How To Argue For Gun Control.

You brought other ammendmentside. Into the conversation...not me.

 

Neoprene

[SIZE=12pt][/SIZE]

Okay

So does that mean you would be opposed to prudent gun control measures aimed at trying to lessen the likelihood that guns would fall into the hands of the criminal and irresponsible?

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MXrNj3t6Vxo

 

See... You're looking at this situation all wrong. If everybody at the open-air concert, something like 20,000 people, had been similarly armed with automatic weapons they could have all saved the day and nobody but the initial shooter would have been harmed. Or someshyt like that... [/sarcasm]

 

No posts about Steve Scalise or the church shooting in Tennessee

Only exploit events that can fit the left narrative.

 

This shooting with a guy like me does not count because there are other shootings with a guy who I would rather did the shooting. Those are the shootings that matter and it's a massive conspiracy.

My my what a reach. Is is truely that hard to admit facts? Time and time again you put foot in mouth.

 

Of course no. I never said otherwise.

But after what happened in Vegas, I don't give a fuck if they take them all and melt them down.

 

Funny you mention that, both of these shooters had a previous history of domestic violence, so with some common sense gun control regulations in place neither of them would have been allowed to purchase a firearm.

There ya go, I am very happy to exploit any situation for ya where someone's death could have been prevented if only we had reasonable gun control laws.

You cant really blame us for missing those though as that kind of thing literally happens every day in America. It IS really sad that it takes almost 60 deaths by an automatic weapon to really shock anyone anymore.

 

Full automatic weapons are illegal anyway.

Less gun purchases means less gun violence? Let's see about that http://www.aei.org/publication/chart-of-the-day-more-guns-less-gun-violence-between-1993-and-2013/

But if authoritarian gun control laws are the goal, why not exploit EVERY gun related act of terrorism? Why ignore and let any of them slip through the cracks?


Because Hodgkinson had better politics, and the church shooter was of the incorrect ethnicity, thats why. They pick and chose which ones to give the most attention to for a reason. I'm sure if the media didn't glorify gangster lifestyles and showed what it does to inner city communities, we could cut gun crimes in half.

 

They may not be legal everywhere, each state regulates firearms differently.

Let me say that less guns are better. Anybody with a large amount of weaponry raises my red flag.

 

Define "authoritarian gun control laws." Because I dont think anyone is suggesting that.

As far as the less guns dont equal less crime argument, the graph you linked follows a nationwide trend of decreasing crime, but that trend has slowly been reversing in recent years and of course the graph you linked fails to compare the homicide rate by firearm compared to other countries with stricter gun control

Here are some handy graphs regarding gun stats - # 5 and 6 do indicate that a higher rate of gun ownership does indeed correlate with a higher rate of gun related deaths.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.vox.com/platform/amp/policy-and-politics/2017/10/2/16399418/us-gun-violence-statistics-maps-charts

 

I think that there should be gun control in terms of not allowing guns to end up "legally" in the wrong hands. And longer wait times to buy one. Thorough reference and background checks. I'm kind of neutral about it but responsible mentally well people owning guns isn't the issue. It would be like banning all junk food because some people eat too much junk food. The junk food isn't the problem, the person eating it has the problem. That's why responsible gun owners get upset. I'd be upset too if junk food was banned since I love it but only eat it on occasion.

 

People kill themselves with junk food. They don't kill other people.

Eating a bag of Doritos on the 32nd floor doesn't kill 58 other people.

If it did, I'd hope a lot of us would be willing to give up Doritos.

 

True, how about in Europe? Those working for ISIS who ran over people with a truck? Should we ban all trucks? The average gun owner isn't the Las Vegas shooter, if that were the case, we would see these things happening every week considering a lot of people own guns.

I think the problem is deeper than a gun discussion. I think in the US, there's not enough attention given to people with depression. The shooter's brother described him as this normal average guy. Um he was anything but that. Normal healthy minded people don't shoot through a crowd of thousands hoping to kill people and then kill themselves. It always seems like everyone was shocked that their family member/neighbor committed violent crimes. So I think it's way deeper than just talking about gun control, IMO.

 

Banning trucks would be silly considering how much usefulness they have to a functioning society.

Automatic weapons, on the other hand...When's the last time anyone needed to fire off 30 shots in 10 seconds?

 

I agree, those should be banned but thought we were talking about all guns in general.

 

I might be. I don't know anymore.

Maybe we should go back to muskets since that was the pinnacle of firepower when the Constitution was written.