Grab those illustrations, and instead of making them a roll and stick it somewhere, go and show them to the relatives of those killed in Sandy Hook, Orlando, and Las Vegas. I bet you your salary they will hug you and kiss you. Make sure you leave your affairs in order because you will die of so much love.
Gee! You can’t enter a plane if you carry this much of any liquid in any container, but you can go on the streets of any given city and you can carry your M-16 to anywhere and they won’t bother you, of course, if you are not black.
People are not numbers. Relatives of those killed are suffering, they won’t care about any numbers but solutions and it’s happening one too many times. Only ISIS kills people like the nuts armed to their teeth “because the government is coming to get me”. They are called insane if white, criminals if black or any other race or nationality. Proven!
We should be the nation leading with example. We should tell others country “no chit” about them not killing their own people when we allow that to happen too many times and the stupidity we hear from the ammo-maniacs is the same, “gun control doesn’t work”.
Let’s try it, then we can say it didn’t work.
Enough with the stupidity of showing numbers. Let’s put some liability on those owning a gun. Let’s make them pay an insurance as we do when we drive any vehicle that can kill people because out stupidity. Guns shouldn’t be any different.
Yes, what a good business that would be. An insurance on gun owners paid monthly as we pay car and home and life. Ain’t that a good idea to create jobs?
I think majority of Americans would support banning weapons whose only purpose is to inflict large amount of casualties (AK47S rifles and other military-style semi-autos). Weapons for legitimate self defense, I am not sure what the polls will say, but I would think that will be more debatable.
If we can ban those weapons of mass destruction, risk of mass killing should decrease. Sure it may not completely stop it, but it will definitely make it much harder to do. Why our congress can not start to ban these?
what is the rational for NRA to support owning weapons of mass casualty? I do not see any benefit for them to support it. Gun manufacturers? that should not be too many.
Many have the “slippery slope” mindset: our gun rights are absolute and we can’t never compromise, lives be damned. They think once they give up anything, government will swoop in and take their guns away.
So laws wouldn’t have stopped him, but we should have laws.
Australia’s gun laws produced a slightly smaller reduction in homicide rate than in the US. The US didn’t pass any laws like Australia. Australia passed stricter gun laws but armed robberies increased. How is that even possible? Sexual assault and assault rates are also higher in Australia since the gun law. US sexual assault rates are down. US violent crime rate is down.
So we should trade our gun laws for stricter gun laws that produce a smaller homicide reduction than we have, so we can increase sexual assaults and assaults. That makes total sense.
I don’t think banning weapons of mass destruction will increase sexual assaults and assaults. Basic weapons of self defense (pistols etc) should be effective enough to deter these crimes.
75% of homicides are handguns. Everyone references Australia’s gun laws, and they made handguns very difficult to get. The thing is Australia’s homicide rate didn’t decrease by more than the US. Other crime rates increased in Australia while those crime rates decreased in the US.
I love to read certain people on this forum. I got 2 in particular. One with his constant kind of dumb down questions, the other one with his relentless push of obsolete, racist and borderline of criminal ideas.
In this forum, I see the berating and insulting of the “stupidvisors” and government and so on. I laugh when I see them supporting a totalitarian organization as the NRA is. They control the entire government through $ and they are not elected by the people.
Nowadays, they are going to get away with murders by just talking about the bump stocks. There you are kids, a candy you can taste or smell. Meanwhile, the crazy guy wasn’t that crazy, so there you go your excuse, when the shooter is white, that he was mental ill.
Oh, don’t forget the worthless administration ever voting on allowing silencers to be the next generation of desired things to collect. That is just great, awesome!
But Australia, but the second amendment for dummies.
I am a hopeless romantic and optimist (usually). In this day and age of great advances (slowed down slightly by the Iphone 8), one would think we would not allow something like guns and the negative impact that it can have to further impede that progress as a civilized society.
“Americans die as a result of gun violence every day. The estimated number ranges from 42 to 93 people killed by guns on an average day.”
You realize legal gun owners out number criminals by a huge margin. The 2.5M who legally use a gun to protect themselves far our number the people who use guns for bad reasons.
How can anyone point to Australia as an example of gun control making people safer? The US had a slightly larger reduction in homicide rate without that law. Rates of other violent crimes increased in Australia while they decreased in America.
Gun control is just another case of people believing sensational headlines that aren’t even representative of the facts. You can see it from survey data where over time the homicide rate has fallen, but the percent of people that think it’s increasing keeps growing. How do we get a disconnect like that? People clearly aren’t basing their opinion on facts. They are reacting emotionally to headlines.
The NRA spends about $3M/yr on lobbying. They aren’t even one of the top spenders.
