I honestly don’t see a point in discussing. The 2 other people posting have so much emotional bias that it’s pointless. It’s not like either of you address questions.
It’s a good thing we made schools “gun free zones” to keep people safe. That way criminals won’t bring a gun onto school property.
The shooter is a convicted felon. Meaning, he can’t purchase a gun legally. Wait, you mean the law saying he can’t own a gun didn’t stop him from getting a gun?
The guy broke two existing laws which didn’t stop him, and people think a third law would have stopped him?
The issue, which most idiots on the side of the “well, the second amendment tells me I should be armed like Rambo” is not taking their “guns” from them. It is the conversation on arms, weapons deemed to be in the hands of civilians when the same police force lacks of them. Such weapons should be banned, period!
Save your BS, your stupid data, and graphics for the relatives of those killed in stupid shootings. They will certainly appreciate your concern for dumb data.
Sorry, but I disagree. Your stance is not completely correct, nor is the pro gun lobby’s. I want movement from both sides to get to a policy that works for everyone. What makes absolute sense to me at least is the simple removal of military grade weaponry from the average citizenship. Where in that says no firearms or handguns for personal protection?
I share the same idea. To do so, you have to erase from the dumbsters brains that nobody is coming to get their guns. It is just the banning of weapons deemed to be in the hands of people in the army, or at least, SWAT or police force.
Why aren’t you starting a conversation about prescription drugs, illegal drugs, or cars? They all kill far more people than guns do. Smoking kills more than all of those combined, and cigarettes are still legal. Why not fight big tobacco?
That’s what’s so irrational about this. There’s no prioritization of the top things killing people.
Yeah, I remember Columbine, those kids got into the school with cars and started mowing everybody down. They then started killing people by throwing bundles of marijuana at them, and then, they threw OxyContin to the happy kids who died of an overdose.
Sorry, I can’t debate with people who were dropped on the head when they were born.
Come on, how soon we forget. The Las Vegas shooter was a CPA, real estate investor with a fair amount of money in his possession. He had his faults but certainly not the profile of the worst mass murderer of US history.
We keep asking the question but no one has answered it. What legitimate purpose do military grade weapons serve? You don’t hunt with these guns. These weapons simply do not belong in the hands of regular citizens. The fact is, anyone can crack. Because that is the case, it makes total sense to then ban those weapons that can cause the most harm in the least amount of time.
Thanks to finally make an opinion worth debating. Most posters here are advocating for a change to the laws that allow any assault rifle, any weapon that has a military capacity to be take away from the hands of one day sane persons, next day criminals. I said most posters, except for an idiot bugging us with “data” and mumble jumble with no emotion.