of course accountants needs to be banned and replace them with amazon AI accounting services.
Letâs start discussing this:
1 Like
This was a fairly common, Monday morning quarterbacking kind of comment I kept hearing yesterday on the radio when I was driving around the Bay yesterday on my off dayâŚ
âThese folks were attacked by a man from 32 stories up with automatic rifle fire and so I donât really know how you plan for that. We just didnât see it coming.â
Well, Einstein, maybe you do something about the automatic rife part???
Banning drugs hasnât kept them off the streets, so why would banning guns prevent criminals from getting them? Iâd love to see anyone arguing for banning guns explain how thatâd be more effective than prohibition or making drugs illegal. Also, if you make guns illegal then you better secure the border with Mexico or illegal guns will come in just as easily as the drugs do. I know, securing the border is racist, so we canât do it. So letâs pass a useless law restricting gun ownership while doing nothing to prevent illegal guns from entering the country.
Are all homicides using a gun? No, they arenât. You canât use a chart showing homicide rate and pretend the only issue is guns. The US has far more racial diversity and gangs than those other countries. If you donât count the black-on-black homicides, then the US homicide rate would drop by over 50%. Letâs just keep calling it a gun problem though and pretend those people wouldnât get guns if they were illegal.
1 Like
That could be true but letâs not generalize like that. Plenty of black people are non-violent.
The same lame comments deflecting on the very hard core issue, gun control, but if drugs, but if Obama, but ifâŚ
Again, letâs discuss this:
The guy who mowed down 60 people is white and yet people are taking about blacks?
Making guns hard to get and there will be fewer guns on streets. Easy logic. Guns are efficient at killing people. Thatâs why we give soldiers guns and not knives. Next time you see someone killing 60 people from 1000 feet away in 20 minutes with a knife we can talk about knife control.
I will say this again. If seeing small children getting slaughtered didnât move you nothing will.
6 Likes
Itâs not about being moved. Itâs about applying logical thought. If he wasnât using a gun, then heâd use a bomb, semi truck, or something else. Banning law abiding citizens from owning guns isnât going to stop crazy people from doing crazy things. Allowing gun ownership does give law abiding citizens a chance to stop crazy people from inflicting more harm. It happens, but youâll never see ABC, NBC, CBS, or CNN cover it because it doesnât fit their agenda. Maybe the real question is why is media coverage of guns so biased?
Also, given whatâs happening in Europe you canât simultaneously say you care about public safety but think we should allow in refugees.
You canât ignore that 14% of the population is responsible for over 50% of the homicides. You also canât ignore that cities with the highest homicide rates have the highest percent of those people. Do the foreign countries have cities with the same demographics as the American cities with the highest homicide rate?
I usually donât comment much, especially on political topics, but for those who keep saying gun control doesnât work, there is clear evidence from Australia that gun control does work. Unlike the US that wouldnât take action even after the horrific Sandy Hook massacre of little children, Australia took action after a mass shooting in 1996, and they have not had a mass shooting ever since.
(Reuters) - Australia on Thursday marked the 20th anniversary of a mass shooting which led to strict gun controls that have in turn led to a huge decline in gun murders, undermining claims in the United States that such curbs are not the answer.
The chances of being murdered by a gun in Australia plunged to 0.15 per 100,000 people in 2014 from 0.54 per 100,000 people in 1996, a decline of 72 percent, a Reuters analysis of Australian Bureau of Statistics figures showed.
In 1996, Australia had 311 murders, of which 98 were with guns. In 2014, with the population up from about 18 million to 23 million, Australia had 238 murders, of which 35 were with guns.
It was the April 28, 1996, shooting deaths by a lone gunman of 35 people in and around a cafe at a historic former prison colony in Tasmania that prompted the government to buy back or confiscate a million firearms and make it harder to buy new ones.
The country has had no mass shootings since.
6 Likes
Frankly I donât see much logical thought. I see a lot of racial bias. You are saying all our countryâs problems are due to black people. And itâs due to their race, not poverty or any other circumstances.
1 Like
I posted an article before about Australia âgun controlâ. Their gun ownership process is actually very similar to the US. The main difference is they have a longer âcooling offâ period before the actual sale. Also, they still have mass killings. Killers just use other means. Which is the whole point that banning guns wonât solve mass killings Mass killings are happening without guns in Europe too.
14% of the population and over 50% of the homicides. Yet, you want to blame guns and pretend without guns they wouldnât be killing each other. Data isnât biased. Itâs a lot more logical and rational than emotions are.
We keep reading a person here that is absolutely disgraceful on his defense of anything that has to do with the deaths of hundreds of Americans every year. His approach is always one party line. Government doesnât exist for him when itâs a republican one. Always the black guy, even thought the White ones have caused more chit in one incident alone.
Yes, wrap this around your brain, republicans advocate for everybody to be armed, so you can âkill the bad guyâ. But when something happened in Texas last year, the police were looking for a black guy exercising his second amendment while the real shooter was still alive. Stupidity anyone? Racism? It was a black guy, so he was already being found a criminal.
But, if I hate people, I hate the hypocrite religious ones. Take Pat Robertson for example. A leader in the Christian community who called for the assassination of Chavez. Yes, he was calling for the killing of another human being!
But now, the hypocrite, contrary to what he did when Obama was in charge, is saying that Americans deserve this killing, all because people are disrespectful to the president, the flag, veterans, as if he never disrespected Obama.
Come on people!
Take these ignorant people aside so they can play with mud, and letâs sit down and debate about gun control and whatnot. Next time, who knows, it may be you dying when going to work in SF or San Jose, or during any parade or music event or NRA event.
Do those homicides involve people hacking others with knives? Or guns?
I donât care the race of the murderers. I care about that taking the weapons away from those people.
1 Like
Australians in that respect are more intelligent. In this country, most gun fanatics are stuck in history about guns. The government is coming to get me! Buahhhhhhhhhhhhhhh!
Do you really believe that without guns theyâd stop killing each other? Do you think making guns illegal would stop those people from getting them? Chicago has super strict gun laws yet has tons of shootings. What percent of homicides are by a legal gun owner? They ended up estimating 3-11% of guns used in crimes were legally purchased. That means the biggest issue is already black market, illegal guns.
Iâd love to know how making guns illegal would be more effective than drugs or prohibition. Anyone?
Rapes and murders are illegal and yet rapes and murders still occur. Therefore we should legalize rapes and murders.
1 Like
legalize prostitution maybe
So you have no logical argument. You also ignore the other questions and the fact that only 3-11% of guns used in crime were legally obtained. Iâm not sure how changing gun laws will prevent a black market for guns that already exists. Those people are already breaking gun laws and adding another charge or charges to any crime they commit.
If you read your own quoted article you will see that 3% number is for people buying guns from a retail store. So the rest got their guns from 2nd hand sources. Are these 97% transactions illegal?
Logically these used guns were bought initially from a retail store. If you took that source away the 2nd hand market will dry up.
Easy logic. You make something hard to get and you will see less of it.
1 Like