheSlamma
Originally posted by: Narmer
Originally posted by: BrunoPuntzJones
Originally posted by: Narmer
Originally posted by: PrinceofWands
Originally posted by: techs
Originally posted by: Narmer
Can I get some second opinion here. A lot of gun owners are claiming that everything is honkey-dory with everyone armed. I simply don't believe that there are no drawbacks. I mean, look at all these third-world countries where there are gangs/warlords and weak central governments. The stats may be non-existant, but I doubt that gun-ownership is as perfect as some people make it out to be.


We would see a HUGE increase in gun violence. Just imagine how many people get into fights every day. Then imagine what would happen if they had a gun in their pocket.
What people overlook, is that in the old west gun violence was epidemic. They fixed the problem by passing laws against carrying guns in town.
If anyone could get a concealed weapons permit, the most aggessive people would get guns. Then those who feared the aggressive people would have guns.
Clearly, their would be tens of thousands if not over a few hundred thousand more gun deaths every year. Crimininals would also start shooting their victims, secure in the knowledge that with so many gun crimes and accidental shootings every day, the use of guns in crimes would be commonplace.

And yet huge numbers already carry guns and this absolutely NEVER happens. Why is that? It's because you're wrong, and I'm right quite simply. Nearly everyone can already get a concealed weapon permit, yet most don't.

You have not fact one to support your claim, I have research done over the last 20 years that totally supports mine. CCW holders do not commit crimes, do not have accidents, etc. They are statistically the safest citizens in the world with a weapon...statistically safer than military, safer than law enforcement, and so on.

In other words, you're talking out your ass while I'm providing a reasoned and supported argument. Thanks for playing, ok, bye-bye.

Do you have references?

Texas conviction rates by total and CHL holder

Thanks for the info, but what percentage of the general population are CCW holders? We have to keep things in perspective.
What a troll.

Obviously you only want one answer to a question that can't really be answered 100% correctly anyway. :thumbsdown:

WTF is your problem? if 1% of the population is carrying guns and 1% of the population of the same population is committing crimes, doesn't that mean that there's a linear relationship between CCW holders and crime? Does that not imply that if we increase that number the number of crime would increase linearly?

That's not really a good argument. If 100% of the population had CHLs, then 100% of crime would be committed by CHL holders. :Q
 
Originally posted by: Narmer
WTF is your problem? if 1% of the population is carrying guns and 1% of the population of the same population is committing crimes, doesn't that mean that there's a linear relationship between CCW holders and crime? Does that not imply that if we increase that number the number of crime would increase linearly?
lol, no. All it means is that gun carriers are no more apt to commit crimes than anyone else in the general population. If you strapped a .45 on the ass of every man, woman and child then 100% of the crime would be committed by people carrying a gun. The relationship you're looking for is something along the lines of 1% of the population carries a gun and is responsible for 10% of the crime, but that kind of relationship just doesn't exist.

 
Originally posted by: PingSpike
Originally posted by: Mxylplyx
I, as a conservative/libertarian, would gladly trade our gun situation with England, France, Germany, or other European countries that make it very difficult to obtain guns. The situation in America has gotten ridiculous, and our crime situation is frankly embarassing when held up against many other Western countries. However, the cat is already out of the bag in America, and the gun situation cannot be brought under control at this point. Therefore, any citizen who is trained with a firearm should be allowed to carry.

...didn't violent crime in australia and england increase right after the weapons were taken out of the hands of law abiding citizens?

http://www.geometricrate.com/b...der-rates-and-methods/
 
Originally posted by: Narmer

4. Wouldn't this increase accidental shootings and death by gun astronomically?
NO

7. Are more guns the solution to guns?
YES

Are the negatives worth the positives?
YES

Are there certain places in America that allows people to carry guns, unconcealed?
YES, Kennesaw Georgia.

Extremely low crime rate especially in comparsion to surrounding Atlanta suburbs.

Gee I wonder why?

Topic Title: If everybody in America was allowed to carry a gun...

the U.S. would be a much safer place.
 
Originally posted by: 1EZduzit
Originally posted by: PingSpike
Originally posted by: Mxylplyx
I, as a conservative/libertarian, would gladly trade our gun situation with England, France, Germany, or other European countries that make it very difficult to obtain guns. The situation in America has gotten ridiculous, and our crime situation is frankly embarassing when held up against many other Western countries. However, the cat is already out of the bag in America, and the gun situation cannot be brought under control at this point. Therefore, any citizen who is trained with a firearm should be allowed to carry.

...didn't violent crime in australia and england increase right after the weapons were taken out of the hands of law abiding citizens?

http://www.geometricrate.com/b...der-rates-and-methods/

That's right. Poverty is far and away the leading cause of crimes, including murder.

This is one reason why I see the gun control crowd as either hopelessly stupid or nefariously cynical (although I lean towards the former in most cases). For the most part, people commit crimes because they are poor, not because they have a gun. Take away the guns, they're still be poor, so they'll still commit crimes. What have you done to help them but make them even poorer?
 
Back
Top